CharonY

Blast tells you about global homologies and related sequences. If you want to find out whether there are conserved areas you should proceed by getting further mitochondrial sequences (from the area that you sequenced) and do an alignment (e.g. using clustal).

In which context? I can think of at least half a dozen.

Genecks, I have no idea what you are talking about. I am talking from the perspective of a scientist. A distinction only makes sense if it is helpful in any way or if it is based on intrinsic properties. The dichotomy between alive and dead is very old, however, we know that there is no clear cut distinction. Viruses are definitely borderline, for instance. If we consider metabolism to be crucial, they are definitely not. However, as biologically active replicative entities they cannot be dismissed as pieces of dirt, for instance. How about differentiated cells that lack the ability to replicate, for instance? In other words, in science the question is far from trivial, yet making the distinction makes sense in certain contexts, and doesn't in many other. It is more a convenience, similar to the species concepts (although the latter of a higher impact in many fields), to make that context depending distinction.

This question pops up every now and then. The basic is that there is no consensus, only more or less useful conventions that assist in categorizing stuff. Whether it is useful to make such a distinction in the first place is dependent on the question at hand.

It is slightly more complicated than that. Generally the major forces in such systems are electrophoresis and electroosmosis (the latter mostly in capillary or smaller system and assuming a homogeneous field). The electrophoretic component is determined by the electrophoretic mobility of the particle in the given system. The force of acting on the particle scales with the charge, although geometry also has an effect (as well as media properties). Generally, however, the size effects tend to be negligible compared to the charge (on which the field really acts on). The size dependent resolution in some standard electrophoresis techniques is based on the use of additional tricks (i.e. gels) to achieve separation in cases where the electrophoretic properties of the particles alone are insufficient or not well-defined (e.g. in case of biomolecules).

Well, I think toxoplasmosis is one of the best known parasites with effects on human behavior (that I am aware of). Effects of toxoplasma on human behavior. Flegr J. Schizophr Bull. 2007 May;33(3):757-60. Epub 2007 Jan 11. Abstract: Although latent infection with Toxoplasma gondii is among the most prevalent of human infections, it has been generally assumed that, except for congenital transmission, it is asymptomatic. The demonstration that latent Toxoplasma infections can alter behavior in rodents has led to a reconsideration of this assumption. When infected human adults were compared with uninfected adults on personality questionnaires or on a panel of behavioral tests, several differences were found. Other studies have demonstrated reduced psychomotor performance in affected individuals. Possible mechanisms by which T. gondii may affect human behavior include its effect on dopamine and on testosterone.

For now, yes. It is not my field of expertise but the majority of current data that I am aware of point into that direction.

First of all there is no scientific consensus on what is life. There are notions that the dichotomy between life and non-life is purely artificial. Whatever it may be, it has no real impact on this discussion as the question is not what is life, but what constitutes a person. There is no doubt that a cancer cell is alive according to all possible notions and definitions, but it is clearly not a person.

A dead cell does not have a membrane potential anymore. Pioneer, for energy conservation membrane potentials are generated passively to facilitate ATP generation. The rest does not make much sense either. ATP still can be retained within a dead cell for a while, if no lysis occurs. There a lot of different assays to determine the viability of different cells, primarily based on membrane integrity.

There are a lot of transport mechanisms and many are shared between those two cell types. However, generally this is a homework question related to what specialized functions neurons fulfill and what specific transport mechanisms are needed for that.

Technically there is no free iron in cells as they are all associated one way or another with biomolecules. It is correct, however that the term refers to only loosely associated as opposed to tightly bound iron. Generally only specific binding elements are therefore considered non-free. However, even in cases of specific binding, the strength of the bond can be so weak that it will be easily released in standardized assays to determine free iron. The unspecific binding is similar for most heavy metals, however there are different proteins and other molecules that specifically bind iron or copper in certain configurations. This could e.g. be in the form of iron-sulfur clusters in specific proteins, the binding regions of certain transporters, etc.

Another thought experiment. In the early blastula phase you take out a single cell. Do you have one or two humans now (under the right conditions the single cells would start proliferating)? You put it back. Did you just kill one?

I would first start with the big job websites (e.g. monster) and simply try out keywords like e.g. biotechnology or mathematician. It can help a lot if you manage to network your way to a real person within a company you are interested in to talk to, though.

