Bio in ACTION!

Blog 4: Biology Song!

Verse:
There are just four bases in DNA.
There is G and T, and there’s C and A.
And their sequence in genes
Forms our guts, lungs, and spleens
From our genome after all.

Chorus:
It’s your genome after all,
It’s our genome after all,
It’s our genome after all,
We’ve great gobs of genes.

Verse:
If your ACA turns to ACT
There’s a world of problems
For you and me.
For the bases won’t hold,
And the protein won’t fold,
From your genome after all.

Chorus
From <http://www.juliantrubin.com/biologyjokes.html>

This song refers to the biological principle of DNA formation and base pairing – the “matching” of the complementary chemical components of DNA. Those four components, A, T, C, and G, bond to form the backbone of DNA. Adenine (A) and Thymine (T) form bonds, while Cytosine (C) and Guanine (G) form those bonds as well. There are many biology “inside jokes” in this song, beginning with the very fact of the song’s content: the “bases in DNA” and the fact that these bases form every organ, tissue, and cell in our bodies.
In order to fully understand the song, the listener must have working comprehension not only of the facts of DNA base pairing, but of the effects of DNA base pairing mutation (such as base substitution, which is the example used in the song) on not only that base pair, but on the entire genome.
The biology is properly applied in this song – DNA, and DNA’s base pairs, do in fact make up the entire human genome. And it is certainly true that a single base substitution can have devastating effects. In fact, the exact base substitution named in the song – from adenine to thymine – is the base substitution which leads to a debilitating and potentially fatal condition known as sickle cell anemia. Although the codon named in the song (ACA or ACT, respectively) is not the same codon, the base pair substitution itself is the same.
The only inaccurate statement is “For the bases won’t hold;” the idea of a base holding is an abstract one which could reference several things. The first possibility is that the song is implying that the chemical component thymine, once it replaces adenine, will not form chemical bonds. This is not literally true, but could be interpreted in such a way as to be factual: while the thymine will, in fact, bond, it will form a bond in the complementary RNA strand with an adenine, as opposed to the uracil that the adenine would have bonded with: so while it does form a bond, it forms  a different bond than would have been formed had the base pair substitution not occurred. The alternative possible interpretation of this song is simply that the bases won’t “hold,” as in, won’t stay the same or won’t produce the same nucleotide.
While this song is largely factually correct, it is also hilarious when taken at face value. Its humor is derived largely from the fact that it takes such dense scientific information as the human genome, DNA base pairings, and mutations, and condenses them into a short ditty. The irony of a song about submicroscopic bits of matter sung to the tune of “It’s A Small World” is readily evident; the rhyme scheme, which sticks closely to the existing rhyme scheme from the popular children’s song, adds to the humor. The oversimplified representation of systems which are clearly extremely complicated (as in “Their sequence in genes/forms our guts, lungs, and spleens”) is humorous, because the listener is part of the song’s “inside joke”—it is almost as though the song is nudging you and saying you get it – Average Joe doesn’t. For those listening to the song itself, as opposed to reading the lyrics, the cheery tone with which the song is sung must gain a new humor during the final verse.

The very strange evolutionary classification of Ferrets
Nicole Steck
Ferrets are animals that have very complex taxonomical and evolutionary histories. Black-footed ferrets, Mustela nigripes, are an endangered, predatory species that live in prairie areas. M. nigripes are evolved from weasel-like ancestors. The first ferrets were Mustela stromeri, which most likely evolved M. putorius (European polecat) and M. eversmanni (Siberian polecat), in addition to the M. nigripes, during the Pleistocene era. Interestingly, the domestic ferret shares the taxonomic classification of the European polecat, M. putorius. The differences between the two animals are made, taxonomically, through the very tenuous subspecies listing of furo for ferrets, making them Mustela putorius furo. The European polecat and domestic ferret are genetically very similar. According to one ferret specialist, if tested, there would most likely be a genomic similarity of greater than 99% between the ferret and polecat.  However, physical differences, particularly internally, are vast. The skulls of European polecats and domestic ferrets have different shapes, bases, teeth sizing, shape, and layout; there are also fundamental differences between the structures of the eyes and brains of the two animals. Also of note is the fact that, although the ferret and the European polecat are able to mate and reproduce viable offspring, the fact that it does not occur commonly indicates a difference in species. For these reasons, although there would most likely be a genomic similarity of greater than 99%, there is no proof that the domestic ferret and the European polecat share a common ancestor.
However, despite the genomic similarities and same-species classification, M. putorius furo and M. putorius are clearly not the same species. It is very possible that the domestic ferret evolved from another Mustelid of similar genetic makeup. Other possibilities suggested for the strange taxonomic, genomic, and reproductive similarities between the European polecat and the domestic ferret is the possibility that there was an intermediate species which existed in the past, and from which one or both are descended; if this species had become extinct and its skeletal remains associated with or confused with some other Mustelid, this could very well be an undiscovered link between the animals. Any examination of this possibility would be confused by the intertwined evolutionary history of the other animals of the Mustelid classification. Perhaps, one day, the ferret and the European polecat will obtain their own niches.

