Renal function lab write-up guidance
For this practical you will be provided with the class data written up as a results section. You are required to write a methods section (250 words maximum) and discuss two aspects (2 x 250 words maximum) of the results on the write-up template document. Further guidance for each section is provided below.
A methods section has several key aims: to document the methodology employed, to provide an indication of how data was collected (clear enough for a scientist to reproduce your experiments; replicability), and to convince readers that you were careful and systematic. All of these provide the methods with credibility, and the reader more likely to accept your results and conclusions.
To provide enough information to replicate your experiments, certain aspects are critical and must be included, others maybe irrelevant. Any part of the method that may affect the result obtained must be clearly stated, those which do not have a bearing on the results obtained should be omitted. For example, the characteristics of the experimental group may affect the results obtained and should be clearly described. Similarly, the concentration of a solution is important, whereas the volume of solution prepared isn’t relevant (for example it doesn’t it matter if you prepared 200ml or 300ml of a solution, but a concentration of 2mM or 3mM will affect results).
It is important to ensure you describe the supplier of key materials (e.g. vodka (ASDA, UK); orange squash (Robinsons, UK), and Furosemide (Pfizer Inc., UK) as well as equipment that may affect the outcome of results obtained (e.g. Model-410 Flame Photometer (Sherwood, UK)).
Methods sections are written in the past tense, describing what was performed, and in the third-person (i.e. not 1st person “I”, “we” – or 2nd person “you”, “they”).
An example of a well written and poorly written method sections are shown below:
Growth rates were determined by estimating the number of bacteria in a culture at zero time and after 1 hour of growth at 37°C. In order to make this estimation, a dilution series was performed by diluting aliquots of the bacterial culture, at each incubation time, by a factor of 10, 100, and 10 000 with nutrient broth, and each dilution plated onto quadrants of a sterile agar plate. Following one week’s incubation at 25°C, the colonies of the plate were counted manually. In this excerpt no amounts or descriptions of equipment have been included nor would they have been necessary, as someone wishing to repeat the experiment could change these and get the same result.
We did a serial dilution by pipetting 0.9 ml broth into labelled tubes, then adding 2 drops (0.1ml) of the original culture to tube 1, 2 drops of tube 1 to tube 2, 2 drops of tube 2 to 3 and 2 drops of tube 3 to tube 4. Mix the tubes and spread a loopful of each tube onto a different quadrant of a labelled agar plate. The personal pronoun we could have been avoided by using the passive voice (a serial dilution was carried out).
Keep explanations as simple as possible.
Avoid unnecessary repetition. In the present tense, this reads like an instruction, not a description of what you did. The past tense should be used (The tubes were mixed…)
(examples taken from ‘Examples of method sections’ https://unilearning.uow.edu.au/report/2biv1.html)
When using either animal or human participants it is important to state if the experiments have been ethically approved (this practical has been approved by the local ethics committee), and that human participants consented for their inclusion. It is also important to remember that the statistical analysis employed is a method that also needs stating (two-way ANOVA with post-hoc Tukey analysis, P<0.05 considered to be significant).
Additional information that may prove useful in relation to the participants:
Total number = 23
Average age = 20.4 ± 1.37 (mean ± Standard Deviation)
Male: Female = 3:20
Total number = 23
Average age = 20.7 ± 1.61 (mean ± Standard Deviation)
Male: Female = 15:8
Total number = 21
Average age = 20.0 ± 0.949 (mean ± Standard Deviation)
Male: Female = 7:14
The purpose of a discussion section is to explain the results obtained within the context of the experiments performed, and the wider literature. A discussion should be written in clear, simple, effective language throughout. Normally, this section will be written in three parts:
- An introductory paragraph
- Intermediate paragraphs, typically addressing each of the study’s results in turn
- A concluding paragraph
The discussion section can be the longest in a research article, but for the purpose of this write-up you are asked to address two study end-points – which would equate to two ‘intermediate’ paragraphs. You should attempt to demonstrate your understanding of kidney physiology by answering the specific questions. Additional marks will be awarded for the inclusion of relevant primary research article references (do not reference lecture notes).
