Hello Team Carrot -

It looks like you've uploaded your final postings about the project, and you all seem to have reached different conclusions, even though you were looking at exactly the same plants and the same data.  There is a lot to digest in what you've written, so let me comment on a just a couple of things.

1) What claim can we make from our experiment?

I've looked at your data files and your graphs, and it seems to me that you have no differences among treatments.  There is a lot of variation among plants, but no consistent difference in growth among the three treatments.  This means that whatever variable you were manipulating had no effect on growth.  I'm still not completely clear about what your independent variable was (something do to with rocks and water?), but whatever you manipulated, it didn't change the way the plants grew.  This seems to be the only claim you could make from your experiment.

2) What are possible explanations for our results?

This is where things get tricky.  Your data are very messy - lots of variation from plant to plant.  Based on your remarks and photos, some of your plants had unexpected growth patterns.  As a group, you don't seem to agree about the explanations for all this variation, especially with respect to the relative importance of genes vs environment.  At least one person is attributing everything to genes, whereas others are emphasizing environmental variation.  Since I don't know the full details of your experiment, I won't try to resolve these differences, but I can suggest a couple of things to think about. 

First, your class experiment into testing for a 9:3:3:1 ratio suggests to me that you did not use genetically uniform seeds.  You were expecting to see genetic variation with respect to the traits you measured for the 9:3:3:1 ratio.  Thus, there was probably also genetic variation for the quantitative traits you measured in your own experiment.  Different plants had different genotypes.  This means that you can't attribute all the variation you see only to the environment.

Second, I read at least one remark about possible environmental variation in your experiment, beyond the planned variation based on manipulation of the independent variable.  I would be surprised if you managed to keep all other environmental variables completely uniform across treatments.  That's very difficult to do, even by professional botanists.  Thus, I think you can safely assume that the growth of your plants was also affected by environmental variation that was possibly beyond your control.  This means that you can't attribute all the variation you see only to genes.

The conclusion then is that a lot of the variation you saw was probably due to a combination of genetic differences among plants and environmental variation in the experimental set-up.  This may seem anticlimactic, but it is actually a very important conclusion.  The variation you see in nature, whether in plants, people, aardvarks, mushrooms or any other organism, will inevitably be explained by a combination of genetic variation and environmental variation.

I don't know where you are going from here on this project, but I suspect that you are wrapping things up and moving on to other things.  It's been a pleasure to work with you.  You should congratulate yourselves on completing such a complex project.  You wrestled with some difficult questions, and I was impressed with the depth of thinking that you were applying to those questions.

Your sincerely,

Andrew Schnabel

Hello everyone!

We are aware of some technical issues with the platform, leading to an issue with posting to project pages and issues with users' dashboards. We are working diligently with our developer to resolve them as quickly as possible. Please be patient and keep checking your projects so you can post your hellos, updates, reports, thank-yous, and goodbyes.

4. Based off of… A. your group results, B. your class results, C. 9^th grade CM Biology results, did we actually see this pattern of traits be expressed? Check the Mustard Seed Master Class Data sheet for this information and use it as evidence in your claims below.

Which level of the population (A, B, and/or C) showed the 9:3:3:1 phenotypic ratio? If your results varied from this ratio, please explain how that could occur with 3 claims. (15 points)

In the graph of Discrete Traits for our data, we did not see this exact ratio. First, this could be because of human error. Some people may have forgotten to write down the proper traits, or at all. Second, it could be because some of the plants died before the results were over, leaving the ratio off. And finally, it could be because some plants changed color as they grew. Drawing from personal experience and

6a. An organism exists as an expression of its inherited genes interacting in an environmental context (Phenotype = Genotype X Environment).

Yes, this statement is true. Both Genotypes and Environment influence Phenotypes. For example, for our plant Mustard seeds, the Genotype might have said it would be Straight and Wrinkled. But because of our environmental variable of not having rocks, instead of the plants being straight, they were twisted due to lack of rock support.

6b. Inheritance of genes occurs via the life cycle of an organism through successful reproduction of offspring.

Yes, this statement is true. During reproduction, the child gets one allele from each parent, which come together to form genes. Each allele is dominant and recessive, which effects the circumstances which the new Phenotype, or physical trait, takes form. We know this because it is evidenced in the child showing traits from both parents.

