write a blog post [website recommendation] on Fermentation.
Description
write a blog post [website recommendation] on Fermentation.
Part 1: Fermentation Initial Blog Post
Fermentation is an important process in biology. It is also an important process in which many foods we eat and beverages we drink are made. Now that you have had a chance to study the various ways in which fermentation can be used, you will choose a topic from the table below that uses an organism that undergoes fermentation to produce the desired product and discuss. Find a credible and reliable, scientific resource that augments what you have already learned about fermentation and the product it produces and address the following questions.
Which food product did you choose?
What does this process involve (describe the method)?
What types of other foods can be prepared using this method?
What type of organism (living creature) is used for this product of fermentation?
- Part 2: Blog Response Post
Peruse some of the Blog entries made by your fellow classmates. Choose at least one Fermentation blog) that you found useful and comment on how the website helped you with this week’s content.
Joshua Little
I picked natto for my fermentation blog. I never knew natto had so many steps into making it. I didn’t even know what it was before this blog. Natto is a soybean in Japan. Natto is when the soybeans are soaked for 12-24 hours then they are steamed for 40 mins. After that they are fermented for up to 30 hours by bacillus subtilis in 40 celsius. In Japan this part of fermentation is called sumibi hakkou. Other types of food that are prepared using this method are used in Korean kimchi, Egyptian kishk, and many more foods throughout the world. Bacillus subtilis is the organism used for fermentation. It is also known as “grass bacillus” or “hay bacillus” It is also known to help with intestinal microflora and is also used as a probiotic.
References
Piggot, P. J. (2016). Bacillus Subtilis – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. Sciencedirect.com. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/bacillus-subtilis
Natto – an overview | ScienceDirect Topics. (n.d.). Www.sciencedirect.com. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/food-science/natto
| 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 | |||||