CK-12 Biology I - Honors

by CK-12 Foundation

  Figure 1.14

  Examples of a graph and a chart that can be used to communicate data in scientific papers. (l-r) Graph showing how speed increases over time, Histogram which illustrates the frequency a particular trait appears in a population. Graphics help to illustrate ideas that would otherwise be too confusing to describe in words only.

  8. Interpretation of the meaning of the results is usually addressed in a discussion and/or conclusion section. The conclusions drawn should be based on previous studies and/or new scientific results. They should also be written in a way such that any reader with knowledge of the field can follow the argument and confirm that the conclusions are sound.

  9. Finally, a references or literature cited section lists the sources cited by the authors in the format required by the journal.

  Sources of Information

  The reliability of information is dependent on whether the information appears in a primary source, secondary source, or a tertiary source.

  Most research studies are first published in a scientific journal, which are referred to as primary sources. Technical reports, for minor research results are also primary sources.

  Secondary sources include articles in review journals (collections of recent research articles on a topic). Review journals are usually published to highlight advances and new lines of research in specific areas, such as human genetics, specific medical disorders (such as heart disease), neurology (the study of the nervous system) or malacology, (the study of snails and other mollusks). Large projects, broad arguments, or a mix of different types of articles may appear in a book. Review journals and books are referred to as secondary sources. Tertiary sources might include encyclopedias and news articles which are generally written for the public to read.

  Peer Review

  Scientists are expected to report their work truthfully and honestly. They are also expected to have their work reviewed by fellow scientists. This process is called peer review.

  Peer review is a process of opening a scientist’s research or ideas (in the form of a scientific paper) to examination by other scientists who are experts in the same field. The peer review process aims to make authors meet the standards of their area of study, and to meet the expected standards of science in general. Publications that have not undergone peer review are likely to be regarded with suspicion by scholars and professionals in many fields. However, even peer reviewed journals can contain errors.

  A reason for the need for peer review is that it is rare for an individual author or research team to spot every mistake or flaw in a complicated piece of work. The review process provides an opportunity for improvement because a person with special expertise or experience reads the research paper before it is published. Typically, for publication in a science journal, it is also a requirement that the research is new and useful. Since reviewers are normally selected from experts in the areas of science covered by the article, the process of peer review is considered vital to establishing a reliable body of research and knowledge. Therefore, showing work to other scientists increases the likelihood that weaknesses will be found and corrected.

  The process of peer review is not designed to detect fraud. As a result, there is usually a large scandal when a researcher and author of a science paper is found to have falsified the research in an article, as many other researchers may have relied upon their original research for their own work or the researcher could have received grant money based on falsified research. Peer review of scientific work assumes that the article reviewed has been honestly written. Usually reviewers do not have full access to the data from which the paper has been written, so they trust that the author is being truthful and honest.

  Research Bias

  It is important for the researcher to remain neutral or objective when conducting scientific research. A bias is a position for favoring one particular point of view over another, and it is usually based on preconceived ideas about a situation. The inability of a human being to remain completely objective is the source of such bias in research. Nevertheless, a researcher or their study is generally said to be biased only if the researcher’s judgment is influenced by the biases they hold, which could influence their research results.

  For example, you want to test whether your dog, Frankie, prefers his regular food or the super expensive brand dog food that you have just bought on sale. You would put each food in a bowl and offer both foods to Frankie at his meal time. However, you secretly hope he prefers his regular food because it is half the price of the more expensive food and you can buy it in the store down the road. Frankie takes a couple of mouthfuls of his regular food, but gobbles up all of the expensive food. You may think, “Well, he did eat some of regular food, so he still likes it,” when in fact Frankie clearly preferred the expensive brand. You buy the regular food anyhow. Whether you like it or not, you are biased toward the regular dog food.

  This example above is greatly simplified, but, illustrates how personal opinions may influence an investigation.

  Another type of bias, called a systematic bias is introduced from a flaw in measurements. For example, an incorrectly calibrated thermostat may consistently read several degrees hotter or colder than actual temperature. As a consequence, systematic bias commonly leads to systematic errors in the results of an investigation. Peer review can usually detect systematic biases in a research study.

  Conflict of Interest

  A conflict of interest is a situation in which a researcher has professional or personal interests that are at odds with each other. For example, a researcher is about to investigate a new headache medicine from a drug company called Tinneas. The researcher carries out experiments and finds that the medicine works very well. End of story, right? Not exactly.

