ATAR Notes: Forum

Uni Stuff => Universities - New South Wales => Australian National University => Topic started by: enwiabe on June 11, 2008, 11:10:23 am

Title: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: enwiabe on June 11, 2008, 11:10:23 am
Let's get this discussion rolling. Feel free to create your own new topics on this!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: KeyMan on June 11, 2008, 11:12:36 am
Totally stuffed up my exam. Had a mental blank for the electron transport system question and the hormone description.

I'll be expecting a C.... -_-

Hrmm... couldn't answer the fibrous protein question either. I didn't learn about that or i wasn't paying attention in class.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:24:59 am
I messed up the 'chemical composition' question - I wrote protein and lipid but I assume it was Carbon, hydrogen etc.

Keyman: For fibrous I wrote collagen, not sure if that's right though.

Oh and for the whole 'subunit' for polypeptides I stupidly wrote protein.

My antibody drawing looked so crap hahaha.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: KeyMan on June 11, 2008, 11:32:10 am
Mmm... I wrote monomer for subunit... but i think it was amino acids... not sure and I'm to scared to check lol
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:33:56 am
Unfortunately it WAS amino acids.

Let's be disappointed together.

Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: KeyMan on June 11, 2008, 11:35:26 am
Hahaha, damn it

Hrmm now I remember the antigen question.... I wrote macrophages as the first cells to detect it....
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:38:01 am
Whuh?

Oh I wrote MHC marker cells. :\ Crap now my heart is racing like crazy.

alkajdlkasuishfrv.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 11:41:10 am
Oh god..I stuffed up that antigen question, I had to guess it. I think I wrote Th cells lol. And I left the final part of the 1st short answer (something about a feature of a fibrous protein and how the arrangement of chains gives that feature) blank because I forgot absolutely everything I learned about that! It was only 1 mark so I suppose it's not the end of the world for me lol :S ...I put collagen for a fibrous protein, and said that its key function is that it gives strength and elasticity to skin. My friend and I came out freaking about our hormone definitions...ours were basically identical to the one they gave on the paper! My biology teacher said the paper was very easy, so they're going to mark it hard. I was actually expecting a hard paper, but even last year's was marginally harder than this one.  
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:42:33 am
I thought last year's paper was EASIER than this one.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 11:44:50 am
I thought last year's paper was EASIER than this one.

Last year's questions were generally harder and more 'analytical' than this year's...but the shit thing about this year's was that they asked a number of straightforward questions about fairly unexpected topics, if that makes sense. I'm just so, so glad it's all over now!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: KeyMan on June 11, 2008, 11:47:00 am
I thought last year's paper was EASIER than this one.

Last year's questions were generally harder and more 'analytical' than this year's...but the shit thing about this year's was that they asked a number of straightforward questions about fairly unexpected topics, if that makes sense. I'm just so, so glad it's all over now!

Haha yeh, I was spending all my time studying the more difficult things such as photosynthesis, aerobic respiration and different plant hormones, but most of the questions were more of the easier stuff that I didn't spend too much time on.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:48:45 am
Any of you guys have other exams tomorrow?

Psych and chem for meeee.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: KeyMan on June 11, 2008, 11:51:33 am
Psych tomorrow and then the GAT for Friday. I finally feel relieved, all the stress that has been building up was for Bio, now that it's over I can relax. Psych is much easier for me in comparison to Bio.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Survivor on June 11, 2008, 11:52:58 am
For the Tasmanian devil one, what was the answer to the question: "Why were the tumour cells recognised as self cells?" or something along the lines of that? Was it because it was a deep wound and the cells surpassed the first and second lines or defense? :P I had no idea.

Oh, and I have chem tomorrow which, for me, is 10 times worse than Bio unfortunately :P
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:55:15 am
Survivor - I said the tumor was recognised as self cells because it had the same MHC surface markers as the organism's other cells....
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 11:56:12 am
Same..but I totally don't regret cramming aerobic respiration yesterday, because of that question about the electron transport chain! If I hadn't revised it yesterday, there would have be no way in hell I could have done that question. I'm glad they didn't ask about plant hormones though, because I am totally blank on those. Did anyone else find the multi choice fairly easy?

Any of you guys have other exams tomorrow?

Psych and chem for meeee.

Good luck :D ! Well, I was supposed to have psych, but I dropped it a month before the mid year exam. Crazy? Maybe. But I already had 2 subjects under my belt from last year, and the psych SAC standard at my school was so ridiculously high that even marks like 26/30 were only As. I do have one more mid-year exam - Linguistics at uni on Friday.

Psych tomorrow and then the GAT for Friday. I finally feel relieved, all the stress that has been building up was for Bio, now that it's over I can relax. Psych is much easier for me in comparison to Bio.
...LOL psych was doing my head in. Biology just seems to 'click' in my head much better than all the other sciences!

For the Tasmanian devil one, what was the answer to the question: "Why were the tumour cells recognised as self cells?" or something along the lines of that? Was it because it was a deep wound and the cells surpassed the first and second lines or defense? :P I had no idea.

Oh, and I have chem tomorrow which, for me, is 10 times worse than Bio unfortunately :P

Good luck for chem! For that Tassie devil question, I wrote that the antigens carried by the foreign cells (i.e. the tumour cells) are virtually identical to the uninfected devil's autoantigens, hence the tumour cells were treated as 'self' by the immune system.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: KeyMan on June 11, 2008, 11:57:44 am
For the Tasmanian devil one, what was the answer to the question: "Why were the tumour cells recognised as self cells?" or something along the lines of that? Was it because it was a deep wound and the cells surpassed the first and second lines or defense? :P I had no idea.

Oh, and I have chem tomorrow which, for me, is 10 times worse than Bio unfortunately :P

I wrote "Because the tumour cells were passed from another Tasmanian devil, the immune system was tricked into believing the cells to be passively acquired". It's most likely wrong but was the only thing I could think of.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: enwiabe on June 11, 2008, 11:58:34 am
People, you don't have to just use this thread btw. If you have specific questions, I.E. "What did you guys get for 2 c)?" Make a new thread! You guys have a WHOLE BOARD for this :P
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Nick on June 11, 2008, 12:11:45 pm
How did you go for time? I remember from last year that my friends commented on how there wasn't enough time to complete the whole exam.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 11, 2008, 12:15:10 pm
I finished at 10:15am thinking that was when the exam was meant to finish. Then I saw the next column of times on the board which had "10:30" and "10:45" and mentally slapped myself.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: enwiabe on June 11, 2008, 12:16:42 pm
I hope you checked over your answers :P
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Nick on June 11, 2008, 12:17:01 pm
I finished at 10:15am thinking that was when the exam was meant to finish. Then I saw the next column of times on the board which had "10:30" and "10:45" and mentally slapped myself.

