Evelyn Kluemper
AP Biology
4/21/17
Gorman, James. "No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care." The New York Times. The New York Times, 20 Apr. 2017. Web. 20 Apr. 2017.
The naked mole rat is the only known cold-blooded mammal. The creature lives with hundreds of others in a system of underground tunnels. A queen mole rat leads her colony, which consists of workers, soldiers, and male consorts. Until two recent cases, it was widely believed in the scientific community that mole rats are unable to develop cancer. The latest discovery about these remarkable creatures is that mole rats have the ability to survive without oxygen for eighteen minutes. The normal level of oxygen in our atmosphere is about twenty percent. It was found that mole rats “can live for at least five hours in an atmosphere that is only 5 percent oxygen” (Gorman). Scientists from Berlin, Europe, Africa and the United States have determined that mole rats are able to convert forms of energy metabolism. In an ideal setting with an abundance of oxygen, these animals typically run on glucose, as does any other mammal on Earth. However, when there is an absence of oxygen, mole rats can metabolize using fructose, which is a sugar that can be found in fruits. Most mammals can metabolize fructose anaerobically, but only in particular organs, while the mole rat can use fructose in their brain and heart. Although their pulse lowers and breathing slows, the mole rat is the only known mammal that metabolizes fructose in all organs. Scientists speculate that this ability evolved in these animals because mole rats live in tunnels that may lack oxygen.
According to Dr. Thomas Park from the University of Illinois, “there’s no immediate use for this knowledge, but it is one of many aspects of mole rat biology that seem worth learning more about” (Gorman). Dr. Park is likely correct that this information is not critical to current society. Even if people lived in conditions with low oxygen levels, it would take millions of years for humans to naturally evolve to develop this ability. However, this knowledge could potentially be used by the medical community, such as to treat or prevent strokes.
This article was interesting to read, as I had little knowledge about how fascinating mole rats are. An informative video was included, allowing me to see naked mole rats and help me understand the information presented in the article. I would have liked it if the article was longer and had more facts. Additional background information about naked mole rats would help readers understand the significance of the discovery.
I read Evelyn’s review of the article "No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care." Her review talked about the fact that naked mole rats can survive without oxygen for 18 minutes. She then goes on to explain that studies show that mole rats are able to convert forms of energy into metabolism- more specifically they use fructose. The mole rat is the only mammal that can metabolize fructose in all organs of the body. I chose to read Evelyn’s review because the topic seemed interesting and a new piece of information that I know nothing about.
ReplyDeleteI think that Evelyn could have improved her review of this article by including more details about the significance of this new discovery. She also could have included more about the habitat and background of naked mole rats to give some context for readers who know nothing about the mammal.
I definitely learned something new from this review. I’m not really sure how this will change my life but I’m glad to have learned something new from reading Evelyn’s review.
I decided to comment on Evelyn’s review of “No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care.” Overall, the article and its review were very well-written. For example, I liked how Evelyn began the review by giving a background on the lifestyle of the naked mole rat. This helped understand her point later on. Another thing I liked was how Evelyn included quotes from the article. This makes her review seem more legitimate and accurate. Finally, I liked how she explained how rats were able to survive on such low amounts of oxygen by convertings forms of energy metabolism. This helped me to understand how something that seem impossible, they are able to do.
ReplyDeleteEven though the article was very well-written, there were areas that could have been improved. The review was hard to follow at some points when ideas were not connected. For example, she wrote that previously scientists thought mole rats couldn’t get cancer and next writes that they can survive without oxygen for 18 minutes. Another thing I disliked was how she included quotes in her second paragraph. I would have prefered that her connections be more her own ideas as opposed to just stating what some scientists believe.
Overall, the article and its review were very well-written. This topic was interesting to me because it makes me wonder if humans will eventually develop some way of surviving with less oxygen. This is interesting to me as a runner because being about to produce energy other ways would be very beneficial.
I read the review of and the article “No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care,” by The New York Times and I found it very interesting and informative. I liked that a video was included in the article, so watching that helped me understand the topic more and definitely boosted its importance in today’s society. Also, I liked how the author brought in a quote from a researcher who has been studying mole rate saying that mole rats “can live for at least five hours in an atmosphere that is only five percent oxygen,” I did not know anything about mole rats prior to reading this article and learning this information was really interesting because I never knew how special and unique mole rats are to other animals. Lastly, I like how the author related facts we knew about other animals and related those to the facts of a mole rat, singling it out and showing how distinct they are. As you can see, there were a lot of positives about this article and it was a good read.
ReplyDeleteEven though there were many good aspects about this article, there were also some negative aspects. First, I did not like how short the article was, it would have been better if the article was longer and included more facts about mole rats and why they are underrated and should be a focus on in society. Also, I did not like how the author did not incorporate a lot of background information about those mole rats, this would have helped the readers understand the significance of this discovery even more. Although there were some bad aspects, I really enjoyed reading.