6e. Science is an active process of inquiry, investigation, and communication.

This statement is true. It is evidenced in the Scientific Method. The Scientific Method is a tool used by researchers and scientists to plan and conduct their work. It has 8 steps. First make an observation, then ask a question, research the question for existing answers, data, or solutions, propose a hypothesis on the question, then design and carry out your experiment, test the hypothesis to accept or reject it, make a conclusion and answer your question, and finally report your findings so other can build off it, try the experiment themselves, or answer their own questions. Almost all experiments revolve around these steps. In the Scientific Method, you are inquiring, investigating, and communicating.

1. What claim can we make from our experiment?

Yes, traits are effected by the environment. In our experiment, Bottle C had a variable of no rocks in its top layer of soil. Because of this, while the plants in Bottle C had roughly the same height as the other bottles, all of its plants were lopsided and did not grow straight, while the others with rocks did.

2. What are possible explanations for our results?

Some possible explanations could be genes. The phenotypic traits of our plants parents could have influenced our results. Envirnment also could have played a factor, with different envirnmental variables greatly influencing plant traits group to group.

3. How do the data we collected and our reasoning with scientific ideas support our claim?

The data we collected proves that envirnment changes phenotypic traits, because data varied from group to group. We know that they all had the same parents, so the only way they could have varied would be through the envirnment.

4. What future experiments could be done to expand on the results of this experiment?

We could take the plants that we grew and then breed them together, to further see if the new traits developed would carry onto the next plants in line.

1. A claim we can make from our experiments is that there are advantages for a plant to have certain traits because it can help them blend in for use of camouflage and help make themselves more scary. Another advantage could it could help protect itself from certain climates. Another claim we can make is traits are not affected by environment because it is all genetics for how the plants look.
2. Some possible explanations for our results could be the genes that their parents had and what the plants look like. To answer our essential question the way the plant looks is totally based off the genes it has. Another possible explanation for our results are the environments our plants were in were consistently changing temperature but they didn't change.

3. Our plants did well with more soil, because the soil soaks up for water, causing the plant to become hydrated without becoming drowned. The soil can also help the plant become more rooted in it, helping the plant have its roots expand and have more breathing room (literally). The soil can also help the plants stay firmly inside the bottle. 
4. We could test and see if the plants do better with fertilizer than soil. Maybe the fertilizer soaks up more soil, causing us to need less water to not kill the plant. If we change up the sand-particle, then we can test and see what works better for plants opposed to that which works worse.

Looks like you are in the final stages of your projects.

It’s great to see that teams from your school are wrapping up and posting conclusions. Enjoy the final stages of your project, and feel free to post any final comments or questions you have for your mentors.

You have until Tuesday, April 25, 2021, for final posts to be added, so please be sure to thank your fellow teammates soon!

Questions

1. Are traits affected by the environment?

Yes, phenotypic traits are the physical showing of your genotypes mixed with the enviroment. We all had the same seeds but we didn't all have the same results which means they were affected by the enviromment.

2. The possible explanations are that the variables we used have an effect on how the plants grow.

3. The data supports our claim because the data we all have different data which means environment had an affect on our plants.

4. If we did this same experiment but at a much larger scale we could expand our results.

1. Plants differ in different environnments. If you have a plant outside it will have to work for it's resources to grow and probably have more competition compared to a plant in a pot sitting on your window sill. They are fed their own needs and probably are not as good at gathering and holding within of water because nothing will take it from them. When you are a plant it a dry climate that doesn't know when it will rain next.

2. Our possible explanations for our results if they are bad could be if we didn't give them the right amount of water or we maybe hit them over at the start that maybe effected the seeds and they were hit out of position to where they couldn't grow correctly because they were too close to another seed which stole all the water. Another reason could be what bottle it was like maybe 2x fertilizer and that was too much for the plans or in our third they didn't have any rocks and that effected it to not be able to stand correctly. It could have been good because it was succseful in their environment and they got what they needed.

3. Some plants were more succseful than others. We had our control which did very well but then our one with no rocks died off. It shows that it needs the rocks because of how our control was so succesful or even the 2x time was good. These environments showed if it could survive or not. 