At least you would have had lots of time to proof read lol.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 12:18:06 pm
10:15am?! That's so good..you'll probably ace it because you had so much time to check! I finished with approximately 5-10 minutes to spare. Lol..I finished the multi choice in just under 10 minutes and wasn't really pushed to write too fast in the short answer. But I suspect I will have made some very silly errors in the multi choice :/ I always do!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: jess3254 on June 11, 2008, 12:41:53 pm
I went terribly. :( what an awful day.

I started getting a Migraine (with the flashing eyes stuff, so I couldn't see half the exam paper) about 10 minutes into writing time. I felt like I was going to throw up, my head was throbbing like death and so many of my short answers were fuzzy, badly worded and retarded. I just wanted to get it over with so I could have an Asprin.

I seriously feel like crying.  :'(
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 12:43:44 pm
So one the MCQ was all straightforward and easy in general, I suspect there will be good number of students getting full marks for it; some of the short answer questions were very amibguous, esp question 1:

"Chemical composition of structures A and B"
A (was the phospholipid bilayer)
B ( was a protein channel )

By chemical composition did they want to say A contained phospholipids and B proteins,
or the elements themselves ?? Carbon hydrogen oxygen phosphate for A, and C, H, O, N for B??
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Nick on June 11, 2008, 12:45:36 pm
I went terribly. :( what an awful day.

I started getting a Migraine (with the flashing eyes stuff, so I couldn't see half the exam paper) about 10 minutes into writing time. I felt like I was going to throw up, my head was throbbing like death and so many of my short answers were fuzzy, badly worded and retarded. I just wanted to get it over with so I could have an Asprin.

I seriously feel like crying.  :'(
That sucks Jess...I'm really sorry to hear that. Have you already spoken to your coordinator about special consideration etc?

I am sure you will ace psych tomorrow to make up for it :) Psych will be good to you..
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Matt The Rat on June 11, 2008, 12:47:01 pm
That question was very ambiguous (nothing new in VCE Biology there with ambiguity).

I wrote  

A - Phosphate heads and fatty acid tails
B - Proteins - amino acids

for their compositions.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 12:51:26 pm
I went for the chem-oriented answer for that really ambiguous question
A - phosphate group, two fatty acid chains and glycerol backbone
B - C, H, O and N

I went terribly. :( what an awful day.

I started getting a Migraine (with the flashing eyes stuff, so I couldn't see half the exam paper) about 10 minutes into writing time. I felt like I was going to throw up, my head was throbbing like death and so many of my short answers were fuzzy, badly worded and retarded. I just wanted to get it over with so I could have an Asprin.

I seriously feel like crying.  :'(
That sucks Jess...I'm really sorry to hear that. Have you already spoken to your coordinator about special consideration etc?

I am sure you will ace psych tomorrow to make up for it :) Psych will be good to you..

Aw I'm so sorry Jess..I'm sure something can be done about it, as Nick says! And he's right, you'll ace psych :)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 12:58:55 pm
I did the same as you JL and stated the elements in those compounds.
Anyway
I so gunned it!
The only question which stopped me in my tracks was the one regarding fibrous proteins, where it asked to name an example, and then to explain why the structure of the protein creates a feature of it or something.
:S:S

Else, it was easier than I expected :)


Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Matt The Rat on June 11, 2008, 01:04:53 pm
I put down 'chitin' as the fibrous protein.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 01:06:07 pm
I had cilia :S idno....
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 01:11:51 pm
For the 'how many atp' produced question, what did everyone get? I wrote 36, but I'm starting to believe it was 2.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 01:18:06 pm
i said 36 as well.
because didn't it say the net energy production per glucose molecule, which would include the whole process of cellular process, yeah?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Matt The Rat on June 11, 2008, 01:19:47 pm
Yeah, I did 36.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 01:20:25 pm
I sure as hell hope so... :(

What cell did you put down for the one that differentiates between self and non self? Thats causing such an uproar.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 01:26:29 pm
Gahhhh that was fucked...
It was talking about autoimmune disease, and I read that immunosuppressive drugs inhibit the ability of cytotoxic T cells to recognise self from non-self, so I wrote cT cells. I'm thinking that it's not right though because ALL white blood cells can do it? :S
Maybe the were after a less specific answer, like 'white blood cells' lmfao.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 01:28:17 pm
Crap I wrote MHC markers. Because I read that thats how the body differentiates self from non self or something, cuz of the antigens on the surface. Quite a lot of people wrote Th cells so I'm guessing you're on the right track. ^_^
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 01:33:08 pm
32- electron transport chain- dunno y e.o wrote 36?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: psychlaw on June 11, 2008, 01:33:57 pm
well now that most Biologists are here in a group. Can I ask, is Biology worth doing?
A good subject??
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 11, 2008, 01:40:16 pm
well now that most Biologists are here in a group. Can I ask, is Biology worth doing?
A good subject??


I'm finding it very enjoyable, and yes, worth it. :)
Depends I guess.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 01:41:37 pm
I like it, but thats because I'm curious and like to know why things happen and in bio you get to understand this stuff.
It's one of the subjects I look forward to during the school week lol.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 01:49:12 pm
I did the same as you JL and stated the elements in those compounds.
Anyway
I so gunned it!
The only question which stopped me in my tracks was the one regarding fibrous proteins, where it asked to name an example, and then to explain why the structure of the protein creates a feature of it or something.
:S:S

Else, it was easier than I expected :)




Agreed, I was expecting something out of this world, but that was easy. I'm too cautious to say I gunned it though! And I had trouble with the same question as you..I studied it a long time ago, but blanked out in the exam and left it as I said before..thinking back, the answer is something along the lines of how the chains are generally unbranched, hence allowing them to pack very closely together, making the bonds difficult to break and the protein very strong. Damnn!!! I did chem 1/2 last year, so I should have been able to at least make up an answer to that on the spot.. *slaps self hard*
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 01:50:01 pm
For the 'how many atp' produced question, what did everyone get? I wrote 36, but I'm starting to believe it was 2.

