my multiple choice answers (2 Viewers)

[suchet_i]

hmm i fked that up i think .. i said put the new and old plant in hot dry condition and wet humid condition (didnt say how) and record the observations everyday

 

[emma max]

yay! i got all the same answers for m/c

with that 8 mark question, did anyone else talk about how they should have tested the bacteria on a wider range of people to disprove the fact that stress and bad eating habits also don't contribute?...or was i just waaaay off course?

overall it was an alright exam...what did everyone say for that question where the experiment on fruit fly was supposed to help support the theory of natural selection?

 

[Loz_metalhead]

Will I lose alot of marks because I never learn Koch's postulates...the teacher never said we had to.

I also said they should have tested the bacteria on a wider range of people and eliminated all other factors.

 

[Wakely]

1. A
2. B
3. C
4. A
5. C
6. B
7. D
8. B
9. D
10. D
11. C
12. C
13. A
14. B
15. D

I got the exact same answers for u except for Q10. I got A, but i think i was wrong... Anyways, I hope its right! Other tha that I thought the exam was GREAT! Except for one question in the option 'human story', but other than that...

 

[Wakely]

Dude you got it wrong.
T t
T TT Tt
t Tt tt

Heterozygous pairs show the medelian ratio 1:2:1

But anyway you got the answer right ! i got 4 multiple choice questions wrong and 3 of them were changed in the last min....ARGH it kills

Actually, the capitol 'T' represents the dominant allele, therefore, all heterozygous (ie, Tt) offspring are counted as showing the dominant allele; therefore, it is a ration of 3:1 where for every 3 dominant phenotypes shown, there is 1 recessive.

 

[shimmy&shine]

-i don't think i mentioned enough of koch's postulates. damn. didn't touch effectively on validity, accuracy, etc. boohoo. But i think isaid enough to at least get a 6. I think this question was the only worthwhile question in the exam. I wouldn't sayit was a trick, but you had to go beyond the information presented to you. that was, of course, koch's postulates.
-I stupidly coloured in c rather than d for q9 even though i knew. I didn't comprehend it properly.

other than that, i am happy.

Also, is it alright if i said heamoglobin was a molecule rather than a protein. and yes, i also defined it by its job with oxygen.

 

[Sassy2600]

That's exactly wat i got but i got 15 wrong... i was between c and d and chose c damn it lol

1. A
2. B
3. C
4. A
5. C
6. B
7. D
8. B
9. D
10. D
11. C
12. C
13. A
14. B
15. D

 

[Survivor39]

They gave us an exert from a source (The Australian Magazine or sumfin for December 2005) and it talked about how Marshall and Warren won a nobel prize for demonstrating that they found the bacterium responsible for causing stomach ulcers and gastritis which were previously believed to be caused by stress and poor diet. Then they had a quote from one of the guys saying that 'they told us that bacteria couldn't grow in the acidic environment of the stomach but we found it...'

Then out of the source there was info which listed their methodology of identifying Helicobacter pylori as the pathogen responsible for ulcers and gastritis:
- They used prepared slides of ulcer tissue
- They used flexible endoscopes to identify swelling in the stomach
- They utilised staining methods to identify the presence of the bacterium in the tissue
- Something else here i think...

Then they told us that Marshall was tested for the presence of H. pylori and it was negative. So, he swallowed the bacterium and showed symptoms of gastritis.

And the actual question was:

Discuss the methodology used by Marshall and Warren to identify the pathogen as being the cause of stomach ulcers and gastritis. (or something along those lines)

Yes, in that case you must talk about the Koch's postulates. You will probably lose some marks for not mentioning them.

In reality, they did have evidence that demonstrate the first two postulates. However, in this case, you would have to base on the information they give you.

Barry was trying to convince the scientific community that the third postulate can be satisfied so he decided to drank the bug. He quickly developed problems and took some antibiotics to stop the infection. I am not sure whether in real life they actually demonstrate the last postulate as well. But you would have to talk about that in your response.

In think for your response, you need to relate the first 3 points as methodologies to satify the requirement of the first Koch's postulate:
- They used prepared slides of ulcer tissue
- They used flexible endoscopes to identify swelling in the stomach
- They utilised staining methods to identify the presence of the bacterium in the tissue

You must discuss that the listed methodologies were used to illustrate that the bug is in every case of the disease.

