CharonY

There are no systems in cells that directly react to radioactivity and transduce it to a sensation.

In most cases one does not expect the precise amounts, unless for some reasons there was a big emphasis on it during the course. It is much more important to understand e.g. which components to use and why. You should have a broad understanding of the conducted experiments and what they are used for.

Not directly in magma, if that is what you think. Though numerous extremophiles have been found e.g. near volcanic vents.

Sounds like spam to me.

Bacteria are even there where animals are not.

In short: the immune system is very complex, consisting of a lot of individual components. As such it is hard to assess optimal or even normal levels to begin with. In essence it is an equilibrium system that performs within some parameters, though there is no true metric to define an optimum. Its performance is also dependent on a number of other factors, as e.g. previous exposure. As such it is easy to envision that any supplement that may interact with any part of the immune system has a higher potential of disrupting the regulatory network (or doing nothing) rather than boosting it. Now what happens during stress or lack of sleep? Common answers are that the immune system gets weakened, but things are more complicated than that. Stress, for instance can act via the humoral system on certain elements of the immune system, but it is not a simple reduction. For instance, certain certain forms of stress, resulting in triggering autoimmune disease (i.e. overreaction of the immune system rather than a lowering of the immune system). In many cases the precise molecular mechanisms are unknown though in the given example certain T-helper cell types have been implicated. Can supplements therefore restore such defects? Most unlikely. Normally the only way to restore your immune system is to remove the source of the distortion, as e.g. getting sleep or remove the stressor. In the absence of the knowledge regarding the molecular mechanisms and, even worse, the underlying distortions in the regulatory interactions no simple remedy is likely to be forthcoming. Regarding vitamin D, it is known to modulate immune responses, and a deficiency is likely to reduce efficiency. However, it does not mean that you can use it to boost the immune system above normal levels. In other words, it is more of a reduce deficiency effect rather than a boost effect.

As the names imply, none of the mentioned media are truly limiting. Many usual contaminants (e.g. skin bacteria) proliferate very quickly on BHI, though. Also the risk of enriching pathogenic bacteria is higher there. If you got a pure culture my choice would be use something more selective like Listeria enrichment broth. Overall tryptic soy broth is an acceptable choice, though.

As a generic advice for a start point: figure out the main conclusions and summarize them in one or two sentences.

There are quite a number of possibilities, however the basic is that you should know what was discussed and taught in the respective courses and that you understood the principles. Most of the time it is revolving around a practical problem and you are supposed to solve it with the techniques learned during your course.

In contrast to the chemistry approach for molecular bottom-up learning (i.e. detailed molecular structures) are less helpful. As the matter gets complex very fast it a good grasp on concepts is better and after that maybe specialize (but that is way later). Of course, genetics and molecular biology is a vast field and it is not easy to recommend something that covers it all. You may be interested in Genes by Lewin and Molecular biology of the cell (for broader concepts) by Alberts.

Shouldn't the exams connected to a given course?

I kind of having the feeling that this was not quite the point....

Actually not all religions even have a superior being. In Buddhism there are no deities, for instance. Taoism is another example though in practice often a variety of gods can be involved. Then polytheistic religions have a profoundly different view of what a god is compared to monotheistic ones, etc.

A zoologist would provide a better response but essentially birds also undergo ovulation cycles. In addition, after mating many (most?) birds are able to store sperm for an extended period of time, which can be used to fertilize said eggs. I expect that under natural conditions the mating rate is very high and thus the occasional loss due to unfertilized eggs is relatively low. The high production breeds used for egg production are the result of artificial selection of course, in nature they do not lay that many eggs.

There are different ways to assign distances based on similarities, however, the usefulness of local regions to identify loci is dependent on how close the organisms are and how conserved the region is. For instance, it is possible that gene duplication resulted in multiple copies of that particular region in the genome, or the gene region itself may have undergone some kind of changes as e.g. inversions, relocation and so on. In these cases looking at synteny, which requires the addition of surrounding genes and not only the gene region may be of relevance.

To reiterate other posters genes only allow for rough plans. They generally do not encode sufficient information for complex behavioral traits. As such interaction with the environment are required to create functions. So the genes may set certain trajectories, however interaction with the environment is required to produce complex traits (as e.g. personalities). This is the simple basis for the "it is both" answer. Or for a thought experiment: take identical twins, bring one up normally, put the other in a torture chamber for 20 years. Guess who is more likely to have personality disorders.

You do not only lose a particular electrolyte but dilute out all of them. Also you would be surprised how much electrolytes you can lose just by walking around in, say Phoenix at this time of year. However, to have any significant impact just drinking another glass or two generally does not cut it, if one maintains a high sodium diet.

That is wrong. Evolution is slow, but why would you think that the rest would be, too? How are you able to catch a ball if your brain does not quick estimations where it is going to land? Likewise organisms with a sufficiently sophisticated brain easily show signs of creativity. Playing is a trait found in all mammals, for instance. This is biology, pure and simple. Incredulity is a poor argument.

You read too much into the studies. They are of epidemiological nature. Thus they provide no mechanisms. In fact, the link is far from being established and as I mentioned different studies have different outcomes. I would not encourage wild and baseless speculations based on that.

The simplest way is still controlling the intake. While drinking a lot of electrolyte-free water while sweating and urinate a lot will decrease the sodium content, it will result in fluctuations rather than a controlled decrease. If the short-term level of sodium decreases too fast, it will have really nasty effects.

In all games it depends on the mechanism. Being RT and round based is but one parameter. With limited option and easy evaluable outcomes good AIs are likely to make less errors. The Civ games are so open, however that often the generalized, often non-adaptive strategies will lose after one gets the hang of it. In RTS reflexes will be an issue and creating a game where one has to be everywhere at one will put humans at a disadvantage (though games are of course designed to be controllable to begin with). I have heard good things about the Galactic civilization series (I think it is called that) and of course highly sophisticated chess routines have been shown to best the human best chess players. Races are yet another issue. It is possible to program the computer drivers to be perfect (i.e. running perfect laps using the best route etc.). Only it wouldn't be any fun to play. And that is the final bit, computer games are intended to be challenging, but also enjoyable. Even in games where it would be easy to create perfect adversaries, it would not be fun to do so.

For four correct prediction (assuming an equal distribution of right an answers as null) it barely passes an alpha of 5%. For three it would be below that.

Not necessarily. Right now we are calculating the likelihood in terms of how many correct answers he chose in terms of game outcomes. However, the real decision is most certainly remote from the game itself. What the octopus did was choosing from two containers, and that outcome happened to match the game outcome. Let us assume the flag in the background had an influence. Paul chose the German flag five times and other flags twice. If we group the answers according to that, we got 5-2 instead of 7-0. Here it appears that there is a bias towards the German flag. Thus an interpretation could be that we was supposed to choose the German flag, but messed up (or was not interested) in two sets.

Flanking regions just means up and downstream from a given position. A flanking region of an ORF is precisely as you defined it. One could also take any other arbitrary region or position and define bp and and down from it. However, BLAST is a global alignment tool and non-coding regions often only have local similarities. Other alignment algorithm may serve you better (depending on what you intend to see).