Nah its not 2, the question clearly stated product of AEROBIC RESPIRATION,
2 ATP is the product of anaerobic respiration (just glycolysis)

the answer should've been 36-38 ATP so youre right
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: memka on June 11, 2008, 01:51:41 pm
I love bio. I find it fascinating.
I thought the exam was ok.

The calcium concentration question really threw me though.

I ending up putting B, only because I eliminated the others :(

I said MHC markers for the non-self question.

For the fiborous proteins I said because the chains allowed them to shrink/stretch without breaking.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 01:52:48 pm
I wrote 36 for the ATP output question as well, because it was asking for the TOTAL output of ATP for one glucose, not just from one stage, but from aerobic respiration as a whole...so I treated the question as including glycolysis, Krebs and the electron transport chain.

memka, I put B for the calcium question too! The options were all quite strange.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: beezy4eva on June 11, 2008, 01:56:01 pm
The first short answer was a shocker, they really should've worded it better. I'd say the answers had to be phospholipids and proteins, otherwise it would've been too hard to discuss the features.  Other than that i thought it was a good exam :)

I'm pretty sure the answer 2 the calcium one was B, coz it mention something about the hormone stimulating reabsorbtion of calcium from a part of the intestines. So less hormone would mean more calcium in the faeces.

AFTERWARDS OUR TEACHERS GAVE US LOLLIE BAGS!!!!!:D:D:D:D
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Matt The Rat on June 11, 2008, 02:01:47 pm
Yep, B for the calcium question for me.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 02:06:45 pm
I also picked B (the one involving feces) because the other three all contradicted the information given :S.
And yeah, that short answer one was too open for interpretation. Chemical composition to me means what elements the compound is composed of,  but yeah who knows exactly what they meant :S
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 02:12:09 pm
abt the electron transport chain i really do not think the answer is 36-38 they were asking specifically about electron transport chain n therefore the answer i think is 32 ATP- any1 else agree???
btw abt the devil q- did ne1 get the clue that it was pheremones- in the slab of info it said used to attract mates..etc???
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 02:14:57 pm
pheromones? what? no.
It's because they are of the same species meaning the genes which code for the skin cells should be the same, and hence the antigens displayed are the same.

Here's proof:
http://www.tassiedevil.com.au/research.html
"In the case of devils from eastern Tasmania, genetic diversity at the MHC is so low, and the MHC type of tumour and host are so alike, that the host does not see the tumour as ‘non-self’."
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 02:16:33 pm
i would also like to know what ppl wrote for the copper q? n the one where you had to compare the graphs?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Essein on June 11, 2008, 02:17:08 pm
Does anyone have the exam paper. ???
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 02:18:48 pm
I don't think pheromones had anything to do with the answer for that Devils question? Because pheromones have nothing to do with the immune system.

The one where we had to compare the graphs was the one about photosynthetic rate, not copper...or are you thinking of a different question?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 02:19:53 pm
Damn i think i got the virus diagram question wrong, i said lipid envelope when it shouldve been protein coat :( ...........
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 02:24:15 pm
Argh! I also put lipid envelope for that.

I'm interested to know what people chose to draw on the last page, for their feedback diagram? I drew the insulin-glucagon one.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 02:25:56 pm
I did aswell, I wasn't sure whether to show the pathway of the increase AND the decrease of glucose concentration, but I did anyway just to be safe >.<
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 02:27:07 pm
I showed it as a complete loop, with a stimulus, sensor, effector, response and so on. So basically, I did the same thing as you I think.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Marc on June 11, 2008, 02:30:04 pm
I just did the increased blood glucose levels.. I'm interested to know what people said for the stimulus for copper conc. was?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 02:32:12 pm
For that question, they were asking for the 'stimulus for the regulation of copper', so I just put something like fluctuations in copper concentrations within the cells of the drosophila fly..that was a guessed question for me, I'm not sure they'd give the mark to me.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Marc on June 11, 2008, 02:35:00 pm
Yeah i put the high or low concentrations of copper.. hopefully that was right. We need someone with the exam! lol
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Matt The Rat on June 11, 2008, 02:36:35 pm
Fluctuations in copper levels was what I put.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 02:40:22 pm
no im tlking abt part b) with the copper
n im curious to know did ppl think it was easy bc they were able to fill it in????? lol in biol you can write wtvr does that make it easy?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 02:47:14 pm
I'm confused about the virus multiple choice question,   ??? if you guys can remember there was a diagram of a virus, and we were asked to identify what the inner membrane thing was, i was choosing between

a) protein coat
b) lipid envelope

I chose lipid envelope because i figured that the protein coat was the outermost coating of a viral cell..... But after the exam my friends said i was wrong and the protein coat surrounds the genetic material , but  then someone else said it was the lipid envelope??? who knows the answer
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Jed on June 11, 2008, 02:48:55 pm
The diagram had a picture of a phospolipid bilayer outside the protein coat didn't it? I put protein coat.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 02:50:04 pm
Having just checked my textbook, I think it should have been protein coat - the phospholipid envelope surrounds the protein coat. As I said before, I also put lipid envelope..so I guess that's one mark off :/
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Matt The Rat on June 11, 2008, 02:54:06 pm
I put protein coat.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 02:56:03 pm
yeah -1 mark for me too  i guess
which is alot seeing as how this years exam was so much easier and the A+ cutoff might be somewhere in the mid - high 60s
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 02:57:54 pm
could you guyz define rational drug design????? also one more q lol with the graph in the multiple choice- solubility---
versus lipid permeability--- what did u guyz put down/?
btw i also did protein coat!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 03:01:00 pm
Solubility vs lipid permeability question

ANS: ethylene glycerol is harder to remove than water

i think that was pretty straightforward one cause all the other options were contradictory..
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: melaniej on June 11, 2008, 03:03:52 pm
Ah i had that then changed it!!

i think...hmm i cant quite remember!

i did say protein coat tho...twas just a guess!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 03:04:29 pm
but even though water is not lipid soluble it is more lipid soluble than alcohol? so y couldnt a be right?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 03:05:36 pm
LOL my answer to that rational drug design was such BS. We never really studied it - so I just made up something about how it's to do with considering the target cells/cell components at a molecular level and designing highly specific drugs that exert their effect by integration with cellular processes.. :S