Method: Clear concise description of the methods employed. 40%
Discussion: Simple, clear, effective explanation of the experimental results demonstrating an understanding of renal physiology. 60%
The grading criteria for each section are given in the table below. In general, your overall mark will be based on the following:
80-100% All assessment criteria have been achieved to an exceptionally high level
70-79% All assessment criteria have been achieved to a very good standard and some at an exceptionally high level
60-70% All assessment criteria have been met fully at a good or very good standard
50-59% All assessment criteria have been met, some may have been achieved at a good standard
40-49% All assessment criteria have just been met
30-39% One or more of the assessment criteria have not been met
10-29% Most of the assessment criteria have not been met
0-9% Almost none of the assessment criteria have been me
Grading criteria for BY266 Intermediate Physiology respiration practical
Marking scheme % total mark 80-100% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 30-39% 0-29%
A concise description of the methods used to perform experiments, following the guidance provided 30 % Criterion is met in full and to an exceptional standard. Pertinent information is included, the presentation is of the highest quality and reflects the methods employed Criterion is met in full and to a very high standard. Pertinent information is included in a logical order, the presentation is of very high quality and reflects the methods employed
Criterion is met in full and to a good or very good standard. Any errors or inaccuracies are minor. Work is well-organised, and the presentation is of high quality. The methods employed should be well reflected, Criterion is met. No significant inaccuracies and/or misunderstandings. Work is appropriately organised, and the presentation is of good quality. The study methods may not be completely reflected. Criterion is mostly met. Some inaccuracies and/or misunderstandings. Work may lack appropriate organised and the presentation is acceptable. Aspects of the study methods should be clear – but not all. Criterion isn’t met, or significantly lacking in parts. Inaccuracies and/or misunderstanding. Work is poorly organised, typically with limited presentation quality. Study methods not reflected in the text. Criterion isn’t met. Poor presentation is likely, with a lack of content, or misrepresentation of the study methods.
A simple, clear, effective explanation of the results provided. Text should demonstrate a good understanding of kidney physiology underlying experimental data. 60 %
(2 x 30) Criterion is met in full and to an exceptional standard. Pertinent information is included in a logical order, the presentation is of the highest quality and discussion reflects the results. Supported by appropriate sources Criterion is met in full and to a very high standard. Pertinent information is included in a logical order, the presentation is of very high quality and discussion reflects the results
Supported by some sources Criterion is met in full and to a good or very good standard. Any errors or inaccuracies are minor. Work is well-organised, and the presentation is of high quality. The results should be well reflected in the discussion. Maybe supported by appropriate sources. Criterion is met. No significant inaccuracies and/or misunderstandings. Work is appropriately organised, and the presentation is of good quality. The study results may not be completely reflected in the discussion. Few or no external sources. Criterion is mostly met. Some inaccuracies and/or misunderstandings. Work may lack appropriate organised and the presentation is acceptable. Aspects of the results should be clearly discussed – but not all. May not have any supporting sources of information. Criterion isn’t met, or significantly lacking in parts. Inaccuracies and/or misunderstanding. Work is poorly organised, typically with limited presentation quality. Study results not reflected in the discussion. Criterion isn’t met. Poor presentation is likely, with a lack of content, or study results not reflected in the discussion text.
