March 8

03/06/19 Class Poster Decisions/ Starterator

Rationale:

The purpose of today’s lab was to decide as a class on which poster to present as well as checking my starterator annotations.

Materials:

  • PowerPoint
  • DNA Master
  • Starterator PhagesDB

Procedure:

  • Each group presented their poster submissions, and the class voted on which to use.
  • Starterator annotations for genes 61-64 were checked and fixed accordingly.

Results:

  • Genes 61 and 63 were changed to NI instead of SS and genes 62 and 64 were left as SS.
  • This was the poster that won the majority of the class

    •  

  • Possible additional poster elements

Conclusions:

Genes 61 and 63 were changed to NI as the starterator did not aid with any start calls as I disagreed with the starterator report. Also the poster that was chosen by the class is the poster that the class will continue to work with to present.

Next Steps:

Polish and refine the elements on the poster as well as looking to add some “meat” to the poster.

Category: Gabriel Andino | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 8

03/04/19 Final Poster Submission/ Gene Correction

Rationale:

The purpose of today’s lab was to correct the genes that were found to have errors in them, as well as finish a group submission poster for the class to review.

Tools:

  • NapoleonB PhageNotes
  • DNA Master
  • PowerPoint

Procedure:

  • Gene 64 was found to have a coding potential error, and a gap miscalculation. In addition to this, gene 61 was found to have an RBS value error.
  • Both genes had their errors corrected, and a final presentation poster was completed and submitted as well.

Results:

  • It was decided that gene 64 did not cover all of the coding potential marked by genemark and that it has an overlap of 11 instead of 9.
  • Also, the Z-value for gene 61 was inputted incorrectly and was corrected to the proper 3.113 instead of 3.118.
  • Final poster submission:

Conclusions:

It was decided to change the coding potential originally annotated for gene 64 as the atypical coding potential extended past where the gene was called. The gene could have been pulled back to a longer ORF, however that would have violated the overlap rule that guided phage genome annotations. The overlap miscalculation was an error on my part as I did not add, I subtracted. Also, the z-value was an input error.

Next Steps:

The next steps for this experiment are to decide on a poster to represent as a class and check my starterator hits.

Category: Gabriel Andino | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 8

3.6.19 Poster Presentations

3.6.19 Poster Presentations

Rationale: Since each group has created a poster that is ready to display for the class, it is necessary for the class to decide which format is chosen to create the final poster.

Procedure:

Each group stood in front of the class and gave a brief presentation. The presentations were followed by discussions about each posters. After the discussions, a class-wide vote and conclusion was reached about the poster style.

Results:

One poster was selected from the entire class, but aspects of each poster were chosen to be added to that poster. Therefore, even though only one group’s base design will be chosen for the entire poster, each group/individual will have the opportunity to have a role in creating a product representative of the year’s work.

Conclusions:

With so many people working on one project, splitting into groups was especially helpful in ensuring that each person had their ideas heard, and that they had a chance to be seen on a poster, even if it was a draft.

Next Steps: The poster will be refined until there is a solid final product that is ready to be submitted to URSA.

Category: Henry Burns | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 8

Poster Presentation

Title: Poster Presentation

Date: 6 March 2019

Purpose: To present the compiled posters and decide as a class which aspects of each poster belong on the final Scholar’s week poster

Tools: 

  • Microsoft PowerPoint

Procedure: 

  • Each group presented their poster to the class and each group critiqued each other’s posters in order to select a final poster format and elements from each poster to compile the final Scholar’s week poster.

Results/Observations: The final poster format came from Lily Goodman’s group, and various elements from other posters were taken. NO final poster exists at this time to post on the report.

Conclusions/Next Steps: The final poster still needs to be made, but the rough outline and design being determined is a big step towards the final product.

Category: Uncategorized | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 8

3.4.19 Poster Creation

3.4.19 Poster Creation

Rationale: Since the posters were half-done, the next step was to refine/revise the posters and combine with another group.

