Find a research article about any thing to do with genetics that you are interested in. A good place to start is Science Daily. (Science Daily.com)
Here is also an LCC library source:
Give a URL and a short (1-2 paragraph) summary of the article and why you found it interesting. Use your own words.
The article I read was called “THE GENETICS (AND ETHICS) OF MAKING HUMANS FIT FOR MARS.” Despite the title, there was little debate on the ethics of gene editing. However, it did discuss the possibility of modifying genes in human adults to make them more fit for space travel. We want to put people on Mars, but due to cosmic radiation, the fear of deep space, muscular atrophy from zero gravity, and a variety of other obstacles, the human body is in no shape to survive long treks past the moon. A Harvard geneticist has found around forty genes that can help with some of these hurdles. They code for things like cancer and radiation resistance, bone density, oxygen-processing efficiency, and even helps reduce the odor produced from our bodies. These studies are still relatively new and scientists are testing individual cells before moving to larger subjects, but they are hopeful that gene therapy can make our goal of reaching Mars a reality.
I found this interesting because the closer we are to space travel, the closer we are to understanding the universe. I am not sure if I agree with modifying our genes to accomplish these goals, since I am unaware of the consequences that could bring on our species and the world. There’s a fear in my family that in time, the rich will be the only ones who can afford to modify their genes to make more powerful offspring. Although this sounds like a sci-fi dystopian future teen novel premise, it’s something to think about before we jump into trying to make scientific advancements for the sake of making them.
https://www.wired.com/story/ideas-jason-pontin-genetic-engineering-for-mars/
Very interesting. Perhaps you can say something about how they found those genes.
https://flavourjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2044-7248-1-22
The title of this article is “A genetic variant near olfactory receptor genes influences cilantro preference”.
Basically, some people think that cilantro tastes bad (it is often described by these individuals as tasting/smelling “soapy”). In this study, the authors asked users from 23andMe if they thought that fresh cilantro tasted like soap, and also if they liked the taste of fresh cilantro. 14,604 people answered the first question and 11,851 answered the second. The authors then did what is known as a genome-wide association study and found two SNPs that they felt were significant. They hypothesized several genes that could be playing a role in cilantro aroma that are associated with these SNPs (OR6A2 on chromosome 11 being the most promising).
In the study results, ~13.7% of individuals said that cilantro tasted soapy while ~26.3% said that they did not like cilantro. The authors speculated that environmental factors may bias more individuals with the second question than the first. They did note that the participants were primarily of European ancestry, so they may not have as much exposure to cilantro in comparison to individuals coming from cultures where cilantro is a staple of the cuisine.
I thought this article was interesting because cilantro tends to be such a polarizing ingredient and this gives a hypothetical genetic basis as to why some people might not like it. It is also interesting to see a consumer product like 23andMe being used to conduct genetic research.
They do a fair amount of research on quite a variety of traits. I constantly get surveys about many aspects of my health and behavior. I like cilantro…
I also like cilantro. My wife thinks it tastes like soap.
I think it tastes like soap AND I like it
The article I read was “Gene Activity Data Could Spare Thousands Of Mice”, was very interesting in that they had developed an online app, which they collected over 45,000 genes from the blood of 10 mice and the lungs of 6 mice. Which meant that any scientist could get a hold of any gene(s) from mice blood and/or lungs samples that were all frozen in storage and the data that was collected was stored, in what they called “modules”. What surprised me is what Akul Singhania, Bioinformatics Postdoc, used an advanced approach through bioinformatics to cluster genes into the modules. By this he clustered thousands of genes and millions of points into an online app that is useful and in a visual form for any scientists to access at any time. From the blood and lungs they infected the mice to collect the gene activity from: (parasite which is transmitted to mother-child from an infected cat’s feces or from under cooked infected meat) Toxoplasma gondi, Influenza virus , Respiratory Syncytical Virus (RSV), the soil-dwelling and water bacteria Burkholderia pseudomallei, the fungus Candida albicans, and allergens house dust mite. In the blood they collected diseases like Listeria, murine Cytomegalovirus(mCMV), malaria, and parasite Plasmodium chabaudi. They did look into how the genetic relationship of the diseases impacted the immune response. Like how the genes of Type I and Type II Interferon.
Overall the article was worth while, but I wished that there was more diseases looked into. It means that animals are still going be used for harvesting for genes to find new and present diseases and viruses to either find cures or new medications like anemia, Rheumatoid arthritist, Asthma, Diabetics Type I and II, GERD, Vitamin B deficiency, Fibromyalgia. These are just a few diseases I currently have. I hope in time they will have collected more genes from the diseases from above, and from all the life threatening diseases in the world.
