Author Archives: navpreet ganda

Pip, SAR, and GMOs: How UBC Researchers are Advancing our Knowledge of Plant Immune Systems

What would happen if plants couldn’t protect themselves? Well, for one, they would be prone to many different infections and viruses. Ultimately, plants would die without the ability to protect themselves. To really put things into perspective, humans would not have many of the food sources they have without plants.

Yuli Ding, a 5th year PhD student at the University of British Columbia, and her colleagues made a coincidental, break-through discovery in October 2016. Focusing on the ability of plants to resist diseases that they’ve previously encountered, called Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR), Ding set out to determine if a specific molecule is required for this type of protection. SAR is described with greater depth in the following podcast with the researcher herself. The molecule in question was Pipecolic Acid (Pip). According to the findings of the scientists, “Pipecolic acid could be a relatively important mobile signal is the systemic acquired resistance.” In simpler terms, Pip aids in SAR by activating the process.

We had the opportunity to interview Yuli Ding about her research to help clarify some of these complex concepts. Listen to her explanations of the research in the following podcast.

What happens to plants that cannot complete SAR? Mutated plants, with a non-functional SARD4 gene, are SAR-deficient and thus unable to effectively defend against diseases. Instead of making Pip to activate SAR, a Pip pre-cursor molecule gathers in the plants – demonstrating SARD4’s importance in synthesizing Pip. Since Pip is not being created, the plants don’t exhibit SAR and are less able to defend themselves when infected by pathogens.

In this video, Yuli Ding describes how they identified SAR-deficient Arabidopsis plants, and demonstrates one of the main lab techniques, Polymerase Chain Reaction, that her team used to help identify Pip as a signal molecule.

Arabidopsis Timelapse
Music: Horizon, by Letmeknowyouanatole

Why should we care? SAR is a key process by which plants protect themselves, so SAR is an essential mechanism in ensuring the maintenance of agriculture and healthy crop yields.

Science is advancing at a rapid rate and the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) has been increasing. A GMO is the result of a gene transfer between organisms. For example, the gene of one organism is inserted into another organism in order to improve that organism. The results of this study could be a stepping stone to creating GMOs that have better SAR, and are better able to defend against disease. Specifically, the genes responsible for synthesizing Pip could be added to immuno-compromised organisms. Genetic modification could also be used to make plants have stronger SAR or better immune systems.  Although the use of GMOs could be beneficial, GMOs pose several threats to the environment and other organisms.

What can we do with this research right now? The findings of this study could help improve the yield of crops and the number of successful crops. Farmers and agriculturalists could now focus on improving the environmental conditions of their plants to ensure that all requirements for a plant to be healthy are met. A healthy plant would increase the chances of proper SAR. All in all, a healthy plant is a happy plant!

 

By Navpreet Ganda, Pavneet Virk, and Zhongkai He.

Ready, Set… Crash?

Space missions begin long before lift-off, and continue after their conclusions as well. In preparation for the first human Journey to Mars, the European Space Agency (ESA) and Russia’s space agency Roscosmos jointly sent the latest of landers to Mars as part of their ExoMars programme. On March 14, 2016, Schiaparelli EDM Lander was jettisoned into the cosmos with the goal landing on Mars to test technology that may be used in future Mars missions and collect data on the Red Planet. The lander is named after famed Italian astronomer, Giovanni Schiaparelli, whose biggest contributions to science are his telescopic observations of Mars. During his initial observations, he named various seas and continents on the planet.

The acronym “EDM” in the lander’s official title stands for Entry, Descent, and Landing Demonstrator Module indicating that the lander’s main purpose is to test soft-landing technology that the ESA and Roscosmos intend to implement during part to of the ExoMars programme where they will attempt to land a rover on the planet. Note that landers are stationary, while rovers are mobile vehicles.

When Schiaparelli lander’s attempted descent on October 19, 2016, didn’t go as planned, many touted that the mission was failure, but I don’t believe that’s necessarily the case. The lander disembarked from an orbiting carrying vessel on October 16, three days before its descent. A few hours before the planned landing, however, its signal was lost. ESA’s Mars Express orbiter and NASA’s Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) and MAVEN probe all listened intently for signals from the lost lander. Data retrieved from the lander before the accident suggest that its landing parachute and rocket thrusters both failed to execute properly.

A brief account of how Schiaparelli‘s descent was supposed to occur and what actually happened from The Cosmos News:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McSCXWpZT8k

NASA’s MRO later returned images of the crash site.

Area where Europe's Schiaparelli Lander crashed on Mars, with 3 magnified sites where space craft parts hit the ground. Obtained from: http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/pia21131-hirise_of_edm.jpg

Area where Europe’s Schiaparelli Lander crashed on Mars, with 3 magnified sites where space craft parts hit the ground.
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/pia21131-hirise_of_edm.jpg

While the Schiaparelli lander did not effectively land on Mars, the mission is still a success because it fulfilled its goal of testing the landing equipment and returned enough data to Earth for part 2 of the ExoMars programme to proceed as planned.

Navpreet Ganda

“White Mars”: NASA to use Antarctica to Study Astronaut Behavior

Space missions begin long before lift-off. In its preparation for America’s first Journey to Mars, NASA will collaborate with the Nation Science Foundation to study effects of isolation, confinement, and extreme environments on people. These effects, known by the acronym ICE, that astronauts will encounter on their expeditions to outer space can be difficult to simulate – in particular, the extreme environments. Antarctica provides the closest setting to what the astronauts will experience, and as such is the best location for the behavioral studies to take place.

Training camp near McMurdo Station in the Antarctic.

Training camp near McMurdo Station in the Antarctic.

Dr. Candice Alfano developed an initial study that will analyze Antarctica’s effect on the behavior of people working there for extended periods. Dr. Alfano is a clinical psychologist, Director of the Sleep and Anxiety Center of Houston, and psychology professor at the University of Houston. Her and her researcher team hope to discover the greatest sources of stress that the study participants will face, and thereof create a checklist to detect early signs of behavioral changes brought on by ICE. The checklist will help ensure that proper intervention can take place before adverse negative effects occur. NASA considers astronaut well-being a top priority primarily because the space explorers need to be in good health to both complete their missions and problem-solve when things go wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjgTeIWut4s

The results will have other implications, including aiding deployed military personnel who are more likely to suffer mental health disorders than civilians.

These efforts echo UBC in addressing mental health issues on campus, and hopefully the data can eventually help stressed university students.

Navpreet Ganda