1887

Using PCR to Target Misconceptions about Gene Expression

    Authors: Leslie K. Wright1,*, Dina L. Newman1
    VIEW AFFILIATIONS HIDE AFFILIATIONS
    Affiliations: 1: Thomas H. Gosnell School of Life Sciences, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623
    AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION AUTHOR AND ARTICLE INFORMATION
    • Published 06 May 2013
    • Supplemental materials available at http://jmbe.asm.org
    • *Corresponding author. Mailing address: School of Life Sciences, Rochester Institute of Technology, 85 Lomb Memorial Drive, Rochester, NY 14623-5608. Phone/Fax: 585-475-4449. E-mail: [email protected].
    • ©2013 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology.
    Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2013 vol. 14 no. 1 93-100. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v14i1.539
MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
  • PDF
    432.46 Kb
  • XML
  • HTML
    62.30 Kb

    Abstract:

    We present a PCR-based laboratory exercise that can be used with first- or second-year biology students to help overcome common misconceptions about gene expression. Biology students typically do not have a clear understanding of the difference between genes (DNA) and gene expression (mRNA/protein) and often believe that genes exist in an organism or cell only when they are expressed. This laboratory exercise allows students to carry out a PCR-based experiment designed to challenge their misunderstanding of the difference between genes and gene expression. Students first transform with an inducible GFP gene containing plasmid and observe induced and un-induced colonies. The following exercise creates cognitive dissonance when actual PCR results contradict their initial (incorrect) predictions of the presence of the GFP gene in transformed cells. Field testing of this laboratory exercise resulted in learning gains on both knowledge and application questions on concepts related to genes and gene expression.

Key Concept Ranking

Agarose Gel Electrophoresis
0.42883047
Amino Acid Synthesis
0.4255062
0.42883047

References & Citations

1. Allchin D 2000 Mending mendelism Am Biol Teach 62 633 639 10.1662/0002-7685(2000)062[0632:MM]2.0.CO;2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1662/0002-7685(2000)062[0632:MM]2.0.CO;2
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science 2009 Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: a call to action American Association for the Advancement of Science Washington, DC
3. Baltimore D 2004 Viruses, viruses, viruses Eng Sci 67 20 29
4. Baviskar SN, Hartle RT, Whitney T 2009 Essential criteria to characterize constructivist teaching: derived from a review of the literature and applied to five constructivist-teaching method articles Int J Sci Educ 31 541 550 10.1080/09500690701731121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09500690701731121
5. Birney E, et al 2007 Identification and analysis of functional elements in 1% of the human genome by the ENCODE pilot project Nature 447 799 816 10.1038/nature05874 17571346 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature05874
6. Bowling BV, et al 2008 Development and evaluation of a genetics literacy assessment instrument for undergraduates Genetics 178 15 22 10.1534/genetics.107.079533 18202354 2206067 http://dx.doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.079533
7. Committee on Undergraduate Science Education 1997 Science teaching reconsidered: a handbook The National Academy Press Washington, DC
8. Crick F 1970 Central dogma of molecular biology Nature 227 561 563 10.1038/227561a0 4913914 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/227561a0
9. Fisher K 1985 A misconception in biology: Amino acids and translation J Res Sci Teach 22 3 62 10.1002/tea.3660220105 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660220105
10. Gerstein MB, et al 2007 What is a gene, post-ENCODE? History and updated definition Genome Res 17 669 681 10.1101/gr.6339607 17567988 http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/gr.6339607
11. Hunter N 1999 Prion diseases and the central dogma of molecular biology Trends Microbiol 7 265 266 10.1016/S0966-842X(99)01543-7 10390630 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0966-842X(99)01543-7
12. Khodor J, Halme DG, Walker GC 2004 A hierarchical biology concept framework: a tool for course design Cell Biol Educ 3 111 121 10.1187/cbe.03-10-0014 15257339 437643 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.03-10-0014
13. Kolstø SD 2001 Scientific literacy for citizenship: tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues Sci Educ 85 291 310 10.1002/sce.1011 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.1011
14. Lanie AD, et al 2004 Exploring the public understanding of basic genetic concepts J Gen Couns 13 305 320 10.1023/B:JOGC.0000035524.66944.6d http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:JOGC.0000035524.66944.6d
15. Lewis J, Kattmann U 2004 Traits, genes, particles and information: re–visiting students’ understandings of genetics Int J Sci Educ 26 195 206 10.1080/0950069032000072782 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000072782
16. Lewis J, Leach J, Wood-Robinson C 2000 All in the genes?—young people’s understanding of the nature of genes J Biol Educ 34 74 79 10.1080/00219266.2000.9655689 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2000.9655689
17. Lewis J, Wood-Robinson C 2000 Genes, chromosomes, cell division and inheritance—do students see any relationship? Int J Sci Educ 22 177 195 10.1080/095006900289949 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095006900289949
18. Marbach-Ad G 2001 Attempting to break the code in student comprehension of genetic concepts J Biol Educ 35 183 189 10.1080/00219266.2001.9655775 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2001.9655775
19. Maydanovych O, Beal P 2006 Breaking the central dogma by RNA editing Chem Rev 106 3397 3411 10.1021/cr050314a 16895334 http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/cr050314a
20. Miller JD 1998 The measurement of civic scientific literacy Public Und Sci 7 203 223 10.1088/0963-6625/7/3/001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/7/3/001
21. Newman DL, Catavero C, Wright LK 2012 Students fail to transfer knowledge of chromosome structure to topics pertaining to cell division CBE Life Sci Educ 11 425 436 10.1187/cbe.12-01-0003 23222838 3516798 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-01-0003
22. Pashley M 1985 A-level students: their problems with gene and allele J Biol Educ 28 120 127 10.1080/00219266.1994.9655377 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.1994.9655377
23. Pennisi E 2007 DNA study forces rethink of what it means to be a gene Science 316 1556 1557 10.1126/science.316.5831.1556 17569836 http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.316.5831.1556
24. Schwartz DL, Bransford JD 1998 A time for telling Cogn Instr 16 475 522 10.1207/s1532690xci1604_4 http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1604_4
25. Smith MK, Wood WB, Knight JK 2008 The genetics concept assessment: a new concept inventory for gauging student understanding of genetics CBE Life Sci Educ 7 422 430 10.1187/cbe.08-08-0045 19047428 2592048 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-08-0045
26. Stewart J, Hafner B, Dale M 1990 Students’ alternate views of meiosis Am Biol Teach 52 228 232 10.2307/4449090 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4449090
27. Travis H, Lord T 2004 Traditional and constructivist teaching techniques: comparing two groups of undergraduate nonscience majors in a biology lab J Coll Sci Teach 34 12 18
28. Wood-Robinson C, Lewis J, Leach J 2000 Young people’s understanding of the nature of genetic information in the cells of an organism J Biol Educ 35 29 36 10.1080/00219266.2000.9655732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2000.9655732