Cite:
The Francis Crick Institute. (2019,June 2019). Gene activity database could spare thousands of mice. Science Daily. Retrieved June 28, 2019 from
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/06/190628120527.htm
Studies from Queensland Biosciences Precinct Have Provided New Information about Animal Genetics [A regulatory gene network related to the porcine umami taste receptor (TAS1R1/TAS1R3)]
This article discussed how “taste perception plays an important role in the mediation of food choices in animals.” The genes TAS1R1 and TAS1R3 have been linked to the umami taste receptors. Researches performed a meta-analysis of 20 gene expressions that spanned from 480 prone microarray chips and then screened 328 other taste related genes that were selected from a variety of 12320 genes. The porcine umami taste network seemed to be constructed from expression of 328 different genes on 27 different tissues working together. Considering this, and an identified coexpression cluster for the umami taste, the first connecter of the cluster begins with the TAS1R1 and TAS1R3 genes. They concluded the identification of several taste-regulatory genes and furthered the knowledge of porcine umami taste.
I found this article interesting because pinpointing such a specific flavor pallet such as umami seems like such a difficult task considering how it has to be tested. It is obvious that it is such a complex flavor with the 328 genes that are connected to this flavor.
http://go.galegroup.com.lcc.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T004&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=BasicSearchForm¤tPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CA442605627&docType=Brief+article%2C+Report&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZGPP-MOD1&prodId=ITOF&contentSet=GALE%7CA442605627&searchId=R6&userGroupName=lom_lansingcc&inPS=true
The article I read was called “Fast-Changing Genetics Key to Hospital Superbug Survival” by the UCL Genetics Institute and Peking University People’s Hospital. They explain that a type of bacteria that is commonly found in hospitals, K. pneumoniae, was found to be drug-resistant and were causing deadly effects in patients. It was found that the drug Carbapenems, that is typically used as a last resort in a patient with severe infections, was losing its beneficial effect. A group of geneticists tested a hospital including different wards and equipment, for fourteen months where they found that this bacteria had been circulating the hospital for a year. Through series of tests they found that additional genes had been packaged up inside the bacteria’s plasmids. These genes allowed the bacteria to survive the Carbapenem treatments and were called fosA which were present in all of the strains that were tested on the K. pneumoniae. The team found a correlation with this gene and the drug resistance where the larger amount of copies the bacteria had in its plasmid, the more successful it was to invade a patient. I found this article intriguing because I recently was just offered a position in a hospital and it relates to how important infections control with addition to hand hygiene is in healthcare.
I teach a microbiology lab and we spent quite a bit of time discussing handwashing.
The article I chose to read was titled “Study uncovers genetic switches that control process of whole-body regeneration”.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190314151546.htm
Animals such as worms, salamanders, geckos, and jellyfish can regenerate their bodies after being attacked. Researchers conducted a study using three-banded panther worms in an attempt to figure out exactly how this process of regeneration works. They started by looking at the worms’ genome. What they found was that there is a section of non-coding DNA that controls the activation of a very important gene. Researches named this master control gene “EGR” which stands for early growth response. Once activated, EGR activates a cascade of other genes involved in regeneration. There were over 18,000 regions of DNA that researchers were able to identify that change in response to EGR activation during the regeneration process.
The next step for these researchers is to use this information to figure out why the regeneration process does not work in humans. The EGR gene is present in humans and becomes activated when cells are injured, yet we cannot regenerate. EGR has a different effect in human cells, but we don’t yet understand why. If scientists can figure what makes EGR activate regeneration in the worms, they can apply it to other animals.
I chose this article because I was interested in learning more about how regeneration works after learning that the human liver can regenerate. If scientists can gain a better understanding of how total body regeneration works in animals like jellyfish, we may be able to figure out a way to regenerate things like human flesh for burn victims.
I found an article called “Genetics behind the evolution of flightless birds”. Looking through a catalog of genetics articles, this one just caught my eye. The researchers in this article took a look at the genome of dozens of flightless birds. Although the overall genomes could vary a high amount, the segment which codes for flight development stayed consistent. The authors explained that these alleles presented very similarly in phenotype within these birds, giving them shorter forelimbs, smaller breastplates, and reduced musculature in their upper body.
The authors decided to try and prove their theory by tagging the genes which are responsible for flight in birds in their sequencing. Following their gene tagging experiment, they determined that the marked gene was turned off in all of these birds. The authors found it fascinating that forelimb development was greatly reduced in these birds, yet hindlimb development was not. I think its pretty cool the different ways environments impacted these species and their development. I wonder at what point in ostrich evolution did their genome decided that running was more advantageous than flying? Did they ever fly at all?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190417115101.htm