4. Future experiments could be using something different than water or even a differnt plant. We could use all three of our bottles but instead of using a mustard seed we could use a sunflower and see what works and if it is different from mustard seeds. Then it would let us compare these plants and find the best environment for them to live in while also getting the right things to survive.

Which level of the population (A, B, and/or C) showed the 9:3:3:1 phenotypic ratio? If your results varied from this ratio, please explain how that could occur with 3 claims. (15 points) 

1. In our Group we had a 7:0:7:0 ratio b. We had a 15:2: 45:4 C. 71:24:187:17. 

2. In this data we did not get this ratio. This could have happened because of seeds were modified. They may have also been from the same plant so they would mostly have the same genetics in color. 

 An organism exists as an expression of its inherited genes interacting in an environmental context (Phenotype = Genotype X Environment).       In our plants we see that the environment can change our plants like fertilizer we have doubled, or we put no rocks in. The plant must change for the better and try to survive and adapt to survive. 

2. Inheritance of genes occurs via the life cycle of an organism through successful reproduction of offspring.   Over time when your body grows, and the life cycle occurs you will get genes from both sides of families and genes will be continued to be passed down each time. The successful reproduction 50%from mom and the other 50% from dad and that will keep going on and be passed down. 

50%from mom and the other 50% from dad and that will keep going on and be passed down. 

3. Plants are living, reproducing organisms that live in and are influenced by the environment.   They are infected by the environment because they will change to better themselves like growing closer to the light source. 

4. Plants vary in their phenotypes (traits), and we can observe, measure and analyze this variation by studying populations of plants.     They vary in their traits because we can see the population of them in our classroom and we can see how they vary on the control experiment by color or length and it is a part of tracking the plants. 

5.  Science is an active process of inquiry, investigation, and communication.    Every day we have recorded our data and mostly everyday it has changed whether it comes from height or color you must investigate and keep watching. 

4. Based off of… A. your group results, B. your class results, C. 9^th grade CM Biology results, did we actually see this pattern of traits be expressed? Check the Mustard Seed Master Class Data sheet for this information and use it as evidence in your claims below.

Which level of the population (A, B, and/or C) showed the 9:3:3:1 phenotypic ratio? If your results varied from this ratio, please explain how that could occur with 3 claims. (15 points)

My groups data and our classes data both do not show a 9:3:3:1 ratio. This could be because of having the C bottle with a unique variable to each group, having plants change their visible traits which would affect the ratio, and having plants die due to human error or other which would give us incomplete data so we couldn’t make a ratio.

5. Please choose ONE of the continuous traits you measured and create a graph. You may choose to graph the using data exclusively from your group dataset, your class data, or the entire CM Biology growth data. Any data we collected from the Mustard experiment will be available to you in a downloadable excel file. Bonus points below will be applied to a missing or low grade from Q3.

I graphed the amount of leaves for our whole class data.

My x-axis is the plant ID number

My y-axis is the amount of leaves

6. Please read Concept #1 and 2 other concepts from the list below. In claim-evidence-reasoning fashion, tell me why these concepts are true using the collected data from your mustard experiment, feedback from your mentors, and connections to genetics and evolution we have discussed together. (14 points)

Concepts:

1. An organism exists as an expression of its inherited genes interacting in an environmental context (Phenotype = Genotype X Environment).

This is true because an organism receives genes from its parents in which the phenotype is determined by environment.

2. Inheritance of genes occurs via the life cycle of an organism through successful reproduction of offspring.

This is true because when reproduction occurs an offspring inherits genes from both of its parents.

3. Plants are living, reproducing organisms that live in and are influenced by the environment.

 I know this to be true based on prior knowledge and some information I’ve received from my planting science mentor.

Dear Team Carrot -

You have uploaded a ton of information and ideas in the last day.  I'll read through those later today when I'm free from my classes and see if I can't provide a few responses.

Glad to have you back from your break and thinking again about science -

Andrew Schnabel

Link removed

1. A claim we can make from our experiments is that there are advantages for a plant to have certain traits because it can help them blend in for use of camouflage and help make themselves more scary. Another advantage could it could help protect itself from certain climates. Another claim we can make is traits are not affected by environment because it is all genetics for how the plants look.
2. Some possible explanations for our results could be the genes that their parents had and what the plants look like. To answer our essential question the way the plant looks is totally based off the genes it has. Another possible explanation for our results are the environments our plants were in were consistently changing temperature but they didn't change.

