Contact:
sales@biotechnologyforums.com to feature here

  •  Previous
  • 1
  • ...
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106(current)
  • 107
  • 108
  • ...
  • 122
  • Next 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
GATE BT-2017 Answer Key | Solutions Discussion
45. 
Recessive traits are not supposed to show up in all generations. If X linked recessive were the answer, it is based on the chance factor of all the mothers being carriers. In that case, from first to second generation, there is a 50% chance , both the girls are carriers. One does not mate and the other mates to have two healthy children of both the sexes. This is dependent on high chance possibilities. Also, the affected boys of the second generation have no contribution whatsoever in making boys of third generation affected had it been x linked recessive. Therefore, the inheritance is from the mother to son and not a family or pedigree inheritance. Also, there is no evidence of the case not being Y linked. So, it should be only Y Linked.

49. The sum is there in Octave levenspiel PG 47 where the unit of k is in moles/l/min leading to the answer being 100. But since this question had a different unit of k and properly mentioned that the answer be specified in mins and not min/l , it should be multiplied with the volume of the reactor, I.e. 100l, making the answer to be 10000 mins.

These are my arguments. And, please report if you can include them while challenging the questions. I do not have a problem in paying a share of it. But personally, I am in a family trouble and would like to avoid the hassle as of now. This is a sincere request. Please respond. Thank you.
(03-04-2017, 03:44 PM)Debasmita Wrote: 45. 
Recessive traits are not supposed to show up in all generations. If X linked recessive were the answer, it is based on the chance factor of all the mothers being carriers. In that case, from first to second generation, there is a 50% chance , both the girls are carriers. One does not mate and the other mates to have two healthy children of both the sexes. This is dependent on high chance possibilities. Also, the affected boys of the second generation have no contribution whatsoever in making boys of third generation affected had it been x linked recessive. Therefore, the inheritance is from the mother to son and not a family or pedigree inheritance. Also, there is no evidence of the case not being Y linked. So, it should be only Y Linked.

49. The sum is there in Octave levenspiel PG 47 where the unit of k is in moles/l/min leading to the answer being 100. But since this question had a different unit of k and properly mentioned that the answer be specified in mins and not min/l , it should be multiplied with the volume of the reactor, I.e. 100l, making the answer to be 10000 mins.

These are my arguments. And, please report if you can include them while challenging the questions. I do not have a problem in paying a share of it. But personally, I am in a family trouble and would like to avoid the hassle as of now. This is a sincere request. Please respond. Thank you.

I will add them to the argument list, still preparing a document, will file the challenge by tomorrow.
I am thinking of adding the snapshot of the standard symbols of pedigree chart from Genetics - a conceptual approach, by Benjamin a Pierce,
and snapshots of the nptel lecture video on pedigree analysis.
Can I do that?

Debasmita, for the zero order question can you please tell the edition of the levenspiel book and the exact page and question number, which you found.
I also have the levenspiel book, but i have 3rd edition and the i could not find the question there.

I am looking for more arguments to support my bid for the Cytokinesis question (18)
Actually, a college professor mailed me that information about Levenspiel. I will mail him as to what exact edition and chapter he is referring to. But, I don't know if he will be able to reply within the weekend.

Also, I haven't attempted the cytokinesis question, and should not say anything regarding that. But, probably, colchicine acts by inhibiting spindle fibre formation is specifically mitotic inhibitor and cytokinesis occurs thereafter, so it might not be accepted. So, its better to look a bit deeper into that.
(03-04-2017, 11:09 PM)Debasmita Wrote: Actually, a college professor mailed me that information about Levenspiel. I will mail him as to what exact edition and chapter he is referring to. But, I don't know if he will be able to reply within the weekend.

Also, I haven't attempted the cytokinesis question, and should not say anything regarding that. But, probably, colchicine acts by inhibiting spindle fibre formation is specifically mitotic inhibitor and cytokinesis occurs thereafter, so it might not be accepted. So, its better to look a bit deeper into that.
In case of some unicellular eukaryotes, Colchicine has been reported as inhibitor. Refers ncbi site.
  

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread
Author
  /  
Last Post
Replies: 0
Views: 80
07-19-2017, 09:49 PM
Last PostPallavi Tiwari
Replies: 92
Views: 21,075
06-19-2017, 05:23 PM
Last Postswarnava
Replies: 0
Views: 500
04-18-2017, 04:41 PM
Last Postsram022
Replies: 29
Views: 7,403
03-21-2017, 07:00 PM
Last Postkashyap.aluru



Users browsing this thread:
6 Guest(s)

GATE BT-2017 Answer Key | Solutions Discussion32