...damn that protein coat question!!!!!!!!! :( I've lost at least 2 marks now grr

the MC graph one - I got the same answer as annie I THINK...I was taken aback by that question at first, but then when I looked closer it wasn't that bad
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nvl on June 11, 2008, 03:08:05 pm
LOL my answer to that rational drug design was such BS. We never really studied it - so I just made up something about how it's to do with considering the target cells/cell components at a molecular level and designing highly specific drugs that exert their effect by integration with cellular processes.. :S


thats 100% right actually, since rational drug design is all about molecular specificity
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 03:08:34 pm
For rational drug design I wrote: Technique in which the active site of the infective agent is established and the second molecule (the drug) is made to fit into the active site on the agent and inhibit it's effects.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 03:16:12 pm
LOL my answer to that rational drug design was such BS. We never really studied it - so I just made up something about how it's to do with considering the target cells/cell components at a molecular level and designing highly specific drugs that exert their effect by integration with cellular processes.. :S


thats 100% right actually, since rational drug design is all about molecular specificity

Oh..yay! :D

For anyone who's interested, I just checked the cutoff mark for an A+ in Exam 1 last year...it was 60.5/75
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 03:17:37 pm
LOL my answer to that rational drug design was such BS. We never really studied it - so I just made up something about how it's to do with considering the target cells/cell components at a molecular level and designing highly specific drugs that exert their effect by integration with cellular processes.. :S


thats 100% right actually, since rational drug design is all about molecular specificity

Oh..yay! :D

For anyone who's interested, I just checked the cutoff mark for an A+ in Exam 1 last year...it was 60.5/75

That's great and stuff but I think it'll be a lot higher this year, since the exam is supposedly 'easy'. :(((
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Jed on June 11, 2008, 03:19:48 pm
Where does it say the cut off mark for an A+?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 11, 2008, 03:21:11 pm
Where does it say the cut off mark for an A+?
2007:
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/statistics/2007/section3/vce_biology_ga07.pdf

2006:
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/statistics/2006/gradeassess/vce_biology_ga06.pdf
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 03:22:19 pm
Yes, I realise that :( unfortunately! For 2006 it was 54/70. This year...I guess we may be looking at around 65? Hopefully not much higher!  

Jed - http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/statistics/subjectstats.html you can see the statistics for yourself here, this link has them for 2001-2007  :)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Jed on June 11, 2008, 03:25:03 pm
Thanks :)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 03:25:29 pm
I guess... Here's to hoping everyone else did worse than us. >_>
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nvl on June 11, 2008, 03:34:08 pm
come on... someone upload the paper.....
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Essein on June 11, 2008, 03:44:43 pm
Yeah upload the paper i want to see it.
I done bio last year and got an A for mid year. ::) :) :)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: BA22 on June 11, 2008, 03:56:31 pm
Hey guys

This years bio exam was always going to be a little more difficult as last years was considered "easy". I'm suprised you guys were thrown by drug design, as it was a poorly addressed question in the 2006 mid year exam.

As for the virus membrane question, a lipid coat is always the outermost coat, which surrounds the capsid, or protein coat.

Don't stress about individual questions too much though, have a break for a bit then get back to the slog of year 12, still a way to go yet . .
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Nick on June 11, 2008, 04:03:10 pm
come on... someone upload the paper.....
If someone doesn't upload the psych paper tomorrow I think I shall cry hahahaha
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 04:05:03 pm
Hey guys

This years bio exam was always going to be a little more difficult as last years was considered "easy". I'm suprised you guys were thrown by drug design, as it was a poorly addressed question in the 2006 mid year exam.

As for the virus membrane question, a lipid coat is always the outermost coat, which surrounds the capsid, or protein coat.

Don't stress about individual questions too much though, have a break for a bit then get back to the slog of year 12, still a way to go yet . .

That's the thing, BA22...a lot of us are saying this year's bio exam was pretty easy :p That's why we're panicking a bit about the cutoff marks! Hah..yes...we're only 1/2 way through the slog...

come on... someone upload the paper.....
If someone doesn't upload the psych paper tomorrow I think I shall cry hahahaha

Where on earth do people get the papers from so soon?! I'm not so sure I want to see that bio paper again just yet...I'll be slapping myself everytime I find a new mistake!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Nick on June 11, 2008, 04:14:40 pm
The exam supervisors usually have spare copies which you can get at the end. LOL
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 04:27:52 pm
The exam supervisors usually have spare copies which you can get at the end. LOL

Ah ok. Lol, the supervisors in my school today were scary 0_0 they were so stone-faced and intimidating-looking that I almost freaked for a moment!

Did anyone else here put Drug Two when we were asked to choose which of the drugs would most effectively treat high blood pressure?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 04:30:03 pm
Yea of course, cause the big circle blob and the other bits fit with the active site of the ACE enzyme..
thats what i wrote, i think i forgot to mention that its negatively charged bit matched the + charge of the enzyme as well....

I wondder if i'll drop marks for that
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 04:32:59 pm
Oh! Good point about the charges. :S I didn't mention it either, although it was in my mind at the time. But It's only a 1-mark question, so maybe 1 point about the situation would be enough to gain that mark?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 04:42:37 pm
ah i didnt know it was 1 mark, i thought it was worth more than that so im feeling better now.

Also does anyone know what was the right answer to the cell that first initiates the specific immune response??
I wrote macrophages, i had thought of Helper T cells.... then i thought that macrophages display the foreign antigens on its surface
and carry it to the lymph nodes ......
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Marc on June 11, 2008, 04:49:35 pm
unfortunately i wrote cytotoxic T cells.. oh well.. only 1 mark..
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 04:52:09 pm
A few other people and I wrote Th cells
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 05:21:31 pm
Yea Th cells may well be the right answer, theres another mark down the drain.....

i had just thought that antigen presentation was the first step to activating the T Helper cells....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigen_presentation

But it might not be what vcaa wants
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 05:26:01 pm
1) FOr the use of copper what did ppl write?
2) The first short answer i think where you had to compare and say why the graphs were the same what did ppl write?
3) the interneuron what letter did ppl write/?
4) how did ppl design their experiment>?????????? just curious????????/
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: yonis_d on June 11, 2008, 05:30:00 pm
for the interneuron i wrote 't' was that right
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 05:37:14 pm
annie, VCAA might be open to different interpretations :)

1) FOr the use of copper what did ppl write?
2) The first short answer i think where you had to compare and say why the graphs were the same what did ppl write?
3) the interneuron what letter did ppl write/?
4) how did ppl design their experiment>?????????? just curious????????/

1) If you mean that question about why it has to be regulated - I put that too much copper may be toxic, while too little can impair the organism's functioning. Or something equally random..
2) I wrote that light is one of the obligatory inputs for photosynthesis, therefore photosynthetic rate, i.e. the rate of output, is much dependent on the input of light...something around those lines.
3) letter T (or whichever one was in the middle, on the spine bit of the diagram)
4) my experimental design involved splitting the mice into 2 groups of 10, one being the control and the other being the experimental group. The control group was left untreated, while the experimental group was treated with a set a mount of vitamin D pills each day over a period of ?? months (forgot what I wrote). Then the rest of it was just observe/record etc., and I said that if the overwhelming majority of mice in the experimental group experienced reduced development of rheumatoid arthritis, then my hypothesis would be supported.

