WEEK 11 LEARNING JOURNAL
- Factual knowledge
Please describe, briefly, two new, distinct pieces of factual knowledge that you acquired or developed since the last learning journal
One piece of factual knowledge I have learned is that the long non-coding RNA called Xist inactivates the X chromosome from which it was transcribed and there are various factors like CTCF, Tsix, and Xite that regulate Xist. Another bit of factual knowledge I have acquired is that there are five potential models to explain how X chromosome inactivation begins: blocking factor, symmetry breaking, alternative states, transvection, and stochastic.
- Conceptual knowledge
Since connections and models make for conceptual knowledge… please describe any connections (direct or indirect) that you can see between the two pieces of knowledge described in A.
CTCF, a binding factor which causes repression of Xist expression, is associated with the transvection model for X chromosome inactivation. The transvection model suggests that physical pairing interactions between homologous regions of X chromosomes allows signal exchange/communication between the two X chromosomes and eventually one X chromosome is shut down. CTCF is thought to aid in these pairing interactions. JPX RNA can target CTCF away from the Xist gene, allowing de-repression of Xist.
- Metacognitive knowledge (no skills this time!)
If you are like most students in the class, you probably spent a significant amount of time reading, studying, and dissecting the article assigned for MT2.
- Please describe, briefly, the strategy that you employed to complete the task.
I read the paper thoroughly once just to get a jist of the main points. Then I read the paper through a second time, carefully going through all the words or concepts that weren’t clear to me. I also wrote explanations in my own words for what each figure was showing and its importance.
- Thinking about your experience with reading and dissecting this article, what was the hardest part?
I thought that generally the paper was really well laid out. I was very confused by some of the wording and I think that definitely could have been improved upon. I would’ve grasped this article much more quickly if the writing was better.
- Thinking about your experience with reading and dissecting this article, what did you feel most comfortable with/confident about? Why do you think that is?
I was really comfortable and confident with interpreting the first few figures because the techniques used were familiar to me and they explained the reason behind their experiments. Even if they weren’t clear, the way they laid out their figures was very well-thought and I think it helped me grasp the important points of the paper really quickly. I definitely have to grapple with the logic behind why some experiments are done in other papers, but in this paper it wasn’t that big of an issue for me.