Drafts

Something Life Science related that I have my mind on to write about is the crippling reliance of capitalistic gain to drive basic medical rights in our country. An example is how the geriatric focus in medicine is diminishing. Medical schools are closing geriatric branches, geriatric teachers are few and far between, and less people want to go into the specialty. Even geriatric units in hospitals are decreasing in both size and number. This would all make sense if the need for geriatric specialists was also decreasing, but it is not. These changes all come at a time where our world population is maximizing longevity and new technology is advancing life expectancies everyday. Why then, when the need is so great for geriatric practices, is the availability disappearing? The answer is money. Because people are living longer lives, the regular age of retirement leaves people with much more time after they stop working to rely on their savings. When is comes to medical needs, they also increase as the patients age: more prescriptions, surgeries, maybe a nurse assistant or nursing home, and thats where medicare comes in. Often times, medicare patients lose money for hospitals, therefore making hopsital CEOs and the primary earners disenchanted to serving them. If a majority or medicare patients are geriatric needs, simply closing the geriatric unit helps hospitals maintain a higher ratio or earnings to expenditures. And so all these people joining the aging population are greatly in desire for something that people don't want to provide them with, all because of money. To me, that is wrong. Medical care nowadays can do so much in achieving solutions to novel problems, so why not extend that ability to all the people who need it, not just the ones who make the hospital profit the most. 

The methods section of the leaf-mining paper is divided into three subheadings, each describing a different part of experimental data collection. The leaf-mining paper’s results section is divided into four subheadings, each explaining a different part of the data collected. The second section of the slime-mold paper describes the reasons for which the experimental subject was chosen, serving a similar purpose to the leaf-mining paper’s introduction. In the slime-mold paper, the third and fourth sections serve as a combined methods and results section. These parts of the paper both describing how the experiments were carried out and the results thereof. 

The discussion portion of the leaf-mining paper is subdivided under three headings and details the implications of the study as well as plausible avenues of future investigation. The fifth section of the slime mold paper takes a step back from the experiment and instead describes why the subject of the study was chosen as it applies to another field. The final section of the slime mold paper bears similarities to the discussion portion of the leaf-mining paper, as it too describes the implications of the research and areas of future inquiry. 

The documents both start with the title of the paper in bold followed by the names of the authors. The slime mold paper labels the abstract as such while the leaf-mining paper does not, though both abstracts are found at the start of each paper. The leaf-mining paper is structured like classic primary literature, featuring level 1 headings for the introduction, methods, results, discussion, and references sections, as well as various level 2 headings within each section. However, the slime mold paper is organized by topic using only level 1 headers. 

The abstracts of both papers are short paragraphs describing the object of and reason for the study. The introduction to the leaf-mining paper opens with an explanation as to why the subject of the study was chosen, followed by a series of explanatory paragraphs concerning the reasons for the study. The first section of the slime mold paper describes the conceptual question at hand and addresses the reason for the study.

Descriptive factors:

spikes, spots, wet, big branches, small home environment, dry soil, not enough soil for the plant to survive, aloe vera pups, some brown spots 

Outside, the aloe vera plant in front of me stands approximately 11 inches high. The plant was store bought, and was in good health when first purchased. Today, two weeks later, the aloe vera is observed for progress. It has a thick exterior resistant to stronger winds. The spikes that peek out on both sides of the succulent are not as sharp as they look. On the flat surface of each branch, there are light green spots that give the plant its vibrant look. Each branch meets at the center of the pot, and closer observation by touch reveals the dry soil surrounding it. Though the plant is large, the pot it resides in is small. One could make the assumption that the aloe vera is living in a cramped environment with little room to breathe. The conditions are not optimal for the succulent, which explains why the plant is beginning to show the first stages of decay. The damage is minimal, but I hypothesize within the next few weeks the decomposed areas will spread. However, at the center of the plant, it is glossy and wet: a sign of self lubrication and health. When lightly pressing on the branches, one could feel the gelatinous liquid inside. In addition, the succulent does not give off any notable scent. 