...when we were asked to name the type of pathway (in the question with the nerves diagram), did everyone put reflex (spinal)?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 05:38:15 pm
1) FOr the use of copper what did ppl write?
2) The first short answer i think where you had to compare and say why the graphs were the same what did ppl write?
3) the interneuron what letter did ppl write/?
4) how did ppl design their experiment>?????????? just curious????????/

1: Use of copper: cofactor in enzymes
2: light is a necessary input for photosynthesis, so availability of light was limiting factor, hence phs rate would correspond to the amount of light absorbed
3: i forget which letter exactly, but its the one in middle between the 2 molecules

4: i think it was a 5 mark question im not sure if i managed to clinch all the marks
Hypothesis (they asked for one):
absence of Vitamin d in mice will have greater incidence in Rheumatoid arthritis.

- 2 genetically identical groups of 50 mice
- exposed to same conditions first group (A) of mice had vitamin d tablets incorporated into its diet
- other group (B) did not get vitamin d
- wait a few weeks and see mice remaining
- less mice in group B than A would support the hypothesis
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 05:40:39 pm
Yeah i got down reflex arc

http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/oxford/Oxford_Sports/0199210896.reflex-arc.1.jpg

Im 100% sure the middle on in the diagram they gave us is the interneuron now  ;D
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 05:47:53 pm
For that experiment question, i stressed that one group would be deprived of vitamin D whilst the other received safe amounts constantly, the information clearly said that the scientist was suggesting that the disease was caused by a lack of Vitamin D, not that Vitamin D would cure the disease so in order for the hypothesis to be supported, the group that was deprived from Vitamin D would have to have had a much higher incidence of rheumatoid arthritis in it's numbers after a specific period of time.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 05:54:24 pm
For that experiment question, i stressed that one group would be deprived of vitamin D whilst the other received safe amounts constantly, the information clearly said that the scientist was suggesting that the disease was caused by a lack of Vitamin D, not that Vitamin D would cure the disease so in order for the hypothesis to be supported, the group that was deprived from Vitamin D would have to have had a much higher incidence of rheumatoid arthritis in it's numbers after a specific period of time.

My interpretation was different...the background info suggested that the disease was caused by Vitamin D deficiency, yes. But the mice they 'gave' us for use in our experimental design were already naturally suffering from rheumatoid arthritis, so I took that as meaning the mice already had a possible Vitamin D deficiency, i.e. they don't need to be deprived as such, they are already deficient. So I had the experimental group receiving x vitamin D pills a day (to ensure that each mouse got precisely the same amount).
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 05:56:43 pm
Where did it say that they were already suffering from disease?
I said that none of the mice would have the disease to begin with, and then given that all other factors are controlled, those which are deprived from Vitamin D should develop the disease whilst those who receive regular Vitamin D supplements shouldn't. :S:S
I was surprised that whole question was worth 5 marks, it was only worth 3 in the past O_O.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 05:57:02 pm
What did you guys write for the process of rejection of transplanted tissue?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 06:03:06 pm
Where did it say that they were already suffering from disease?
I said that none of the mice would have the disease to begin with, and then given that all other factors are controlled, those which are deprived from Vitamin D should develop the disease whilst those who receive regular Vitamin D supplements shouldn't. :S:S
I was surprised that whole question was worth 5 marks, it was only worth 3 in the past O_O.

I'm very certain that at the end of the paragraph it said that the mice available had already 'naturally developed rheumatoid arthritis', that's what I based my whole answer on. Anyway - rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune disease, which more often than not have a genetic basis, and may be compounded by factors such as the vitamin D deficiency scenario they gave us...so if you were using mice that didn't have the disease to begin with, you wouldn't know for sure if they were ever going to develop the disease in the first place (they might not have been genetically inclined to developing it), if that sort of makes sense lol. It was a lot to do with reducing the progress of rheumatoid arthritis, I believe.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 06:10:04 pm
Where did it say that they were already suffering from disease?
I said that none of the mice would have the disease to begin with, and then given that all other factors are controlled, those which are deprived from Vitamin D should develop the disease whilst those who receive regular Vitamin D supplements shouldn't. :S:S
I was surprised that whole question was worth 5 marks, it was only worth 3 in the past O_O.

I'm very certain that at the end of the paragraph it said that the mice available had already 'naturally developed rheumatoid arthritis', that's what I based my whole answer on. Anyway - rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune disease, which more often than not have a genetic basis, and may be compounded by factors such as the vitamin D deficiency scenario they gave us...so if you were using mice that didn't have the disease to begin with, you wouldn't know for sure if they were ever going to develop the disease in the first place (they might not have been genetically inclined to developing it), if that sort of makes sense lol. It was a lot to do with reducing the progress of rheumatoid arthritis, I believe.
Where did it say that they were already suffering from disease?
I said that none of the mice would have the disease to begin with, and then given that all other factors are controlled, those which are deprived from Vitamin D should develop the disease whilst those who receive regular Vitamin D supplements shouldn't. :S:S
I was surprised that whole question was worth 5 marks, it was only worth 3 in the past O_O.

I'm very certain that at the end of the paragraph it said that the mice available had already 'naturally developed rheumatoid arthritis', that's what I based my whole answer on. Anyway - rheumatoid arthritis is an autoimmune disease, which more often than not have a genetic basis, and may be compounded by factors such as the vitamin D deficiency scenario they gave us...so if you were using mice that didn't have the disease to begin with, you wouldn't know for sure if they were ever going to develop the disease in the first place (they might not have been genetically inclined to developing it), if that sort of makes sense lol. It was a lot to do with reducing the progress of rheumatoid arthritis, I believe.

