Can we apply Ron's technique to understand the main idea / purpose of this passage (see the link: https://sas.elluminate.com/site/externa ... cr&sid=329):
Nearly a century ago, biologists found that if they separated an invertebrate animal embryo into two parts at an early stage of its life, it would survive and develop as two normal embryos. This led them to believe that the cells in the early embryo are undetermined in the sense that each cell has the potential to develop in a variety of different ways. Later biologists found that the situation was not so simple. It matters in which plane the embryo is cut. If it is cut in a plane different from the one used by the early investigators, it will not form two whole embryos.
A debate arose over what exactly was happening. Which embryo cells are determined, just when do they become irreversibly committed to their fates, and what are the "morphogenetic determinants" that tell a cell what to become? But the debate could not be resolved because no one was able to ask the crucial questions in a form in which they could be pursued productively. Recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have opened up prospects for a resolution of the debate. Now investigators think they know at least some of the molecules that act as morphogenetic determinants in early development. They have been able to show that, in a sense, cell determination begins even before an egg is fertilized.
Studying sea urchins, biologist Paul Gross found that an unfertilized egg contains substances that function as morphogenetic determinants. They are located in the cytoplasm of the egg cell; i.e., in that part of the cell's protoplasm that lies outside of the nucleus. In the unfertilized egg, the substances are inactive and are not distributed homogeneously. When the egg is fertilized, the substances become active and, presumably, govern the behavior of the genes they interact with. Since the substances are unevenly distributed in the egg, when the fertilized egg divides, the resulting cells are different from the start and so can be qualitatively different in their own gene activity.
The substances that Gross studied are maternal messenger RNA's-products of certain of the maternal genes. He and other biologists studying a wide variety of organisms have found that these particular RNA's direct, in large part, the synthesis of histones, a class of proteins that bind to DNA. Once synthesized, the histones move into the cell nucleus, where section of DNA wrap around them to form a structure that resembles beads, or knots, on a string. The beads are DNA segments wrapped around the histones; the string is the intervening DNA. And it is the structure of these beaded DNA strings that guide the fate of the cells in which they are located.
My take in next post. Thanks
Target Test Prep is 20% off right now!
Use code FLASH20
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Ron's technique to understand the main idea!!
This topic has expert replies
-
patanjali.purpose
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
- Thanked: 114 times
- Followed by:12 members
-
patanjali.purpose
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
- Thanked: 114 times
- Followed by:12 members
Nearly a century ago, biologists found that if they separated an invertebrate animal embryo into two parts at an early stage of its life, it would survive and develop as two normal embryos. This led them to believe that the cells in the early embryo are undetermined in the sense that each cell has the potential to develop in a variety of different ways. Later biologists found that the situation was not so simple. It matters in which plane the embryo is cut. If it is cut in a plane different from the one used by the early investigators, it will not form two whole embryos.
A debate arose over what exactly was happening. [spoiler]Which embryo cells are determined, just when do they become irreversibly committed to their fates, and what are the "morphogenetic determinants" that tell a cell what to become?[/spoiler] But the debate could not be resolved because no one was able to ask the crucial questions in a form in which they could be pursued productively. Recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have opened up prospects for a resolution of the debate. Now investigators think they know at least some of the molecules that act as morphogenetic determinants in early development. They have been able to show that, in a sense, cell determination begins even before an egg is fertilized.
Studying sea urchins, biologist Paul Gross found that [spoiler]an unfertilized egg contains substances that function as morphogenetic determinants. They are located in the cytoplasm of the egg cell; i.e., in that part of the cell's protoplasm that lies outside of the nucleus. In the unfertilized egg, the substances are inactive and are not distributed homogeneously. When the egg is fertilized, the substances become active and, presumably, govern the behavior of the genes they interact with. Since the substances are unevenly distributed in the egg, when the fertilized egg divides, the resulting cells are different from the start and so can be qualitatively different in their own gene activity.
[spoiler]The substances that Gross studied are maternal messenger RNA's[/spoiler]-[spoiler]products of certain of the maternal genes. He and other biologists studying a wide variety of organisms have found that these particular RNA's direct, in large part, the synthesis of histones, a class of proteins that bind to DNA. Once synthesized, the histones move into the cell nucleus, where section of DNA wrap around them to form a structure that resembles beads, or knots, on a string. The beads are DNA segments wrapped around the histones; the string is the intervening DNA. And it is the structure of these beaded DNA strings that guide the fate of the cells in which they are located. [/spoiler].