3. Our plants did well with more soil, because the soil soaks up for water, causing the plant to become hydrated without becoming drowned. The soil can also help the plant become more rooted in it, helping the plant have its roots expand and have more breathing room (literally). The soil can also help the plants stay firmly inside the bottle.
4. We could test and see if the plants do better with fertilizer than soil. Maybe the fertilizer soaks up more soil, causing us to need less water to not kill the plant. If we change up the sand-particle, then we can test and see what works better for plants opposed to that which works worse.

1. A claim we can make from our experiments is that there are advantages for a plant to have certain traits because it can help them blend in for use of camouflage and help make themselves more scary. Another advantage could it could help protect itself from certain climates. Another claim we can make is traits are not affected by environment because it is all genetics for how the plants look.

2. Some possible explanations for our results could be the genes that their parents had and what the plants look like. To answer our essential question the way the plant looks is totally based off the genes it has. Another possible explanation for our results are the environments our plants were in were consistently changing temperature but they didn't change.

4. We could test and see if the plants do better with fertilizer than soil. Maybe the fertilizer soaks up more soil, causing us to need less water to not kill the plant. If we change up the sand-particle, then we can test and see what works better for plants opposed to that which works worse.

6. Please read Concept #1 and 2 other concepts from the list below. In claim-evidence-reasoning fashion, tell me why these concepts are true using the collected data from your mustard experiment, feedback from your mentors, and connections to genetics and evolution we have discussed together. (14 points)

Concepts:

1. An organism exists as an expression of its inherited genes interacting in an environmental context (Phenotype = Genotype X Environment).  The organism expressed by the dominant traits given by the parents are dictated by the parent traits and environment. If the trait is homozygous, then it will have the same traits as the parents. If a trait is heterozygous, there is a small percentage that that organism will express different traits than the parents. The environment can change an organism before and after birth. An example of before is sea turtles in the sand. If it is below a certain temperature, it is sure to be a male. If it exceeds that temperature, it will be a female. The environment dictated the organism’s genotype and phenotype. An example for changing after birth is clownfish. They can change their gender, depending on what the environment is for that certain organism. If there for no females but only males, one fish can change gender to successfully reproduce. The environment plays a major role as well in the producing of offspring in certain species.

2. Inheritance of genes occurs via the life cycle of an organism through successful reproduction of offspring. 

3. Plants are living, reproducing organisms that live in and are influenced by the environment. Plants are affected by the environment in a bigger way than traits given by the parent. In our mustard seed project, our plants started with the same nutrients and same traits. Over time, some bottles have unsuccessful plants while other bottles did. We placed our plants in different spots of sunlight inside the boxes with different water supplies. With a certain level of water, a plant could be overwatered or under. IF the nutrients are the same and the environment is different for every plant, then we can draw the environment back to those plant successes or not. The plants can have different traits, but if the environment is having the same effect on the different plants, then we can assume the environment is to put as the cause of their downfall.

4. Plants vary in their phenotypes (traits), and we can observe, measure and analyze this variation by studying populations of plants. Study plants has helped out millions of organisms because of the knowledge we possess after study these different organisms.. Many animal species would die if there was only one type of plant, because they cannot find any food. When we analyze these different plants and their traits, we are also studying the animals affected by the plants. Plants are unique in the sense that not all plants are the same. With the knowledge that we know about plants, we have been able to produce remedies and help with some illnesses. For example, with my dad and his colon cancer, there were hundreds of books going in depth on what plants to eat to help with cancer. The knowledge we have on plants and their populations is life-changing and truly helps everyone around the world.

5.  Science is an active process of inquiry, investigation, and communication.

5. Please choose ONE of the continuous traits you measured and create a graph. You may choose to graph the using data exclusively from your group dataset, your class data, or the entire CM Biology growth data. Any data we collected from the Mustard experiment will be available to you in a downloadable excel file. Bonus points below will be applied to a missing or low grade from Q3.

