Chemistry Total number of DNA molecules after environmental change

AI Thread Summary
After placing a Streptococcus bacterium with N^{15} in an N^{14} environment and allowing it to replicate for five generations, the total number of DNA molecules becomes 64. The confusion arises regarding the distribution and remaining quantity of N^{15} DNA. It is suggested that the N^{15} content does not diminish but rather gets split among the new bacterial cells. The key point is that while the total DNA increases, the proportion of N^{15} remains unchanged in each generation. Therefore, understanding the distribution of isotopes is crucial for determining the remaining N^{15} DNA molecules.
Medicol
Messages
223
Reaction score
54
1. Suppose DNA molecules of a Streptococcus bacterium contain a radioactive isotope N^{15}, if this bacterium is then put in an environment containing only N^{14} and after 5 generations (DNA duplication), how many N^{15} DNA molecules remain ?



Homework Equations





3. after 5 generations, it is 2^{5+1}=64. But then I become clueless as to how I can reason the eliminated DNAs as well as their remaining number. Oh nooo...Help please...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't see why the total content of N15 should change at all. It just gets splitted and distributed over multiple bacteria.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
View full post »

Similar threads

Probability of drawing duplicates (warning long post)
Replies
7
Views
2K
Medical Targeting microbial metabolites to treat autism
Replies
1
Views
2K
Can I get my intro Bio problems checked?
Replies
1
Views
3K
Find the number of units of the molecule in the river after n weeks
Replies
1
Views
2K
Could We Build Unnatural Forms of Life?
Replies
11
Views
6K
Solve the Mystery: Guess the Wrong Chemistry Question
Replies
3
Views
3K
Atomic displacements, replacements, and radiation damage of structural materials
Replies
1
Views
640
I A Sequence T based on the Rule of Three
Replies
15
Views
2K
Body's kundalini spiral bands are DNA of The Universe
Replies
2
Views
5K
Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States
Replies
9
Views
28K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top