this assignment is a mini review on the origin of mitochondria. the instruction file is long but please read it all carefully. you need 6 sources and 6 of them MUST be from the progress report document I attached
1 Table of Contents GEM [GEM Introduction] [Additional GEM assistance] [Graphics and Citations] [Rubric for GEM and guidelines] [Peer Review] Citations and References [Plant Physiology reference style] [In-text Citations] Videos coming soon! 2 How to write a GEM (mini-review) Your GEM will explore and explain an important example of the power of evolutionary thinking. Your paper will be a "mini-review," which includes in-text citations, at least one graphic, and a Literature Cited section. Provide your reader with a background and important facts and implications about your topic Build an argument explaining how your example illustrates a “big picture” of evolutionary biology. Don’t talk about the researchers or journals or affiliations. Focus on the principle(s) and evidence. Create an essay that would be appropriate to include in an introductory textbook on evolution. Which topics? Any one that is not in the original Nature GEMs or published by a 2290 student and is unique will be acceptable. NO VIRUSES! NO MEDICAL ISSUES! NOTHING UNIQUELY HUMAN! NO RESISTANCE TO ANTHROPOGENIC FACTORS! And no repetitions within a section. Table 1.Summary of topics in Nature’s “15 Evolutionary Gems.” Topics and subtopics seen in the original GEMs may be eligible using different organisms. Also, organisms may be eligible if you use them to illustrate a different topic/principle. tgray Typewritten Text see also Welcome Letter 3 NOTE: Choose your articles wisely because you must commit to citing the articles from your PROGRESS REPORT. You need a minimum of four sources for your GEM, and at least three must be primary. There is no set maximum. Word count for the GEM falls between 800 and 1000 including the in-text citations, but excluding the title, Literature Cited section, and any table title or figure legend. [Back to top] More hints for writing a GEM We rarely think linearly, why should we write linearly? Use subheadings in your draft to help flesh out the different ideas you want to present. Give your ideas a title and write a paragraph on it. Remember to remove subheadings in your final copy and the copy you bring to the peer review session. Read the paper through more than once to check for flow and effective transitions. The "5-paragraph" essay format you might have used previously is not appropriate for this level of writing. Writers have always worked on an introduction, body, and conclusion. Focus on writing something that contains valuable information and persuasive arguments. A story is built on who, what, when, why, and how questions. Well, maybe not why in biology. There is no "why" in Nature. Imagine that I asked you to present a 10-minute presentation to the class on your topic. What slides would you create? What general information/background would you include? Which data/discoveries/observations from your sources would you show? In which order would you present your talk? What kind of graphic could be used to enhance the information you're presenting? tgray Sticky Note six is a reasonable number for a 4-page essay If you go over 6, I won't cry tgray Highlight 4 Once you delete a passage, it's gone. When you keep multiple drafts, then you can go back to pick the best parts. The way to write a good draft is by writing many drafts (and keeping them). Two things to avoid in your GEM 1. The GEM is not a remix of your progress report summaries, that is, do not copy and paste from one assignment to another. The GEM is a mini-review (cited essay) illustrating a principle of evolution, which is appropriate for an introductory textbook, discussing one or more examples from Nature (not the journal, I mean!). 2. Don't follow the model of the original GEMs. Don't bring in researchers, institutions, journals, publication dates, etc. Focus on your own story. Stating that such-and-such data came from some study is stating the obvious. Let the facts speak for themselves. Most of all… I hope you enjoy researching and writing about your topic. I am looking forward to reading your GEM. [Back to top] GRAPHICS A picture is worth a thousand words, and this statement is particularly meaningful when it comes to illustrating scientific text. Can you imagine reading a science textbook without figures, diagrams, and tables? The good news is that you do not have to invent your own graphic; you may use an illustration, photograph, diagram, phylogenetic map, or table from one of your sources…as long as you cite the source properly. Cite the source of the graphic after the table title/figure legend and place the graphic after its text reference. Textbooks and most scholarly articles will follow this principle. Graphic(s) for GEM A minimum of one graphic Don’t feel restricted on number of graphics GO FOR QUALITY AND EFFECTIVENESS Legends and Titles You may “copy