Log in
Home1,900,000CA1,000,000

BLG 10A/B Midterm: document0 (2)

19 views7 pages
School
Ryerson University
Department
Biology
Course
BLG 10A/B
Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Document Summary

Yard bright iced tea, which you can either hand to your guests for or make your own. It also contains a few sweet, tangy ingredients which will make you stand out. Once you"ve had your tea, however, you can get started enjoying it right away. One of the great things i love about this tea is that it tastes sweet without being as sweet as a whole minty or minty teapot. So you can be sure someone is trying the tea and you don"t really want to get drunk on it! It"s really versatile and can be made into a really great dessert just like a lemonade. To top it off, there are also a few different types of sweetener that you can add to the tea. For example, there"s cinnamon this is a great one at all, as it"s one of the sweeter tasting foods on this list too!

Get access

Grade+
$40 USD/m
Billed monthly
Grade+
Homework Help
Study Guides
Textbook Solutions
Class Notes
Textbook Notes
Booster Class
10 Verified Answers

Related Documents

HLTH101 Lecture Notes - Lecture 1: Iced Tea, Lemonade, Political Philosophy
risimangaleswaran
GEOG 3113 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Sherry, Kabinett, Port Wine
champagnetermite16
ADPR 3520 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: The Color Wheel, Beatification, Microsoft Powerpoint
amaranthsquirrel732

Related Questions

Data Table 1. Sugar Tests with Benedict’sReagent.

Test tube
number

Substance

Hypothesis

Final color

Test results for
reducing sugar

1

Distilled water

2

Glucose solution

3

Starch solution

4

Table sugar

5

Splenda®

6

Sweet'N Low®

7

Milk

8

Juice

9

Potato

Questions

1. Did the table sugar solution test positive or negative forreducing sugars? Explain why you received these

2. Do Splenda® and Sweet’N Low® test positive or negative forreducing sugars? List the ingredients found in each of theseproducts. Underline the ingredient that is the artificialsweetener. (Hint: There is only one artificial sweetener in each ofthe products. Refer to the Introduction.)

3. What is the relationship of glucose and dextrose? How doesthis relationship influence the test results for Splenda® andSweet’N Low®?

4. A common artificial sweetener found in Equal®, NutraSweet®,and many diet sodas is aspartame(C14H18N2O5). Would asample of pure aspartame test positive or negative for reducingsugars? (The pure sample does not contain other ingredients, suchas dextrose, maltodextrin, or calcium silicate.)

5. Unlike other sweeteners, Splenda® may be used in cookingbecause it does not break down at higher temperatures. Many recipescall for Splenda® instead of table sugar. Is a cake baked withSplenda® actually sugar-free? How might this affect a personconcerned with blood sugar levels?

Exercise 2: Detection of Starch

Data Table 2. Starch Tests with IKIIndicator.

Test tube
number

Substance

Hypothesis

Final color

Test results for starch

1

Distilled water

2

Glucose solution

3

Starch solution

4

Table sugar

5

Splenda®

6

Sweet’N Low®

7

Milk

8

Juice

9

Potato

Questions

1.Which sugar substitute tested positive for presence of starch?This sugar substitute contains a starch derived from corn orpotatoes. List the ingredient that is the starch.

2. List three examples of polysaccharides in living organisms.Describe the structural orientations of each.

3. When a human consumes starch, the polysaccharides are brokendown into simple sugars, which are converted to polysaccharides forstorage in the cells. However, simple sugars are used by the cellto perform work. Describe why it is necessary to change the form ofthe carbohydrate in the body.

Exercise 3: Converting Starch to Sugar

Data Table 3. Conversion of Starch to the SugarMaltose.

Test tube
number

Substance +
α-amylase

Final color

Test results for
reducing sugar

Test results for
starch

1

Distilled water

----------

2

Distilled water

----------

3

Starch solution

----------

4

Starch solution

----------

Questions

1. What type of reaction is the conversion of starch to maltose?Describe what occurs during the reaction.

2. Is maltose a reducing sugar or a non-reducing sugar? Supportyour answer with information in Data Table 3. Maltose is a reducingsugar. Explain why by finding a supporting reference.

Please answer the question after reading the paragraph.