Then, if they also tell you that the bug was cultured, then that satisfies the requirement for the second postulate. If not, you need to discuss it and say that they need to do this (discuss how to culture, and the importance of a pure culture).

When he drank the bug and developed disease-specific symptoms, it support the third postulate to some degree, but you need to mention the limitation of this experiemnt and how can it be imporved to satify the third postulate. e.g. more replicates, develop an animal model.

And lastly discuss the last postulate and how it may be achieved.

Overall I think this is a good question to separate those who can apply biological concepts learnt in the course to those who cannot.

 

[Survivor39]

Also, is it alright if i said heamoglobin was a molecule rather than a protein. and yes, i also defined it by its job with oxygen.

By saying it is a molecule, it doesn't tell me anything about it. I think the examiners are looking for the key word "protein", which is found in RBCs and function to carry O2.

If it's a 2 mark question, may be you also need to say that it is composed of 4 subunits, 2 alpha and 2 beta.

 

[ari89]

Dude you got it wrong.
T t
T TT Tt
t Tt tt

Heterozygous pairs show the medelian ratio 1:2:1

But anyway you got the answer right ! i got 4 multiple choice questions wrong and 3 of them were changed in the last min....ARGH it kills

I was talkin about mendelian ratio for phenotype...

just saw ur thingo Wakely...i can't b bothered to delete mine

Actually, the capitol 'T' represents the dominant allele, therefore, all heterozygous (ie, Tt) offspring are counted as showing the dominant allele; therefore, it is a ration of 3:1 where for every 3 dominant phenotypes shown, there is 1 recessive.

 

[ari89]

u can talk about koch's postulates and relate them to their methods. i thought that their method wasnt that good since when they implanted the bacteria in Marshall, they did not attempt to isolate the organism from him.

however i also talked about how antibiotic use could be one way to determine if the bacterium is the cause of the ulcers

What do you mean by antiobiotic use? I don't think the antibiotics would survive in the stomach so you won't be able to talk about it that way?
I agree there methods wasn't that good...i called the Marshall ingesting it bit a controversial technique or some crap...
pls explain the antibiotic thingo?

 

[Dr_Doom]

By saying it is a molecule, it doesn't tell me anything about it. I think the examiners are looking for the key word "protein", which is found in RBCs and function to carry O2.

If it's a 2 mark question, may be you also need to say that it is composed of 4 subunits, 2 alpha and 2 beta.

Shit I think I called it a molecule aswell... But I mentioned the 4 subunits (alpha 1,2, beta 1,2).. I also said it had adaptive advantage because RBC have no nucleus so it can carry more.

 

[*yooneek*]

r u sure they were looking for koch's postulates?? i think they just wanted you to justify the reliability and vailidity of the procedure used and asses it, not re-write what they did, i.e koch's postulates

i fully just related it all to koch's postulates...said what they did in relation to his requirements and what they didn't do...im so unsure about it! what a weird question... lol im either completely wrong or completely right...here's hoping for the latter

 

[4DOGS]

does any1 hava copy of the short answers they can put up.

thanx

 

[Dr_Doom]

Ummn we had to hand those in remember

 

[Sgs2006]

They used discuss not assess



What do you mean by antiobiotic use? I don't think the antibiotics would survive in the stomach so you won't be able to talk about it that way?
I agree there methods wasn't that good...i called the Marshall ingesting it bit a controversial technique or some crap...
pls explain the antibiotic thingo?

No, they did use assess for the 8 mark

 

[kido_1]

yeh they used assess for the 8-marker.
ATleast i hope so...

 

[shimmy&shine]

with the haemoglobin answer

where the hell was the information on the 4 subunits. I have never encountered that before. Maybe that's more indepth, but argh. And i didn't mention the red blood cell having no nucleus because it asked specifically on haemoglobin. .. whateva i can't recall exactly what i wrote. all i remember is being really happy with finishing the exam.

 

[abroscrasha]

yeah i got all the same answers in multiple chioce as well. my teacher thinks that q9. is a) or b) though.

 

[teehees]

hmm well for that "What is haemoglobin?" question (which was worth one mark). I said that Haemoglobin was a protein found in red blood cells that was made up of 150 amino acids. Didnt mention the function because the next question down basically was asking for the function and turns out its 146 amino acids in haemoglobin, not 150... anyone know whether what i said is still worth the mark? =/