Thank you! The reason why we chose these compounds is because we were interested in compounds that were previously statistical hits in some manner, and both of these drugs had extensive research on them prior to our experiment so it gave us a great foundation of knowledge for our research.
For your second question, I cannot reply for some reason so I will post my answer here: Yes, Deoxycytidine needs to be re-trialed completely since our data was invalid so I would say that all three experiments that I described (Max Dose, Dose Response, and Bacteriostatic/Bactericidal) should be done on Deoxycytidine. For Azacytidine, it would also be beneficial to retest with the same procedures since we had a low amount of data but our data was consistent so I think that testing with a new procedure would be beneficial to collect more research on the compound and its reaction in different environments. For other compounds it would be beneficial to test compounds of similar structure to either confirm or deny that drugs of this type of molecular structure are ineffective at killing S. Typhimurium (which is what we hypothesized in the end).
Is there any other further testing that could be done to learn more about the effects of the two compounds/other compounds that could be insightful for your hypothesis?
Yes, Deoxycytidine needs to be re-trialed completely since our data was invalid so I would say that all three experiments that I described (Max Dose, Dose Response, and Bacteriostatic/Bactericidal) should be done on Deoxycytidine. For Azacytidine, it would also be beneficial to retest with the same procedures since we had a low amount of data but our data was consistent so I think that testing with a new procedure would be beneficial to collect more research on the compound and its reaction in different environments. For other compounds it would be beneficial to test compounds of similar structure to either confirm or deny that drugs of this type of molecular structure are ineffective at killing S. Typhimurium (which is what we hypothesized in the end).
Unfortunately, our low number of plates tested was most likely due to human error in the lab. I think that as we neared the end of the experiment, time pressure or stress in the lab could have resulted in higher inaccuracy in our data collection which means (for example) inaccurate pipetting or inaccurate measurements, but this is just my speculation. I think that also it is possible that our stock that we obtained in the max dose experiment for Deoxycytidine could have had something wrong with it which is maybe why none of our plates with Deoxycytidine worked.
Sure, when we were looking at the results of our experiment in each plate we were looking at three things primarily: if the bacteria grew in the negative control (DMSO), if the bacteria was killed in the positive control (AMP), and how the bacteria reacted in our drug being tested. For the three plates that we tested in Deoxycytidine, the bacteria did not grow in the negative control which means that the bacteria did not grow in the whole plate. This means that we have really no comparison of what is effective and what is ineffective for our drug so we can’t use that data because what we are testing is not there.
Im not sure if my question was posted so I’m sorry if this is redundant but why do you think there were only 3 plates with observed growth and would it be difficult to obtain more as a future experiment?
Unfortunately, I think that there were only three plates because of human error during our experiment. I think that due to the nature of our compounds, really precise research collection is required and for some of those plates we just did not meet those standards which resulted in bacteria not growing and ,therefore, invalid data. I do not think it would be difficult, however, to obtain more plates in future experiments especially if future researchers are more experienced than us.
I am not sure I completely understand the question but if you are asking about the difference between Azacitidine and Deoxycytidine, they are both chemotheraptuic drugs but they have different molecular structures and because of this they have different properties all together (and different effects in our experiment) since structure defines function.
I am not completely sure what you are asking so I will answer it the way I understand it. The difference between Azacitidine and Deoxycytidine that caused the different effects in our experiment was their differences in molecular structure because structure defines function.
Based on our Max Dose Experiment, a higher dosage of Deoxycytidine would most likely be toxic and harmful to humans, because the maximum dosage we obtained is the maximum dosage safe in humans.
In this lab were you allowed to chose the two compounds you chose to study and if what made you chose these compounds over others? Great presentation!
Thank you! The reason why we chose these compounds is because we were interested in compounds that were previously statistical hits in some manner, and both of these drugs had extensive research on them prior to our experiment so it gave us a great foundation of knowledge for our research.
For your second question, I cannot reply for some reason so I will post my answer here: Yes, Deoxycytidine needs to be re-trialed completely since our data was invalid so I would say that all three experiments that I described (Max Dose, Dose Response, and Bacteriostatic/Bactericidal) should be done on Deoxycytidine. For Azacytidine, it would also be beneficial to retest with the same procedures since we had a low amount of data but our data was consistent so I think that testing with a new procedure would be beneficial to collect more research on the compound and its reaction in different environments. For other compounds it would be beneficial to test compounds of similar structure to either confirm or deny that drugs of this type of molecular structure are ineffective at killing S. Typhimurium (which is what we hypothesized in the end).
Is there any other further testing that could be done to learn more about the effects of the two compounds/other compounds that could be insightful for your hypothesis?
Yes, Deoxycytidine needs to be re-trialed completely since our data was invalid so I would say that all three experiments that I described (Max Dose, Dose Response, and Bacteriostatic/Bactericidal) should be done on Deoxycytidine. For Azacytidine, it would also be beneficial to retest with the same procedures since we had a low amount of data but our data was consistent so I think that testing with a new procedure would be beneficial to collect more research on the compound and its reaction in different environments. For other compounds it would be beneficial to test compounds of similar structure to either confirm or deny that drugs of this type of molecular structure are ineffective at killing S. Typhimurium (which is what we hypothesized in the end).
Why do you think only three of the plates had observed growth?
Unfortunately, our low number of plates tested was most likely due to human error in the lab. I think that as we neared the end of the experiment, time pressure or stress in the lab could have resulted in higher inaccuracy in our data collection which means (for example) inaccurate pipetting or inaccurate measurements, but this is just my speculation. I think that also it is possible that our stock that we obtained in the max dose experiment for Deoxycytidine could have had something wrong with it which is maybe why none of our plates with Deoxycytidine worked.
Could you explain in more detail why Deoxycytidine was not included in the results?
Sure, when we were looking at the results of our experiment in each plate we were looking at three things primarily: if the bacteria grew in the negative control (DMSO), if the bacteria was killed in the positive control (AMP), and how the bacteria reacted in our drug being tested. For the three plates that we tested in Deoxycytidine, the bacteria did not grow in the negative control which means that the bacteria did not grow in the whole plate. This means that we have really no comparison of what is effective and what is ineffective for our drug so we can’t use that data because what we are testing is not there.
Im not sure if my question was posted so I’m sorry if this is redundant but why do you think there were only 3 plates with observed growth and would it be difficult to obtain more as a future experiment?
Unfortunately, I think that there were only three plates because of human error during our experiment. I think that due to the nature of our compounds, really precise research collection is required and for some of those plates we just did not meet those standards which resulted in bacteria not growing and ,therefore, invalid data. I do not think it would be difficult, however, to obtain more plates in future experiments especially if future researchers are more experienced than us.
What was different about the two compounds that created these effects?
I am not sure I completely understand the question but if you are asking about the difference between Azacitidine and Deoxycytidine, they are both chemotheraptuic drugs but they have different molecular structures and because of this they have different properties all together (and different effects in our experiment) since structure defines function.
I am not completely sure what you are asking so I will answer it the way I understand it. The difference between Azacitidine and Deoxycytidine that caused the different effects in our experiment was their differences in molecular structure because structure defines function.
What do you think the effects of deoxycytidine as an antibiotic would have in humans at higher doses?
Based on our Max Dose Experiment, a higher dosage of Deoxycytidine would most likely be toxic and harmful to humans, because the maximum dosage we obtained is the maximum dosage safe in humans.