When presented with a plant sample that needs identification, one might start with whether the sample is woody, tree-like, shrub-like, vine, forb, aquatic, or evergreen versus deciduous. The sample in question seems to be possibly deciduous and shrub-like. It has broad flat leaves that are dark green on the top and lighter green on the bottom. The leaves themselves are almost waxy and reflective to some degree. The next step in identification is deciding whether or not the leaves are truly simple leaves, or compound structured leaflets. There are three total leaves in questions. To decide this the axillary bud must be identified. There is no axillary buds identifiable on this sample. Since it does not appear at the base of each leaf, one might assume that it was at the base of the main leaf stalk connecting the three leaves together. This would make them leaflets rather than true leaves. The leaflets are organized in a compound structure rather than alternating. The margins of the leaflets are also key to identification. The margins of this sample appear to be wavy rather than serrated, lobed, or smooth. The overall shape of the leaflet is almost tear drop shaped. Some leaf or leaflet shapes could be round, heart shaped, palm-lobed etc. but this sample remains a tear drop shape. It is symmetrical rather than asymmetrical. The overall size of the sample is 7cm in length and 7cm in width. Each leaflet is about 3.5cm in length and 3cm in width. Each leaf has a small dark brown discoloration to it that has a swirl like pattern branching off the discolored shape. This could be some sort of parasite or unfortunate symbiotic relationship. The dark brown discoloration seems to be a damaged part of the leaflet that reduces the surface area of green useful parts to the leaflet. Overall it is possibly a negative symbiotic relationship going on. There are also 3-5 small bumps about 1mm in diameter on each leaflet. they are raised on the top of the leaflet and not noticeable on the bottom. It is unclear if there is a relationship between these bumps and the discolored patches. The leaf stalk is fuzzy in appearance and pinkish brown colored. It is also flexible and has no bark. With these defining characteristics, one should be able to identify this plant using a key; assuming they know what region the sample is from.  

The professor gave us a leaf and told us to write about it for 15 minutes. The bag that the teacher took the leaf out from had a napkin. I wonder what that is for. the bag was also kind of foggy. is it to keep the leaf from wilting? as for the lave that was given to me, there are three leaves on the small structure. a large one and two comparatively smaller one on either side. two of the leaves, the big one and one of the smaller ones have brown spots on the side of it. it spirals from the stem of the leaf to the other end of the leaf. It looks kind of like a path that a small bug would eat through except that there are no big empty spots where is only brown spots that becomes lighter at some places and darker in others. the feel of the leaf is mostly dry in the feeling that while it has been a while since someone has picked off the leaf, it isn't dessecated that if some pressure is applied and the leaf is bent slightly the leaf would snap off in a billion piece. on the back of the leaf, the brown spots are slightly lighter in most places, although there are some part of the leaf that is just as darker as the front of the leaf, there are less of it, and the darker patterns are more circular, giving off the appearance of a spots that have been connected by lighter brown rather than  a lighter brown crawling across the leaf, getting larger and darker as it goes on. how large the spots do not seem to affect the color of the spots. there are areas where the spot is quite large but the color is not as dark as some of the smaller area that is near the end of the leaf. 

the stem of the leaf is reddish-pink with the darkest color at the point where three of the leaves join together. the color there is similar to rhubarb almost where the color is vastly more blue-tinted rather than orange-tinted. looking at the end of the stem, the leaf appears to almost be ripped apart from the tree because while the outside of the stem is pink the inside is green. the inside is also fibrous, with uneven strands, giving the impression that the leaf is ripped apart from the tree rather than cut with a scissor or fallen from the tree naturally. The fibrous inside is slightly glossy that gives an impression of being wet or at least there used to be some liquid on the stem. it's the glossiness where a sugary viscous drink is spilled over ona surface and after it has been dried, there are sticky spots that when the light hits it just rights it becomes shiny as though there is a waxy varnish on the surface.  the stem's color fades at the middle of the leaf, it fades not in a rainbow-like way where the color goes from red to orange to yellow to green, but from red to pink to yellow. 

The leaf is also not completely flat. when the stem is placed parallel to the desk, the largest leaf floats upwards and one of the smaller leaves ( the one with brown spots) have a noticeable slant facing the larger leaf. ok, so apparently the leaf is a compound leaf and what I've been calling leaf is called a leaflet. anyway, the entire leaf is 5.5 cm from stem to leaf. the stem is 1.5cm, which is surprising because I thought that it would be longer. across the leaf from the tip of one of the smaller leaf to the other is about 5 cm, making the leaf sort of square-shaped. and pleasing the eye.  compared to others, my leaf is darker than the one that professor is holding up and lighter than the leaf that the person next to me has. the leaflet is 3.2cm, 2.4cm and 2.6 cm, which is also surprising because I thought that the 2.6 cm one would be larger. Since that leaf has a gradient of lighter green and a darker green, the color may have influenced me to think that the 2.6 cm leaf was larger. 

