Reviewing Annotations and Group Abstract Writing 2/18/19

Rationale

The rationale behind these procedures is to ensure that all annotations on NapoleonB are correct and that abstracts are prepared for Scholar’s Day.

Tools/Procedure

1. Several annotations were marked as potentially erroneous and were reexamined
2. Genes were reexamined using:
   • NCBI was used to BLAST amino acid sequences against a large database of recorded sequences
   • Starterator and genemark were used to determine if the genes ought to be altered to include more or fewer base pairs
3. The information gathered was used to verify the gene calls that were previously made
4. Then in order to have an abstract prepared several lab members collaborated to create an abstract

Results

This image shows the unchanged gene 66 after it was reviewed

The abstract that was created by group collaboration is written below:

“Bacteriophage phage represent a widely diverse and understudied population of microorganisms. In order to further aid in the effort to understand the mechanics behind bacteriophages, the 2018-2019 Phage Hunter class of Baylor University isolated Arthrobacter phages from soil samples collected throughout Waco, Texas. The samples were washed and the resulting lysates were plated to test for phage presence. Phage presence was indicated by a series of plaque assays, spot tests, PCR and gel electrophoresis. Once phage presence was confirmed, the process of purification and amplification was used to achieve a high titer lysate which was then archived for DNA extraction. DNA was extracted from NapoleonB, sequenced, and late annotated using DNAMaster and other bioinformatics tools. In bench research, NapoleonB was found to constantly display two distinct plaque morphologies and appeared to be a Myoviridae in the AM phage cluster. In silico research revealed that NapoleonB contains a linear double-stranded DNA genome with approximately 97 genes composed of 57846 base pairs. Future research can be used to determine the exact mechanics behind NapoleonB’s many functions.”

Conclusion

There is not a lot of information from which to draw conclusions, but I am able to assert that gene 66 was called correctly.

Future Plans

In the future, I will use the annotations of NapoleonB to be able to research my own questions and hopefully add in someway to knowledge about phage.