Particulate matter impact on the lungs and on communities

Particulate matter impact on the lungs and on communities

Purpose:

• To practice reading and interpreting primary scientific literature.

• To relate PM 2.5 damage in the body to climate justice topics such as disproportionate health outcomes on communities of color. Task: 1. Read and summarize the following article: Lakey, P., Berkemeier, T., Tong, H. et al. Chemical exposure-response relationship between air pollutants and reactive oxygen species in the human respiratory tract. Sci Rep 6, 32916 (2016). a. What is the purpose of this study? b. What information was known before and what information is new? c. What hypotheses are the authors testing? d. Summarize the results shown in figures 1 and 2 of the article. e. What conclusions did the authors make? 2. Map redlined neighborhoods in any city in the USA that has sufficient data. a. Access ArcGIS – https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html i. You do not need to create an account or sign in b. Navigate to a city of your choice on the map. c. Set the basemap to topography if it is not already set. i. Click on the basemap tab in the upper left (next to details and under MyMap) ii. Click Topography d. Add freeways to the basemap i. Click on Modify Map in the upper right of the window (next to Sign In) ii. Click Add in the upper left iii. Click Search for Layers iv. Type in Freeways and press Return on your keyboard v. Select the USA Freeway System map by clicking on the + under the name e. Add Redlining Information i. Click Add ii. Click Browse Living Atlas Layers iii. Type in Redlining and press Return iv. Select the Home Owner’s Loan Corporation Neighborhood Redlining Grade map by clicking on the + under the name f. Add PM 2.5 monitors i. Click Add ii. Click Browse Living Atlas Layers iii. Type in PM 2.5 and press Return iv. Select the AirNow Air Quality Monitoring Site Data (Current) map by clicking on the + under the name g. Optional: Add a layer of your choice. Other air pollutants for example. h. Explore your chosen city and answer the following questions: i. Where are the redlined neighborhoods? 1. What do the colors mean? Click on them to learn more. ii. Do you see any differences between current air quality? 1. Do you expect differences based on the time of year? iii. If you were given air sensors, where would you place them? i. Choose two air sensors in your city that you’d like to compare. For example, one in a green (grade A) neighborhood and one in a red (grade D) neighborhood. Write down the name and ID numbers of the sensors, you will use these in the next activity. j. Take a screenshot of your city, or save the map (you need to create an account to do this) 3. Comparing air quality data sets a. Open the Outdoor Air Quality Data US EPA site – https://www.epa.gov/outdoorair-quality-data/download-daily-data b. c. d. e. Select PM 2.5 as the pollutant Select the year you want to analyze Select your city Select one of your sensor sites by matching the sensor number from your ArcGIS map to the numbers in the dropdown menu f. Click Get Data g. Click on the Download CSV link h. Open the downloaded file in Excel i. Make a scatterplot of your PM 2.5 data i. Select the entire column for Date and Daily_AQI_Value by holding down Control (on a PC) or Command/Open-Apple (on a Mac) on your keyboard and clicking on the letters at the top of each row (for example A and G). This should highlight the entire column for both. ii. Click on the Insert ribbon at the top of the Excel window iii. Click on the chart type that looks like a scatterplot 1. Alternatively, click on Insert in the Excel menu at the top of your screen or window, hover over Chart, and select X Y (Scatter) iv. This should insert a scatter plot that puts the date on the X-axis and the AQI values on the Y axis. j. Repeat this process for your other selected sensor. k. Compare the two scatter plots i. What yearly trends do you see in each location? ii. Do any data points stand out? iii. Compare the two locations. 1. Do you see similar patterns? 2. Do you notice differences between the sensor locations? 3. How many days were above the healthy EPA limit (0-50 AQI) in each location? l. Label the axes and give each plot a meaningful title. i. Click on the title of each chart to select it, then type in a meaningful name. ii. To label axes: 1. Click on the Chart Design ribbon at the top of the Excel window 2. Then click on Add Chart Element in the upper left (this may be different on a PC) 3. Next select Primary Horizontal. a. This will add a text box below your X-axis. Click on the text to add/delete text. 4. Repeat this process for the vertical axis: Click Add Chart Element, Select Primary Vertical, change text in the text box label. m. Save your plots in a single word document by selecting the plot and copying it. Paste it into word. n. Include the answers to the questions asked above. 4. What to turn in: a. Summary of the research article b. Map of your chosen city c. Two graphs of yearly PM2.5 data d. Answers to the questions asked e. Reflection on what this means to you. References to help understand air quality and climate justice: Air Quality • https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/particulate-matter-pm-basics • https://www.airnow.gov/aqi/aqi-basics/ • https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/12/17/world/asia/india-pollutioninequality.html Poor air quality and COVID Susceptibility: • https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-08/air-pollution-linked-to-highercoronavirus-death-rates Redlining: • https://www.kcet.org/shows/lost-la/segregation-in-the-city-of-angels-a-1939-map-ofhousing-inequality-in-l-a Redlining and Environmental Justice • • • Turner, Nicholas. New maps show strong correlation between redlined places in Seattle and worse air quality. Seattle Times, Mar. 29, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/24/climate/racism-redlining-citiesglobal-warming.html https://www.usnews.com/news/healthiest-communities/articles/2019-05-24/asthmaair-pollution-rates-higher-in-historically-redlined-neighborhoods This assignment is adapted from: Jones, A. C. (2021). Graphing and mapping patterns of air quality in Los Angeles, California through an environmental justice lens.. Social Justice and Community Change, QUBES Educational Resources. doi:10.25334/AZ2T-1Y63

  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