Genomics Blog
January 6, 2013 1:45 PM
A taste for Genomics
Filed Under: Gerry Ward
I am a huge supporter of project-based learning. I was pleased when I found an interesting opportunity published in the journal American Biology Teacher. Titled “Tasting Phenylthiocarbamide (PTC): A New Integrative Genetics Lab with an Old Flavor”, this activity-oriented learning experience uses PTC tasting to illustrate an array of genomic concepts.
PTC tasting has been used as an example of a Mendelian trait controlled by a dominant gene. This paper shows how a teacher can go beyond Mendelian genetics to:
- demonstrate pedigree analysis,
- make Hardy-Weinberg calculations,
- determine student genotypes through the use of cleaved amplified polymorphic sequence analysis, and
- encourage students to examine evidence for evolution at the molecular level.
Teach.Genetics, a Genetic Science Learning Centre based at the University of Utah, indicates that many schools have (in their opinion) needlessly banned the use of PTC paper in schools based on toxicity reports. They suggest PTC is no more dangerous than table salt. They include various calculations to justify their stance. Regardless, salt (NaCl) has a median lethal dose (LD50) of 3000 mg/kg whereas PTC is 3 mg/kg. This is not a trivial difference: it is several orders of magnitude.
Here are my questions:
- Were we in Alberta previously far too cautious?
- Are we now being far too imprudent?
- Is it even wise for a teacher to suggest that students taste something described on Wikipedia as being twice as toxic as potassium cyanide? (I’m imagining the hushed tones of the breathless reporter on the evening news as I type this).
Our blog comments are moderated and do not show up immediately. Your email address is not revealed. You can also let me know directly by email or send me a tweet.
You can find me on
Categories
Blog Roll
Archive
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007




Comments
Retired teacher -
While I suspect that some teachers dream of giving a hefty dose of cyanide or other toxic substance to an occasional administrator, it behooves us to think carefully about the benefits versus the risks of using hazardous materials with students, It is always worthwhile to look for alternatives that might be better. A fine example of this is the use of online physics problem-solving. It's far safer to show the effects of increasing the mass of an object when sending the object in a circular path by using a computer than it is to have a carload of teenagers trying to prove the same results driving around a bend at speed.
I am old enough to remember the use of mercury thermometers in class. Although I held and played with mercury as a student (and it didn't hurt me -- I think) no one today would use mercury thermometers because we now have a better idea of the toxicity of mercury (and the potential lawsuits involved for using it!) Digital thermometers are a better choice because they are safer and they have the added benefit of being more accurate than mercury thermometers.
I jokingly referred to cyanide in my initial sentence but HCN is another substance that can be used for the dominant gene test but it's high effectiveness as a rodenticide precludes it from being an acceptable substance in most science classes.
So, given the knowledge that PCT is toxic in surprisingly small doses and given the risks involved in using PCT, I believe we are prudent to avoid it in the classroom. Better to stick with recessive or dominant earwax. It's also more funny to talk about.
Gerry Ward - genomealberta.ca/
Thanks for the comments from the retired teacher.
Here are some additional comments from the G+ Genetics and Genomics Community
https://plus.google.com/u/0/106586618772646506145/posts/7Znp7isRULt
(cut and paste this URL if it is not a live link)