       1.  Your Group Data (15points)

1. Your Class Data (1.5x points=22.5points) I chose this option
2. The 9^th grade Biology Mustard Data (2xpts=30points) 

What trait did you graph? Please paste it below from the excel file.

What is your x-axis? What is your y-axis? 

Chart, bar chart Description automatically generated

I did the number of plant leaves per plant. It is also below the excel file as “Mulcahey Number of Leaves Class Data”. My x axis was the group with the plants. (ex: radish, carrot, etc.) My y axis was the plant number it was assigned. (ex: A1, B3, C7)

4. Based off of… A. your group results, B. your class results, C. 9^th grade CM Biology results, did we actually see this pattern of traits be expressed? Check the Mustard Seed Master Class Data sheet for this information and use it as evidence in your claims below.

Which level of the population (A, B, and/or C) showed the 9:3:3:1 phenotypic ratio? If your results varied from this ratio, please explain how that could occur with 3 claims. (15 points)

A.No

B.No

C.No

This could have occurred because the nutrients could have been tampered with. This could happen by changing how many nutrients were used, or what types were used. The environment could also affect the difference of what stems/leaves were produced from the bottles. The temperature could be hotter within each bottle, affecting the outcomes. The last variable could be the water or Gatorade inside the bottle. If the Gatorade or water inside were changed throughout each bottle, the plant itself could be changed due to the income of its respective liquid.

Hi Reilley -

Thanks for the photos.  You now have a lot of data, and if I'm reading the data tables correctly, it looks like you might have some differences among treatments.  What's your next step?

Best,

Andrew Schnabel

Hi Alexander -

Thanks for the added clarifications.  I figured out most of the data tables, but the explanation of what the treatments are is very helpful.

I understand that you are off for a holiday break, but I'll be looking forward to continued news about the project when you return.

Best regards,

Andrew Schnabel

Hi Dr. Schnabel,

I just wanted to clarify on a few points that we may not have fully explained. In our project, we have three bottles with plants using different treatments, listed A-C in the graphs we sent. For those treatments, Bottle A is our control, and has normal rocks and fertalizer. Bottle B has double the fertalizer. Bottle C has a normal amount of fertalizer, but no rocks. 

To answer your question from the 28th, our next steps are really just to keep recording data, but now instead of recording data on height and leaves, as shown in the tables, now we are recording data on the plants' possible/current flowers and seed pods.

Also in those tables there are data from different groups, as you could probably tell. Like our team name, in the tables we are listed as Carrot.

Thanks,

Alex

The images under files (not sure why my computer decided to name them that way) are the class data for the Red Day Team (essentially me and Aidan Kelly). All 3 of the images are of different traits from all the classes.

Dear Team Carrot -

Thanks for the photos.  If you have one bottle labeled "no vermiculite", then is there also a bottle labeled "vermiculite"? 

I can see why you are concerned about the growth of your plants, but of the bottles visible in the photo, your plants look the healthiest.  One of your plants appears not to be growing well - perhaps too much water? - but the others seem to be getting ready to produce flowers.  As one measure of growth, you might want to keep track of when the first flowers open on each plant and how many flowers they produce.  That's pretty easy counting, so it won't take you much time.  It's always better to have several ways to measure growth, since height isn't always the most important thing for a plant.

Best regards,

Andrew Schnabel

Hi Reilley -

These are good questions but not easy to answer, since I don't know what your growing conditions are or what these "bottles" look like.  Perhaps you could upload some photos. Photo-documentation is an important part of botany.  People really like to see what the experimental conditions look like or what the plants look like that botanists study.  Even without that added information, I can try out some possible answers.

1) In my experience growing plants in the lab or greenhouse, there are several reasons that they don't stand up.  Too little light or crowding from other plants are two main issues.  As for why one bottle has taller plants than another, I can't say, because I don't know what your growing conditions are.  I don't know how bottle 1 differs from bottles 2 and 3.  It would be a great help if you would upload a detailed description of your experimental design - what the treatments are, what the control is, how you incorporated replication into the experiment, and what data you are collecting.  Thanks much.

2) In terms of watering, too little water is obviously not good, but too much water is also a danger, because the soils can become waterlogged and not have enough oxygen for the roots.  In that case, the roots die and then the rest of the plant dies.  You are presumably using the same amount of water for all experimental treatments - just don't give them too much.