OH NOOOOOOOOO
5 MARKS
5 MARKS
5 WHOLE MARKS
ON AN EASY APEPR

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 06:10:25 pm
i was also under the impression that the mice were already exposed to the disease!
i made sure also to include that the experiment should be repeated atleast 5 times! to reduce experimental error
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Essein on June 11, 2008, 06:12:06 pm
Can sombody please post the exam! ???
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 06:14:31 pm
i was also under the impression that the mice were already exposed to the disease!
i made sure also to include that the experiment should be repeated atleast 5 times! to reduce experimental error


WOW 5 times! :D I just put 'repeat to ensure validity of results' lol
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Marc on June 11, 2008, 06:15:53 pm
vcaa says that they like 'more than 5 times' :P
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 06:16:36 pm
vcaa says that they like 'more than 5 times' :P

Oh my god..that's what I get for skim reading the assessment reports... :(
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Matt The Rat on June 11, 2008, 06:19:33 pm
Ahh, bugger. I put the large test sample but forgot to specify multiple testings.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 06:24:55 pm
My teacher always said that 'repeat to ensure validity' was okay...I was never under the impression that I needed to specify '5+ times'...hopefully they're lenient on that!

Does anyone here feel that they got full marks?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 06:26:00 pm
I dont know about full marks, but I also included to minimize extraneous variables, that the mice be kept under the same living conditions such as environment and such.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 06:30:29 pm
Oh, my bad, I meant does anyone feel like that got full marks on the entire exam :]
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 11, 2008, 06:36:27 pm
Oh, my bad, I meant does anyone feel like that got full marks on the entire exam :]

if there was such a person chances are they wouldnt be here right now, they'd be at a party or celebration of some sort...
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: memka on June 11, 2008, 06:37:28 pm
Oh, my bad, I meant does anyone feel like that got full marks on the entire exam :]
Nope...but I think I did alright anyway.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 06:41:59 pm
Oh, my bad, I meant does anyone feel like that got full marks on the entire exam :]

if there was such a person chances are they wouldnt be here right now, they'd be at a party or celebration of some sort...

LOL...or else studying to also ace the rest of their midyears..

Oh, my bad, I meant does anyone feel like that got full marks on the entire exam :]
Nope...but I think I did alright anyway.

Ditto
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: perfect_broken on June 11, 2008, 08:04:40 pm
DOes anyone think the multiple choice were WAY simpler this year?

and with the rats... I'm fairly sure they said that the question stated they were from a group who were prone to the arthritus!

i want my results back!!! *cries*
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 08:09:46 pm
DOes anyone think the multiple choice were WAY simpler this year?

and with the rats... I'm fairly sure they said that the question stated they were from a group who were prone to the arthritus!

i want my results back!!! *cries*

I agree, the multiple choice were cinch (yet I still made a dumb mistake with that 2nd question about the virus' structure).

..I'm starting to really doubt myself now. I was very certain that the rats question stated that "the mice had normally (i.e. not artificially caused to) developed rheumatoid arthritis".

..I'm dying to know what I got too!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: perfect_broken on June 11, 2008, 08:31:01 pm
DOes anyone think the multiple choice were WAY simpler this year?

and with the rats... I'm fairly sure they said that the question stated they were from a group who were prone to the arthritus!

i want my results back!!! *cries*

I agree, the multiple choice were cinch (yet I still made a dumb mistake with that 2nd question about the virus' structure).

..I'm starting to really doubt myself now. I was very certain that the rats question stated that "the mice had normally (i.e. not artificially caused to) developed rheumatoid arthritis".

..I'm dying to know what I got too!

Yer i was really pleased with them! (have to admit i nearly tripped up on that 2nd question too!)

I don't think you are actually able to innoculate an organism with rheumatiod arthritus or expose it to it (it's not communicable obviously) so the rats must have been prone to it already! also, vitamin D wouldn't be able to prevent the virus from progressing... or at least i woulndt expect so!

but that's just me trying to make myself (and anyone else) feel better :P

Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 09:00:33 pm
with the q abt secondary structure in multiple choice - was the answer b)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 11, 2008, 09:01:45 pm
with the q abt secondary structure in multiple choice - was the answer b)
yep the helix
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 09:05:35 pm
n wot did u do for the last q) abt the use of copper..lol ive asked this q) but no1 has answered
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 09:10:51 pm
I said that too much present in the cell could cause cell poisoning and dysfunction.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 09:12:03 pm

Yer i was really pleased with them! (have to admit i nearly tripped up on that 2nd question too!)

I don't think you are actually able to innoculate an organism with rheumatiod arthritus or expose it to it (it's not communicable obviously) so the rats must have been prone to it already! also, vitamin D wouldn't be able to prevent the virus from progressing... or at least i woulndt expect so!

but that's just me trying to make myself (and anyone else) feel better :P



that's exactly what i thought!
I doubt vitamin D would have been able to cure the disease altogether, and i'm more than 100% sure that it said that the virus was CAUSED by the lack of vitamin D, and that is the theory I believe they would be testing, and well you cant test for a cause of a disease if all the subjects already have it. :S


About the copper question.
I wrote that heavy metals occupy the active sites of enzymes and hence inhibit theyre function :S. Wild guess. I was thinking of lead poisoning and yeah. It's prob wrong.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 09:55:09 pm
I said that too much present in the cell could cause cell poisoning and dysfunction.

I said something very similar to that, but I also added that too little copper could adversely the fly's functioning as well.


Yer i was really pleased with them! (have to admit i nearly tripped up on that 2nd question too!)

I don't think you are actually able to innoculate an organism with rheumatiod arthritus or expose it to it (it's not communicable obviously) so the rats must have been prone to it already! also, vitamin D wouldn't be able to prevent the virus from progressing... or at least i woulndt expect so!

but that's just me trying to make myself (and anyone else) feel better :P



that's exactly what i thought!
I doubt vitamin D would have been able to cure the disease altogether, and i'm more than 100% sure that it said that the virus was CAUSED by the lack of vitamin D, and that is the theory I believe they would be testing, and well you cant test for a cause of a disease if all the subjects already have it. :S


About the copper question.
I wrote that heavy metals occupy the active sites of enzymes and hence inhibit theyre function :S. Wild guess. I was thinking of lead poisoning and yeah. It's prob wrong.

