Writing in Biology

The original figure (Figure 1) is composed of three photos taken at 11:00 am at Durfree Conservatory’s koi pond. The top left hand corner has a photo of multiple orange, yellow, and white fish swimming in the water. The top right hand corner has a photo of plants along the edge of the pond. And the bottom panel of Figure 1 has a photo showcasing an orange koi and plant in the center of the pond.

Differences in the original figure and the replicate (Figure 2) include scale size, border thickness, arrows, amount and color of subjects in focus, glare in some panels of the figures, and figure watermark.

Compared to the original figure, the replicate figure (Figure 2) has a zoomed in view of the fish, the plant, and their interaction. The scale for the photos are different. The photo in the top left corner of Figure 2 is focused on a single, white koi fish and appears larger. The plants in the top right corner of each figure are also different based on background. The bottom panel of Figure 2 also features a single koi fish instead of multiple in the frame like that of Figure 1. Border size in Figure 1 is thinner than that of Figure 2. There is also a glare and watermark on the panels of Figure 1 and not on Figure 2. The arrows indicating subjects between the three panels of each Figure are different based on feather end type.

DISCUSSION:

The goal, or the mission, of this project was to create a figure that illustrated the interaction between the koi fish and plants in Durfree conservatory. The replicated figure (Figure 2) completed that task but with differences in format. In my methods, I did not specify some components that could have made the replicate more like the original .

I did not specify how many koi fish were to be present in the frame when taking the photos. That should have been a factor I should have taken into consideration for my methods. By counting the number of fish in the frame, their color, and their relative size to one another and other objects in the pond, the replicate would have resulted in three yellow, two orange, and two white koi fish. With that amount of fish in the frame of the photo for the top left of the figure, the fish would be shown at a smaller scale rather than that with a single fish.

The original figure has a glare/reflection of the glass ceiling in the water in multiple panels, while the replicate features little to none. This could be because of the size scale and zoom of the camera on the subjects in Figure 2 or could have been due to the photo being taken at a different time of day. An 11 am time for a school week may mean that the creator of Figure 2 was in class, off campus, or otherwise busy. I myself had a class thirty minutes after I took the photos of the interaction.

For the plant panel at the top right of the figure, I also did not state the specific direction in which I took the photo of the plants. The original figure did not feature the stairs of the conservatory like the replicate did. I took the photo at an angle from the bridge but the inclusion of the stairs in the replicate implies that the photo was taken from the center of the bridge towards the entrance of the building stated in the methods.

As for making the figure itself, I did state the scale of the border, but I did not indicate what the specific scale was and where to find it on the page. Looking back now there were two scale options and a “4” of one is more thick than a “4” from the other and that can account for the border thickness difference. For the arrow, I stated I used “an arrow with a feathered end” and while at the time I thought that was specific, looking at the style of the other arrows it was not. Multiple arrows in the tab of arrows on the format website had “feathered ends”, I had just chosen the first one I saw. The original figure also features a watermark from the website that is not on the replicate. This implies that perhaps the replicate was not made using the same website as the original or the creator was able to get rid of it. I did not mention the watermark in my methods so whether or not to include it was up to the creator.

Fractional distillation is a more viable technique than straightforward distillation because fewer material is lost throughout the procedure. Therefore, the distilled compounds are more purified in the results. The copper wire in the fractionating column acts to copy multiple distillations in one round of fractional distillation.

During fractional distillation of unknown 20, I observed a higher boiling compound at about 79 degrees celsius and a lower boiling compound at about 56 degrees celsius. There was a 1:1 ratio of higher and lower boiling points from the product collected in the vials. It can be determined that the lower boiling point compound is acetone because acetone boiling point is 56 degrees celsius. Moreover, the identification of the higher boiling point compound is 2-methyl-2-propanol. The theoretical boiling point for 2-methyl-2-propanol is 82 degrees celsius, which is about 3 degrees different from the experimental boiling point. The difference could be due to human error by heating the compound too quickly. The experimental results for this procedure are accurate because fractional distillation provide pure compounds that are less likely to be lost during the process.

Another possible study we can do as a class is a study on produce or fruit from different supermarkets. We could all buy the same item from various supermarkets, and we each person could record its color, if it's organic or not, and where it was grown. We can leave the fruit/produce out and observe how it rots over time. We could also measure the size of the food item if we need more variables to study. This experiment would be impactful for learning about preservatives used in the food we purchase at grocery stores. It could also show us the difference in shelf life between organic and non-organic foods. There are various grocery stores students can visit to purchase their sample, including Trader Joe's, Big Y, Stop and Shop, Aldi, Target, and Whole Foods. Possible food items to observe are apples, spinach, bananas, avocados, tomatoes, carrots, etc. If its a food item with multiple varieties, such as apples, we would probably keep the variety observed constant. We may have to do research on shelf life ahead of time to choose a food item that won't rot in too short or too long a time. 

