Ode To The Microbe

When sodium hypochlorite (bleach) solution is added to luminol, a chemical reaction occurs that releases energy in the form of light. This is called chemiluminescence. The bleach solution acts as an oxidizing agent, which means it takes electrons away from the luminol molecule. This causes the luminol molecule to become excited, and it releases the energy as light.

🎥 Courtesy: Kendra Frederick

The luminol molecule is made up of two amino groups, a carbonyl group, and an azo group. The amino groups are electron-rich, while the carbonyl group is electron-poor. The azo group is a conjugated system, which means that the electrons in the double bonds can move freely from one atom to another.

When sodium hypochlorite (bleach) solution is added to luminol, the bleach molecules react with the amino groups of the luminol molecule. This reaction takes electrons away from the luminol molecule, which causes the luminol molecule to become oxidized. The oxidized luminol molecule is in an excited state, which means that it has more energy than it normally does.

The excited luminol molecule then releases the extra energy as light. This light is called chemiluminescence. The light emitted by the chemiluminescence reaction is blue because the luminol molecule has a blue fluorescence.

The chemiluminescence reaction between luminol and sodium hypochlorite is catalyzed by the presence of a metal ion, such as iron or copper. The metal ion helps to stabilize the excited state of the luminol molecule, which makes it more likely to release the extra energy as light.

The chemiluminescence reaction is very sensitive to impurities, so it is important to use pure chemicals. The reaction can also be affected by the pH of the solution. The optimal pH for the reaction is around 9.

The chemiluminescence reaction between luminol and sodium hypochlorite can be used to detect blood, as the iron in hemoglobin can catalyze the reaction. The reaction is also used in some commercial products, such as glow sticks and emergency lights.

I hope you enjoyed learning about this. ❤️🙏

FUNGI: THE ROTTEN WORLD AROUND US [1983]

could you explain why/if we can't just copy the genes of one animal and splice them into another animal, for example why we couldn't give humans cat ears?

There's no one easy way to answer this, but the basic answer is that it's not that simple. There's no one gene, or even easily reducible set of genes, that just is "make cat ears". Not only is there a network of genes activated within a cell, there are a myriad of signals from nearby cells (the "microenvironment") as well as cues from the rest of the body and environment.

So each one of the cells making your ear isn't just encoded to be a cell that makes your ear. In fact, most of them don't have any "ear" genetic characteristics or activation. They're generic cartilage or skin cells that were told to grow more or less by neighboring cells or distant cells during carefully coordinated times during growth and development. Each cell interprets this signal in different ways, and also receives multiple signals at a time, the combination of which can produce unique results.

The easiest to interpret example of this is finger development. During development, when your hand is still a fingerless paddle, a single cell on the pinky side of your hand (or thumb side, it could be reversed) releases a signalling molecules to nearby cells. A cell receiving the highest dose will start to become a pinky, and send a signal for the cells immediately around it to aide in that. The next cell that isn't aiding that, but still receives the initial signal, receives a lower concentration of that signal since it's further away. That lower concentration signals a ring finger, and it repeats until you get thumbs at the lowest concentrations.

That's the most visible example, but it's similar to what happens all over the body- signals that are dependent on the structure and genetics of the microenvironment, not just the genetics of the developing cells alone.

This careful network of timing, signals, gene activations, and spatial placement of cells is the core of the field of Developmental Biology (which, technically, my PhD is in as well bc it's often wrapped in with molecular bio lol).

So making cat ears on a human genetically would essentially require not only genetic manipulation, but also babysitting the fetus the entire time and adding in localized signals to the microenvironment of the developing ear cells, which is essentially impossible. There's too much "human" flying around to realistically get that result, and an attempt at doing so would essentially be akin to molecular sculpting. That's why *my* preferred approach would be epithelial stem cell manipulation/printing and subsequent grafting, but that's an entirely different thing.

If you're interested in this kind of thing, the most approachable and engaging summary of developmental biology is the book "Your Inner Fish", by Neil Shubin, the discoverer of Tiktaalik. He summarizes a lot of dev biology through the lens of evolutionary biology, which is a great way to see how differences in structures have arisen and differentiate across the tree of life.

If you want a shorter introduction, and like cute but kinda "cringey in the way you love" science parodies: the song evo-devo by a capella science is really fun and gets stuck in my head a lot:

But yeah, hope that answered your question!

source

just some very Shaped things

i complain alot when it comes to uni and my course, but not gonna lie, here on my final year i've started to fall in love with it again, the way the fascination started when i was younger and learning new things was exciting.

throughout learning it always felt like i was not built for it, that I just cannot for the life of me focus and dedicate myself on anything. and i was just doubting myself and i should change courses or drop out because I was not meant to do this. and now on my second last semester, things kinda clicked. It may be hard for me to understand and learn, but it's worth it. To see the universe in all of its beauty, its ugliness, its complexity, its charm; it's a struggle but I'll endure it for you.

and I find myself really hoping I get to continue down in the stream of sciences and contribute to something for nature and for humanity as well, or at least deepen my understanding of how this universe works and widen my view of how intricate and special this world we live in actually is, how caring it is, how every single thing is worth something, and nothing from nature is ever truly useless

gorgeous mold in a petri dish, Sporothrix schenckii

phys.org

Predatory bacteria provide hope for chlorine-free drinking water

In a unique study carried out in drinking water pipes in Sweden, researchers from Lund University and the local water company tested what wo

In a unique study carried out in drinking water pipes in Sweden, researchers from Lund University and the local water company tested what would happen if chlorine was omitted from drinking water. The result? An increase in bacteria, of course, but after a while something surprising happened: a harmless predatory bacteria grew in numbers and ate most of the other bacteria. The study suggests that chlorine is not always needed if the filtration is efficient—and that predatory bacteria could perhaps be used to purify water in the future. Just as human intestines contain a rich bacterial flora, many types of bacteria thrive in our drinking water and the pipes that transport them. On the inside of pipe walls is a thin, slippery coating, called a biofilm, which protects and supports bacteria. These bacteria have adapted to life in the presence of chlorine, which otherwise has the primary task to kill bacteria, particularity bacteria that can make humans sick.

Continue Reading

Metatrichia floriformis by sir.myxo.lot

Did we kill them?

Looking at what concentrations my antibiotics killed resistant Staphylococcus bacteria.

Higher antibiotic concentrations are on the right side, where there is clear liquid with no bacteria growth. It works!