Supplemental Material

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v14i1.539
2013-05-06
2019-04-26

Abstract:

We present a PCR-based laboratory exercise that can be used with first- or second-year biology students to help overcome common misconceptions about gene expression. Biology students typically do not have a clear understanding of the difference between genes (DNA) and gene expression (mRNA/protein) and often believe that genes exist in an organism or cell only when they are expressed. This laboratory exercise allows students to carry out a PCR-based experiment designed to challenge their misunderstanding of the difference between genes and gene expression. Students first transform with an inducible GFP gene containing plasmid and observe induced and un-induced colonies. The following exercise creates cognitive dissonance when actual PCR results contradict their initial (incorrect) predictions of the presence of the GFP gene in transformed cells. Field testing of this laboratory exercise resulted in learning gains on both knowledge and application questions on concepts related to genes and gene expression.

Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmbe/14/1/jmbe-14-93.xml.a.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmbe/10.1128/jmbe.v14i1.539&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Figures

Image of FIGURE 1

Click to view

FIGURE 1

Typical depiction of the Central Dogma concept.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2013 vol. 14 no. 1 93-100. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v14i1.539
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 2

Click to view

FIGURE 2

Sophomore-level biology students do not demonstrate a clear understanding of PCR or the difference between DNA replication and expression. Students from a second-year Molecular Biology course (n = 49) predicted the results of their PCR experiment with the open-ended question shown in Appendix 3 (Pre-lab assessment). Categories of student responses are as follows: 1) Gene (DNA) is present whether or not it is being expressed; 2) Amount of gene (DNA) present is proportional to expression level of gene; 3) Gene (DNA) is only present when it is being expressed; 4) Presence of arabinose allows the GFP gene to get added to the E. coli genome; 5) Unable to follow logic.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2013 vol. 14 no. 1 93-100. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v14i1.539
Download as Powerpoint
Image of FIGURE 3

Click to view

FIGURE 3

PCR amplification of the GFP gene from pGLO Examples of three student gels demonstrating GFP gene amplification (white arrows at 714 bp) in samples labeled G+ (DNA from induced pGLO ) and G– (DNA from uninduced pGLO ) but not W (DNA from wild-type DNA ladders (L) are included on all gels. White arrows indicate the 714 bp PCR product. Black arrows indicate primer-dimer product, which varies in intensity depending on conditions.

Source: J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. May 2013 vol. 14 no. 1 93-100. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v14i1.539
Download as Powerpoint

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error