dannielle_93
Member
What did everyone think of the questions? and what did you say as answers?
Students helping students, join us in improving Bored of Studies by donating and supporting future students!
I said mutation one was a base substitution mutation and mutation 2 was a base deletion/frameshift mutation.That one wasn;t too bad i hated the technology one my brain went dead haha.
what mutations did you say for q1?
I said base sub aswell but the 2nd one i had deletion then changed it to inversionI said mutation one was a base substitution mutation and mutation 2 was a base deletion/frameshift mutation.
Yep I put no effect as well. I stared at that table for ages trying to figure out what it meant lolWasn't it frameshift? lol. It's bases, not chromosomes?
Anyway, yeah mutation 1 was base substitution.
Effect - no effect since it codes for the same amino acid?
Yeah, I looked at the mutation - the bases i think were TGC AND TCC and i couldnt find one of them! and they were in the same freaking table cell or whatever! lmao. I'm like oh... that was silly of me.Yep I put no effect as well. I stared at that table for ages trying to figure out what it meant lol
Yeah me too...had answered q's like this in class and presumed/wrote that ____ amino acid would change to ____, and then realized nothing happened. Not much of a time waste thoughYeah, I looked at the mutation - the bases i think were TGC AND TCC and i couldnt find one of them! and they were in the same freaking table cell or whatever! lmao. I'm like oh... that was silly of me.
P.S: I had already started writing my answer saying they're different and that the effect would be that it would code for a different amino acid... but once I looked at the right base sequence.. I'm like oh crap. had to scribble it out lol.
Yeah but that's obviously what they mean - how else would you show that the offspring could be different? Just cross two carriers of the RH- factor and show how it could result in offsprings that are negative. I did that.Fuck did so shit --> for the technologies -- all I could think of was DNA hybridisation and I filled up the whole given lines just with waffling on about how higher degrees of hybridisation mean a more recent common ancestor.
So i did one technology -- reckon I can get 4/7?
and the 4 marker with the rhesus - fucked that up lol. There's like 50 different antigens for rhesus blood grouping system, how the hell do you show it? Srsly, BOS, they should have said Rhesus FACTOR - which just refers to the D antigen, Rh+ and Rh- ...let's see that 4+3+3 marks gone... 15/25
19/20 for multiple choice -- and shit house for the other 55 marks
But the thing is that DNA hybridisation was part of blueprint, DNA sequencing/amino acid sequencing (essentially the same) would be part of genetics (I think), DNA fingerprinting is in option and I didnt think gene homologues were relevant since I thought they are genes that are shared by MANY species (I did HOX genes as gene homologues which is present in pretty much every multicelluar organism) + gene probes were used in locating positions of genes in chromosomes not only specific to gene homologues.Yeah but that's obviously what they mean - how else would you show that the offspring could be different? Just cross two carriers of the RH- factor and show how it could result in offsprings that are negative. I did that.
For technologies, there were heaps! I put DNA-DNA hypridisation, DNA sequencing, Amino-acid sequencing, DNA fingerprinting, gene homologues (gene probes).. and I think i had more.
I did the same thing, and then I was like, oh, and just wrote a little this could happen but this is not the case here as they both code for the same amino acidP.S: I had already started writing my answer saying they're different and that the effect would be that it would code for a different amino acid... but once I looked at the right base sequence.. I'm like oh crap. had to scribble it out lol.
I did DNA hybridisation (My teacher said it was correct= YAY!), genome maps, inheritance and evolutionary patterns, common genes, and just to be a smart arse i made up some BS about comparative gene cascading in the similar development of tissue through gene expression- LOL but at least it didn't contradict anything so i can't lose marks for it. So 3 or 4 methods ok for 6-7/7But the thing is that DNA hybridisation was part of blueprint, DNA sequencing/amino acid sequencing (essentially the same) would be part of genetics (I think), DNA fingerprinting is in option and I didnt think gene homologues were relevant since I thought they are genes that are shared by MANY species (I did HOX genes as gene homologues which is present in pretty much every multicelluar organism) + gene probes were used in locating positions of genes in chromosomes not only specific to gene homologues.
I did DNA fingerprinting and genome maps (mentioned how recombinant DNA created probes which allowed genome maps to made in flurorescent in situ hybridisation)