WEEK 2 - COMIC ASSIGNMENT and Topic 1 : History of Life Part I

REFLECTIVE JOURNAL - WEEK 2

Hello readers,

We've got an assignment which we were asked to make a comic related to natural selection. So my group decided to create a story of two populations white and black peppered moth living peacefully in same area. Unfortunately, population occurred where the factories had released too many of soot until the trees at the forest became sooty. The population of white peppered moth extremely decreasing due to the insufficient hiding place from the predators. This is because their appearance are too obvious and attractive for predators to catch them compared to the black peppered moth body which is closely and almost same color as the sooty trees.

The second topic of Cell and Development Biology is History of Life. This topic is divided into two division which are

1. History of Life - Part 1 
2. History of Life - Part 2 (Systematic, Taxonomic and Classification)

History of life - part 1

• Have you all imagine how life's form? 
• For the first time by referring to this topic, i'm so curious and think what is actually had happened billions years ago? 
• How was it happened? 
• What is the thing that induced it to happen? 
• How can earth finally turns out like now? How? Why? 

For the first part we had learnt about how did life begin which is the 'the origin of life'. The most important thing that i realized, not all we had naturally nowadays like Oxygen (O₂ gas) is already present itself on the early earth. It surprised me a lot. 

By looking the graph of time-line for the origin of life, i tried to relate it with human evolution theory from the first topic. At what duration of time did human exist actually? It also may took sufficient of time to evolve right? i think it is the biggest and hardest evolution. Ya at least I could know my ancestor's birthday roughly.

Overall based on what I've learnt, the life's begin from the molecules to cells.

                                                 INORGANIC MATERIALS

↓

 chemical evolution occurred 

- life can not survive

-earth is not condusive place for life

↓

ORGANIC MOLECULES

↓

biological evolution occurred  

-life comes out

-about 3.8 billion years ago

↓

LIFE

↓

natural selection and mutation occurred

↓

DIVERSITY 

It's not on the lecture notes but I've been told by Prof Madya Dr. Parameswari that it's took about 1.1 billion years for the chemical reaction the inorganic molecules to accumulate and react before the life started. It's already a sufficient time. 

Before this i'm curious how was the chemical evolution have been induced to occurred? Beside the theory of the fallen comets, it is actually about the prebiotics broth hypothesis that have been proved by Miller-Urey's experiment.

They found that micro molecules like simple amino acid monomers formed at the end of the reaction. Examples, monosaccharides and glycerol + fatty acid. 

CHEMICAL EVOLUTION (PREBIOTICS BROTH HYPOTHESIS)

INORGANIC MOLECULES

                  

         ↓                                   
MONOMERS ORGANIC – SIMPLE ORGANIC         

            ↓                                                              

POLYMERS ORGANIC

Moreover, i like the quite confusing and interesting question for this topic. 

"Can you all guess which came out first, RNA or DNA?"

By referring to this website; 

http://www.science-explained.com/theory/dna-rna-and-protein/ 

It's clearly stated that: 

RNA is synthesized from DNA strands and from a single RNA strand also can be formed DNA strands. Closely like question that never have the exactly true answer so far. 

"Which came out first, egg or chicken?" 

It's confusing right? Well, but between RNA and DNA it is actually RNA did came first in early earth. From the website Exploring Life's Origin;

http://exploringorigins.org/nucleicacids.html

  I find out that the reason is relevant and acceptable which is evolution. At the first beginning, RNA evolved to become DNA because DNA is more stable compared to RNA (not fittest to survive).  The replication of RNA also do not need the help of enzyme, it can be replicated by itself. While DNA replication need the help of enzyme. RNA is actually ribozymes. If DNA need the help of enzyme to replicate, it can be said that RNA must be existed first, right? However, it is sad to say I still couldn't find the answer for which came first either egg or chicken.

  Overall, I think this topic is much related to the first topic which evolution. Because most of the life have been through several stages or evolution. For example the essential part of living thing which is DNA. DNA itself have been through evolution.



Cheers,
Nurul Syafiqah Azhar-published on 260915;0841pm 

WEEK 1 - Topic 1: Evolution and Charles Darwin and Endlessly Forms Most beautiful

REFLECTIVE JOURNAL - week 1

Hello readers,

  One of the subjects i'm taking for my course is Cell and Development Biology. The first topic is Evolution and Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin is an English naturalist and geologist. He had proposed an evolutionary theory, the best distribution of him about evolution.

  At first, I have no idea the purposes on learning the evolutionary theory he had mentioned about and how it is related to this subject.

