“Climate Change May Be Throwing Coral Sex out of Sync.”

Erin Kaye

9/13/19

Biology

Current Event #2

Milius, Susan. “Climate Change May Be Throwing Coral Sex out of Sync.” Science News, 13 Sept. 2019, www.sciencenews.org/article/climate-change-throwing-coral-sex-out-sync.

The article “Climate Change May be Throwing Coral Sex Out of Synce” by Susan Milius, published in the Science News on September 13th, 2019, examines a recent enviormental trend with coral sex. Tom Shlesinger, a marine biologists at Tel Aviv University, conducted a study to test how coral sex has changed. When corals reproduce they all at once let out tiny colorful egg-sperm on the same few nights a year. The sex cells will separate from one another and gain a chance to fertilize. Environmental cues such as “water temperature, sunlight and wind affect the month of the event” and “the phase of the moon matters in determining the night, and local sunset cues the time,” enable the coral spit out the gametes in the same half hour. After four years of monitoring the coral three out of the five species are no longer synchronized. The mini releases do not create a thick enough environment to make fertilization likely or any gametes left over after fish finish eating. This may be due to the fact that water warmed .31 degrees Celsius in the North and pollutants, especially endocrine disrupting ones, have affected the process.

This can have a huge affect on society because if the producers are decreasing that will hurt all the other animals in the ecosystem. This could lead to a decrease in food availability and hurt the economy and local fishermen. It also could hurt tourism in the country if the coral and sea life is disappearing. If the pollution and warming of the planet are causing problems in this area, it could also be a sign of the same problems occurring in other parts of the world. Trump’s weakening of the clean air and water acts could lead to more waste dumping and could have an effect on the sea life surrounding America and the way our own corals’ reproduce.

The article could have been improved by correlating the decrease in coral with a study of a decrease in its consumer. This would have added validation to the negative effects. A weakness in the article is the length of time spent on the study; it would have been stronger if extended a couple of years. A weakness of the study that James Guest, a coral biologist at Newcastle University in England, pointed out in the article is that it is not easy finding old records with comparable methods so older data might have missed on times of un synchronization that showed up in Shlesinger’s study. A strength of the article is that Milius points out the flaws in the study. Milius also does a good job of describing Shlesinger’s study methods and the effects that his findings could have.

Lily Jebejian

Gallagher, James. “Common Cold Stopped by Experimental Approach.” BBC News, BBC, 16 Sept. 2019, www.bbc.com/news/health-49682583.

Almost everyone experiences a cold once in a while; the sore throat and runny nose plagues us all. But now, researchers at Stanford University are beginning to develop a way to fight the common cold. They are using a technique in which they can change the DNA of a cell through gene-editing. This allows for scientists to switch off the protein methyltransferase SETD3, a protein they found critical in the survival of the virus in mice. The mice without the protein were completely protected and never caught the virus. The virus would not be able to survive without the protein, because it required parts of the cell and the protein to reproduce and stay alive. The cells they modified could be found in the cytoskeleton of the cell. Moving forward, researchers say they will attempt to create a drug which would suppress the protein within the cell, creating an impossible environment for the virus to survive. This experiment is not yet safe for humans and requires extensive research, but is the crucial first step to finding the cure for the common cold.

This research could have a drastic effect on society by finally finding the cure for the common cold. Everyone gets a cold at some point of their life, but for most people it is more of an inconvenience than a life-threatening illness. Except in rare cases where paralysis can be caused when the illness spreads to the brain, and for asthmatics whose symptoms are amplified by the common cold. There is also importance because of the potential of allowing scientists to overcome virus mutations, “‘There is increasing interest in developing treatments that target these host proteins, because it can potentially overcome virus mutation - one of the major barriers to developing effective broadly active antivirals’”(Gallagher), stated Professor Jonathan Ball, a virologist at the University of Nottingham. In conclusion, this experimentation is not only helping to find a cure for the common cold, but is also opening doors to new developments surrounding the topic.

Overall, I think the article was fascinating to read and very relatable because it covered a topic I could invest myself in. The article explained the procedure and the relevance of the experiment very well, but one aspect I think was lacking was explaining what the common cold is and how it affects human. I believe going deeper into the functions of the common cold would have made the article much more intriguing. Another aspect that was well done in the article was the use of quotes from unbiased scientists who were outside of the experiment. This really gave the article perspective, making it easier to believe. In conclusion, the article by James Gallagher was very well written, making it easy to understand a complicated subject that relates to everyday life.   

CRISPR Gene-Editing May Offer Path To Cure For HIV, First Published Report Shows

Caroline McGrath

9/15/19

Current Event 2

Stein, Rob. “CRISPR Gene-Editing May Offer Path To Cure For HIV, First Published Report 

Shows.” NPR, NPR, 11 Sept. 2019, www.npr.org/sections/health-

shots/2019/09/11/759369190/crispr-gene-editing-may-offer-path-to-cure-for-hiv-first-

published-report-shows. 

