Assignment: DNA Sequencing Analysis - 10 points
This assignment is due one week after Lab 6.Please follow the instructions in the wiki in Lab6 Series2 for using the DNAStar analysis software to compare the DNA sequences provided for the mutated and wild type versions of the gene we have located and identified as associated with your Dpy phenotype in our forward genetics project. Once you have discovered the exact nature and extent of the mutation in the gene of interest inC. elegans, you are to look for and investigate homologs/orthologs in other species. The directions for using the DNAstar software by Lasergene to analyze your sequences are found at: Media:Instructions for DNA sequence analysis_F13_1.doc
Please write a Results section, a narrative with at least one figure or table, and a separate Discussion on this sequence analysis (not the whole forward genetics investigation), addressing its implications. The figure should NOT be a screen shot of the sequences and amino acids from DNAStar™, but rather, something of your own design. (Remember that the screen shot of the polypeptide sequence may show misinformation, particularly if there is a stop codon that does not indicate the end of translation!) The assignment is about the DNA sequencing analysis exclusively and does not include other findings from this project.
Results & Discussion Rubric- DNA sequencing Analysis – 10 points
||At or Above Standard
||Narrative is structured appropriately: begins with a concise description of topic, experimental goals and experimental design. Narrative references figures & tables directly and describes key findings accurately, concisely and clearly & includes only relevant information. Data analysis is thorough and leads incrementally & clearly to appropriate conclusions to experimental question and addresses topic’s goals. Analysis is understandable to an audience unfamiliar with topic and principles used in the experimental design.
||Narrative doesn't begin with an appropriately concise description of the experimental goals and experimental design. Narrative omits key findings, describes the data inaccurately or unclearly, includes irrelevant information, or is repetitive. Narrative fails to give appropriate conclusions to the experimental questions or fails to show how the experimental data allow the conclusions. Specific figure and table numbers for data that support conclusions is not cited in the narrative. Data analysis requires background knowledge that general audience may not have.
|Table(s) and/or Figure(s) well designed to illustrate conclusions and give the main point visually and easily. Included all crucial information that allows the figure or table to make the main points visually and to “stand alone”. All data adequately identified; labeling appropriate. Title and Legend information properly placed and appropriate.
||Figure(s) or table(s) not well designed to illustrate main points visually, clearly, or in most direct and simple way or missing essential information needed for understanding. Title and Legend information not appropriate or not properly placed
||Discussion begins with a brief restatement of topic & experimental goals and a summary of the main findings in the results section with specific references to Fig. or Table # for the data referenced. Discussion uses outside sources that are properly cited in the format requested (model journal Genetics)in the body of the discussion and in an included Works Cited page. (Note that citation of functional information gleaned from WormBase or other public databases should be to the published original investigation rather citing Wormbase.) Your work in this investigation is the central focus although it is integrated with other outside studies in order to expand your reader's understanding of the significance of the dpy gene that you have characterized in your forward genetics project. Discussion includes the importance of this gene and gene product in C. elegans and in other species.
||Discussion was not properly structured, did not include properly cited sources, was missing a Literature Cited page or the page was formatted incorrectly. Discussion did not center around and specifically reference your findings or did not expand the scope and significance of the investigation with appropriately integrated information from outside sources.