    Currently, there are a lot of allergies in the world, and it seems like you can be allergic to almost anything. Yet does the possibility exist that we will be able to stop being allergic to anything as a species in the future? As of right now, the only “remedy” to an allergy lies in using an epipen when an allergic reaction occurs. The solution right now only exists by eliminating the problem in case it occurs. Yet couldn’t we genetically engineer a method that allows us to alter our bodies so that allergens are not considered foreign anymore? That would solve the root of the problem and allow us to live without allergies. Of course, this solution brings forth a lot of ethical issues. If we are able to become immune to allergens, what’s stopping us from doing cosmetic changes based off our genome? This would introduce a lot more problems such as the standard of beauty in society, how important we view attractiveness, etc. As of current, the only methodology that’s similar yet ethical to this would be through epigenetics--where our genetics are altered due to outside stimuli. We are able to grow older and eventually “grow out” of our allergies, but are even able to become allergic to new things when we get older.

This isn’t exactly biology-related, but we had to write papers for an archaeology course this week: The archaeological site that I have selected is the Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site located in Saugus, Massachusetts. Founded by John Winthrop the Younger, it was supposedly in operation between 1646 and approximately 1668. The site was renamed Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site and became part of the National Park System in 1968 due to its significance to the early history of the United States. The site is nationally significant because it is the birthplace of the iron and steel industry in Colonial America, starting and sustaining skilled iron making technology in the New World. The Saugus Iron Works initiated the distribution of workers to other parts of Colonial America where they were able to establish other iron producing facilities. This was critical to the development of industry and technology in the emerging American country. In the early 17th century, iron was used to create indispensable goods such as nails, horseshoes, cookware, tools, and weapons. However the production and manufacturing of iron could only be completed by an industrial enterprise which was not available in North America during the early years of English colonization. Hence all iron goods had to be imported which was very expensive. Winthrop believed that because the colonies had a cheap and abundant supply of materials, an iron works in Massachusetts could be made to produce goods for the Colonies as well as in England itself. Eventually the Braintree Iron Works in Braintree Massachusetts was created to be the first iron works, but proved to be unsuccessful due to a lack of iron ore in the area and an inadequate supply of water to power the machinery. A new manager arose, Richard Leader, who selected a location on the Saugus River to build the next iron works called Hammersmith, which proved to be successful and one of the most technically advanced iron works in the New World.

    They say that unless a child starts learning a language before the age of 6, they will be unable to speak proficiently and fluently enough that they sound native. This is technically incorrect. The way the brain picks up language is actually very similar to how we interpret music. For music, the brain will make “presets” that determine what “music is”. Our brain will then listen to other pieces of music, and compare it with the preset that we have as to what music is defined as. If the preset does not match to what we are listening to, then the brain will decide “oh we do not like this”. The same goes for language, but in a slightly different sense. The brain will create presets based on the sounds that are created in an alphabet of a language. For example, our brain distinctly knows the difference in sound between a “ruh” sound for “r”, and a “luh” sounds for “l”, and is able to formulate the differences in these two sounds. Languages like Japanese or Korean, do not have a distinctive “r” or “l” sound, so when native Japanese or Korean people hear the words “law” and “raw”, they hear the same thing because they never developed the preset to differentiate the two sounds. For them, the two words sound the same. So instead, the child simply has to be exposed to (at the very least) the alphabet of a language in order to still be able to speak proficiently and fluently if they would like to study the language in the future.

Organisms in extreme temperature environments have different physiological and anatomical features that allow them to maintain a desired body temperature. In cold environments, many marine mammals have a thick layer of blubber to help insulate their bodies to stay warm. Not only does the blubber act as a thick insulator, but they also have a very integrative blood system which flows through the blubber to help maintain temperature and offer a high degree of control. Marine mammal’s flippers however are not layered with blubber. In order to keep their extremities warm in cold waters they have a counter-current heat exchange blood system. In the flippers each artery is surrounded by a system of veins. As cool blood flows from the extremities back to the heart it is warmed by the counter flowing warm blood from the heart to the extremities. Other ways for organisms to stay warm in cool environments includes: muscular activity, non-shivering thermogenesis, and an increased metabolic rate without muscular contractions.

Solutions to prevent further deforestation include several national parks including Virunga in the eastern DRC, wildlife reserves such as the Okapi Reserve in the transitional forest of northern DRC, and other heritage sites located in the Sangha Trinational area of Cameroon, Republic of Congo, and Central African Republic. Other reserves are using mixed landscapes and biosphere programs to include nature conservation and sustainable human use, and to provide additional revenue for local communities. Also researchers are working conserve mountain gorilla landscapes in the montane forests of the eastern Congo basin, through ecotourism, community projects, and park management. One of the major programs combating deforestation is the UN-REDD Program (where developed countries, pay forest rich developing countries for conserving their forests and manage forests more sustainably). Most conservation efforts are enforced by militant forces. Guards with guns stop people from entering the forests and restrict hunting.