Rheumatoid arthritis isn't caused by a virus - it's an autoimmune disease that occurs largely due to genetic predisposition, but the question suggested that vitamin D deficiency could have contributed to its development. I think the wording was quite open to interpretation. As I said before, my personal interpretation of it was that it was to do with vitamin D deficiency making the disease develop at a faster rate, rather than being the cause of it. My friend and I were discussing the answer to this question with our teacher right after the exam, and he approved this interpretation...but we could all be wrong :)

I think your "wild guess" would probably be accepted as a correct answer, again that question was so open!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 11, 2008, 10:04:23 pm
hormone definition- howd u answer that 1?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: carolyncarolyn on June 11, 2008, 10:10:32 pm
lol for the polypeptide monomer my friend put "monosaccharide" or "monopeptide or something" - if theres sucha  thing!
lol it was funny at the time, poor guy!

THE TUMOR ONE WAS SO RIDICULOUSLY WHATTHURR!

yeah i have psych tmrw tooo!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 10:34:19 pm
hormone definition- howd u answer that 1?

Oh god. Mine was basically exactly the same as their definition...! I won't get the mark for that.

lol for the polypeptide monomer my friend put "monosaccharide" or "monopeptide or something" - if theres sucha  thing!
lol it was funny at the time, poor guy!

THE TUMOR ONE WAS SO RIDICULOUSLY WHATTHURR!

yeah i have psych tmrw tooo!

Good luck for psych! I was meant to have it too, but I quit a while ago :D ...LOL MONOPEPTIDE..your friend has nice language skills :P And incidentally, I see that this is your first post, so welcome to VCENotes :]
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 10:42:44 pm
Stupidly enough I thought it was protein, because many proteins = make up polypeptide chain? Its amino acids though I'm guessing.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: BA22 on June 11, 2008, 10:48:50 pm
polypeptide chain is basically the same as a protein.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: chiapants226 on June 11, 2008, 11:08:42 pm
mmm... i think i did averagely today. i thought i did alright as soon as i got out of the exam, but then reading what you guys wrote and what my pro bio friends were talking makes me think my answers were a bit too vague... i guess i'll find out how i did when i get the results back =P
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 11:10:58 pm
mmm... i think i did averagely today. i thought i did alright as soon as i got out of the exam, but then reading what you guys wrote and what my pro bio friends were talking makes me think my answers were a bit too vague... i guess i'll find out how i did when i get the results back =P

I'm sure you were fine =]

Does anyone know exactly when our mid year results come out?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: varnie on June 11, 2008, 11:11:25 pm
when do we get our results back?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 11, 2008, 11:14:17 pm
when do we get our results back?

4th August
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 11:15:11 pm
Are you serious?! 4th August is ages away! :/
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 11, 2008, 11:16:08 pm
hormone definition- howd u answer that 1?

I think for that one they wanted you to say that hormones don't just travel in the bloodstream.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 11, 2008, 11:16:44 pm
Are you serious?! 4th August is ages away! :/

It'll be here soon :).
It's also the day of VTAC preferences by the way.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 11, 2008, 11:19:27 pm
Haha I had no idea that was also the day of VTAC preferences..I have no idea what to put for mine...

I was so annoyed they didn't put a question about prions on the exam. I love writing about prions!
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: AppleXY on June 11, 2008, 11:25:54 pm
Are you serious?! 4th August is ages away! :/

It'll be here soon :).
It's also the day of VTAC preferences by the way.

Yeah 4th August 9:00am is VTAC applications day. It's engrained into my head :)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:30:04 pm
I hope we can all come to one giant agreement on what the hell 'chemical composition' meant. Like some said, the elements made it hard to talk about the function in its relation, but 'protein' doesn't seem to cut it as a chemical composition.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 11, 2008, 11:31:23 pm
Oh and for the hormones one I wrote:

produced by endocrine glands
receptor specific
travel in blood
involved in growth etc
protein molecules

But I dont know if thats what it was asking.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: bucket on June 11, 2008, 11:39:01 pm
lol that hormone question was waaaaay too ambiguous.
I can't even remember what I wrote, I like crapped on explaining everything I knew about hormones rofl. One thing I do remember writing is how nerves can produce neurohormones, meh.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: beezy4eva on June 12, 2008, 07:18:22 am
for hormone i think i wrote: a signalling molecule that produces a change in the function of cells. A hormone can either act on the cell its produced by, cells nearby it by diffusing through intercellular fluid or cells in another part of the body by travelling through the bloodstream.

I think i overdid it =S
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 12, 2008, 08:44:35 am
lol that hormone question was waaaaay too ambiguous.
I can't even remember what I wrote, I like crapped on explaining everything I knew about hormones rofl. One thing I do remember writing is how nerves can produce neurohormones, meh.


I think what the examiners were after was the recognition of the role of hormones as a signalling molecules;
I wrote that a hormone is a chemical based messenger molecule that will initiate a specific response on a
target tissue, organ, or cell,
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: BA22 on June 12, 2008, 04:25:28 pm
Oh and for the hormones one I wrote:

produced by endocrine glands
receptor specific
travel in blood
involved in growth etc
protein molecules

But I dont know if thats what it was asking.

This is a pretty good outline of what you should have said, only thing missing is a mention of lipid based hormones.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: mhsstudent on June 12, 2008, 08:59:12 pm
i put down fibrin as my firbrous protein a few people in my class did that too, did anyone else?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Toothpaste on June 12, 2008, 09:13:43 pm
i put down fibrin as my firbrous protein a few people in my class did that too, did anyone else?

me too :) and blood clot's the function.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: clau.diia on June 12, 2008, 09:28:06 pm
For the hormone one I wrote

"A chemical substance which travels in the bloodstream, other body fluids and adjacent tissue to its target cell which intiates a response"

or something along those lines.

I wrote collagen for the the protein....then I forgot it's function so I probably stuffed that up.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: chris on June 12, 2008, 09:51:59 pm
i thought dendritic cells present the foreighn parts to the mhc markers which are located on the cell membranes which in turn activate a specific type of response. anyways otehr then taht question i thought the examw a spretty straight forward and easy, surprised nothign on amst cells infalamotory respons ige's etc popped up , not much on both the hunmoral or cell mediated response.. However i did think the paper was long and i ahd to rush at the end just a tad. :)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Essein on June 12, 2008, 10:03:10 pm
Chemical composition for a polypeptide could have being C O H N some Sulfur, cause polypeptides are short proteins and proteins are made of amino acids, and all those chemicals are in an amino acid.
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: Saraime2003 on June 14, 2008, 03:13:08 pm
I wrote the number '11' on my hand so i would remmeber to come back to the fibrous protein question, cos i couldn't think of one, i thought collagen was a structural protein so i didn't write that... i got to my next exam n looked at my hand wondering why i had 11 on my hand, then i remembered and i was like OMG IDIOT!!! lol.... it was only 1 mark though. for the antigen one i wrote Th cells too n i said because Th cell recognise the antigens which are presented on the surface of the macrophages or phagocytes or whatever, then the Th cells stimulate the B cells to produces antibodies to fight the antigens. or something like that.