In 1987, the first step to genetic engineering was made with the discovery of CRISPR. CRISPR, or the protein Cas9, acts like DNA scissors, cutting out and adding in different DNA sequences based on needs. For the past four decades, scientists have worked tirelessly to try and use CRISPR to manipulate DNA in order to protect against terminal diseases. And finally, in the past few days, scientists seemed to take a break to celebrate the success of one of these procedures. Chinese scientists have recently published a journal detailing the CRISPR treatment on an HIV-positive man. Although the treatment did not result in the complete removal of the AIDS virus, it was able to make the DNA change that was intended, without any side effects (a huge development). It inserted a CCR5 gene (which makes people naturally immune to HIV) in hopes that it would disable the gateway that HIV uses to destroy important immune system cells. The scientists call the result “promising” because of the apparent lack of danger (granted the journal is only published after 19 months of trial). The CCR5 was also used in a “reckless” procedure by He Jiankui last year, when he implanted them into the embryos of twin girls. The breakthrough is amist multiple different trials with the genome, including the treatment for blindness, blood disorders, and cancer. When the experiment was underway, the HIV-positive man also had lymphoblastic leukemia, which was found in remission after the transplant, another promising effect of the procedure. The approach did not completely cure the man of HIV, because only 5% of his white blood cells were implanted with the CRISPR, but it is bound to be 100% soon enough. 

The threat of diseases and disorders such as blindness, sickle cell anemia, and cancer impact countless people. Almost every single person in modern society knows at least one person carrying these diseases, with the majority knowing more. And this is not where CRISPR stops, CRISPR has the possibility of changing the DNA to almost every genetic disease. The impact of this new biotechnology would be immeasurable, and with this breakthrough not only promising the end to HIV, but also showing signs pointing towards a possible cure to cancer. It is monumentous, and this is just a scratch on the surface. 

Personally, I found this article to lack important details. First off, the article never mentioned what CRISPR was, or what HIV was. Because of the importance of both of these things to the article, and experiment in general, I found it appalling that they would not provide an explanation or background to either of these topics. Secondly, I found the article to be mostly one sided. There was nothing that gave information about the danger of CRISPR. I read more about the danger of this biotechnology and found the risk factor to equal the development. I think the author needed to give both a brief description about the two topics it was writing about, and give the readers an idea of how dangerous these procedures are. Through the lack of detail in the article, I found there to be multiple positives; starting with the level of simplicity the author wrote with. I am not the most informed person on human genetics, yet the article was easy to follow. I also found it more interesting when the author included other experiments and future experiments using CRISPR, it made me want to read more about these procedures, but also look forward the seemingly bright future CRISPR has to offer.

New DNA Evidence May Prove What the Loch Ness Monster Really Is

Ava Chiang

9/9/19

AP Bio Even / C

Current Event #1

Conversation, Jason Gilchrist/The. “New DNA Evidence May Prove What the Loch Ness Monster Really Is.” Popular Science, Popular Science, 6 Sept. 2019, www.popsci.com/loch-ness-monster-dna-mystery/.

For my current review I decided to read an article by Jason Gilchrist called “New DNA Evidence May Prove What the Loch Ness Monster Really Is.” In the article, Gilchrist claims that, according to a new scientific survey, the Loch Ness Monster (“Nessie”) is most likely a giant eel and not “not an aquatic reptile left over from the Jurassic era or a circus elephant that got in the water to bathe with her trunk aloft.” Reports of the Loch Ness Monster originated in 565 AD Scotland on the River Ness by an Irish missionary; the myth has been kept alive in Modern times through repeated sightings, for example, a grainy photo taken in 1934 by Colonel Robert Wilson. Until now, sightings by monster hunters and tourists were all the evidence that scientists had to use in their investigation. However, this provides unreliable evidence because it could be the result of a psychological situation called “expectant attention,” which is when people who expect or want to see something are more likely to misinterpret visual cues as the thing that they expect or want to.” But a new technique known as e- DNA, gathering environmental DNA, allows scientists to gather a genetic sample of all organisms that live within the Loch Ness. E-DNA is “genetic material that's present in the cells of organisms and shed into their surrounding environment,” this means scientists can identify all living organisms “in a habitat without them having to observe or capture them.” The scientists were based in Drumnadrochit, a village on the western shore of Loch Ness, where they announced their findings. The “team took well over 200 one-liter samples of water from throughout the loch—including the surface and deep water—and compared them with 36 samples from five ‘monster-free’ lochs nearby” this study resulted in “over 500 million DNA sequences and 3,000 species.” After comparing the DNA samples with popular possibilities of the true identity of Nessie, such as large fish (shark, catfish, sturgeon) or a plesiosaur, scientists believe that the “most likely candidate for Nessie that has surfaced in media reporting of the research is a giant eel.” Scientists are hesitant to confirm that this is the truth to the popular Scottish myth, but eel DNA was found all over the Loch Ness, so the possibility cannot be ruled out easily. 