3) If your plants start to die, then it is very difficult to know whether it was something about your care for them or whether is was the plants themselves.  Since these are brassicas, they will have a very short life cycle and will naturally begin to senesce as they mature their fruits.  On the other hand, if you've been providing too much water or too little water, then you could be the cause of your plants' demise.  For overwatering, if the plants die, then you can remove the plants from the soil and check the health of the roots.  If they look all soft and dead, then you probably were providing too much water.

Hope these answers are helpful.  I look forward to reading about the details of your experimental design in the coming week.

Best regards,

Andrew Schnabel

I have 3 questions for you Mr. Schnabel: 1. Why is my third bottle having no straight plants standing up, but the first two bottle do? The third bottle also has the tallest plants and the longest leaves. 2. Is more water to soak the soil better or worse for the plant than the other? 3. If our plant starts to die, how can we know what we did for its failure?

Hi Team Carrot -

Thanks for uploading your data.  Would you please let me know what the experimental treatments were?  My understanding was that you were testing the effects of fertilizer on germination and early growth.  However, your datasheets don't mention anything about fertilizer.  So what are the treatment differences between groups A, B, and C?  Also, are you continuing to monitor the growth or is this the complete and final data set?

Best regards,

Andrew Schnabel

Looking forward to seeing the data, when you figure out how to upload files.....

Cheers,

Andrew Schnabel

Here is the most recent data from our plants

Mentor Questions from below: 

Is it necessary for the landscaping company to fertilize? Will the grass grow better with fertilizer, or will it be just the same? 

1.What do you think the fertilizer is actually doing for the plant? 

2) What is the meaning of "help the seed grow"?

3) What is the nutrient content of the soil in which you are planting the seeds?  Are there already enough minerals present?

Hello Aidan -

This is a good question.  You are making a logical hypothesis, based on your own observations of what the landscaping company does.  I would follow up in good scientist skeptic form by asking:  Is it necessary for the landscaping company to fertilize?  Will the grass grow better with fertilizer, or will it be just the same?  Perhaps your grass really needs a lot of fertilizer, or perhaps the company just wants to make more money by adding a charge for fertilizing, and the grass will be just as happy without the added fertilizer.  As always, the answer depends on several variables, such as what type of grass you have and what the soils are like in your area and how often the company fertilizes.  I suggest looking into information about lawn fertilizing to see what the pros and cons are.

Applying your question to the problem of seed germination, however, my comments would be these:

1) What do you think the fertilizer is actually doing for the plant?  Remember that plants make their own food using photosynthesis, they don't get that food from fertilizers or anything else in the soil.  Plant fertilizer is nothing but minerals, like nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus.  Plants need the mineral nutrients from the soil to help keep their cells running properly, just like you need minerals to keep your cells running, but that's not their food.  So, although the plants wouldn't be using the fertilizer as food, they could be making good use of it in other ways.

2) What is the meaning of "help the seed grow"?  This wording makes me think that you are proposing a benefit in the very earliest stages of growth - just after germination and during early seedling growth.  In that case, you might want to consider what a seed already supplies for the seedling.  Does it already have everything that a seedling will need to get started in its early growth?  Or would the seedling benefit from a little extra nitrogen or phosphorus?

3) What is the nutrient content of the soil in which you are planting the seeds?  Are there already enough minerals present?  If so, then adding more will not help.  Plants can only use so much of each mineral, and after that it goes to waste.  In fact, having too much of some minerals can actually harm growth.

Those are a few ideas that jump to mind based on your question.  I hope you can use the information to continue thinking about this problem.

Best regards,

Andrew Schnabel

I think more fertilizer will help the seed grow because when the landscaping company comes to my house they put down fertilizer to help the grass be healthier and grow so I think it will do the same for our seeds.

Will more fertilizer help or hurt the growth of the seeds?

Hi Dr. Schnabel,

Do botonists also study fungi or do they study plants exclusively.

Cheers,

Declan

Dear Alex, Adam, and Declan -

Thank you also for the greetings.  Is this now the full team?  5 + me = 6 excited and ready-to-go botanists?