Paragraph 1: Nearly a century ago, biologists found that...This led them to believe that....Later biologists found that..=> Biologists found XX that led them to believe YY, but later they found different thing
Paragraph 2: A debate arose over A.But the debate could not be resolved because of B. Recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have opened up C ==> debate arose over A..recent discovery opened up resolution possibility
Paragraph 3: Studying sea urchins, biologist Paul Gross found XX. Since AA when the fertilized egg divides, the resulting cells are YY ==> study findings
Paragraph 4: He and other biologists studying a wide variety of organisms have found that.. ==> further on study findings
Main Purpose: Talks about a recent discovery that can resolve the debate over XX
Is this approach appropriate and does it sound as a resonable purpose. Pls share your thoughts
Thanks
-----
Patanjali
A debate arose over what exactly was happening. [spoiler]Which embryo cells are determined, just when do they become irreversibly committed to their fates, and what are the "morphogenetic determinants" that tell a cell what to become?[/spoiler] But the debate could not be resolved because no one was able to ask the crucial questions in a form in which they could be pursued productively. Recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have opened up prospects for a resolution of the debate. Now investigators think they know at least some of the molecules that act as morphogenetic determinants in early development. They have been able to show that, in a sense, cell determination begins even before an egg is fertilized.
Studying sea urchins, biologist Paul Gross found that [spoiler]an unfertilized egg contains substances that function as morphogenetic determinants. They are located in the cytoplasm of the egg cell; i.e., in that part of the cell's protoplasm that lies outside of the nucleus. In the unfertilized egg, the substances are inactive and are not distributed homogeneously. When the egg is fertilized, the substances become active and, presumably, govern the behavior of the genes they interact with. Since the substances are unevenly distributed in the egg, when the fertilized egg divides, the resulting cells are different from the start and so can be qualitatively different in their own gene activity.
[spoiler]The substances that Gross studied are maternal messenger RNA's[/spoiler]-[spoiler]products of certain of the maternal genes. He and other biologists studying a wide variety of organisms have found that these particular RNA's direct, in large part, the synthesis of histones, a class of proteins that bind to DNA. Once synthesized, the histones move into the cell nucleus, where section of DNA wrap around them to form a structure that resembles beads, or knots, on a string. The beads are DNA segments wrapped around the histones; the string is the intervening DNA. And it is the structure of these beaded DNA strings that guide the fate of the cells in which they are located. [/spoiler].
Paragraph 1: Nearly a century ago, biologists found that...This led them to believe that....Later biologists found that..=> Biologists found XX that led them to believe YY, but later they found different thing
Paragraph 2: A debate arose over A.But the debate could not be resolved because of B. Recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have opened up C ==> debate arose over A..recent discovery opened up resolution possibility
Paragraph 3: Studying sea urchins, biologist Paul Gross found XX. Since AA when the fertilized egg divides, the resulting cells are YY ==> study findings
Paragraph 4: He and other biologists studying a wide variety of organisms have found that.. ==> further on study findings
Main Purpose: Talks about a recent discovery that can resolve the debate over XX
Is this approach appropriate and does it sound as a resonable purpose. Pls share your thoughts
Thanks
-----
Patanjali
-
bubbliiiiiiii
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 979
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:38 am
- Location: Hyderabad, India
- Thanked: 49 times
- Followed by:12 members
- GMAT Score:700
Nearly a century ago, biologists found that if they separated an invertebrate animal embryo into two parts at an early stage of its life, it would survive and develop as two normal embryos. This led them to believe that the cells in the early embryo are undetermined in the sense that each cell has the potential to develop in a variety of different ways. Later biologists found that the situation was not so simple. It matters in which plane the embryo is cut. If it is cut in a plane different from the one used by the early investigators, it will not form two whole embryos.
Biologists found something which led them to believe something.
Later the something beleived was not as simple as it was assumed to be. (indicates contradiction with belief.)