Observations:

- Compound leaf

- Three leaflets

- Glossy on one side and rough on the other

- Red Stem

- Purple bumps on all three leaflets

- Two leaflets identical (teardrop shape), big leaflet kite shaped

- Black spots on the midrib

- Yellow outline of the whole leaf

- Flat leaf

- White powder on the end of stem

- 8 cm height, 7.5 cm width

- 2 Leaflets yellower as compared to the third

Paragraph:

The sample given by Professor Brewer in class was a compound leaf (was open from one point in different directions, like a palm). It appeared to be plucked from a plant having red stem. The end of the stem was large- bulb like. The leaf had yellower outline and was waxy on the upper part as compared to the lower part of the leaf. The upper part of the leaf also appeared dark green as compared to the lower part. The leaf had three leaflets, two of which were of the same size and appeared to be identical whereas the bigger leaflet was kite shaped and different than the other two. Two small leaflets were teardrop shaped and had purplish spots on them. One of the leaflets also had purplish bumps which made the plant look malnourished or diseased.  The leaf was overall a littl dried out. All three leaflets were pale green (yellowish green) in colour but one of them was darker than the other two. The midrib of the bigger leaflet aso had black spots which were evident. The purple spots on the leaflets also followed a curvy pattern. Leaflets also seemed to have little hair coming out of them. Red stem also became yellower as it extended through the leaves as the midrib. Veins of the leaf also followed a beautiful pattern and looked like alveoli of the lungs. Veins were lighter in color as compared to the color of the leaf. At last, odor of the leaf cannot bedescribed but the leaf had a very distinguishable scent.

The plant sample given out in class is a compound leaf; it has three main leaf parts similar to a clover. The three leaf parts are connected to the stem at the same point; the stem itself was redish maroon. The three leaf parts were different sizes and shapes, the main part (middle) was larger than the other two being 4.25 cm it is also a spade like shape with indentations. The outer leaves were smaller the right one being 3.5 cm and the left being 2.5cm presumably because it was damaged the most. Both the peripheral leaves were damaged and had leaf minor damage on them. The leaves all were firm and would return to its form. The overall plant piece is 6 cm tall and 5.5 cm wide.

On initial observations of the leaf, there is a single red/pink stem that further branches out into 3 different leaves. The stem is fuzzy and feels softer, while once the leaves begin to grow out that fuzz is replaced with a waxy coating on the top of the leaf, and the softness of the stem is replaced with slicker, more slippery feeling. The leaves are almost exactly symmetrical in shape and size, with the center leaf being larger in both aspects. They all exhibit a broader shape at the head of the leaf, and all narrow down once they get closer to the stem. The leaves are a dark, shiny green on top and have yellow veins running through them in a very uniform fashion. Every vein has smaller tributary veins breaking off of them, and even smaller ones breaking off of those as well, which seems to go on indefinitely. While the leaves display a rich, dark green color, the middle leaf has a distinctly large brown spot, which is a sign of decay and death. There is also a small “wiggling” pattern coming off of the spot. This is due to a small moth larvae hatching in between the leaf layers and eating its way out of the leaf. Very small dark spots were noticed on every leaf as well, sort of like freckles. While the top of the leaf is shiny and vivid, the underside is more pale and dull and looks its unfinished compared to the top side. The leaves also have some lighter patches of green mixed throughout, and can slightly let light through itself. 

    As far as more analytical descriptions on the leaf, there were 4 or 5 small dark spots on the left leaf, while 4 were observed on the middle leaf and 3 were seen on the right leaf. The leaf in its entirety measured in at 7.0 cm in length, and 6.0 cm in width. The left leaf alone measured in at 3.3 cm in length and 2.3 cm in width. The right leaf came in almost exactly the same as the left one, with a 3.1 cm length and a 2.4 cm width. The middle leaf was larger, and came in at 4.6 cm in length and 3.3 cm in width. All these measurements relayed that not only were the leaves in a symmetrical shape and size pattern, but also that the length measurements were always approximately 1 cm more than the width measurements.

I was given a leaf to write about today. The leaf I was given reminded me of a shamrock because of its three leaves. The two leaves attached to the root were similar in shape. The leaf at the center had an upward curving leaf. The texture was noticably different on both sides. The top of the leaf had a smooth wet surface. In contrast, the bottom of the leaf had a chalky texture. The leaf colors also varied. The top of the leaf had a darker green color, while the bottom leaf was a lighter green color. The texture and color differences may be due to photosynthesis. The leaf must be adapted to absorb light so the top of the leaf problably has more chlorophyll. I noticed that each leaf has a midrib going through the center. The midrib starts thick near the petiole, but then decreases in thickness as it travels near the apex. The leaf I was given was noticeably veiny. Each leaf had around eight veins coming out from the midrib. The veins themselves had additional veins coming out of them. This reminded me of a blood under a microscope. The leaf had a musky, skunk like smell. It kind of reminded me of back home where we had lots of skunks running around. The unpleasant smell of the leaf might play a role in repelling insects and birds. What was very interesting for me were the quantitative measurements. The total width of the leaf was 7.2cm wide. The total length of the leaf was 7.2cm. I also noticed that the leaf always felt cold. It seems that the leaf does not hold to heat well.