Yes, I have heard of Barbara McClintock, as has every other botanist in the world.  You can't win a Nobel Prize and stay hidden from view.  I remember a colleague once told me that she had heard Barbara McClintock give a talk about her maize genetics, and it was so complicated that even though this colleague was a maize geneticist herself, she had a hard time understanding the information.  That was some really fancy work that McClintock got up to.

But, no, I have not heard of either of the other two scientists you mention.  Thanks for the reference to O'Neil R. Collins, because again, it's Black History Month and a good time to celebrate as much diversity among famous botanists as possible.  I looked up Dr. Collins and discovered that he was really a slime mold expert!  Slime molds are not plants (not even close to plants).  They used to be considered fungi, but now they are in their own group separate from fungi and plants.  In the past, before we understood the evolutionary history of life on earth very well, we used to think that fungi and plants were close relatives of each other and so botany organizations would include both botanists who studied plants and mycologists who studied fungi.

Dr. Woo Jang-Choon is even more of a mystery to me, but it looks like he did some very famous work on the evolution of Brassica, which is a genus of mustards that supplies us with many of the common vegetables we eat - cabbage, broccoli, kale, cauliflower, and many others.   It would make sense for him to study this group of plants, because of the importance of these vegetables in the diet of the peoples of East Asia.  And, of course, it's Brassica that we'll be using for this team's project, correct?

Thanks very much for the opportunity to learn something new through all of your questions.  My own influences have been from my teachers and botanist friends over the years.  I hope you will also have influential teachers and friends as you continue your education.

Work during the pandemic has been slow.  My teaching continues, but the research projects are at a standstill.  In 2021, however, things will get better and I expect to be back working with research students both in the lab and in the field.

So when do we get started doing some science?  What questions will we be exploring? 

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts about the project -

Andrew Schnabel

Hey Mr. Schnabel,

My name is Alex and I am excited to be working with you! I think that botany is really cool too. For a quick question, how do you do your work with the pandemic going on? Also, have you ever heard of O'Neil Ray Collins?

Cheers,

Alex

Greetings, Mr. Schnabel, it's Adam, thank you for working with us. Have you ever heard of Barbara McClintock, she has been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. who studied chromosomes and how they change during reproduction in maize. McClintock received her PhD in botany from Cornell University in 1927. There she started her career as the leader in the development of maize cytogenetics, the focus of her research for the rest of her life. Has she influenced you at all and if not who is that person.

Cheers,

Adam

Hello Dr. Schnabel,

Have you ever heard of Woo Jang-Choon? I read that he was a prominent researcher and teacher in Japan. What made you want to become a botanist and study plants?

Cheers,

Declan

Hi Aidan and Reilley -

Thank you for the greetings.  Yes, I have heard of both Charles Darwin and George Washington Carver.  I'm especially happy that you mentioned George Washington Carver, because it's Black History Month and a good time to recognize his work.  I don't know a lot about the details of his life, so I've been reading some online biographies this afternoon.  I found out that he was a botanist who studied at Iowa State University, which is a place I also spent some time earlier in my career.  I never knew at the time that I was probably walking in the same places as such a famous botanist!!  I also discovered that the whole peanut thing was part of an attempt to improve soils for poor farmers of the South.  Do you know about crop rotation?  It's a practice that is widely used to slow the depletion of nutrients from farming soils.  You plant one crop for a time on a patch of land, and then you rotate to a new crop, like peanuts, that helps to renew some of  the nutrients in the soil.  I'm sure your teacher will be able to tell you more.  Peanuts are a good choice, because they can increase the nitrogen content of soils.  Last:  It's not true that George Washington Carver invented peanut butter, but he did invent a lot of other uses for peanuts.

I know a lot more about Charles Darwin, because he's not only famous for his work on evolution, but he was also a very keen botanist, and as you say, studied the movement of plants.  He did that work in collaboration with his son, Francis.  If you want to see some cool videos about plant movements, here's a website from Indiana University botanist, Roger Hangarter:

https://plantsinmotion.bio.indiana.edu/

So here's my question to you:  What famous person from American history has exactly the same birthday as Charles Darwin?

BTW, is there anyone else in Team Carrot, and when do we start doing science together?

Cheers,

Andrew Schnabel