BioQuakes

AP Biology class blog for discussing current research in Biology

Author: biospearb

CRISPR: Is Science Going Too Far?

CRISPR is a some-what new genetic tool in the field of science to edit human embryos. Using CRISPR, scientists can edit the genes of organisms more precisely than ever before. It uses RNA and an enzyme that slices up invading virusesF. One use of this new technology is to fix mutations that cause genetic diseases.

Crispr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRISPR

Ethical concerns arose in April of 2015 when Chinese research used CRISPR to edit nonviable human embryos. In addition, some fear that the use of CRISPR to give the embryo traits not found in their genetic code can lead to a obsessive gene culture like the one found in Gattaca. This ethical debates caused scientists to meet at an international summit hosted by the United States National Academies of Sciences and Medicines, where the scientists discussed the ethical concerns of CRISPR but agreed to continue researching it cautiously.

In addition, some argue that using CRISPR for gene editing defeats the sacredness of the human genome and is unnatural. To this point, Sarah Chan from the EuroStemCell argues, “There is nothing sacred or sacrosanct about the genome as such. The human genome – the genome of humanity as a whole, and the unique individual genome we each possess – is merely the product of our evolutionary history to date”. From this point of view, the genome is merely a record of one’s history, but to some religious groups it is a symbol of life which should not be tainted with.

So readers, what do you think? Should we use this tool to help cure treatable diseases, or does this new technology cross the line between scientific mechanisms and morality? What type of genes should this new tool be allowed to edit?

 

Other sources

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/year-review-breakthrough-gene-editor-sparks-ethics-debate

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/crispr-debate-fueled-publication-second-human-embryo-editing-paper

http://www.wired.com/2015/12/stop-dancing-around-real-ethical-problem-crispr/

http://www.eurostemcell.org/commentanalysis/ethics-changing-genes-embryo

Viruses are Like Felons, They Both Get Mugshots

Scientists at the Stanford University School of Medicine and three other schools have just discovered that a bacteria named Marinomonas mediterranea takes “RNA mug shots” to help recognize and defeat harmful viruses. The bacteria can take “RNA mugshots” or “DNA mugshots” depending on whether the invader is RNA-based or DNA-based.

Researchers want to use this technic to genetically form crops that have this virus-identifying property. Another use is to prevent viruses from infecting dairy products.

CRISPR is a new way of editing genomes that relates to this discovery. Bacteria takes pieces of DNA from cells and store them, also like “mugshots”.

RNA help DNA is coding, decoding, and expressing genes. By just getting a snapshot of a virus’ RNA or DNA, bacteria can identify this virus and destroy it in the future.

This finding is very new and so scientists are still studying how it exactly works and what its applications are. How do our readers think about it? Is this a surprising discovering or does it seem obvious? Were you aware that viruses have their own DNA and RNA? How do you think bacteria can apply this technic to other problems in the body, such as the regulation of cell production? Comment below on your scientific observations of this finding!

 

https://pixabay.com/en/virus-microbiology-cell-infection-163471/

Other sources:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/02/160225153423.htm 

http://kalen2utech.com/bacteria-take-rna-mug-shots-of-threatening-viruses/ 

http://www.technewscoverage.com/news/bacteria-take-rna-mug-shots-of-threatening-viruses.html 

 

My Gut is Telling Me To Exercise

Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder have recently discovered that early life exercise can improve the activity of the gut microbiome. The gut microbiome is the next big thing in scientific research as scientists discover its affect on both general health and disease progression.

“Our gut microbiota contains tens of trillions of microorganisms, including at least 1000 different species of known bacteria with more than 3 million genes”. Microbiota, found in the intestine, help with a range of bodily functions such as digesting foods that the stomach is unable to, producing vitamins, and helping the immune system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli#/media/File:EscherichiaColi_NIAID.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escherichia_coli#/media/File:EscherichiaColi_NIAID.jpg

‘Exercise affects many aspects of health, both metabolic and mental, and people are only now starting to look at the plasticity of these gut microbes,”. Bacteria reside in infants’ intestinal tracts after birth to assist digestion and immune development. Exercise increases the effectiveness of these bacteria, and a  healthy gut biome promotes better brain function and causes antidepressant effects.

Scientists studied exercise and its effects on the gut microbiome using juvenile rats and proved this theory. The rats that exercised during their early lives developed a better microbial structure. The adult rats that exercised could not catch up to the rats that exercised as juveniles.

