Class Journal Week 2

From LMU BioDB 2017
Revision as of 05:41, 12 September 2017 by Cwong34 (talk | contribs) (Added response to question 3)
Jump to: navigation, search

Mary Balducci's Respones

  1. The biggest discovery that I made while doing these readings was that there was so much similarity between the genetic code and computer code. I've taken biology courses before, so I knew that DNA worked using four letters that coded for proteins. However, I've never taken a computer science course so I never really understood how computer coding worked. It was interesting to read the connections made in the Digital Code of Life between the two. I think this has also given me a better understanding of computer coding, since I can relate it to something I already know about.
  2. The thing I understood least from these readings was at the end of the Ode to the Code article. Hayes talks about the fact that there are 64 codons, but only 20 amino acids. One of the proposals for the organization of these is the 2x2x2x2x2x2 hypercube. I am confused about what this would look like, and how does it get across information differently than the 4x4x4 cube currently in use?
  3. The genetic code and computer code are similar because they both code digitally. By doing this, there are less mistakes made between the information and the copy of the information. Both types of codes work by having letters or numbers that convey a meaning that the computer or cell carries out.

Links

Other Pages

Individual Journals

Mary Balducci

Week 2 Journal

Week 3 Journal

Week 4 Journal

Week 5 Journal

Week 6 Journal

Week 7 Journal

Week 8 Journal

Week 9 Journal

Week 10 Journal

Week 11 Journal

Week 12 Journal

No Assignment Week 13

Week 14 Journal

Week 15 Journal


Assignments

Week 1 Assignment

Week 2 Assignment

Week 3 Assignment

Week 4 Assignment

Week 5 Assignment

Week 6 Assignment

Week 7 Assignment

Week 8 Assignment

Week 9 Assignment

Week 10 Assignment

Week 11 Assignment

Week 12 Assignment

No Assignment Week 13

Week 14 Assignment

Week 15 Assignment

Shared Journals

Class Journal Week 1

Class Journal Week 2

Class Journal Week 3

Class Journal Week 4

Class Journal Week 5

Class Journal Week 6

Class Journal Week 7

Class Journal Week 8

Class Journal Week 9

Class Journal Week 10

Page DesiignerMbalducc (talk) 18:15, 6 September 2017 (PDT)

Katie Wright's Responses

  1. My biggest discovery from the reading was that even brilliant scientists can make mistakes and need to be corrected. I thought the communication by Kanji and Kanji about "setting the record straight" was interesting because, had I not seen it, I would have read the autobiographical paper by Nirenberg without questioning it. I suppose it is a reminder that we should question and be critical of all science, regardless of who it is presented by.
  2. I understood the readings pretty well for the most part, although I did skim through some of the biology that Nirenberg describes in his autobiographical story. I tried to focus more on the narrative than the science, since I know the basics already from my previous classes.
  3. The genetic code is incredibly similar to computer code. As Glyn Moody demonstrates in his book, the genetic code can easily be converted to binary, which is one of the most important types of computer code. Since the genetic code can be easily digitized, we can use a wide array of computer programs to study the genetic code that would not be available in non-digital systems.
    Kwrigh35 (talk) 21:00, 9 September 2017 (PDT)


Zachary Van Ysseldyk's Responses

  1. The biggest discovery I made from these readings was from the Digital Code of Life reading. Specifically, when they compared DNA’s ATCG pairings with the computer’s 0 and 1 binary code. What I found interesting was that both ATCG and binary are representations of something rather than the actual property themselves. I also realized how much computers helped with mapping out DNA considering how large the human genome is. Furthermore, I discovered that both biology and coding have a very systematic approach. I always thought biology was arbitrarily observing living cells and seeing if they can find a connection. With the introduction of bioinformatics, a clear systematic approach becomes clear when it comes to biology.
  2. The deciphering of the genetic code was probably the most academic and confusing paper I have ever read in my life. I have never had to look up so many words in a sentence. The phrase: “in the presence of a high concentration of methanol, pancreatic RNase A catalyzes the synthesis of trinucleotides and higher homologues from oligoribonucleotide primers and pyrimidine 2’-3’-cyclic phosphates” was probably the most confusing sentence I have read. The last time I took biology was freshman year of high school so I really felt like I dove in head first here.
  3. Similar to my answer to question 1, I think that the biggest relationship between genetic and computer code is how the actual coding is a mere representation of what the data actually is. Also, both codes must be very exact and precise. If there is an error, then the entire code will spew out something other than what was intended.

