Posted on

MGEM2014 Cancer Biology Coursework 2020-21

• Marked via word document submission through Turnitin
• Submission due date of 22/04/2021
• Credit: 40% of total module marks

 Total practical write-up ~2000 words (+/- 10%, refer to coursework rules document)
 Write-up will combine the first two cancer biology practicals in their entirety (SDS-PAGE & Western blotting with PCR-RFLP).
 These two completed experiments (SDS-PAGE & Western blotting and PCR-RFLP) will produce two subsections of a single results section.
 Practical write-ups will follow a research journal format, but without a materials and methods section since this is provided in the practical handbook.

 Marking will be divided into four sections:
Abstract
Introduction
Results
Discussion
 Abstract: approximately 200-250 words (+/- 10%)
Organise as a single paragraph that summarizes the context of the study (background and aim/reason for it), methods, results, and a take home conclusion. (20% of final mark).
 Introduction: approximately 500 words (+/- 10%). Provides some background to the study. Which gene/proteins are being investigated and why? What methods are currently available for this analysis? How are you going to perform your analysis, so finish off the introduction with the aim of the experiments. Include appropriate references, Harvard style, primary literature. (10% of final mark).

 Results: approximately 500 words (+/- 10%). Clear succinct results section for each of the experiments undertaken. (30% of final mark):
Consider: experiment 1: results generated, image of the stained gel, ensure it is correctly orientated and labelled such as position of molecular weight standards and approximate position of p53 protein. Can you detect p53? And any differences between the wild-type (wt) and mutant p53 proteins?
Second part of experiment 1 – Western blotting: produce a labelled image of your Western blot. How does the intensity of the bands compare between the wt and mutant proteins, are they the same? Have the wt and mutant proteins run to the same position down the gel, consistent with the same or similar molecular weights? Hence can you distinguish wt and mutant proteins by SDS-PAGE and Western blotting?
Experiment 2 & 3: Provide a labelled image of the PCR and RFLP products. Which of the unknown samples were wt and which mutant? Look at the practical guidance for the size of the fragments you would expect to see. Consider how you could present the fragments produced, such as in a Table. Can PCR-RPLP be used to distinguish sections of wt and mutant p53 DNA?
Ensure Figures and Tables have a Legend and refer to the Figure or Table in the text of the document.
 Discussion: approximately ~750 words. a discussion of the results, and context to the results by comparison with other relevant studies. Include appropriate and relevant references, using Harvard style and primary literature (30% of final mark)
Consider: What questions were addressed by each of the experiments? What do the results mean? What are the benefits or limitations of the methods? What is the relevance of your data to other studies?
 Referencing: (10% of final mark). Does not contribute to the word count.
Try to use relevant primary literature to support your statements. Check with the BSc homepage about correct style for Harvard referencing. Ensure that references are correctly formatted and all cited references are in the final reference list.

Type of service: Academic Paper Writing
Type of assignment: Coursework
Subject: Healthcare & Medicine
Pages /words: 8/2000
Number of sources: 0
Academic level: Sophomore (college 2nd year)
Paper format: Harvard
Line spacing: Double
Language style: US English