mattbimbo

i have never heard of it before either. there is a more recent paper by the same group with more immunological analysis and the description of a 'bystander' effect. the key thing seems to be the selective germination of the bacteria in the hypoxic environment of the tissue. if you are curious as to what this entails, there was a thread about this recently.

it was once widely accepted that circumcision of males significantly reduces the sexual transmission of viruses, but this is not to certain as was once thought. if it is true that male circumcision prevents diseases, then i can't see how circumcision is any different from a vaccination. well i can see a difference, but not ethically.

the animals are coming on 06-06-06 at 06:06:06, which is the same in the us and the uk. i'd avoid anyone who is 666 years old on this day.

this abstract is interesting, it shows how a vestigial organ in flowers can be adapted to a new function.

with the link i pulled up before, it is clear that some literature exised in 1890 stating that there were 180 vestigial organs. unfortunately this source is not included in the references. but this link is bizarre (like all creationist reasoning). i don't know many who would consider the thymus a vestigial organ, it is true that the thymus, like tonsils, can be removed at a very early age but this is not a criteria for a vestigial organ, well not as far as i understand the definition of vestigial but maybe this was the definition in 1890. in lab mice the thymus can be removed 5 days after birth without any deleterious consequences. however if it is removed earlier, T cell development, which begins mid-gestation, is skewed and can promote auto-immune diseases.

this may or may not be helpful. finding this link makes me wonder where your teacher is getting his/hers sources.

in the words of desparate dan, i have to say 'mwepps'. i think i got it wrong, a missspelling took me to this link. i guess you can figure out the rest. there is one thing i am curious about. the fossils have been dated to 375 million years ago, am i wrong but doesn't this preceed the appearance of sharks by about 200 million years? i know from research on the evolution of the immune system that the shark marks an important point. some have hypothesized this is due to the jaws, predation and ultimately an altered intake of pathogens. now i have seen the pictures, this tiktaalik beauty had a good set of choppers, so i am wondering how developed its immune system would have been compared to contemporary organisms, salamanders for example.

in the words of desparate dan, i have to say 'mwepps'. i think i got it wrong, a missspelling took me to this link. i guess you can figure out the rest. there is one thing i am curious about. the fossils have been dated to 375 million years ago, am i wrong but doesn't this preceed the appearance of sharks by about 200 million years? i know from research on the evolution of the immune system that the shark marks an important point. some have hypothesized this is due to the jaws, predation and ultimately an altered intake of pathogens. now i have seen the pictures, this tiktaalik beauty had a good set of choppers, so i am wondering how developed its immune system would have been compared to contemporary organisms, salamanders for example.

can anybody explain the scientific name of Lota lota for the Tittaalik fish?

i have had the chance to divulge some literature on sexual dimorphism. there are many interesting differences. mens brains decilne in size with age, from 25y onwards, womens do not. intellect in mens brains is localised throughout the brain, in predominantly grey matter, while in women it is centrally localised and consists motsly of white matter.

well it is a 'she' that did the breeding, scientifically and foxily. the control ngroup consists of the wild foxes!

this thread has got me thinking of a quote by ML King "If we do not learn to live together as friends, we will die apart as fools" maybe this should be rewritten in light of gcol's thoughts? sinice by living together we will die as fools.

perhaps. i have always considered modern schooling an act of domestication. fortunately many learn to rebel and undo their schooling. but now you are making me worry about the brains of our teachers? do they get smaller as they give more rote teaching. does "jungle survival" include warlike behaviour?

and did you know this?

good point. relying on others for answers or getting information form others perhaps puts less burden on ourselves. or maybe smallness equates with efficiency?

maybe i could have a bladder in an alternatively shape? perhaps something like this

hi, i reread your initial post as you wrote, knowing where to start is very important. also important is realising what is achievable with all your resources and limitations. i have no idea on the later. but where to start? break the problem into steps. a) obtain data (this may be invented or borrowed from a paper. remember that the data will come from the same experiment repeated many times.) b) prepare data for analysis (this may involve going from residue H-D exchange times into probability distributions that a residue is at the surface) c) analyse data (does the data make sense? ie, have some expected distribution for what the data should look like. perhaps this kind of analysis may suggest that the protein has multiple domains? can you detect correlations in exchange times between adjacent residues?) d) build model (algorithms already exist for this, but they will have limitations. perhaps focus on a small part of the algorithm. or do you want to try to incorporate other data, ie protein secondary structure predictions?) e) display model and stats analysis in my opinion if you tackled any of the steps a) to e) this would be a good project, or focus even further and tackle a small part of one of the steps. the main reason why i suggested this kind of project to you was that i thought it would be educational. think of the challenge! you are going from one-dimensional information to a 3D model. but if you want you could simplify it, go from 1D to a 2D protein. admittedly 2D proteins don't exist but you can invent them (or maybe they have already been invented). in my experience, thinking along these lines, 1D to 2D, is better for testing ideas and easier for programming. it is a project where there is plenty of room for imagination, more so as your use of statistics and probability advances.

in your scheme for immune responses do T cells precede DC?

i was just listening to the new album by kate bush. it contains a track called Pi and here are the lyrics. can anyone come up with songs similar to this?

perhaps the most significant result of all this research comparing the effects of domestication on the brain is that animals can have the same/similar emotional intelligence that humans have?

or give them a blood donation from a thin person perhaps?

i once read an article along the lines that women in the countryside have higher prolactin levels compared to women who live in a city. also glucocorticoid levels are higher for people living in cities compared to the those in the country and glucocorticoids counteract prolactin. the net result of this was that women in the city had smaller breasts on average compared to women in the country. i don't know whether the paper was a one off, or part of a serious line of research, but the antagonistic effects of GCs on prolactin are well recognised. i looked at the papers by elena Jazins and brian hare, mentioned above, and it seems that the genetic and hormonal differences between wolfs and domesticated dogs are small. however i couldn't find any mention of why smaller brain sizes contribute more to emotional intelligence. i was under the impression this had to with the activity of the hypothalamus, and is independent of brain size. can anyone help me out with a reference or two here?

this thread could easily lead onto calorie restriction and lifespan. the best work has been done in yeast but seems to be applicable to all organisms.

maybe i could ask for some advice here. i would like to crystalise a complex of Mg5-IP6 (IP=inositol polyphosphate). i have made the complex, it readily forms a precipitate and is very insoluble - ie soluble at concentrations of 10-100uM; this is more insoluble than all proteins i have worked on. i can resolubilise the Mg5-IP6 precipitate in NH4 acetate, or other salts, but NH4 seems best. i have tried to evaporate the NH4 acetate at 40C in a vacuum with the hope that crystals of the Mg5-IP6 might form, but no, i still get a precipitate. any suggestions to how i could get crystals would be welcome.

for all i care, it can be anywhere, even the internet.