Zvanysse

BIOL/CMSI 367-01: Biological Databases Fall 2017

Assignments

Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 14

Individual Assignments

Zvanysse Week 1 | Zvanysse Week 2 | Zvanysse Week 3 | Zvanysse Week 4 | Zvanysse Week 5 | Zvanysse Week 6 | Zvanysse Week 7 | Zvanysse Week 8 | Zvanysse Week 9 | Zvanysse Week 10 | Zvanysse Week 11 | Zvanysse Week 12 | Zvanysse Week 14 | Zvanysse Week 15

Shared Journals

Zvanysse Week 1 Journal | Zvanysse Week 2 Journal | Zvanysse Week 3 Journal | Zvanysse Week 4 Journal | Zvanysse Week 5 Journal | Zvanysse Week 6 Journal | Zvanysse Week 7 Journal | Zvanysse Week 8 Journal | Zvanysse Week 9 Journal | Zvanysse Week 10 Journal | Zvanysse Week 11 Journal | Zvanysse Week 12 Journal | Zvanysse Week 14 JournalZvanysse (talk) 21:21, 9 September 2017 (PDT)


Simon Wroblewski's Response

  1. The biggest discovery I made while reading these works were about how recent the discovery of the genetic code was and still is. It's inspiring to think about how just a few decades ago, we discovered something so fundamental and crucial to the understanding of life. I also never knew what the proteome was which I found interesting because I had no idea how much of the cell proteins actually make up.
  2. Nirenberg's Deciphering the genetic code - a personal account I found to be the most difficult to understand due to the high level concepts being discussed. I'm not sure I retained much of the information due to the complicated systems and vocabulary.
  3. I think the closest relationship between computer code and genetic code is the algorithmic processes each one undergoes to achieve their goal. It is very fitting to include the word code in each of these phrases due to this similarity.


Emma Tyrnauer's Responses

  1. The biggest discovery I made from these readings is just how important computer coding has been in deciphering DNA. Moody points out in the Digital Code of Life that while understanding the genetic code is simple in terms of pairing rules, we would not have the knowledge we do today about genomics without computer coding. This is merely because of the immense scale of genomes. I found that deciphering the DNA strand given in the individual assignment (only 60 base pairs long) was very tedious and time consuming. I also found myself making a lot of simple mistakes.
  2. The part of the readings I understood the least was the paper, The history of deciphering the genetic code: setting the record straight. I don't really follow the experimental procedure of how Akira and Hideko Kaji were able to prove that the binding of tRNA to programmed ribosomes was very specific (in contrast to what was proven by others in earlier experiments).
  3. The relationship between the genetic code and computer code is that genetic code gives the instructions and guidelines for how processes are carried out in the body, similar to the way computer code defines how programs are run. Moody describes in the Digital Code of Life that like DNA, some parts of computer code are ignored when a program is run. Furthermore, "a computer copies parts of a program held on a disc and sends them down wires to other components of the system," just like a cell copies DNA and sends it as information stored a mRNA.

Emmatyrnauer (talk) 18:34, 11 September 2017 (PDT)

Links

  1. My User Page
  2. List of Assignments
  3. List of Journal Entries
  4. List of Shared Journal Entries

Nicole Kalcic's Responses

  1. The biggest discovery I made from these readings was the very first sentence of Hayes' article. The Genetic Code was cracked 40 years ago?! Because of my age, I feel like the things I learn about in school are nowhere near my own timeline. But, 40 years is a shorter time span than that of my parents/our university/etc. This just reinforces the idea that there are still so many things we are bound to discover, and so many things we think we know that we are wrong about.
  2. I understood Akira Kaji and Hideko Kaji's procedure the least. I understood the result but had a hard time following the language.
  3. The genetic code and a computer code are so similar, in fact, that I am now really grasping the concept of this class. They are both so precise, one error causing an entirely different makeup. We often use a computer code to understand the genetic code and because the translation of information is done in the same alphabetical/numerical way.

Nicolekalcic (talk) 20:42, 11 September 2017 (PDT)

Corinne Wong's Responses

  1. I think it’s really cool that the mitochondria have special mRNA. Not only does it go against the rules of genetic decoding, but it also makes organisms that much more unique. It’s really interesting that there are different deviations in mitochondrial RNA in different organisms, and I would be interested in learning more about why that is and about the different types of deviations.
  2. I found it difficult to understand the article about how the genetic code was deciphered. Even as a science major, the frequent use of scientific jargon is a bit overwhelming, and I have to rely on my memory of the meanings of the terms that I actually know, which makes it a bit challenging to fully comprehend.
  3. The genetic code and a computer code are pretty similar. Both of them contain an input that is read and translated to create an output, which involves the use of signals and keys. That output is then further used and built upon to create a greater working system.

Cwong34 (talk) 22:41, 11 September 2017 (PDT)

cwong34

BIOL/CMSI 367-01: Biological Databases Fall 2017

Assignments

Journal Entries:

Shared Journals:

Group Project

John Lopez's Responses

  1. The biggest discovery I made from these readings came from "Ode to the Code", where I learned how error-proof the genetic code could be, other than having common mutations. The fact that the genetic code is so well structured, using the term "one in a million", I believe is extremely fascinating to emerge out of nature.
  2. Most of the "Deciphering the Genetic Code-a Personal Account" was difficult for me to understand due to my lack of a biology background and the technical terms within the text. As I read I had to perform a Google search on several of the terms
  3. The first chapter of "Digital Code of Life" draws several similarities between genetic code and computer code to conclude that they function the same. Some examples of this include the comparison between binary code and the quaternary abbreviations of nucleotide bases, chromosomes as memory, and mutations as bugs. Furthermore, he mentions that treating genetic code like computer code and using computers to understand it is essential for genomics.