 For the first learning session, Prof Madya Dr. Parameswari had told us that try to put aside all the religious beliefs and learn this topic with scientific's thinking. This is because we are going to study on how this theory can be generated/developed and for the evidences he had found. Moreover, some other scientist such as Alfred Russel Wallace also have the same idea and conceptional about evolution as he do.

 He proposed and demonstrated:

All species of life have evolved over time from common ancestors through the process he called 'natural selection'

  I have did some research to strengthen my understanding about evolution through the internet and website such as http://www.livescience.com/474-controversy-evolution-works.html

It has been stated that:

"...Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection is not an idea with holes. It's one of the most solid theories in science."

  Furthermore, I've been amazed by watching the video that Dr. Parameswari asked usto watch which is "Endlessly Forms Most Beautiful". It is about a group of people from abroad university discussed the evolutionary theory some kind of the life story about Charles Darwin, his journey travels around the world at the ocean and successfully discovered many things related to evolution in details. I had learnt extra knowledge, got better comprehension and happily it 80% answered and demystifies my questions so far.I will state another 20% unsolved questions that is uncleared for me at the end of this entry.

  I think the most important part he mentioned is about natural selection. From my own understanding, natural selection is a process whereby an individual that have special inherited traits/characteristics that favorable to environment tends to survive compared to other living organisms.

For example: the issue of modern giraffe with long necks. 

Jean Baptiste Lamarck - french naturalist 

  Based on Lamarck's theory, environmental pressure causes body changes to survive. Long time ago, giraffes have short necks. But then this species evolved their long necks by each generation stretching further to get leaves in trees and this caused the body changes of the giraffes and then inherited. 

I also have did some research at http://natureinstitute.org/pub/ic/ic10/giraffe.htm 
It have been stated that: 

"....In Lamarck's view, we must imagine a situation in the past where the best food for browsing mammals was higher up in trees, the lower vegetation having been eaten by other animals. The ancestors of the giraffe—which we should imagine like antelopes or deer—needed to adapt their behavior to this changing environment. As Lamarck wrote, "variations in the environment induce changes in the needs, habits and modes of life of living beings ... these changes give rise to modifications or developments in their organs and the shape of their parts". So Lamarck imagined that over generations the habit of continually reaching for the higher browse produced in the giraffe's ancestors a lengthening of the legs and neck."

  However, Darwin then comes out with different idea that against Lamarck's theory. It is not because of the pressure of environment forces the body changes, but it is because of the mutation, variation and sexual selection.

But...

• Do the first creature of giraffe millions years ago is actually a giraffe with a short neck?

• Is there any strong evidence such as fossils of giraffe with short neck that could been proven the evolution is really occurred?  

• Or people were only have to just imagine and pretend that it is really was, as one way to understand and get a clear vision about evolution? 

• What if actually the giraffe is definitely created with those specific characteristics long necks, forelegs and polka dots body? 

• Why something is created with no reasons? Meaning to say why giraffe is created with short neck if long neck is suitable for them to survive? 

• We can see that there's no giraffes left nowadays with short neck as antelopes/deer. So I assume all the giraffes already and totally evolved with the inherited trait of long necks due to environmental adaptation. Compared to human evolution theory, there are humans and monkeys alive. Why not all the monkeys evolved over time to each generation transform and become a human? 

So refers to the concept/theory of humans evolution.

  Based on Charles Darwin theory, it could be said that the ancestors of human is monkey. So my very old grandparents from million years ago is animal. Well, it is disappointed and sad to know, pity with all the monkeys that do not evolved and can't live as well as humans do.

  He proposed about the natural selection theory whereby natural selection will favor to living organisms with special inherited traits that suitable to environment. If humans' characteristics are more favorable, why there were still monkeys alive on this earth? It also can be said that monkeys' characteristics are favorable to natural selection too, is it? 

  But yes, it is just only a theory, not a fact. It can be either true or false. In scientific's thinking it can be accepted by looking through all the strong evidences collected by Charles Darwin when he was travelling the world for two years at the ocean. For an example, the interesting story of finches in Galapagos Island. A disaster had happened on the island causes this species facing a problem of their basic needs which is food. Because of the different adaptation to new environment, some of them were evolved with different size/shape of beaks to keep surviving. 

SCIENTIFIC THINKING

  For help this to be cleared for learning process, I'm assuming that different areas have different adaptation to the environment. So no wonder this theory comes out in the case of human evolution. If two population of same species such as monkeys lives in different of areas (A & B), one of the population of monkey evolved to be human due to adaptation to the environment in area A while the another population were just fine and favorable to the environment in area B so it remains stay as monkey. So that is why there were still monkeys do not evolved. 

Prepared by, 

Nurul Syafiqah Azhar-published on 180915;0932pm