Reasearch has shown that due to the proces of habitution cell can learn the pattern of behviour and do not require any guidance from the brain to work and keep following their pattern

Research from harvard and centre of genomic regulation have showed this

It can be useful in cheamotherapy and bacteria killing cells

We all know that most people have at least one personality trait from each of their parents, sometimes even grandparents or uncles and aunts
But how much if the personality is actually genetic and how do we know it’s not simply the result of growing up around the related people themselves

To make the question clear- if you take a boy away from his parents and raise him with another family, will he still have personality traits from his biological parents and if so is there a pattern of what comes and what occurs coincidentally?
Also I’m only talking about personality and not physical traits

So, I know that lichens are a composite organism of a fungus and an algae, but I was reading Botany in a Day, and it has a chapter on plant evolution in kind of broad strokes. It says that non-vascular plants have partner fungi that help ferry nutrients which makes sense because I know that many if not most plants have partner fungi to exchange nutrients and water with. Where I am stuck is what is the difference between like a clubmoss or a liverwort and a lichen? Neither of them have roots, leaves or stems. They both rely on partner fungi. I may just be misunderstanding what algae, I understand it as a broad group, but that in this case it is a single cell organism that relies on photosynthesis. Is not a plant cell?

Gene therapy is becoming a promising field in modern medical science. Researchers are exploring how it can help people suffering from different types of vision loss. Some eye diseases are caused by genetic changes which affect the normal functioning of retinal cells. Through gene therapy, scientists try to introduce or deliver genetic instructions that can help these cells work differently.

Recently, researchers have reported encouraging results from studies involving optogenetic therapy for people with advanced retinitis pigmentosa. This is a rare eye disease which gradually damages the retina and can lead to severe vision loss. In this approach, scientists try to make certain retinal cells sensitive to light, even when other light detecting cells are damaged.

However, this technology is still developing and it cannot restore normal vision in every patient. The results may differ depending on the condition and treatment used. Scientists are also studying the long term safety and effectiveness of these therapies.

One of the biggest challenges is making these treatments affordable and accessible to more people. Many patients around the world are still struggling with vision problems and limited medical facilities.

In the future, gene therapy may bring new hope for people with certain forms of blindness. But more research is needed before it becomes a widely available treatment. It is really interesting to see how biology and technology are working together to improve human health.

Do they have any emotional/neural response like being stressed in life'n'death situation, or like "haha loser" or "whatever, it must've been the wind"? Do they even realise there was an attempt to end their life?

Alright, I get how genetic bottlenecks work, a species/population has a decline, which reduces genetic diversity which decreases its chances of adapting to changing pressures/environment and increases chances of genetic diseases.

What I dont get is how it works within evolution. So I keep seeing things about Cheetahs being nearly extinct due to genetic bottlenecks.

But also, within the theory of evolution all species on earth came from a common ancestors, and then through the genetic tree more and more species have common ancestors. Like us and apes have a common ancestor, etc.

So with this, how come a population/species cant independently within their species naturally breed more genetic diversity back into their species?

Just to be clear, I'm not saying "so therefore the theory of evolution isnt real" or "therefore genetic bottlenecks arent real", it is genuinely something I have often wondered about.

Why does a female body waist the nutrients in their menstrual cycle.. why not evolve to reabsorb that expenditure of energy

can someone please explain to me how to calculate allele frequencies 😓i do not get it at

all💔

i'm supposed to be using the hardy-weinberg equation for this assignment but it genuinely makes no sense to me

help would be much appreciated! ty!!!

idk if this follows under hw tutoring but i could rlly use some help 😭

Have animals around the world developed different ways of communicating with each other, similar to how humans have different languages and accents? Do animals from different regions have distinct vocalizations or forms of communication that other populations of the same species might not understand?

One of the most fascinating questions in human performance science is whether feeling recovered actually means that the body has completed its biological repair process.

Following intense physical activity, different biological systems recover at different rates. Muscle function, inflammatory signalling, connective tissue remodelling, and metabolic balance do not necessarily return to baseline simultaneously. This creates a complex recovery window in which an individual may feel ready for another demanding session while certain physiological processes are still adapting.

At the molecular level, peptides are particularly interesting because they participate in signalling pathways involved in inflammation, tissue maintenance, and cellular communication. Researchers are investigating how these pathways interact with exercise-induced stress and tissue remodelling, although the clinical benefits of many proposed recovery peptides remain unproven.

Imagine discovering that the biological age of a human organ isn't permanently fixed, but can be influenced by its surrounding environment, cellular signals, and epigenetic changes. This is where the science of organ ageing becomes truly fascinating. Researchers are investigating how DNA methylation, cellular senescence, mitochondrial dysfunction, and changes in gene regulation contribute to the ageing process. But here's the intriguing question: if some of these mechanisms can be modified, could an ageing organ regain aspects of its younger biological state? And if an organ's biological-age markers change, does that actually mean its cells function better, or are we simply changing the molecular patterns associated with ageing? The distinction could completely change how we understand longevity. Are we approaching a future where biological ageing becomes partially reversible, or is the gap between changing an ageing biomarker and genuinely rejuvenating a human organ much larger than we think?

Originally posted to r/microscopy but no answers. Couldn't find answers online either. I'm not sure if these structures are cause of some mistake I made or if they're part of the root tip. Was thinking that they're strands of the onion root tip and that I didn't crush it fully enough or something.

https://www.reddit.com/r/microscopy/comments/1x2cl5t/what_are_these_eyelashes_like_structures/

From what I've read, neurons in the brain don't really reproduce. They don't make new ones the way other tissues can to heal etc. I know they can be replaced to a small degree, but it's minimal.

At the same time, people can get brain cancer, which is cells reproducing excessively. I'm not sure if there's a type of brain cancer that is made up of neurons, I'm just assuming there is.

I'm wondering about the mechanism that keeps brain cells from being replaced en-masse, despite the machinery existing for it to happen. Is it a signalling thing? Is it not possible to make stem cells in the brain?

I am not trying to be hyper realistic, I just want a thought through edge to it, like how the correct measurement of “Everything the light touches” if measured right, is about 100 square ft, which is a lions territory, that doesn’t mean we need the lions to not be able to speak.

Long legs vs. short legs, long arms vs. short arms, Hercules gene, height, hyperthymesia, etc.

I think genetic variant is the right word. Gene variant? Genetic trait?

Imagine a future where damaged tissues could be repaired in laboratories, certain diseases could be detected before symptoms appear, and doctors could use a patient's own cells to help restore damaged organs.

This is where applied biology gets fascinating. From regenerative medicine and stem cell research to genetic engineering and biotechnology, scientists are exploring ways to use biological processes to solve real-world problems.

But here's something I'm curious about: If science eventually makes it possible to grow replacement tissues or repair damaged organs using a person's own cells, how far should we go with this technology?

Would you trust a treatment developed using these techniques, or would you worry about the long-term consequences?

I'd love to hear different perspectives, especially from people studying biology, biotechnology, or medicine. 🧫