and paste” the figure legend (or table title) over to the graphic to format with your word processor (Times New Roman 12pt or 10pt) 5 When I say “copy and paste,” I mean that you can retain most or all of the original legend PROVIDED THAT it makes sense within the context of your paper. If the legend refers to another figure or another experiment, GET RID OF THAT PART (you’ve done no experiments, right?) GET RID of anything and everything that makes no sense when placed in the context of your essay ADD information (ex: scientific names) if required to make sense of the figure/table in YOUR ESSAY Get rid of internal citations. Cite the source of graphic at the end of the legend or title. What’s wrong with this figure? ANSWER: The figure is fine, but it has been modified. Change the source to (Modified from Edgar et al., 2012). The legend requires a key to understand which species is in each row. The original legend: Figure 1. The peroxiredoxin active site is highly conserved in all domains of life a, Multiple sequence alignment showing peroxiredoxin amino acid sequences. The highly conserved active site is underlined. Representatives shown from Eukaryota (Ot=Ostreococcustauri; At=Arabidopsis thaliana; Hs=Homo sapiens; Mm=Mus musculus; Ce=Caenorhabditis elegans; Sc=Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Dm=Drosophila melanogaster; Nc=Neurospora crassa), Bacteria (Se=Synechococcus elongatus PCC7942) and Archaea (Has=Halobacterium salinarum NRC-1). HINT: Don’t take out necessary information! 6 You might choose to crop out part of the graphic. Customize the legend as necessary. If I had kept the ‘A,’ then I would have to include ‘A’ in the legend. Whichever graphic you choose, you must explain what’s going on in the graphic clearly and completely. If I wanted this graphic as my second figure, then I name it Fig. 2. I added and subtracted things from the original legend, so it would make sense given my graphic. I added “Modified from…” NOT because I modified the legend, but because I modified the graphic Possible Sources Directly from one of your cited sources OR indirectly from one of your cited sources. Above and beyond the minimum of four sources, you may add more articles just for the graphic. Include articles used for graphics with your cited sources. You may also consider using the sources listed below ONLY FOR THE GRAPHIC Textbooks, web pages, popular magazines, other WWW sources (including Wikipedia) These sources can be cited ONLY FOR THE GRAPHIC Give the url (use tinyurl.com for long links) for the graphic in the legend and at the bottom of your reference list (see GEM example) 7 Refer to the graphic in text parenthetically. A cladogram is depicted in Fig. 1, which shows evolution of tetrapodomorph fishes. NO. A cladogram is depicted in (Fig. 1), which shows evolution of tetrapodomorph fishes. NO. Pectoral fins changed dramatically in tetrapodomorph fishes and support the hypothesis that the primitive fin axis is a homologue of autopodial bones of the tetrapod limb (Fig. 1; Ahlberg and Clack, 2004). Nice. In your text, ALWAYS Table ALWAYS Fig. followed by the number, may also be followed by a citation (see GEM example) Table title sits on top of the table. Figure legend sits below the figure. Bold as shown below in conjuntion with the graphic. Table 1. Title (citation). Fig. 1. Legend (citation). If I want to use a figure from one of my sources, then I cite that source within the figure legend. Fig. 1. Cladogram of the pectoral fins of taxa on the tetrapod stem. Unlike other tetrapodomorph fishes (all species to right of bar (1), Tiktaalik has reduced the unjointed lepidotrichia, expanded the radials to a proximal, intermediate and distal series, and established multiple transverse joints in the distal fin. The fin also retains a mosaic of features seen in basal taxa. The central axis of enlarged endochondral bones is a pattern found in basal sarcopterygians and supports the hypotheses that a primitive fin axis is homologous to autopodial bones of the tetrapod limb. In some features, Tiktaalik is similar to rhizodontids, such as Sauripterus. These similarities, which are probably homoplastic, include the shape and number of radial articulations on the ulnare, the presence of extensive and branched endochondral radials, and the retention of unjointed lepidotrichia (Shubin et al., 2006). 8 If I want to use a cited figure from one of my sources, then I have to use the “citation within a citation” format. Fig. 1. Resistance to methicillin in Staphylococcus aureas horizontally transferred DNA elements called SCCmec confer resistance to methicillin. Five different SCCmec elements can integrate at the same location by site-specific recombination. A novel β-lactam– insensitivepenicillin binding protein, PBP2a, is encoded by the mecA gene (Foster, 2004 as cited in Tu and Gray, 2017). Tu and Gray article will appear in the Literature Cited section; the Foster article will not be included UNLESS the Foster article is cited elsewhere by