We have a global health challenge in our hands today, and that is that the way we currently discover and develop new drugs is too costly, takes far too long, and it fails more often than it succeeds. It really just isn't working, and that means that patients that badly need new therapies are not getting them, and diseases are going untreated. We seem to be spending more and more money. So for every billion dollars we spend in R&D, we're getting less drugs approved into the market. More money, less drugs. Now we have a whole pipeline of different organ chips that we are currently working on in our labs. Now, the true power of this technology, however, really comes from the fact that we can fluidically link them. There's fluid flowing across these cells, so we can begin to interconnect multiple different chips together to form what we call a virtual human on a chip. Now we're really getting excited.We're not going to ever recreate a whole human in these chips, but what our goal is is to be able to recreate sufficient functionality so that we can make better predictions of what's going to happen in humans. For example, now we can begin to explore what happens when we put a drug like an aerosol drug. Those of you like me who have asthma, when you take your inhaler, we can explore how that drug comes into your lungs, how it enters the body, how it might affect, say, your heart. Does it change the beating of your heart? Does it have a toxicity? Does it get cleared by the liver? Is it metabolized in the liver? Is it excreted in your kidneys? We can begin to study the dynamic response of the body to a drug. Organs on chips could also change the way we do clinical trials in the future. Right now, the average participant in a clinical trial is that: average. Tends to be middle aged, tends to be female. You won't find many clinical trials in which children are involved, yet every day, we give children medications, and the only safety data we have on that drug is one that we obtained from adults. Children are not adults. They may not respond in the same way adults do. There are other things like genetic differences in populations that may lead to at-risk populations that are at risk of having an adverse drug reaction. Now imagine if we could take cells from all those different populations, put them on chips, and create populations on a chip. This could really change the way we do clinical trials. And this is the team and the people that are doing this. We have engineers, we have cell biologists, we have clinicians, all working together. We're really seeing something quite incredible at the Wyss Institute. It's really a convergence of disciplines, where biology is influencing the way we design, the way we engineer, the way we build. It's pretty exciting.

Question: For years, technology and medicine have joined together to pave the way or even solve some of the world’s greatest issues in healthcare. These issues include but are not limited to incurable diseases and disorders like AIDS and cancer. According to Geraldine Hamilton however, we as a population are spending too much money to develop drugs and solutions to these issues, only to be at a deficit with the drugs actually produced. She believes that one of the keys is how we test these drugs and finding more efficient ways to do so. As a result, she suggests the use of organs on chips, an innovation created and pioneered by her lab. The use of organs on chips could change the way new drugs are released and tested, thus possibly furthering the process of creating solutions to healthcare’s problems. Where is the fine line between technology and human innovation? Is human innovation gradually becoming depending on technology? (At least two paragraphs, a paragraph is at least 5 sentences long.)

First of all I am not endorsing Intelligent Design (Wikipedialink); I'm asking this because I (someone who does not have abackground in biology, organic chemistry, or philosophy) got into aconversation with someone who does endorse it, and I'm trying tosee his point of view as far as rationality can allow. Second ofall, I apologize for any vagueness; Intelligent Design isn't wellenough defined as a theory for me to help that. I also apologize ifthis is rehashing content already plentiful on the Internet, butfor my purposes I can't simply depend on the likes of Wikipedia orTalk Origins, so what I'm looking for here instead is to take theopposite approach and see, based on your informed minds, if therecould possibly be any reasonable likelihood of an ideal ID theorybeing adopted.

I'm looking for the most favorable consideration for what IDmight be if it were best developed as a viable hypothesis or theoryto get an idea of how far such a discussion is worth taking. Anunbiased, informed Devil's advocate, if you will.

My cursory investigation of what Stephen Meyers (video link) andMichael Behe (video link) say (correct me if I'm wrong) seems to bethat either the first cell was likely designed intelligentlyjudging by the complex code of DNA and that evolution took coursefrom there, or that the first cells were made and many instances ofevolution were from some kind of intelligently guided mutations aswas needed to make "irreducibly complex" cells or body functions(whether the guidance stops after the Cambrian or continued even tothe point of making different types of new bacteria and differenttypes of apes/humans or whether every single mutation and adaptiveability is being guided, I'm not sure if they're at any consensus,and that's why I don't know if I should stop my question atabiogenesis or include evolution). The person I spoke with alsobrought up some specific claims (everything looks designed, DNA hasordered, complex information, blood clotting is irreduciblycomplex, ID can and has make predictions like decades ago that"Junk DNA" wasn't junk) that I don't need you to debunk (I haveGoogle).

But if there could be any possible support or truth to any ofthe above, I would appreciate knowing about that. (Again, Devil'sadvocate so I can be informed and understand where the points comefrom.) Reading an ID book alone, it would be in places hard to knowwhere they differ from actual scientific conclusions. After all,when someone who seems to know what they're talking about and canexplain something in technical detail says that something isimpossible or extremely unlikely, it's hard for me to know why theywould be wrong (are they ignoring other possibilities?misrepresenting facts? are they really right and just getting thecold shoulder from an atheistic scientific community because itimplies a deity?). So I focus on mainstream sources, even if theydon't bother entertaining ID and leave me ignorant of its possiblevirtues. And thus I'm hoping someone from this informed communitymight enlighten me to what those possible virtues might be.