Trisomic and Allelic Differences Influence Phenotypic Variability During Development of Down Syndrome Mice

            Down syndrome is the result of one more or less copies of human chromosomes 21 where the occurrence is 1 of every 700-800 live births. Individuals experiencing Down syndrome display wide range of phenotypic characteristics (severities) which include facial dysmorphology, cognitive impairment, behavioral anomalies and congenital heart defects. Although these traits are specifically identified as typical for individuals with Down syndrome, however precise genetic and molecular mechanisms that causes these specific traits are not well understood. It has been thought that the trisomy of ‘Down Syndrome  critical/chromosomal region’ is responsible for most of the phenotypic traits of Down Syndrome however more researches have been conducted in mice in which prove that the ‘Down Syndrome critical/chromosomal region’ is in fact not sufficient to cause craniofacial features, a common characteristic of Down Syndrome.

            This experiment aims to prove how ‘Down Syndrome Critical/chromosomal region’ is not the only factor that causes the characteristics in individuals but genes of each individuals. Experimental mice from different genetic background, both experiencing Down Syndrome conditions were compared regarding the size of their mandible and craniofacial phenotypes. The first group of mice was a 'standard' Down syndrome mice since these specific groups are typically used in many if not all of experiments and trials concerning down syndrome. The second group of mice came from a mixed background. Mice that developed from mixed genetic background have a larger overall size of morphologically different mandible than the other mice. In addition, there were also in cerebellar and brain size and behavioural tests of learning and memory.These discoveries that have been found during myriad of mice with down syndrome shows that the differences may be due to genetic background difference. This experiment presents evidence that allelic differences in trisomic and nontrisomic genes as well as trisomc gene content all contribute to phenotypic differences shown in mandibular precursor development.

            All of the mice used within this experiment were bred for many generations to stabilize a certain trait and to exclude other possible traits that may affect development of that desired trait. The investigation as well focuses on the embryonic samples which had been implanted with Down Symdrome to explore size differences. From the embryo, RNA were extracted from the cells and through the techniques of PCR (polymerase chain reaction), amplification of DNA were rendered then examined. These two factors being investigated (embryonic samples and DNA) support the hypothesis of which allelic differeces in trisomic content and genetic background cause viariety in Down Syndrome phenotype such as differences in body size (pre and post natal), mandibular precursor.

            Within the experiment, mice from different genetic background were compared. Identical methodologies were used as well as same environmental conditions. These two factors would assure that no other factors would affect the development of each type of mice. The differences being presented within these mice were the size of mandibular precursors, size and volume of embryos, size of the brain and as well as each individual’s ability to learn. The hypothesis made in the beginning of this experiment has been proven to be correct.

Golden Rice, Golden Idea?

More than half of the population of the world depend on agriculture and harvests. Farming, however, is not as easy as it seems, it is prone to be attacked by many factors whether it was weather or pests. Droughts, floods or pests have the potential to entirely destroy crops. Scientists have been trying to counter these problems, but nature had always won the battle. Although these problems may seem inevitable, and perhaps even impossible to escape,  human kind had recently developed another solution, 'GMO' or genetically modified organisms. One famous example would be 'Golden Rice'. How exactly are these plants different?

Through the process of genetic 'cut and paste', scientists were able to transfer specific traits into crops that are popularly planted and consumed. Traits such as resistance to weather and pests are the main focuses. Golden rice, are able to survive through droughts or flooded condition for up to two weeks, their stems are stronger meaning they are less likely to collapse when heavy wind hits. Their stems are as well toxic for certain insects, making them pest resistant. Due to their effectiveness in survival and physical strength, golden rice increase crop production by up to 30 percent. Golden rice are also genetically modified to provide consumers with vitamin B which is crucial in health development. 

Personally, although GMO or specifically golden rice are very effective and can provide a huge solution to areas where nutrients are insufficient but is it really that safe? There have been many arguments regarding the safety of GMO products and golden rice, whether or not excess of nutrients could be dangerous. Golden rice claims to be pest resistant, of only certain species....if a species of pests attack, where Golden Rice is not resistant, then the effect would be severe and quick spreading. There are also researches discussing negative effects of golden rice on Monarch butterflies and the ecosystem in general. Again, effect on human's health have not been scientifically investigated.

Can it be dangerous for human consumers? Is it worth it? I believe further research must be done concerning human's health because if a disease do spread  among these plants then the effect would be too fast and simply too severe to solve.

Your Genes, Your choice?

Genetic advances enable human to learn more about themselves, providing an alternate pathway to predict potential risks of diseases a person may develop due to genetics. Because a huge amount of information can be obtained about a person through their genetic data, there has been many disputes regarding the privacy, who and whether or not they should have access to such information. 