In Mary Shelley's epic, Frankenstein, the book looks at an assortment of parts of aspiration. For example, with Victor, desire demonstrates to be his demise, and, thusly, Victor's model turns into a cautioning for Robert Walton; in the interim, the Creature is, one might say, Victor's tyke and subsequently acquires features of Victor's aspiration but since the Creature is likewise an aggregate of the considerable number of people who exemplify him, he is along these lines additionally representative of Mankind's aspirations that don't completely come to acknowledgment nor satisfaction, which is the reason perusers can relate to the Creature's appalling components. Frankenstein investigates the repercussion of man and beast pursuing desire indiscriminately. Victor Frankenstein found the dark mystery that enabled him to make life. Also, after Frankenstein found the wellspring of human life, he turned out to be absolutely caught up in his exploratory making of an individual and it devoured his life totally. Victor's unlimited aspiration and his longing to prevail in his endeavors to make life, and to have his creation acclaim him as his maker for the existence he gave it drove him to discover ruin and anguish toward the finish of his desire. For this I had denied myself of rest and wellbeing. I had wanted it with a zest that far surpassed balance; however at this point I had completed, the magnificence of the fantasy disappeared, and short of breath repulsiveness and disturb filled my heart." (P. 42) Walton needed to sail to the ice in light of the fact that no other mariner had ever achieved it or found its mysteries. The beast was made without wanting to; his aspiration was to remunerate his creation as a shocking untouchable and to achieve some fulfillment for disintegrating the world around Victor. These three characters all followed up on a similar visually impaired aspiration. The tale poses suffering inquiries about human instinct and the connection among God and man. The beast shows a comparative sort of duality, inducing compassion just as fear in all who hear his story. He demands our sympathy to the degree that we perceive ourselves in his surpassing forlornness and contrast our very own life and the Creature. Disdained by his maker and entirely alone and detested, he realizes what he container of human instinct as he eavesdroppes on a group of house occupants, and he instructs himself by perusing three books that had luckily fallen over his way, among them Paradise Lost. "Who was I? What was I? Whence did I come?" (P. 93), the Creature asks himself in the wake of understanding them. Despite the fact that the Creature perpetrates criminal acts, the way that he has a hesitance and his capacity to instruct himself as an individual brings up the issue of what it truly intends to be human, what contemplations and feelings it takes to be considered a "person". It is hard to think about the beast as anything short of only that in his supplication for comprehension from Frankenstein when the animal wishes to address him: "Trust me, Frankenstein: I was kind; my spirit gleamed with adoration and humankind; however am I not the only one, hopelessly alone? You, my maker, loathe me; what expectation would i be able to assemble from your individual animals, who owe me nothing? They spurn and despise me." (p. 71). At the point when the Creature's obscure, yet supportive demonstrations of consideration toward the De Lacey's are come back with unjustifiable hostility, we come to ponder whether the world the animal occupies, instead of something natural that made him submit tremendousness. In any case, he sticks on to an inner voice and an energetic aching for another sort of presence just as acknowledgment and love from another, which Victor pitilessly denies him. Current man is a case of the beast, alienated from his maker who accepts his very own starting points to be trivial and accidental,non significant and brimming with wrath at the states of his reality just as at his maker. Since the beast has no name of his own, hes not exactly an independent individual. Rather, he is bound to his maker. He is nothing without Victor. He is as much a piece of Frankenstein as he is his very own self. The beast appears on the scene by a truly repulsive situation. He has the build of a monster, yet a childish personality. He has a friendly nature, yet his physical distortion conceals his kindheartedness and makes everybody dread and misuse him. His own maker even rejected him on account of his terrible looks. His sentiments are the most profound and piercing of any characters in this novel, just as the most tangled. When I checked out I saw and knew about none like me. Is it accurate to say that i was, the, a beast, a smudge upon the earth from which all men fled and whom all men repudiated? (P. 105) To make matters increasingly confused, the beast is corresponded to both Adam and Satan in Paradise Lost. This may appear to be marginally indistinct. The thing to remember is that the thought at the core of the beast is his duality. He has an extremely obscure duality. He is without a moment's delay man in his impeccable state before the Fall (the Fall = insidious), but the appearance of shrewdness itself. This is beginning to sound like Victor Frankenstein. Esoteric dualityconflicting characterizationcould it be that the beast reflects