This article is relevant to society because the Loch Ness Monster is an important source of income to the local community since tourists flood to the lake in hopes of seeing Nessie. In addition the Nessie is an important part of Scottish mythology and history, and is an important part of their cultural identity. In August 2018, a  YouGov poll discovered that “24 percent of Scots believe that Nessie exists” including Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister for Scotland. The existence of Nessie becomes a topic that is more important than scientific experiment, if scientists conclude that there is no possibility of a Loch Ness monster existing then it is taking away a vital part of the Scottish community. In addition, it is against the scientific spirit to say with total confidence that there is no Nessie. 

Gilchrist wrote an interesting and thorough article that included both science and history, however the organization of the articles subtopics was all over the place. The paragraphs jumped from scientific evidence collected from the study and quotes from leading scientists to historical information about the Nessie. But despite the lack of organization, the article used a lot of statistics and data, as well as visuals of past Nessie sightings to support the author’s argument. This allowed readers to focus on the article and citing evidence makes the article more trustworthy to readers. A possible improvement would be to organize the article and go from historical sightings to modern “monster hunters” and end with this experiment. Also, it would've been helpful if Gilchrist included other studies on the Loch Ness Monster based in biology techniques and used the scientific method. This would’ve really highlighted how this study differed from all the past ones.

Human Meddling Has Manipulated the Shapes of Different Dog Breeds' Brains

Mariana Apostolatos

Mr. Ippolito

Current Event 1

September 10, 2019

Sanders, Laura. “Human Meddling Has Manipulated the Shapes of Different Dog Breeds' Brains.” Science News, 30 Aug. 2019, www.sciencenews.org/article/dogs-breed-brain-shape-humans.

In a recent article by Laura Sanders, the shapes of different dog breeds’ brains has evolved and manipulated due to human interference. Dog breeders have been shaping the way animals look and behave for centuries, however, this human meddling in dogs has also affected each dog’s brain. A study scanned each brain of sixty-two purebred dogs representing thirty-three breeds. This study revealed that not all dog brains are alike. According to researchers in the Journal of Neuroscience, different breeds have different shapes of various brain regions, which was not in correlation with the head shape or the size of the dogs’ brains or bodies. According to Erin Hecht, an evolutionary neuroscientist at Harvard University, “[they] have been systematically shaping the brains of another species” through selective breeding. After MRI scans of several dogs with normal brain anatomy, researchers identified groups of brain areas, such as smell and taste regions that showed the most variability between breeds. The authors assumed the dogs in the study were all pets.

Dogs that are pets and dogs that are trained for a specific activity may differ in terms that specialized dogs may have even more distinct brains. In our society, the systematic change in dog’s brains can help us in different ways. For example, dogs that have more distinct brains allow us to use them for sheep herding, bomb detecting, guiding the blind, and more jobs that benefit our society. Without having the ability to alter the dog’s brains, we would not be able to utilize them to better our society. 

This article was very well written and informative. It was very easy to read and follow, even providing images of MRI scans of different dog breeds as a visual aid to help better your understanding. All of the information was introduced in chronological order and the author was very straight-foward and to the point. However, I felt that the article was lacking some information that could have helped deepen a reader’s understanding. The article was very short and I wished the author went more in depth about the differences between the brains of wild dogs and the pet dogs with human owners. I would have also liked to read more direct quotes of those who directed the lab or perhaps of more specialists in the subject. Overall, the article was easy to understand, engaging, and not too long, keeping the information relevant and to the point.  

How Bacteria Nearly Killed By Antibiotics Can Recover — and Gain Resistance

Rory Christian
Mr. Ippolito
Current Event 1
September 8, 2019

Saey, Tina Hesman. “Bacteria Nearly Killed by Antibiotics Can Recover and Gain Resistance.” Science News, 12 Aug. 2019, www.sciencenews.org/article/bacteria-nearly-killed-antibiotics-recover-gain-resistance.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that bacteria are becoming resistant to antibiotics. Only recently, scientists have discovered why. The protein known as the AcrAB-ToIC multidrug efflux pump has been buying time for microbes to become antibiotic resistant. Although it can't do the job on its own, it is self sufficient enough to allow for the production of resistance proteins. It is not new that bacteria swaps DNA. If two bacteria come in contact with each other, they will often swap plasmids, antibiotic-resistant genes carried on DNA, and contaminate the healthy cells. The role of antibiotics is to eventually stop this from happening in order to preserve the sensitive cells. However, as Kim Lewis, a microbiologist at Northeastern University said, "yesterday, that's what I would have told you. Today...I have to change my views". The multidrug pump is helping bacteria to stay alive longer, allowing for the development of resistance to other antibiotics. Scientists say there are drugs that can possibly disable the pump, hindering the spread of antibiotic resistance through plasmids; however, that drug wouldn't be safe for the use of the public yet.