  Later it is discovered that the researcher owns Tinneas stock. This means he owns part of the company. Even if everything was done correctly during the experiment, and the drug really does work, this researcher has a conflict of interest. As an owner of the company, he will earn money if the drug works, but will lose money if the drug does not work. Therefore, any scientist that may have a reason to favor one particular result from an investigation should not be involved in that investigation.

  Competing interests can make it difficult for a person to carry out his or her duties without bias. A conflict of interest exists even if no wrong has been done, or nothing results from it. A conflict of interest can affect the public confidence in the person, a profession, or company.

  Scientific Misconduct

  When presenting their research to others, an ethical scientist would not falsify results, lie about their results, or plagiarize (steal other peoples ideas or work).

  Scientific misconduct is the violation of these standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in professional scientific research. Scientific misconduct may take place simply out of reputation. For example, academic scientists are often under enormous pressure to produce publications in peer reviewed journals. Alternatively, there may be commercial or political motivations where the financial or political success of a project depends on publishing evidence of a procedure working or not working. The consequences of scientific misconduct can be severe at a personal and professional level for the people involved. In addition, there are public health concerns attached to the promotion of medical or other procedures that are founded on doubtful research results.

  Truth and Honesty in Research and Communication

  Some instances of scientific fraud and scientific misconduct have gone through review and were detected only after other groups tried and failed to replicate the published results. An example is the case of physicist Jan Hendrik Schön, in which a total of fifteen papers on microelectronics and nanotechnology were accepted for publication in the top ranked journals, Nature and Science, following the usual peer review process. All fifteen were found to be fraudulent and were then withdrawn. The fraud was found, not by the peer review process, but by other research groups who
tried and failed to reproduce the results of the paper.

  Likewise, biomedical scientist Hwang Woo-Suk, rose to fame after claiming a series of breakthroughs in the field of stem cell research. He was once considered one of the pioneering experts in the field of stem cell research, because of his success in creating cloned human embryonic stem cells. However, his two most famous research articles on the cloning experiments were found to contain large amounts of fabricated data. Hwang’s papers were retracted (withdrawn from publication), he lost his job at the university where he worked, and also lost his research funding.

  Scientist to Public Communication

  Science has become such a part of modern life that it is necessary to communicate the achievements, news, and ambitions of scientists to a wider audience. Scientists need to be able to tell each other and the public about their research and the results of their research. These two groups make up two very different audiences for scientists, however. The first audience is made up of their peers-fellow scientists who have an advanced understand of the technical language and procedures that are involved in scientific investigations. The second audience is made up of members of the public who may or may not understand or know about their research. For example, the following passage is a summary of a paper that appears in the Public Library of Science (PLoS), an online science journal:

  A systematic analysis of Alzheimer disease amyloid β peptide variants in Drosophila brain demonstrates that their predicted propensity to form protofibrillar aggregates correlates best with toxicity.

  Biologists would have no problem understanding the language in this paragraph. However, to a person who is not familiar with this type of science, it may be interpreted as gibberish. In this, lies the challenge for scientists to communicate their research in a way that the general public can understand.

  The results of the study could be written in the following way so that a general reader could follow what the researchers meant:

  Studies of a particular type of brain protein, called amyloid β peptides, have shown that they can sometimes change into a defective form that resembles sticky clumps. These clumps may become toxic and contribute to Alzheimer’s disease, a wasting disease of the brain. Researchers are examining these proteins to find out what exactly causes them to form such clumps. The studies were carried out on fruit flies, which are commonly used as animal models for genetic and biochemical studies of humans.

  Communicating to the Public Through the Internet

  Many scientists do a good job of presenting their work in an accessible way on the Internet. Scientists and science journalists write news articles that explain the research in everyday language, and can show how the research relates to the reader and to their environment. For example, who would want to read an article that only talked about research that is taking place at the South Pole? An article packed with numbers, units, and percentage rates would be pretty boring to read if it were not related to other areas such the environment, people, animals, or the climate. Also, presenting such academic subjects in a readable and engaging way, allows people to understand what research is being done and why. Such general presentation of science appeals to people because it allows the reader to relate the subject to their life and experiences. For example, both the National Science Foundation (NSF) U.S Antarctic Program and the International Polar Year (IPY) 2007-2008 have websites that explain the types of research that is going on in Antarctica and the Arctic. An NSF research vessel that is taking part in the IPY 2007-2008 is shown in Figure below.