There are many sides arguing who should have the rights to access genetic data. Arguments are very common among insurance industries and hospitals. Although the answer may seem simple, it is in fact far from such word. Much of the points brought up always end up in the grey area, where an exact answer is undecidable.

If we ask, should the person him/herself have access to his/her own genetic data? My answer without a doubt would be 'absolutely'. The first reason is basically 'why not?', a person should have full rights to know about their personal potential risks of diseases so they will be able to plan out their life, how to take care of themselves to lower the risk and so on. 


On the other hand, insurance professionals want to have access to genetic information of their clients so they can decide whether or not to offer their insurance. Now, what do you think? Obviously, that wouldn't be so nice for the person who may potentially develop diseases just because their genes carry that weakness. But, looking at this situation through an insurance professionals' scope you'd realise: your company would probably lose a lot of money if your client develop a disease, say Huntington's, where there's not only no cure, but slow continuous brain degradation. 

How about prenatal genetic testing before giving birth? It allows doctors to detect mutation in the embryo or fetus and conditions that may lead to birth defects in the child. Once again, personally I think, why not? It's entirely the parents' choice whether or not they want to know about conditions or diseases their child or children may have. But consider this: parents are given genetic counselling about this procedure, in some cases findings lead to the abortion of the baby. That makes it a little harder doesn't it? BUT, the topic of abortion is another whole discussion. 

This argument is especially interesting since it's something that I've never really considered before, I thought the answer would've been straightforward and exact but when I got to expand my point of views I came to realise that it's not that simple. I really do wonder if there will ever be written 'rules' to the accessibility of genetic data that will satisfy everyone. Will these problems ever be justified? 

MANTA RAYS

So the CITES conference has been going on, discussing the matter of whether or not a species should be considered endangered and protected. My blog today will be talking about the Manta Ray. It is considered to be a big matter since the population of Manta Rays have been decreasing very rapidly for the past years, especially in the ocean of Thailand. They are mostly hunted down for their gills which can be used in Chinese medicine, to make oil and for their meat. Major countries that are regularly trading these products are China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Macau. The sad thing about this is, they are mainly used for their gills while the rest of the bodies get thrown back into the ocean.

The profit of which these Manta Rays provide for trade owners are very high leading to the increase in Manta Ray tradings. Many of them are also accidentally caught by fishermen since they wander in open water. Because Manta Rays are only common in the wild and not bred, the impact of human's activity on the environment becomes quite harsh and extreme.

Also, due to the increase in demand for products made from Manta Rays many of them are hunted down even before the period of maturation. If they are caught before being completely matured these Manta Rays then are not able to breed to help stabilized the loses in their population.

One of the issues about trying to save this species is that countries are very dependent on Manta Ray trades. If this species are considered endangered, countries that have been trading products made from them would lose a huge amount of money which could hurt their economy badly.

These Manta Rays, just like any other species should be saved because they are a part of our world. They are the beauty of the ocean, a part of the marine ecosystem. Because they are the top predator, if the species becomes endangered or extinct that could really the food chain or food web they are included in. Manta Rays is one of many species that keep the ecosystem balanced.

LINK:
1) http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/339797/manta-rays-and-cites
2) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2287041/Ethereal-underwater-photos-draw-attention-plight-stunning-manta-rays-hunted-gills.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
3) http://www.mantaray-world.com/manta-ray-conservation-efforts.html

ANTI-SOCIAL FISH

Did you know that fish can become anti-social? Anti-anxiety drugs have the same effect on human and as bizarre as it sounds on animals, in this case FISH.

This article that I have just read talks about an experiment that scientists held in an aquarium. They mimic the aquatic environment of a river in Sweden and that includes the water having a low concentration of anti-anxiety drug diluted into the water. Scientists have found that fish that are more exposed to this drug then become anti-social, they act more boldly and eat more quickly. Anti-anxiety drugs consumed by human makes us less anxious and it treats panic attacks. The same effect takes place in these fish, these drugs decrease the anxiety and stress that animals usually feel in order to not take warrant risks and cause them to act less cautiously.
Fish become exposed to these condition due to the drug excreted by human, washed down the sewage and into the rivers.

First, the headline of this article caught my attention immediately after I saw it. I know that human drugs can have the similar effect in animals, but I have never considered the effect of anti-anxiety drugs on fish, never. I learned that these type of drugs can have similar effect on fish but they may not be as useful as they are to human, considering that wild animals need anxiety in order to survive in nature and it can even be dangerous for animals to lack that survival factor.