Procedure:

Powerpoint was used to finish the poster. Email was used to transfer information between individuals in the group. Personally, I contributed to the In Silico Results section by making graphics in excel and taking screenshots of the programs.

Results:

A complete poster that was fused with another group’s was created. This poster is a rough draft, and still needs to be revised in the future. However, it will provide a basis for the rest of the lab and deciding which poster to use and proceed with.

Conclusions:

Making posters is more difficult in a shortened/expedited time frame. Therefore, the poster cannot be expected to be perfected in two days, so additional collaboration and classwork will need to happen before a final product will be ready to submit.

Next Steps:

On Wednesday, the posters with the main groups will be presented so the class can evaluate the posters and determine which poster should be edited into a final version. The poster that results from this process will be submitted for the research symposium.

Category: Henry Burns | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 8

3.6.19 Presenting Posters to the Class and Selecting One

Rationale:

To select a poster to work on as a class.

Procedures:

  1. Presented various posters and took notes
  2. Voted on the favorite poster

Conclusions:

We concluded that Lily’s group’s poster was the one we wanted to work on as a class.

Next Steps:

The next step will be to work on this poster as a class in order to present it at URSA Scholars Week. I’m also still waiting on Lathan’s advice for gene 18.

Category: Nathan Newton | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 8

3.4.19 Combining Posters and Fixing Annotations

Rationale:

To combine our group’s poster with another group in order for it to be voted on by the class, and to fix the annotations for genes 18 and 20.

Procedure:

  1. Opened an already auto annotated version of NapoleonB.
  2. Looked at gene 18 and rechecked the associated data.
  3. Further research into gene 18 will be conducted by Lathan due to starterator inconsistencies.
  4. Fixed gene 20’s RBS score data entry error.
  5. Combined the posters of our group and Gabe’s group.

Results/Conclusions:

It can be concluded that gene 18 needs further investigation by Lathan due to conflicting data from starterator and all the other sources and the principle of the LORF. The posters were combined using Gabe’s group’s poster as a base.

Next Steps:

The next step will be to select a class poster and proceed to work on it as a class, I will also fix the annotation of gene 18 once I receive Lathan’a advice.

Category: Nathan Newton | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 7

Final Lab Poster Design Presentation & Selection 3.6.19

Rationale:

To present the research, the lab members were divided into groups to discuss and design a poster, two groups were combined to produce the best parts of the two poster designs.

Materials:
  • Laptop
  • PowerPoint
Procedure:
  1. The poster made by the groups were presented in the lab, with the pros and cons of the different posters discussed.
  2. The most appealing poster was then picked out by the class and corrections on the poster were proposed.
Results:

The poster selected for the lab

The Next Step:

The next lab would be making adjustments based on some of the propositions made in the lab.

Category: Yang-En Yu | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 7

Final Group Poster Submission 3.4.19

Rationale:

To present the research, the lab members were divided into groups to discuss and design a poster, two groups were combined to produce the best parts of the two poster designs.

Materials:
  • Laptop
  • PowerPoint
Procedure:
  1. The best elements of the two posters were discussed and combined to produce a final poster that was submitted to Canvas.
Results:

The Next Step:

The poster would be presented by the combined group in the next lab and the most appealing design would be picked out as the final poster format.

Category: Yang-En Yu | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 7

3/6 ~ Poster Presentations and Selection

Rationale: Present the group created posters and determine which one to use as a template

 

Materials:

  • Group posters
  • Opinion from classmates

 

Procedure:

  • Each group went up to present their poster design
  • Collaborated as a cohort on which design was to be used
  • Determined which aspects of other poster was to be kept/transferred to the design

 

Observations:

  • The selected final poster

    ‘

  • Conclusion/Next Steps: As a class, determined which poster to use as a template. In the upcoming labs, will be transferring and tweaking the aspects of the poster to the desired information to be displayed.
Category: Justin Yu | LEAVE A COMMENT