  Figure 1.15

  Gentoo penguins watch the Research Vessel Laurence M. Gould in Antarctica. The Gould is one of two research vessels operated by the National Science Foundation and is taking part in the International Polar Year 2007-2008.

  A science magazine is a publication with news, opinions and reports about science and is written for a non-expert audience. Compare this to a scientific journal, which is written by and for scientific researchers. Science magazines are read by non-scientists and scientists who want accessible information on fields outside their specialization. Articles in science magazines are sometimes republished or summarized by the general press, in newspapers, online news sites, and blogs among other media forms.

  Science magazines such as New Scientist, shown in Figure below, and Scientific American, have non-technical summaries of popular areas of research, notable discoveries, and scientific advancements in different fields of research. Science books engage the interest of many more people. So, too, do science websites and science television programming add more images and illustrations that help tell a story. In this way, more people can become more aware of how science effects their lives and become better informed about science subjects.

  Figure 1.16

  Cover of magazine.

  Scientific Consensus

  You may have already heard the term scientific consensus being used when the subject of global warming is talked about in the news. Scientific consensus is the collective judgment, position, and opinion of a community of scientists in a particular field of science, at a particular time. Scientific consensus is not, by itself, a scientific argument, and is not part of the “scientific method”. But the topic for which a consensus exists may itself be based on both scientific arguments and scientific methods.

  Consensus is normally carried out by scientists talking to each other and sharing their ideas and findings. Scientists can accomplish consensus by giving talks or presentations at conferences, or by publishing their ideas and findings for other scientists to read. This can lead to a situation where those within the field of science can recognize a consensus when it exists, but communicating that to others, such as non-scientists or the public, can be difficult. Sometimes, scientific institutes release statements that are meant to communicate a summary of the science from the inside to the outside. In cases where there is little controversy regarding the subject under study, laying out what the consensus is about can be straightforward.

  Nevertheless, scientific consensus may be used in popular or political debate on subjects such as evolution or climate change that are controversial within the public sphere, but are not controversial within the scientific community.

  Science and Society

  Biology literally means "the study of life," and it is also a science that is very close to our everyday lives. Biology is a very broad field, covering the intricate workings of chemical processes inside our cells, to the more broad concepts of ecosystems and global climate change. Biologists study minute details of the human brain, the make up of our genes, and even the functioning of our reproductive system. For example, biologists recently finished decoding the human genome, the sequence of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) bases that may determine much of our abilities and predispositions for certain illnesses and can also play a major role in many court cases. For example, criminals have been caught, victims identified, and wrongly imprisoned people have been freed based on DNA evidence.

  We are blitzed with headlines about possible health risks from certain foods as well as possible benefits of eating other foods. Commercials try to sell us the latest “miracle” pill for easy, fast weight loss. Many people are turning to herbal remedies to ease arthritis pain, improve memory, as well as improve their mood. Other people may choose the conventional medicines that can be bought at the pharmacist. It is important to know the effects such supplements, such as the ones shown in Figure below, and medicines can have on the body.

  Figure 1.17

  Nutritional supplements. Understanding how your body works and how nutrients work will help you decide whether you need to take a nutritional supplement. It will also help you make sense of the large amount of information available about regular medicines, if and when you need to take them.

  Can a biology book give you the answers to these everyday questions? No, but it will enable you learn how to sift through the biases of investigators, the press, and others in a quest to critically evaluate the question.
To be honest, five years after you are finished with this biology book, it is doubtful you would remember all the details of metabolism. However, you will have a better idea about where to look for the answer. Knowing about the process of science will also allow you to make a more informed decision. Will you be a scientist? Yes, in a way. You may not be formally trained as a scientist, but you will be able to think critically, solve problems, have some idea about what science can and cannot do, as well as an understanding of the role of biology in your everyday life.

  Biology and You

  So why should you study biology? Because you are surrounded by it every day! It is about what happens in your brain as your read the words on this page and about how hippopotamuses know to come up to the surface to breath even while sleeping. Biology is about why a person with hook worms doesn't sneeze as much and about why Velcro works. From understanding the benefits of the vitamin-enriched milk or juice you that have at breakfast, to discerning commercials that promise smoother thighs or a fuller head of hair, or snack foods that announce they are the “health busy livelier option for your," you cannot be fully informed about such claims unless you understand the science behind them, or can think like a scientist to analyze them. For example, you would need to know the types of fats you need to get from your food to know why eating salmon, shown in Figure 7 below, or other foods such as flax seeds and kiwifruit may be good for your health.