his producer in his duality? Obviously, the other reason the beast turns on people is on the grounds that Victor was his last bind to mankind. The beast is one of numerous individuals in this content is influenced by forlornness, disconnection, and an inside and out want for fraternity. Victor may have disdained him, disliked him, and attempted over and again to kill him, yet at any rate he conversed with the beast. At any rate he perceived the beasts presence. What's more, for an animal that burned through the greater part of his pathetic life secluded from everything and outcast, alone without anybody there for him, this can be truly valid justification to seek after Victor. Positive or negative, Victor is the main connection hes had and he attempts urgently to stick to this relationship. Do we denounce him? Do we show disdain toward him? Do we venerate him? Hes kind. He expresses well with others and he even saves a young lady from a waterway. He just gets the pitilessness and scorn since hes appalling. Would we be able to accuse him in the event that he lashes out in unexpected and irrationally savage ways? "From that minute he proclaimed everlasting war against the species, and more than all, against Frankenstein who had framed him and sent him forward to this intolerable wretchedness." (P. 99) This sounds like additionally conflicting feelings. Would it be able to be that we, the peruser, feel the comparable duality of feelings that the beast and Victor feel for one another? One more thing, I'm not catching it's meaning that the fmonster is made out of dead-individual pieces? In the event that hes made up out of individuals, at that point hes basically an individual himself. However, in the event that theyre dormant, at that point hes never extremely surviving in any case. You could likewise say that, since hes a total of human parts, hes additionally a combination of human attributes. This may demonstrate to us the idea of his unpredictable duality. Present day man is likewise Frankenstein, splitting ties and ending up further far from his creatorusurping the forces of God and unreliably tinkering with nature, regardless of whether they are brimming with considerate reason, it closes with harmful outcomes. Despite the fact that Frankenstein just as the beast start with well meaning plans and become killers at last, the beast appear to be much more kind than Victor since he is naturally the outcast of society, while Frankenstein deliberately expels himself from human culture. At the point when Frankenstein initially winds up enchanted in his undertakings to make life, as he gathers materials from a slaughterhouse and disecting room. Frankenstein additionally breaks his ties with loved ones during his preventing work, and he turns out to be progressively limited. His dad rebukes him for this; inspiring Frankenstein to ponder internally what his determined mission for information has cost him, and whether it is ethically adequate. After he thinks back on his mix-ups, he reasons that, as opposed to his confidence at the time it was not justified, despite any potential benefits, "If no man permitted any interest at all to meddle with the serenity of his household affections, Greece had not been oppressed; Caesar would have saved his nation; America would have been found all the more bit by bit; and the realms of Mexico and Peru had not been annihilated." (p. 35). Normal world resembles Eden and will be tainted through an excessive amount of information (science). [Proof— – Biblical Conception of "Learning"; man expelled from heaven for knowing excessively; Prometheus got control over by Gods; novel written in Romantic time which maintains the qualities that Progress is Dangerous and that there must be an arrival to Idealized Past]. Through Victor and Walton, Frankenstein speaks to people as profoundly yearning, but then additionally profoundly incorrect. The works of men of virtuoso, anyway wrongly coordinated, barely ever bomb in at last going to the strong preferred position of humankind. (P. 29) Both Victor and Walton fantasize of changing society and carrying esteem to themselves through their logical triumphs. However their aspirations likewise make them unmindful. Blinded by dreams of brilliance, they neglect to think about the repercussions of their activities. So while Victor transforms himself into a divine being, a maker, by breathing life into his beast, this possibly features his uncertainty when he is at last clumsy of satisfying the commitment that a maker has to its creation. Victor supposes he will resemble a divine being, yet winds up the forebear of a fallen angel. Walton, in any event, diverts once again from his mission toward the North Pole before getting himself and his team demolished, in the wake of hearing Victors story about the overwhelming repercussions of pushing the limits of investigation. I won't lead you on, unguarded and fervent as I at that point seemed to be, to your obliteration and trustworthy wretchedness. Gain from me, if not by my statutes, in any event by my model, how hazardous is the obtaining of information, and how much more joyful that man is who accepts his local town to be the world, than he who tries to wind up more noteworthy than his inclination will permit. (P. 33) He gains from Victors disaster. After Victor passes on, he turns the ship back to Englan>GET ANSWER