This raised a few questions:
1) Is this effect the same as other animals or types of fish?
2) Other than the decrease in cautiousness is this dangerous to fish and their survival in the environment?

http://www.livescience.com/27150-psychiatric-drugs-changing-fish-behavior.html

BAMBOO PLANTS AND US

Hi guys! I am here with more interesting facts to share with you readers as always. Today, I will be blogging on something that is famously known for their height and girth. They are something that have been with humankind since the beginning of time. They are alive. Many people have been depending on it for a very long time. Do you know what it is?
PLANTS.

Everyone have seen as least a plant in their life time. Plants are basically everywhere, it surrounds our country, our town and us. But let me ask you this. How often do you stop by a plant and really appreciate them? Not so often at all. That is exactly what this blog will be about. For you to acknowledge plants and realize that they are pretty amazing.

In this blog, I will be focusing on a fact that I've recently acquired, I was flabbergasted.
Did you know that bamboo plants are known to be the fastest growing plants on earth? That is not enough, currently the fastest growth rate is 100 in a DAY! Rhizomes, or horizontal stems extend under ground from the domain plant and it increases the rate of nutrient and water absorption. Since they have the highest rate of photosynthesis, it releases 35% more than other plants and they also absorb up to 12 tons of carbon dioxide from the environment per hectare! Bamboo plants only flower once in their life time which can vary from 60-120 years. They are also the strongest growing woody-plant on earth.

What led me to this topic was our good friend Google. I am currently studying plants in my biology class and I have realized that plants actually hold many amazing characteristics themselves. I was looking around and came across a statement that says that bamboo plants hold the record of plants with highest growth rate on earth and I was stunned. I decided to do further research and came upon myriad of interesting facts.

It raised many questions in my mind as well:
1) What is it that makes bamboo plants photosynthesize so rapidly other than the rhizomes?
2)  Is there a reason to why bamboo plants only flower once in their life time?
3) What restricts bamboo plants' height?
4) If the rhizomes contribute to the high rate of photosynthesis in bamboo plants, then would planting bamboo in a pot slows down the rate?

Sources:
1) http://www.slideshare.net/greenlivelihoods/bamboo-facts
2) https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEieKxwOUqtRQmUk99ocb-GcBsvDehztP2w3jL4fDFMpyNQ8Tq2qu8lO-x8AT4t0G9jQgNWm8Y9fpnaJKtl6UBwZmxH0dwqKFWLGvS4eo7FTtYsxcvB4lhfu9zpAr1tRr6m_edwg3ac4sxKl/s400/bamboo-forest.jpg (image)

Thanks for reading! I hope you learned more about bamboo plants and their mind-blowing features!

HARMFUL LIGHTS AT NIGHT

Hello guys, this blog that you are about to read talks about an article that I have recently came across. It caught my attention the moment i scanned the headline,

 "Exposure to Light at Night May Cause Depression, Learning Issues, Mouse Study Suggests"

This article talks about how too much exposure to lights in a regular basis may cause depression and learning issues. The experiment was tested on experimental mice, different mouse would receive different amount of light, one longer than the other. A biology professor in John Hopkins University, Samer Hattar constructed this investigation and found out that mouse exposed to longer duration of light exposure shows signs of depression. You might ask: How do you know if a mouse is depressed or not? Well, Hattar observed their behavior and noticed that the mouse became less active, they lacked the interest in sugar or hunting for one and they also learned task a lot less quick.

I read the article and asked myself, why use a MOUSE? How can a mouse be hold accountable for these things? They aren't human, how is it that we can claim that human would portray the same effect?

Turns out mice and human are very much alike, one is that they both contain ipRGCs in their eyes affecting them and us in the same way. ipRGCs (intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells) are cells in the eyes that become activated by bright lights and they would have an effect on the brain's center for learning, memory and mood.

These lights that are proven to effect human ranges from light bulbs in houses, lamps, mobile, computers and even iPads.

After reading the whole article, quite a few questions still rose into my mind.
1) So exposure to light during night time will affect us or the extended time we are exposed to lights?
2) Is there a proper duration to how long human should be exposed to lights?
3) Irregular exposure or simply lights at night?
4) How would our body know 'night lights'? Biological clock?
5) What if the exposure to light human receive (from iPad and computers) also provide human with entertainment and happiness? Would that work against the depression that may buildup?
6) Does this mean that we should be exposed to light as little as possible to save ourselves from depression?

This article summary may be somewhat confusing to some of you readers, I am also quite confused myself  of this experiment but nonetheless it was very interesting. You can read the actual article in the link down below!!

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121114133921.htm

Thank you guys for reading this blog, more to come on other cool interesting science news!