I wrote amino acids for the polypeptide subunits... For the tasmanian tiger thing about why the tumour cells were recognised as self cells i worte because the MHC markers on the tumour cells surface probabaly had species MHC markers so the tiger without the tumour recognised the tumour as self. lol i probably got that wrong but it was the best i could think of. lol

Aimee :)

Edit:

Just thought i'd let you all know about my stupid mistakes i made...
on the question where you had to give 2 reasons for each why DNA and RNA are different i wrote the most obvious one first:
DNA has 4 nitrogen bases: adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine. then i wrote RNA has 4 nitrogen bases too, but they are: Adenine, Uracil, Guanine and Cytosine.

Then i had a mental blank and wasn't sure if adenine was adenine or adenisine, so i crossed it out and wrote adenisine, then crossed it out n wrote adenine then decided later it was adenisine. i meant to go back n change it to adenine again before i left, but i forgot :'(

Then for the next part of the question i wrote DNA has a linear sequence and  then i think i wrote RNA has a circular DNA sequence XD lol...

i was worried it would be really hard n i'd make mistakes it ended up being reeally easy but i made many stupid mistakes. lol

Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: lacoste on June 14, 2008, 04:31:20 pm
1). the first question was ridiculous,
chemical composition?? elements or actual molcule eg. phospholipid molecule?

2). last qst. was too general, something about the stimulus, i mean the ansnwer was in the paragraph above;
change in amount of copper? is that what everyone got? but i also mentioned about the enzyme jst in case

3). experiment,,, 5marks? what the?
1 mark for hypo, 1 mrk for results, 1 mrk for steps involving?? what else??
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: nancy on June 14, 2008, 08:38:25 pm
has any1 in this biology forum been to the tsfx intensive program in semester 1? im wonderin if its worth doin for UNIT 4?
?????????
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: hoopa on June 15, 2008, 01:36:43 pm
i had a massive mental blank on the fibrous protein example and the electron transport chain!?! anybody else have trouble with that?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: ahmed on June 15, 2008, 02:44:29 pm
Oh god..I stuffed up that antigen question, I had to guess it. I think I wrote Th cells lol. And I left the final part of the 1st short answer (something about a feature of a fibrous protein and how the arrangement of chains gives that feature) blank because I forgot absolutely everything I learned about that! It was only 1 mark so I suppose it's not the end of the world for me lol :S ...I put collagen for a fibrous protein, and said that its key function is that it gives strength and elasticity to skin. My friend and I came out freaking about our hormone definitions...ours were basically identical to the one they gave on the paper! My biology teacher said the paper was very easy, so they're going to mark it hard. I was actually expecting a hard paper, but even last year's was marginally harder than this one.  

The correct answer is Th cells. The elasticity is due to the beta-plated sheets in the secondary structure of the protein. I think i will probably get an A. :P
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 15, 2008, 02:49:58 pm
Yes, that's correct about the beta sheets, but I was referring to the second-last part of that first short answer question, where they asked us to name a fibrous protein and state its function (not what feature gives it a certain property) :) The one I blanked on was the last part of that question..which annoys me immensely, because I knew the answer..I just wasn't able to pull it out under exam conditions :( But I'm so glad so many people are saying that Th cells is right lol! I think the most I can hope for is a high A-low A+..
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 15, 2008, 04:31:01 pm
For the antigen question, do you think they would have accepted my answer if I specified that the MHC markers on the surface of T cells and B cells were involved in the recognition of self and non self?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: JL_91 on June 15, 2008, 09:14:29 pm
For the antigen question, do you think they would have accepted my answer if I specified that the MHC markers on the surface of T cells and B cells were involved in the recognition of self and non self?

Hmm..but MHC markers are present on the surface of the body's 'self' cells (e.g. cells in your organs), and recognised BY the T and B cells...so I'm not sure if they would or wouldn't!

I'm feeling so paranoid now. I know I've made a few dumb mistakes, but I don't know how costly it will be :( I'm just hoping I haven't made any more silly mistakes! I guess all we can do is sit back and wait until August 4th to find out. Does anyone think that getting a low A+ on this exam would completely remove the possibility of a mid-high 40s score in Bio?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: jajab on June 15, 2008, 09:21:43 pm
what about a high A?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 16, 2008, 04:06:16 pm
There was a question, kinda like "Students wanted to test the effect of the <b> lack of sunlight </b> in a sample of seeds of the same plant.

Name one variable that you'd keep constant.

Name one that you'd change."

What did everyone get?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: annie on June 16, 2008, 04:20:40 pm

The correct answer is Th cells.

Well today my teacher told the class that was the wrong answer, he's an ex VCAA assessor for Biology, he told us it was meant to be an easy one but that quite a few people got it wrong: the question was "What cells are responsible for the Initial recognition of foreign antigens", the answer is not Th cells, but rather antigen presenting cells (Dendritic cells and macrophages etc..)

Th cells do not recognise foreign antigens , they require the antigens to be presented to them on a Class II MHC marker of an anti-gen presenting cells..

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T_helper_cell

"unprocessed antigens do not interact with T cells and are not involved in their activation"
"antigen presenting cells are primarily dendritic cells, macrophages and B cells"


There goes another mark...... At this rate im not sure if ill make an A+
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: yonis_d on June 16, 2008, 06:27:16 pm
There was a question, kinda like "Students wanted to test the effect of the <b> lack of sunlight </b> in a sample of seeds of the same plant.

Name one variable that you'd keep constant.

Name one that you'd change."

What did everyone get?


One variable you would keep constant would be the water given to the plants
Whilst, the variable that you'd change could be the amount of sunlight given to the plant
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 16, 2008, 06:31:17 pm
I dont get it though, if its testing the lack of sunlight, wouldn't the variable kept constant be the lack of sunlight?
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: jajab on June 16, 2008, 06:34:40 pm
no - because you need to be able to see what effect the lack of sunlight actually has on plants which are otherwise in an environment with the same conditions (i.e. water and temperature)
Title: Re: Biologists! How was it?
Post by: username on June 16, 2008, 06:36:24 pm
In the variable that I could've changed, if I stated 'orientation of plants' would that have received one mark?