Bacterial conjugation occurs when a donor cell bacterium that has a certain plasmid extends a long “arm” called a pilus. In doing so, the bacterium is able to find another bacterium that does not have that specific plasmid, making it the recipient. Once the donor finds the recipient, it replicates its own plasmid so the recipient can have a copy of it as well, hopefully giving it an advantage that allows it to overcome an environmental challenge.

Many people would, incorrectly, consider this a form of bacterial sex. Scientifically, this is untrue, because this process does not result in the production of a daughter cell (The Daily recognizes that sex does not necessarily result in a child in humans – however, this is the definition that is used for microorganisms). This process can be thought of more as a bacterium sharing critical information with its good friend, to help said friend lead a more successful life. An analogy that comes to mind is one person teaching their friend how to swim. It is easy to get through “everyday life” without needing to swim, however, if this person was ever in a shipwreck, the actions of their friend will have single-handedly saved their life.

What’s interesting about this entire process is that there seems to be no obvious benefit to the donor cell. Despite this, the donor expends significant energy in searching for a recipient and in copying its DNA, potentially putting itself at a disadvantage. So why do bacteria do this? Well – bacteria have been on earth for a very long time. For about three billion years, most organisms were microscopic, and bacteria and archaea (another type of microscopic organism) were the dominant forms of life. So, bacteria have been exchanging genetic information with each other for a very long time, leading us to assume there is a logical explanation for the process. And yet, conjugation seems to benefit only the recipient.

Evolution over time is understood by most biologists as the “survival of the fittest.” This can often be interpreted as, ultimately, every organism is looking out for itself, and must compete with everything else in its environment in order to survive. However, in my opinion, the existence of bacterial conjugation demonstrates otherwise. When a bacterium donates its genetic information to another bacterium, the recipient of this selfless act will have the same advantages as the donor. Furthermore, this recipient bacterium will likely go on to donate the copied plasmid to even more bacteria.

This suggests the theory of evolution isn’t so black and white. Perhaps bacteria have been such successful organisms on this planet in almost every environment for so long, not only because they are competitive, but also because they are generous. In times of trouble, they reach out to each other and give each other information that is sometimes critical to survival. Maybe, we could learn something from bacteria. Throughout my entire life I have been taught that in order to succeed I must compete with others. I must be better than others, even if that means leaving others behind in the dust. In competitive environments such as McGill, I do not think my experience is unique. However, I do not think that competition is imperative to success. Despite all that has been said about survival of the fittest, generosity has still proliferated throughout millions of years. Maybe, competition isn’t imperative to progress; instead, in order to better ourselves, we must give to others. Perhaps there is something innate about generosity. If bacteria can look out for each other, so can we.

The post Survival of the generous appeared first on The McGill Daily.

When I entered McGill this year, I expected that just like in high school, with a fairly involved study schedule and regular class attendance, I would be provided with the resources to succeed in exams. I have no trouble spending many hours studying, and I have never missed a single class — somehow, I still find myself struggling to keep up in almost every single class. I have no trouble admitting that I am often very lost in class as the pace of university courses and style of learning is not something I am used to. Sometimes, I feel like I am just not given the proper resources to succeed – and I know I am not alone in feeling this way.

In fact, there is a whole industry that preys on this feeling of helplessness – and for $200 to $500, or more, you can attend an exam prep session with small class sizes, and an instructor who breaks down complicated problems and teaches you in a style similar to high school, even providing exam problems and their solutions that often happen to magically be the exact questions that end up on the exam. I am not targeting any particular company or business – there are many of them out there. Not only that, there are even websites with a paid subscription of $20 or more a month where you can have tutors work out your online assignments for you.

There is, of course, nothing inherently wrong with these prep sessions or wanting to attend them. After all, it is reassuring to feel like you understand the content that is going to be on an exam. The problem is that there are people who can afford attending these sessions before every exam, and there are those who simply cannot, especially when the exams start to add up. Due to the fast paced nature of science courses, it’s pretty much guaranteed that those who attend these courses will perform better on the exams, and because a significant portion of the class does pay for these sessions, they drive the average up, leaving behind those who struggled through the content on their own because they had no other choice. If the exam is curved, those who could not afford the prep session will be negatively affected. Another consequence of this is that professors often end up with feedback that shows a greater understanding in their course than there actually is, and thus lowers the resources even more for the students who cannot shell out upwards of $200 every time an exam rolls around. To put it simply: those who are more financially well off are much more likely to do well in undergrad sciences at McGill.

The more I think about this issue, the more complex it becomes. I have attended a few of these prep sessions, and they did significantly help me succeed on the exams I wrote. However, I also felt an immense sense of guilt and hypocrisy, as I knew I was experiencing a privilege that my peers often did not have access to. I also felt cheated, considering I am already paying for my education, yet I have to pay for my grades on top of it. Many professors and teaching assistants recognize this issue, and some courses have free teaching assistant-lead cram sessions to mimic these paid sessions, which I greatly appreciate. However, an instructor, knowing what is on the exam, is never going to simply give away the answers to an exam question. At paid prep sessions, this is exactly what they do, and this is where the fundamental difference will always lie unless something changes.

What would this change look like? In my opinion, the best strategy would be to improve the teaching and support at McGill. This would include hiring more professors as instructors based on their teaching ability rather than their research capabilities. This would mean allocating more of the departmental budget to teaching-assistant lead tutorials and review sessions. Perhaps this could also include teaching workshops for present faculty so they are more able to connect with their students and get their intended point across. This would mean changing the primary structure of undergraduate science courses at McGill so students no longer feel they need to turn to external support to understand the content.

As for the present state of my undergraduate science experience, I don’t know if I am surprised that this is the way it is, however, I am very disappointed. I believe everyone should be able to succeed, period, no matter their financial situation.

The post Paying for Grades appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Untitled appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Untitled series appeared first on The McGill Daily.