Biotech or biology can give you a job as technician, lab analyst or in technical support, for instance. Though sometimes the latter already have a PhD (for specialized equipment that is). I would scour the job market, looking at positions in companies etc. and see what their respective requirements are. People in industry that I know personally are all PhD level (and in different countries for that matter) so I have only limited personal knowledge about likely jobs. But again, researching what what the companies want (as opposed to relying on hearsay) will get you further.

Amino acids do create energy, just not directly as glycolysis. In fact, the majority of energy created (in most cells) is done by oxidative phoshphorylation. The required reduction equivalents are for the most part created in the TCA cycle. The TCA cycle is the central hub of metabolism, allowing interconversion of required molecules (e.g. from sugars to fatty acids and amino acids as well as vice versa) and, as mentioned, creation of reduction equivalents oxidative phosphorylation. Again, gluconeogensis is the process of creating sugars as building blocks, but is not an element of energy creation.

I think your best bet is to figure out, what kind of jobs are out there that may interest you. The ideas thrown around right now are very vague, to say the least. The disadvantage about talking to academic advisors is, of course, that most can only provide answers in the academic area. However, many unis also provide courses or the occasional talks from people from industry (and sometimes host biotech or similar job fairs). I would advise you to check those out. In the end the coursework is little more than just to give a bit of a foundation but chances are that they will have little impact on what you are finally doing. Of course, if you enjoy them, by all means do that while you are still undergrad. The major is not your career defining decision. But it is important at some point to define ones career. Generally the first big step is to whether enter grad school (and where) than anything else.

There is the areas of computational biology (and chemistry) as well as applied mathematics/statistics. These are often academic disciplines with relatively little use in industrial settings, though. In addition, often these are natural scientists adding modeling or similar mathematical techniques to their portfolio. It is a rare case that a mathematician goes to the lab. What usually happens is that they find e.g. a use for a given mathematical framework to some research question. Again, this is generally only useful in the academic field (I never seen one, but know of bioinformaticians and usually it is a horrible mess). On the other hand, on the undergrad level there is not too strict of a distinction either (one generally assumes a lack of specialization at that point). One job that a few mathematicians I know finally got are in the area of statistical analyses (including marketing).

Hey, do not diss my poor zip drive. Also my MO drive still rocks.

In addition, I would be interested whether there are actually non-religious people who want to homeschool their kids in Germany.

This actually does not add any new knowledge that was not around already. The point is not that ABs lead to resistance against themselves but that they increase mutation rate. Everything falls into place after that.

It depends on a) the form of the DNA, b)how many restriction sites for the given enzyme are present on the DNA molecule c) where the restrictions sites are and d) the resolution of the gel (i.e. which sizes are finally visible).

It is not quite the same as the fermentation products are neglected when just focusing on glycolysis. Respiration is often conveniently described as starting from glucose and ending with oxidative phosphorylation in some textbooks but that is an incorrect description. For instance NADH does not necessarily mean that glycolysis is happening as it will also be produced during the TCA cycle. And the TCA cycle itself can be fueled by substrates other than sugars. In other words the glycolysis to energy image is correct, but only part of the picture (and especially for microorganism a lot of variations exist). What is happening is slightly more complicated as the inhibitory effect of ATP is not limited to the PFK (which occurs at very high concentrations of ATP, I confused enzymes earlier, my bad), but the TCA cycle itself is also inhibited (e.g. the citrate synthase). Also note that this is not an on/off switch, but a gradual shift of the equilibria so that the gradual decline of one will result at the same time in the gradual increase of the other. So it is not that at some point the inhibitory effects suddenly ceases and only after that an increase of NADH occurs but is is a simultaneous shift in equilibrium reactions for each involved protein. Imagine the ratio of inhibited to non-inhibited enzymes shifting under each condition and you will get the picture.

Gluconeogenesis has little to do with energy creation or respiration per se. The only exception, of course, is for the brain, which requires glucose. In other tissues amino acids are simply entering the TCA and provide reduction equivalents for oxidative phosphorylation. For some amino acids this pathway is much shorter than glycolysis.

Actually it is not. Regarding the OP, I am not familiar with that book. However, it looks to me like overselling points and possibly cherry picking studies. I would check out the cited studies and see, what others with possibly different outcomes may be around.