Wednesday, October 29, 2014
November Blog Post AP Biology 14-15
This week in AP Biology we began to look at the processes of cell division, namely the cell cycle, mitosis and meiosis. Understanding of these processes is essential and a hot topic in medical research. Many human diseases can be traced to problems associated with the regulation of the cell cycle. To that end, in this week’s blog I would like you to read the linked article and then pose one question that is generated having read the article on cell cycle regulation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Why are humans so susceptible to having cell cycle abnormalities? What, evolutionarily made them that way?
ReplyDeleteAlso, towards the end of the article it mentions, “By conducting a genome-wide investigation of translation and interrogating the data with sophisticated computer algorithms, the researchers discovered that different groups of protein were made in abundance at a particular phase, only to be quieted during another phase of the cell cycle. Previous studies of translation of messenger RNA into protein focused on only one or just a few genes at a time, according to Ruggero and Taylor” this is very interesting---to think that protein creation is not occurring at a constant rate; an argument made previously probably for lack of scientific tools at the time.
It is very interesting to see the impressive amount of control that cells have over the production of their proteins. Yet, even one little slip up in the human body can start something disastrous. I wonder how scientist may use this new knowledge for the fight against cancer. My question is: Is there some other way to regulate protein production? If scientist could figure out another outside way to inhibit protein production, they could help prevent some of these cancers. I’m very curious to see how the production of proteins could be stopped. Perhaps through enzyme inhibition? Or maybe protein denaturation?
ReplyDeleteI definitely find it weird that cells can regulate themselves and control their processes at a microscopic level without a higher-functioning organelle that's more like the brain than the nucleus. If all of the abnormal processes were wrung out of the system, would superhumans be created, people that weren't susceptible to disease because their cells functioned perfectly all the time? Would this lead to an ability to alter fetal cell functions to create an impossibility of a healthy baby as long as the mother is healthy? Would it be ethical to combat nature by making cancer in humans impossible? Going off of what Cassie said, what would happen if we could impede natural selection? This is leading to an existential crisis.
ReplyDeleteIt seems clear that of the many factors influencing cellular replication, the amount of essential proteins that cells produce is a key indicator of how correctly the cell is replicating. These findings will be useful in combating new diseases, like Ebola, that have mutated to be unaffected by traditional medicines. However, with this research, scientists will have to spend more time and resources finding blocks for a wide variety of proteins. My question is: Have researchers looked into slowing, or halting protein production in cancer cells yet?
ReplyDeleteThe cell cycle is incredibly complex, and the mechanisms involved as described by the article are even more intricate. If it is the large amount of proteins produced that can cause cancer, what would be a way to make sure they remain inactive at the appropriate times? Denaturing a protein is the only way to get rid of one effectively, but how to do that without destroying others...
ReplyDeleteThe cell cycle is really interesting, but has a lot of steps. My question is: Is there a way to simplify this process? Maybe a new protein could be created that can complete more than one step in the cycle. If there are less steps there would be less of a chance for there to be mutations/mistakes in the process.
ReplyDeleteI think it is incredible how cells have such a complex way of sustaining life. However, such a complexity comes with problems that scientists and doctors are still having trouble resolving. For example, as mentioned in the article, one mess up in the cell cycle can lead a disastrous production of specific proteins, which can lead to abnormalities/diseases/cancer/etc. Will finding a way to simplify cell reproduction impair or facilitate the regulation of these proteins? If there was a way to monitor such issues such as overproduction of certain proteins in the cell, maybe there could be a treatment to Down Syndrome by fixing a “broken” chromosome and or many other diseases.
ReplyDeleteIs there any benefits of abnormal cell division? In short, can we use this inability to separate cancer cells from reproducing again?
ReplyDeleteMy first thought was how could this cure cancer. This article emphasizes greatly on the proteins used to separate cells, and how it could be a factor in tumors and cancer. But I think we could fight fire with fire. Use what we know that stops cells from reproducing properly and use it against cancer cells to keep them from multiplying. I think their might be more benefits in learning (for lack of a better word) screw up cell division.
The knowledge that has been understood by the UCal San Francisco team is extraordinary; its mind blowing to think that humans now understand so much about the microscoping process that is the cell cycle, and with that, the abnormalities surrounding it. My question is: couldn’t scientists, hypothetically , simply discover a way to denature the certain proteins that are responsible for the growth of cancer.. Perhaps with an inhibitor that would only bond to the malignant cells. I believe this idea could be explored, if it has not been already, in the quest for curing cancer.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like nature can get cells to overproduce proteins, as explained in the article. I have a few questions relating to the article. If these overproduced proteins are linked to cancer cells, can we target those cells to overproduce a separate protein to send the cell into apoptosis or deactivate the cell? This could be a relatively risk-free solution for cancerous cells, where a specific mass of cells could be targeted rather than targeting the entire body. My other comment is that if we're able to figure out how to manipulate cells into over producing proteins, it could be beneficial to harvest these cells, and grow large amounts of proteins in a lab. This could then be used to treat people who have a deficiency of that specific protein.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, it says that, “the researchers discovered that different groups of protein were made in abundance at a particular phase, only to be quieted during another phase of the cell cycle” (Science Daily). When reading this, I was wondering what proteins are in abundance in a particular phase. I am also curious as to how this great abundance of a certain protein is “quieted” in a different phase. Are there other proteins that lower the levels of the abundant protein? Are there other mechanisms at play?
ReplyDeleteIn the reading of this article I kept wondering how could just one cell be forced into indefinite duplication when it starts producing the proteins. Once the proteins are produced and it starts dividing and then its daughter cells divide and so on wouldn't the protein leave the group of cells being produced from the original cell that was defective. How come the proteins aren’t being carried between cells and spread throughout the body causing rapid cell division away from the initial defective cell?