I learned a lot from reading this article. First, I learned so much information about an animal I never think about: mole rats, and how important they are to today’s society. Also, I learned that mole rats can use fructose in both their brain and heart, not just in their brain like other animals. This discovery is important to today’s society because it brings a voice to mole rate who have been ignored mostly in our community. Overall, I really enjoyed reading this article and I look forward to learning more about this topic in the future.
Sarah’s review of the article "No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care." was very well done. Her summary was clear and concise, while still providing a depth of information about this topic. She also did a great job expressing her own opinion and critique of the article. Her well articulated stance showed she really absorbed the information and considered the authors work. Finally, I thought Sarah did an exemplary job including data points that helped the reader understand the information. She said, “It was found that mole rats “can live for at least five hours in an atmosphere that is only 5 percent oxygen.”
ReplyDeleteOverall Sarah did a good job, but she still could improve a few areas. For example, she could have used a couple more direct quotes from the article. This would give her readers a better sense of the author's voice and add some additional credibility. Also, she could have expanded on the significance of this discovery.
I was very interested in Sarah’s review and the article she cited. I had no knowledge about this topic before, so it was interesting to learn more about the new discoveries.
I read Evelyn’s review of the article"No Oxygen? The naked mole rat may not care ." I enjoyed reading her article for three reasons. The first reason is that she provided a very good summary of the article. The second reason is that she referenced studies done on her topic, which added credibility to her review. Finally, I enjoyed how she kept her review concise and did not include any useless information.
ReplyDeleteAlthough her review was well written, she could have improved two aspects of her review. The first was that she could have improved on her grammar, as this would have made the review much easier to read. In addition, she should have elaborated on the significance of this discovery.
After reading this article, it expanded my knowledge on why naked mole rats may not need to live with oxygen and this information is important because scientists may be able to reverse-engineer this into other life forms.
Gorman, James. "No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care." The New York Times. The
ReplyDeleteNew York Times, 20 Apr. 2017. Web. 20 Apr. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/20/science/naked-mole-rats-metabolism-video.html?_r=0
I think Evelyn did a good job with her review. The first thing that I liked is her incorporation of quotes in her review. It helps give a tie to the article and gives a sense a professionalism. Another aspect of the review that I liked is Her description of naked mole rats. I assume that not many people know much about them, at least I didn't, and this helped me understand the point of her review. And, lastly I think she did a good job on the metabolization of fructose. She explained it clearly and this would help people understand something they did not understand or know about previously.
Although I think she did a good job overall, there are some areas of improvement. For example, there were a few grammar mistakes in which she could fix in a few sentences just for clarification purposes. And second, I wish she could have included some statistics from the article, helping give some more data from research made by scientists.
I learned a lot from evelyn's review. I do not know much about naked mole rats so this allowed me to learn more about them and how they can live without oxygen.
ReplyDeleteGorman, James. "No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care." The New York Times. The New York Times, 20 Apr. 2017. Web. 20 Apr. 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/20/science/naked-mole-rats-metabolism-video.html?_r=0
I read Evelyn Kluemper’s review of “No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care” and thought that she did a very good job. I particularly liked her summary of the article and its main points. She kept her summary short and concise, which summaries are supposed to be, yet still included enough information for the reader to understand what happened in the article. I also liked how she gave details and specific percents, especially when saying, “mole rats can live for at least five hours in an atmosphere that is only 5 percent oxygen”. These numbers helped provide the reader with more information on the mole rat's ability to live with limited amount of oxygen. Finally, I think that Evelyn did a very good job including quotes, specifically in her paragraph about the relevance this topic has to us. For example, she included the quote “there’s no immediate use for this knowledge, but it is one of many aspects of mole rat biology that seem worth learning more about”.
Although Evelyn did a very good job in her review, she could use some improvement. For example, she could have provided more detail regarding the habitat and background of the rats, giving the reader more context. In addition, Evelyn could have expanded on why this was so relevant to the readers lives, as her explanation was brief.
I thought that the review was written very well and Evelyn chose a great article to talk about. I think that the topic is very interesting and relevant and Evelyn has further educated me on the topic. I never knew about this topic before reading Evelyn’s review and now feel knowledgeable on this topic. Overall, I really enjoyed Evelyn’s review and learned a lot from it.
Evelyn, I read your review of "No Oxygen? The Naked Mole Rat Might Not Care" by James Gorman and I thought that you did a good job. I thought that you did a nice job with your summary of the article. I was not confused about your topic. This is good for the readers since it creates a understanding of the subject matter for your review. Also, I like that your summary is brief. You are able to move to the main point of your review faster. Finally, I like that you include a direct quotation from Dr. Thomas Park. It provides insight from a respectable source and provides credibility.
ReplyDeleteAlthough your article was good, there are some things that you could improve on. First,I think you could expand on the significance of these findings. You rely too heavily on the quote. Also, I believe that you could improve some minor grammatical errors. This would stop the reader’s attention from being drawn away from the content of the review towards the grammar.
Overall, I enjoyed your review. It will be interesting to see if anything comes from these findings and if this information is actually used to prevent strokes.