Deciding on an EQ that deals with the application of extremophiles research would allow me to connect the obscurities of microbial ecology in severe settings to the challenges we face today in medicine, technology, and environmental stewardship.
Then there's technique, which is most relevant to my independent component so far. Throughout my mentorship, I've learned technique - navigated through protocols, microfuge tubes, tough-to-deposit 4µl (micro liter, no mu-liter) increments of probe. Delving into the techniques utlized to investigate the complexities of nature as it is - rather than using traditional pure culture - would help me with my I.C. [and, I'll admit, X) impress my mentor].
Both of these are tantalizing... maybe I can do some sort of 2-in-1 deal. I talked to Pittman briefly and she recommended this route: the how and why.
Now I just need to further narrow my focus. Am I covering microbial ecology or extremophiles? I mean, I could delve into how investigating interactions among microbes would reveal the secrets of global energy cycling, the development of biofilms (incluing those on our teeth known as plaque, and infections) , and the environmental application for this (how we can this knowledge to rid our environment of toxic waste like mercury). I could also focus on extremophiles specifically, how they are studied and what we can learn from them. What to choose?! And what should my EQ be? Can't it just be "What makes microbes so awesome?"?
 |
| Nanotubes between bacteria - an interesting form of communication that's just beginning to be studied |
Anyway, I've decided that my 10 minute will focus on the fascinating history of extremophiles. This will hopefully make for an engaging presentation, if executed with enthusiasm and involving fancy pictures. That's a good place to start, I think.
No comments:
Post a Comment