Writing in Biology

Another challenge when developing mathematical models with respect to data usage is the accessibility of specific data pertaining to the topic of simulation. Often times data necessary to simulate certain scenarios, such as number of deaths by a certain disease, is not accessible to the general public or researchers alike. This makes it impossible to accurately model certain scenarios, of which solutions could be offered with mathematical modeling. The WHO has proposed that “Raw data need to be made publicly accessible for research purposes. National health equity surveillance data need to be reported to, among others, national policymakers and WHO. Global health equity surveillance data need to be reported to the Economic and Social Council, other international bodies, and back to national governments” This would allow mathematical models to be more consistent, accurate, and faster and easier to develop. In turn, modeling done more efficiently allows for interventions to be made much sooner, and problems from the community to global level would be resolved relatively quicker.

Solutions to prevent this loss of important data have been explored by communities around the globe. An example of this includes community-based monitoring, in which communities that are not in countries where health data is routinely collected record their own data. This has been seen in India, where a pattern in sex determination and abortion rates was observed after community-based data was collected. When the sex of the child was determined as female, it was seen that many women chose to terminate these pregnancies. This potentially detrimental pattern to the population would not have been caught without this data collection and analysis. Based on this, mathematical models can then be used to simulate interventions and policies to offer the best solution to this problem.

As previously stated the original hypothesis constructed before the experiment was, if there is predation by crabs present and the trait of shell thickness is being observed, then evolution by natural selection will occur and a shift to a larger average shell thickness in the experimental tanks containing the Dogwinkle snails can be expected. Based on the results it is fair to conclude that this hypothesis is supported and that when predation by crabs is present evolution by natural selection occurs. This can be concluded because in all trials the average shell thickness of the tanks with crabs, the experimental population, increased significantly from day zero to day 160. For example in Figure 1 the average shell thickness of tanks with crabs increased from 7.175mm on day 0 to 8.875mm on day 160, a total increase of 1.7mm. Meanwhile there was no trend within the tank without crabs, the control population, and the change of average shell thickness within the population was either random or insignificant. For example in Figure 1 the average shell thickness of the tanks without crabs in them change from 7.175mm to 7.4mm, a total increase of .225mm, a much less significant change than the 1.7mm observed in the tanks with crabs. This change in the experimental population proves that evolution by natural selection occurred when predation by crabs was present because the fact that the trait of shell thickness was heritable and variable was already known, but the significant change from thinner to thicker shells in populations where predation was present proves that there is a selection differential when discussing shell thickness, more specifically it can be concluded that thicker shells provide the organism a higher probability to survive and reproduce. This conclusion reiterates the three requirements needed for evolution by natural selection to occur being, heritability, variability and selection differential. Also the interval and duration of the experiment being only 160 days shows exactly how quickly and effectively natural selection can occur in and change a population.

I simply do not understand how memes can free themselves away from us and evolve away on their own. Memes aren't living things. Yes I feel they can evolve, but in ways that we cause them to evolve. Without us, how would they even come into existence in the first place? So without us, memes are nothing. We were the ones who led to Despacito being the most watched video on YouTube. How could the meme of Despacito itself exist on its own without us? 

The same concept goes for the tide pods. People tend to already eat things that aren't supposed to be eaten. Kids for example always eat things they shouldn't eat. We were the ones who turned the eating of tide pods into a thing. How would the meme of tide pods come into existence without some person starting it and then others copying them? Therefore I believe that we are using memes as a way to communicate. This is why memes go viral. It's because we are trying to use them to connect with others and communicate our ideas. The ideas came from our brains. The ideas did not just come into existence by itself. Successful mass communication is possible because memes tend to spread like diseases as stated in the Virality Prediction and Community Structure link. Memes share complex ideas in such short words without the use of scientific reasoning. 

Vitamin B6, also known as pyridozine, naturally occurs in many foods we eat such as poultry, fish, starchy vegetables, and non-citrus fruits.  People may also choose to take a dietary supplement containing viatmin B6  in order to satisfy daily nutitional needs.  Vitamin B6 is required for more than 100 enzyme driven reactions involved in metabolism.  Healthy levels of vitamin B6 contribute largely to the production of modd influencing hormones such as serotonin and norepinephrine.  Vitamin B6 also assists with the conversion of carbohydrates in food into glucose for storage and ATP.  Most importantly, however, this key vitamin helps control levels of the amino acid homocysteine in the blood.  This amino acid is largely associated with heart disease, although more reasearch is needed to determine exactly how the two are interrelated. 

Food color preference of avian foragers has not been widely studied.  In North America, the most common fruit color of bird-dispersed plants are red and black.  Other preferential fruit colors include blue and purple, while orange and green are rarely chosen (Janson 1983).  Fruit colors are commonly considered to increase the conspicuousness of ripe fruit in order to attract birds to disperse the enclosed seeds.  The preference of fruit color in avian foragers may be due to a variety of factors including background color, the prevalence of one color, and nutritional value associated with certain colors.  In our study, we would examine food color preferences of bird species in areas of the Amazon rainforest that are in need of ecological restoration. Frugivorous birds may play an important role in the restoration process due to their efficiency in seed dispersal (Gagetti, B L, et al, 1996).  We hope to direct the selection of plants that produce certain fruit colors to aid in the restoration of degraded forests

The name Snanker is a playful combination of the words snake and bank that McKenzie came up with during her trip and that the scientists decided to keep. After closer investigation, evolutionist Dr. Devon Elop, Dev for short, has come to the conclusion that the Magnacide dynaphyll is a close relative of Panthera onca, or the jaguar (Sartore). “Both species are well adapted for swimming and aquatic environments, but the Snanker is even more so.” While both the jaguar and the Snanker can become prey to the anaconda, the Snanker is far more equipped in dealing with the snake. The Snanker almost solely hunts anacondas and is extremely specialized in doing so. The anaconda is its only predator and due to the fact that they are larger and swifter than jaguars, they are thought to be on the way to overpopulating the species. “I’m extremely proud of this discovery,” McKenzie gloats. “I cannot wait to see what the world has to say about the Snanker”.

For the tetrad dissection crosses, since it is now known that HB1 and HA2 complement each other, their genotypes were able to be figured out at (ade1-/ade2+) for HB1 and (ade1+/ade2-) for HA2. Knowing this information, the parental ditypes (PD) can be determined as (ade1-/ade2+) and (ade1+/ade2-). This means that the non-parental ditypes (NPD) are (ade1+/ade2+) (ade1-/ade2-) and the tetratypes (TT) are (ade1+/ade2-), (ade1-/ade2+), (ade1+/ade2+), and (ade1-/ade2-). 

Once the two adenine deficient plates were incubated for a week, the results were observed. For the first plate, it was found that HA0 could grow without adenine present, while HA1, HA2, and HB1 could not. For the second plate, it was found that HB1xHA0 and HB1xHA2 could grow without adenine present, while HB1xHA1 and HA1xHA2 could not. 

Two adenine deficient plates were then divided into four sections each. The first plate was labeled with HA0, HA1, HA2, and HB1, and had each quadrant’s corresponding yeast type lightly spread onto it. The second plate was labeled with HB1xHA0, HB1xHA1, HA1xHA2, and HB1xHA2, and had each quadrant’s corresponding yeast cross from the incubated plate lightly spread onto it. For the spreading process, a clean toothpick was used to drag a small amount of the required yeast in a straight line near the edge of the plate. Then a new toothpick was used to drag a single line up from the first line of yeast cells and then spread them in a zig zag fashion. The goal of this process was to spread the yeast cells to roughly one cell thickness. The two adenine deficient agar plates were then left to incubate at 30oC for a week.