FerretCentral: http://www.ferretcentral.org/faq/history…
BlackFootedFerret: http://www.blackfootedferret.org/facts-h…
American Ferret Association, Inc. Breed Standard: http://www.ferret.org/pdfs/general/Breed…

Autosomal recessive inheritance is a term which refers to the inheritance of recessive traits. Recessive traits are, in terms of genetics, the traits that do not occur if another trait is present. Blue eye color is an example of a recessive trait: a person can only have blue eyes if both parents carry the gene that codes for blue eyes, and both of them end up contributing that gene to the child’s code.
Autosomal recessive inheritance includes things such as eye color, but many autosomal recessive traits are disorders. Some examples of autosomal recessive traits are Sickle Cell Anemia, Tay Sachs disease, and Cystic Fibrosis. The disorders are very different: sickle cell anemia is a disorder which can lead to fatigue, increased risk of infection, and more serious complications; Tay Sachs disease is an incurable disorder in which the absence of an important enzyme, hexosaminidase A, leads to fatty cells building up in the brain and it is unusual for victims to survive beyond five years; Cystic Fibrosis is a disease which is characterized by increased bodily secretions, particularly mucus in the lungs which eventually leads to death as a result of respiratory failure.
Each autosomal disorder is, interestingly, associated strongly with a certain group, those from a certain area. This is because the disease is passed through “carriers,” who have only one gene of the trait instead of two. Because communities have historically reproduced largely among themselves, hereditary conditions are often confined to a narrow group who are at risk. This is the case in each of the conditions mentioned above. Tay Sachs disease affects primarily those of Eastern European Ashkenazi Jewish origin, Sickle Cell Anemia affects primarily those of African descent,  and Cystis Fibrosis is prevalent in Caucasians.

 http://www.childrenshospital.org/az/Site…

 http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/dci/Dise…

 http://kidshealth.org/teen/diseases_cond…

This is a photograph of an orchid which is living in my room. This photograph was taken one week after the orchid (which had previously turned its face to the sun) was moved so that its face was towards the inside of the room. The plant has turned almost halfway to the window in the space of one week.

Personal Interest Topic: Crop Biotechnology - What is it? Is it safe?

There is a great deal of controversy regarding biologically altered food on the market. Crop biotechnology involves the genetic engineering of crops by changing their basic DNA structures. These changes can either be to create new or enhance existing characteristics, or to destroy or decrease the effects of detrimental characteristics. These alterations can bring about changes in herbicide resistance, crop gross, nutritional facts, insect resistance, and many other characteristics.

Safety concerns related to the consumption of genetically engineered crops have been prominently featured in the news over the past few years. While specialists from the field of crop biotechnology adamantly defend the safety of genetically altered crops and emphasize the stringent testing to which those crops are subject, organic produce has become increasingly popular in relation to the popularity and employ of genetically modified produce. Independent scientific and health review boards have largely backed the crop biotechnology industry, including The American Medical Association, the Food and Drug Administration, the World Health Organization, and the British Medical Association.

While safety issues remain prominent, they are perhaps somewhat dispelled as a result of the estimated 6 to 12 years of crop testing and $6-12 million per genetically modified crop. Additionally, animals who are fed genetically modified crops have not been shown to have any resulting disabilities, problems or diseases. Due to the way in which animals digest these products, the genetically modified DNA is no longer present within the animal once it is destroyed and sent for human consumption.

Despite the nearly overwhelming and nerve-wracking controversy, it appears that genetic modification of produce is at the very least well thought out and makes every attempt to attain the highest levels of safety and nutrition.

Sources: www.plantsciences.ucdavis.edu www.farmfoundation.org http://www.bio.org/foodag/facts.asp#2