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, I have many questions. Studies were performed to determine the problematic proteins. Once these proteins are found, how can we possibly get to every cell to ensure that this problem will not arise again? Also, what can we do to prevent these mutations before they even take place? If evolutionarily we haven't fixed the problem, then how can we keep these mutations from continuing or even being passed down to further generations? The research seems, so far, to be very helpful in determining what the key problem is, but I don't understand how, by changing one cell, the other cells in the body won't continue the way they were and out shadow the results of the first cell, more than half of the cells would have to be targeted in order for this to be possible.
ReplyDeleteI find it very interesting that researches are able to pinpoint specific factors that lead to abnormal cell reproduction, in this case- different kinds of proteins being produced in tumor cells. One curiosity I had after reading the article is why can't researches produce a drug that can turn off the protein in tumor cells that make them unique? I'm curious as to if there is a certain chemical that could inhibit the production of tumor cell proteins. Either way, it's progress towards developing different drugs to help destroy cancer. It can also be noted that as technology progresses, a better understanding of how the cell works at a molecular level and will be obtained.
ReplyDeleteIt is very exciting that we can now find out which factors are leading to abnormal cell reproduction. These breakthroughs in the biological field are solving the puzzle that is cancer, but there are still many questions that need to be answered. My question is: how can we regulate which proteins mutate and how can we fix those that have without destroying the others. To solve this, scientists would need to find out which factors are at play and what else could be used to stop the production of these cancer cells. Perhaps the addition of some enzymes and the inhibition of others could help the situation without destroying healthy proteins which would occur if denaturing of proteins was used as a cure. It has been proven that some pancreatic enzymes have destroyed cancer cells (stated in the link bellow).
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cancerfightingstrategies.com/enzymes-for-cancer.html#sthash.wVaaVdPH.biChNiWq.dpbs
The article presents evidence that different types of proteins are made in large batches to regulate cell division. This process contradicts the traditional understanding of the translation of RNA into protein, which was previously understood to entail comparatively small amounts of specific proteins. So, my question is as follows: Is it exclusively the process of cell division that involves this atypical protein production, or are their other cellular functions that also act as exceptions to the rule?
ReplyDeleteWhile the findings of this study pose many questions, I think that the discovery of this particular aspect of cell-cycle regulation and the implications when it goes awry is an important step in the ongoing battle to fight diseases associated with cellular reproduction. With many areas of scientific development, knowledge is half the battle, and this discovery is no exception. With the knowledge that this phenomenon exists, scientists can begin answering the questions regarding how to target it.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I'm wondering about after reading this article is how incredibly precise scientists will have to be in treating the irregularity in cell cycle regulation. As clear as the cause for the problem may be, cell cycle regulation is vital for the sustainability of life. Any drug introduced to affect the regulation protiens would have to not only affect only a specific kind of protien, but only the problematic ones. Identifying the protein RICTOR as a regulatory protein is a step in targeting the correct type of protein, but if all RICTOR protein's in a diseased person's body were hindered, the person might suffer serious consequences. How can scientists target an entity so small in such a vast arrangement of cells while minimizing side effects? It will be interesting to see whether this is a feasible feat in medicinal research stemming from this discovery.
In this article it states how timing is crucial when it comes to producing a cell that is normal. And in that if a cells timing is wrong when going through cell division it could lead to perhaps a cancerous cell.
ReplyDeleteSo my question would be basically a follow up to this article, How would they control or manipulate the timing of the stages of cell division to end the cancers cycle? if this is even possible!
After studying all Friday for the biology subject test and then taking the test on Saturday, I was wondering why cancer was never mentioned in any of the material I worked with. Cancer is such a big part of scientific research and one would think it would at least be mentioned. While studying for the test I thought of a question that, after reading this article, is even more mysterious to me. The question is this: Why, if “messenger RNA churn out the chains of amino acids that eventually fold into functional form as proteins”, can't we go back in the sequence of events to DNA (which is transcribed into RNA) and see what is wrong there? I know this is genetic engineering, but is genetic engineering so bad if it is regulated?
ReplyDeleteWhat these scientists have accomplished is mind blowing. They've led us to now being able to determine what factors are prohibiting cell reproduction. These scientists are doing incredible work, finding ways to minimize the effect of cancer; however, they are still many mysteries to finding the overall solution. With all that scientists can accomplish nowadays, and with the millions of people who have cancer, why hasn't an inhibitor been created or made to denature the protein and stop the overall process?
ReplyDeleteTowards the end of the article, it mentions "the ability of tumor cells to make extraordinary amounts of protein to sustain their rapid growth and immortality." Obviously, in human bodies, this is not a desired quality in any way; however, this wording of the function of tumor cells made me wonder where they might be beneficial. Is there any context in which having rapidly reproducing, practically "immortal" cells is desirable and helpful?
ReplyDeleteI think this article definitely places a lot of weight on the concept of timing. Towards the end it mentioned that a lot of the times when a cell turns cancerous the protein RICTOR is turned on. I wonder what conditions dictate whether or not that turns on, and if finding out that information would place us closer in finding out how to prevent cancer? It will be ineresting to see if there can be a way to fine tune a medicine so much that it only affects that one protein, or if they can somehow repair that fanage in order to help the patient become cancer free again.
ReplyDeleteMy questions are mostly about RICTOR since it sounds the most interesting to me. I wonder how hard it would be to turn off the overactive RICTOR in cancerous cells and what the negative side effects to doing this would be. Also, how well could we regulate and choose which cells to shut off the RICTOR and when to shut them off and turn them back on? The protein sounds very vital to the cell cycle so it sounds like understanding it better and being able to control it would help us in the long run against cancer.
ReplyDelete