The threat of antibiotic resistant bacteria is an urgent one. If bacteria become resistant to the common antibiotics used today, the health and survival of the population is at risk. Bacterial geneticist Christian Lesterlin at the University of Lyon in France said, "There's no good news for human well-being". Still, "it's better to know your enemy and what type of weapon it has. Possibly the biggest effect will be the increasing resistance of treatable diseases like pneumonia or tuberculosis, let alone the more major infections. When bacteria becomes resistant to medication, infections persist and spread.

This article was very informative and well written. It remained descriptive and engaging. I specifically enjoyed the video depicting real E.coli bacterial cells in the act of becoming resistant to the antibiotic tetracycline. This provided a great visual to the idea described in the article. I did however, find myself confused in the last paragraph. Saey describes how the removal of the multidrug pump would stop the bacteria from developing resistance. If this is the case, have they not figured out a way to remove it? I would have hoped this idea would have been further explained or explored. Overall, however, I found this article very compelling but also worried for the future and the issue at stake.

Liquid Mouth Drops Could One Day Protect People from Peanut Allergies

Olivia Conniff

Mr. Ippolito

Current Event 1

9/5/19

Landhuis, Esther. “Liquid Mouth Drops Could One Day Protect People from Peanut Allergies.” Science News, 4 Sept. 2019, www.sciencenews.org/article/oral-drops-could-one-day-protect-people-peanut-allergies.

In an article written by Esther Landhuis of Science News, a new treatment that is being developed for allergy tolerance is described as being much more efficient as well as having much less side effects than the previously used treatment, oral immunotherapy. Oral immunotherapy, commonly referred to as OIT, is a treatment that is swallowed, and after taking it requires a 2-hour rest period. It also has many side effects, including nearly fatal allergic reactions that often times require epinephrine. The new treatment is called sublingual immunotherapy, or SLIT and is not only much more efficient for the receiver but safer as well. First and foremost, it does not require a 2-hour rest period after taking it, only a 2-minute period where it is held under the tongue. Also, the only recorded side effects so far are mild mouth itching for about 15 minutes after taking it. The main purpose of a treatment like this is to protect against accidental ingestion of an allergen, such as peanuts or another food. SLIT works by entering the bloodstream through the mouth’s mucous membrane, rather than being swallowed like OIT, meaning it can be taken in much smaller doses, and is therefore much easier for people to ingest.

Food allergies are a huge problem for children and adults alike. “Food allergies affect nearly 8 percent of U.S. kids and 11 percent of adults, estimates suggest. A study in 2010 suggests that the number of known peanut allergy cases tripled, for unclear reasons, from 1997 to 2008. Today, an estimated 2 percent of kids are allergic to peanuts” (Landuis).  This treatment is quicker to administer, and much safer. In the study of SLIT that took place, it was discovered that 86% of the 37 children who participated were able to safely ingest 750 milligrams of peanut protein, found in 2 to 3 peanuts, and 32% of children were able to ingest 5,000 milligrams, or the amount in 17-20 peanuts. Many children even kept the tolerance after stopping the treatment for two to four weeks. This treatment is extremely progressive in terms of creating a safer world for people who suffer from food allergies, and have to be extremely aware of their safety on a daily basis. People who take it will no longer have to worry about accidentally ingesting an allergen and threatening their life.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this article as it was not only informative about the new treatment and how it works but it also gave examples of how the treatment impacts real people, by using quotes and not just numbers and statistics. Landhuis used clear language and kept explanations concise which made them easy to understand. She included statistics that proved the effectiveness of the treatment, such as the percentage of children in a study that were able to safely ingest allergens after taking it. She also added quotes from the mother of a child currently taking it to add the perspective of a real person and how the treatment is impacting them. “We choose SLIT because of how easy it is to administer and the low risk of reactions,’ says Bailie Kopco, whose 4-year-old son is receiving the liquid version at Allergenuity Health in Charlotte, N.C. ‘We were never looking for him to eat PB&J sandwiches at this point,’ she says. ‘Our goal at this time is to protect him from cross-contamination and accidental ingestion” (Landhuis). This gives the reader an idea of how the treatment is actually relevant and affecting real people. One thing that I think would have strengthened the article would be if Landhuis included details about the plans for the treatment in the future. I was curious to know if scientists thought it would be widely used by nearly everyone with an allergy or just a few, select people who seeked out the treatment. I am very interested to know if this treatment will just become an essential for anyone who has an allergy. Besides that I think the article was extremely well-written, easy to follow, and very informative.