Lab 2: Biological Astronaut

Description

Imagine you are an exploratory astronaut looking for life throughout the universe. One day you encounter a planet that has no carbon present at its surface. However, your instrument register movement and a variety of other signs that make you think life exists on its surface.

Part 1: Before taking a potentially dangerous trip to the surface, you must outline a theoretical framework in which another element can serve as a backbone for molecules. (Hint: look for an element on the periodic table that would act similarly to carbon.) Begin by describing this new backbone, including how compounds and macromolecules world form. Detail at least 2 chemical reactions forming macromolecules with this backbone. You may wish to add supporting diagrams (that you create). Be sure to include references using APA format, 7th edition (refer to Module 1 lab for formatting.)

Part 2: Your theoretical framework is deemed strong enough to justify a trip landside. Once there, you are authorized to collect a simple “organism” for experimental use. Collect your specimen and then design a full experiment that will test at least 2 characteristics that define biological life on Earth. Be sure to include all relevant parts of an experiment and describe how you would analyze and present the data, results, and conclusions (refer to Module 1 lab resources on the scientific method.)

Part 1:

Look for an element on the periodic table that would act similarly to carbon. Once you have identified one, be sure to discuss the following in your justification.

· Examine and discuss the outer electron shell and chemical bonding characteristics of this new element.

· Specifically describe how the outer shell would make this new element bond as carbon does.

· Then you should specifically discuss or draw two chemical reactions to form macromolecules with this different element. For example, make a molecule like glucose but without any carbons (replace carbon with your new element). Images will work great here; they can be hand or computer drawn or you may be able to find some on the internet.

· Cite your references!

Part 2:

Choose two of the defining characteristics of life and design an experiment to test each in your alien lifeform. Be sure that your design includes all the following points

· Hypothesis
· Dependent and independent variable
· Control and experimental groups
· Standardized variables
· The specific type of data you would collect
· How you would analyze and present these data

· What pieces of data/evidence you would need to support your hypothesis. Alternatively, what evidence would disprove your hypothesis?

Remember to keep things simple and observable. You will most likely have to design 2 different experiments to test the different characteristics.

End of the question

What property of water, due to hydrogen bonding, do you think is the most important? (adhesion, cohesion, ice density, universal solvent, or heat capacity)

Discuss: Explain why is it the most important or the most fascinating team of water properties. Why does Earth NEED this property?

Grid View

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Main Postinga	45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.	0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness	10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3.
First Response	17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response	16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Participation	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100