Johnllopez616 (talk) 21:43, 11 September 2017 (PDT)

Individual Journal Entries and Assignments

Class Assignments

Class Weekly Journal Entries / Project Weekly Journal Entries

My Page

Blair Hamilton's Responses

  1. What is the biggest discovery that I made from these readings?
    1. The biggest discovery I made from the readings is the idea of the genetic code being "universal" according to the Nirenberg article. As a math major, I often realize while doing proofs that sometimes my understanding of the problem can be completely different from another's. Therefore, when describing and "proving" theorems it is important that anyone can read your work and immediately know what you are trying to do. In the case of Nirenberg, it is amazing to think someone can decipher and study for years about genetic code, and then something as simple as, "can someone understand this and/or read this?" is a necessary and important step.
  2. What part of the readings did I understand the least?
    1. The Akira Kaji and Hideko Kaji article as well as the Marshall Nirenberg article were the most technical and hardest to read. My most recent experience with scientific articles was in high school where the high level language was less frequently used. Primarily language and previous biological background knowledge seemed necessary to gain a better understanding of these experiments.
  3. What is the relationship between the genetic code and a computer code?
    1. Much like computer code, genetic code relies on being precise. If you go through genetic code too quickly, important codons and amino acids can be mixed up and changed. Computer code also needs to be methodical. When writing code if you have forgotten a semicolon or a bracket the entire code can be jeopardized. Additionally, genetic and computer code are used to continue a process, i.e. for genetic code a protein is used for some part of the body, while a computer code can be used to make a calculation or simplify a task.


Bhamilton18 (talk) 21:55, 11 September 2017 (PDT) User Page: Blair Hamilton

Assignments

Week 1
Week 2

Individual Journal Entries

Week 1 Blair Hamilton
Bhamilton18 Week 2

Shared Journal Entries

Class Journal Week 1
Class Journal Week 2


Quinn Lanners' Responses

  1. The biggest discovery I made from these readings was the number of factors that contribute to large scientific discoveries. Focusing mainly on the Marshall Nirenberg article “Historical review: Deciphering the genetic code – a personal account” it was incredibly to read about all the factors that went into the discovery of the process of going from DNA to protein. I was amazed that at the time Nirenberg was researching the concept of RNA (specifically mRNA) as the intermediary between DNA and protein, there were very few people working on similar projects. In fact, he stated that he was the only scientist at the NIH “studying cell-free protein synthesis” (Nirenberg, 2004). It was also interesting to read how Nirenberg was taking a big risk by exploring such a risky topic so early in his career. Finally, I was surprised by the level of collaboration that Nirenberg noted in his research. In each step of the process he reached out to one of his colleagues for assistance. This goes to show that through collaboration with several experts we can accomplish much more in our academic pursuits. However, it was also a bit interesting, especially given the amount of collaboration he had with other scientists, how Nirenberg never did collaborate with Ochoa, who was working on the same topic. Nirenberg cited the competition between the laboratories as being a driving factor in his research, an interesting thought as the idea of competition in academics is often not talked about.
  2. I was very confused by the section in the article “Ode to the Code” that talked about finding a relation between the numbers 64 (number of distinct codons) and 20 (number of distinct amino acids). This section says that in “at least two schemes, the 64 codons could specify exactly 20 amino acids” (Hayes, 2004) and goes on to explain how mathematicians worked through different proposals to prove this. However, the article did not seem to go very in depth on this topic, and I was very confused as to what exactly they found and how they found a relationship suggesting that 64 codons could specify exactly 20 amino acids.
  3. The relationship between the two types of codes is that both can be stored as simple combinations of either binary or quaternary data. Furthermore, both data combinations code for the processes that are carried out within its respective host (the computer for computer code and the cell for the genetic code).

Qlanners (talk) 22:10, 11 September 2017 (PDT)

QLanners Links

Main Page
User Page
Assignment Pages: Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 14 | Week 15
Journal Entry Pages: Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10 | Week 11 | Week 12 | Week 14 | Week 15
Shared Journal Pages: Week 1 | Week 2 | Week 3 | Week 4 | Week 5 | Week 6 | Week 7 | Week 8 | Week 9 | Week 10
Group Project Page: JASPAR the Friendly Ghost

Arash Lari's Responses

  1. The biggest discovery for me was how recently and exponentially the knowledge of the genetic code has been discovered. Most of the stuff we’ve discovered about the human genome has been in the past 50 years. The other surprising discovery is how much genes self-correct according to Hayes’ “Ode to the Code” and how much the genes being “perfect” matters.
  2. The Akira and Hideko Kaji procedure was pretty technical and I’m not very well versed in biology so that was difficult for me.
  3. What surprised me is how logical and understandable our genetic make up is. DNA is remarkably similar to binary code in that way.
Retrieved from "https://xmlpipedb.lmucs.io/biodb/fall2017/index.php?title=Class_Journal_Week_2&oldid=927"