Do you think that this is an obvious or an unexpected idea, that early life exercise strengthens the gut microbiome? Does metabolic health usually coincide with mental health? Why would the gut microbiome be related to gene-making?

Other Sources

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26647967

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/290747.php 

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-guts-microbiome-changes-diet/

 

 

Sorry I’m So Lazy, Blame It On My Pre-Motor Cortex.

Scientists at the University of Oxford revealed in MRI scans of forty people that people of different levels of motivation show different brain responses to motion. Before people act, the pre-motor cortex activates prior to the parts of the brain which control movement. The brain’s of lazy people proved to light up more than the brains of industrious people.

Scientists believe that the brain connections between decisions and action are less effective in the lazy. Consequently, it requires more effort for this people to take actions. This leads scientists to believe that laziness is biology rather than concerning attitude.

mri-brain-scan-apathy.jpg

http://www.livescience.com/52807-laziness-found-in-brain.html

Scientists at the University of Oxford caution that this finding most likely does not explain all conditions of laziness, but state that, by giving us more information about the brain processes underlying normal motivation, it helps us understand better how we might find a treatment for those pathological conditions of extreme apathy” (Robert Roy Britt, Laziness: Blame it on the Brain).

A previous study in 2012 suggests that laziness is related to the level and location of dopamine in the brain. “While high levels in some brain regions were associated with high work ethic, a spike in seemed to indicate just the opposite–a person more likely to slack off” (Jennifer Welsh, Slacker or Go-Getter? Brain Chemical May Tell).  Similar to the recent study in 2015, this study in 2012 suggests a similar point: laziness is most attributable to biology.

So readers, what do you think? Do you think there are some people who are just lazy no matter how much effort they put in? Should lazy people be taking antidepressants, which increase the level of dopamine?

For addition information…

http://brainhealthbook.com/laziness-lack-motivation-can-brain-disorder/

http://www.psmag.com/business-economics/your-brain-is-making-you-lazy-42103

http://gizmodo.com/science-finally-explains-why-some-people-just-dont-care-1742654672

Protein: A Cell’s Hero or Villain?

The function of the endoplasmic reticulum is to fold and secret transmembrane proteins. Proteins in cells provide a variety of functions; such as speeding up chemical reactions through enzymes, protecting the cell against disease through antibodies, and coordinating organism activities with hormones. Proteins are obviously crucial to cells.

However, recent research shows that although proteins are supposed to help cells run efficiently, in some cases, under stress, proteins can cause cell suicide, or apoptosis. Apoptosis is part of the natural cycle of a cell, but in this case, proteins are truncating the cell’s normal cycle, which can even be disease-inducing.

FoldedProtein

Licensing Information at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Protein_folding#/media/File:Protein_fold.png

 

When environmental conditions or genetic factors around the ER go awry, a cellular stress reaction called the Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) either triggers or deactivates DR5, Death Receptor 5 Protein, which can lead to cell suicide. The two main factors which control the UPR are IRE1A and PERK. By activating XBP1, which drives expression of cell-survival genes, IRE1A promotes cell survival. PERK actives CHOP, which in turn activates DR5.

The ER activates UPR in order to alleviate cell stress and return the ER to homeostasis, but this instead can lead to apoptosis.

ER stress is central to many diseases, including neurodegeneration, type II diabetes, cancer, atherosclerosis, and liver disease. This finding is so important because now that scientists have found that IRE1A and PERK are the causes of this response, they can better study the phenomenon.

The idea that an organelle can be stressed is very interesting. I usually think of organelles as having clean structures and clean results, but this story shows that the ER can be overstressed through changing conditions and its actions will reflect this stress.

Another interesting part of this article is that when the ER activates UPR, this will either activate or deactivate the DR5, the cause of cell suicide. In science, we usually think of things as reliable and consistent, but this response to the ER can either save the kill or destroy the cell.

Finally, Cancer is a diseased caused by the over-multiplication of cells. If cell stress leads to cell suicide, then maybe scientists can use their new found understanding of the proteins involved in UPR to figure out a way to destroy cancerous cells.

Original Article

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/40418/title/Protein-Helps-Cells-Adapt-or-Die/

Sources

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21266244

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3290993/

http://carcin.oxfordjournals.org/content/21/3/485.long

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

Skip to toolbar