A good example might be this paper by Francia et al. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11179, in which they tracked the formation of DDR foci (an important step to beginning DDR) in cells with non-functional dicer proteins, and observed that foci formation was inhibited as well. More generally, future research should get more specific, potentially identifying specific sRNA sequences produced by dicer-2, or like the paper, studying the mechanics and organization of these proteins and RNAs.
In this case, it is assumed that dicer-2 is important to the process of DNA repair. Therefore, when a large amount of DNA damage is present, the cell will produce more dicer-2 to assist in the process of repair. This is probably done in similar ways to other genes, but I don’t know the exact mechanism here.
Hello, can you elaborate on the work done by Dr.Lee and how your project fits into a bigger picture. What can the findings of this research project lead to/ be used for?
This research is generally a bit more fundamental, focusing more on understanding biology and how things work in the cell, rather than being immediately or directly applicable in technology/medicine. That said, DNA damage is a hugely important process in the cell, and a deeper understanding of the mechanisms and processes behind it could lead to eventual therapeutic treatments that can build off this knowledge.
Hello, can you further elaborate on the work done by Dr.Lee and how your project fits into that bigger picture. What can the results of your specific project be used for?
You said the the controls would ideally be identical, but they weren’t different enough to be experimentally significant. Is there a definition when using PCR when the difference between two things is experimentally significant, like this difference or higher is significant?
To my knowledge, there is no exact or hard line definition. The slight difference we observed was also noticed by many others in our class, so it was likely caused somehow by the DNA damage induction process. I think, if something were truly wrong, the difference would be much more significant than what was observed.
The results would probably wind up being very similar, but perhaps a bit messier or less distinct. The organism having high rates of DNA repair means that the mechanisms are highly functional and likely already present in decently high concentrations even before artificially inducing DNA damage. This might help the gel results be more readable, and also ensures that the mechanism we are testing is functional and normal.
curesymposium.org 
What would a future experiment look like with the specific mechanisms of action and the importance of sRNAs to the DNA damage response?
LikeLike
A good example might be this paper by Francia et al. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature11179, in which they tracked the formation of DDR foci (an important step to beginning DDR) in cells with non-functional dicer proteins, and observed that foci formation was inhibited as well. More generally, future research should get more specific, potentially identifying specific sRNA sequences produced by dicer-2, or like the paper, studying the mechanics and organization of these proteins and RNAs.
LikeLike
How does your inducing damage to the DNA increase expression of the gene?
LikeLike
In this case, it is assumed that dicer-2 is important to the process of DNA repair. Therefore, when a large amount of DNA damage is present, the cell will produce more dicer-2 to assist in the process of repair. This is probably done in similar ways to other genes, but I don’t know the exact mechanism here.
LikeLike
Hello, can you elaborate on the work done by Dr.Lee and how your project fits into a bigger picture. What can the findings of this research project lead to/ be used for?
LikeLike
This research is generally a bit more fundamental, focusing more on understanding biology and how things work in the cell, rather than being immediately or directly applicable in technology/medicine. That said, DNA damage is a hugely important process in the cell, and a deeper understanding of the mechanisms and processes behind it could lead to eventual therapeutic treatments that can build off this knowledge.
LikeLike
Hello, can you further elaborate on the work done by Dr.Lee and how your project fits into that bigger picture. What can the results of your specific project be used for?
LikeLike
You said the the controls would ideally be identical, but they weren’t different enough to be experimentally significant. Is there a definition when using PCR when the difference between two things is experimentally significant, like this difference or higher is significant?
LikeLike
To my knowledge, there is no exact or hard line definition. The slight difference we observed was also noticed by many others in our class, so it was likely caused somehow by the DNA damage induction process. I think, if something were truly wrong, the difference would be much more significant than what was observed.
LikeLike
Really nice poster it was very easy and nice to follow. What would happen if you used a different organism that doesn’t have high DNA repair
LikeLike
The results would probably wind up being very similar, but perhaps a bit messier or less distinct. The organism having high rates of DNA repair means that the mechanisms are highly functional and likely already present in decently high concentrations even before artificially inducing DNA damage. This might help the gel results be more readable, and also ensures that the mechanism we are testing is functional and normal.
LikeLike