A debate arose over what exactly was happening. Which embryo cells are determined, just when do they become irreversibly committed to their fates, and what are the "morphogenetic determinants" that tell a cell what to become? But the debate could not be resolved because no one was able to ask the crucial questions in a form in which they could be pursued productively. Recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have opened up prospects for a resolution of the debate. Now investigators think they know at least some of the molecules that act as morphogenetic determinants in early development. They have been able to show that, in a sense, cell determination begins even before an egg is fertilized.
A debate then started and on what was believed but could not be resolved.
Recent discoveries opened prospects about something (presumably the belief of first para.)
Studying sea urchins, biologist Paul Gross found that an unfertilized egg contains substances that function as morphogenetic determinants. They are located in the cytoplasm of the egg cell; i.e., in that part of the cell's protoplasm that lies outside of the nucleus. In the unfertilized egg, the substances are inactive and are not distributed homogeneously. When the egg is fertilized, the substances become active and, presumably, govern the behavior of the genes they interact with. Since the substances are unevenly distributed in the egg, when the fertilized egg divides, the resulting cells are different from the start and so can be qualitatively different in their own gene activity.
The substances that Gross studied are maternal messenger RNA's-products of certain of the maternal genes. He and other biologists studying a wide variety of organisms have found that these particular RNA's direct, in large part, the synthesis of histones, a class of proteins that bind to DNA. Once synthesized, the histones move into the cell nucleus, where section of DNA wrap around them to form a structure that resembles beads, or knots, on a string. The beads are DNA segments wrapped around the histones; the string is the intervening DNA. And it is the structure of these beaded DNA strings that guide the fate of the cells in which they are located.
Researchers began studying on certain objects and found something and clarified the belief.
If there is question concerning main idea of passage,
it should be something like, a scientic explanation to a beleif is presented.
Please post the options and the OA so that I evaluate myself and others can be benefit as well.
Biologists found something which led them to believe something.
Later the something beleived was not as simple as it was assumed to be. (indicates contradiction with belief.)
A debate arose over what exactly was happening. Which embryo cells are determined, just when do they become irreversibly committed to their fates, and what are the "morphogenetic determinants" that tell a cell what to become? But the debate could not be resolved because no one was able to ask the crucial questions in a form in which they could be pursued productively. Recent discoveries in molecular biology, however, have opened up prospects for a resolution of the debate. Now investigators think they know at least some of the molecules that act as morphogenetic determinants in early development. They have been able to show that, in a sense, cell determination begins even before an egg is fertilized.
A debate then started and on what was believed but could not be resolved.
Recent discoveries opened prospects about something (presumably the belief of first para.)
Studying sea urchins, biologist Paul Gross found that an unfertilized egg contains substances that function as morphogenetic determinants. They are located in the cytoplasm of the egg cell; i.e., in that part of the cell's protoplasm that lies outside of the nucleus. In the unfertilized egg, the substances are inactive and are not distributed homogeneously. When the egg is fertilized, the substances become active and, presumably, govern the behavior of the genes they interact with. Since the substances are unevenly distributed in the egg, when the fertilized egg divides, the resulting cells are different from the start and so can be qualitatively different in their own gene activity.
The substances that Gross studied are maternal messenger RNA's-products of certain of the maternal genes. He and other biologists studying a wide variety of organisms have found that these particular RNA's direct, in large part, the synthesis of histones, a class of proteins that bind to DNA. Once synthesized, the histones move into the cell nucleus, where section of DNA wrap around them to form a structure that resembles beads, or knots, on a string. The beads are DNA segments wrapped around the histones; the string is the intervening DNA. And it is the structure of these beaded DNA strings that guide the fate of the cells in which they are located.
Researchers began studying on certain objects and found something and clarified the belief.
If there is question concerning main idea of passage,
it should be something like, a scientic explanation to a beleif is presented.
Please post the options and the OA so that I evaluate myself and others can be benefit as well.
Regards,
Pranay
Pranay
Hi,
I want to go through more such manhattan study hall lectures.
Do we have to register for it? Any links about the same would
be of great help.
Thanks,
TOPGMAT
I want to go through more such manhattan study hall lectures.
Do we have to register for it? Any links about the same would
be of great help.
Thanks,
TOPGMAT
Never mind what others do; do better than yourself, beat your own record from day to day and you are a success - William Boetcker
-
rohu27
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 586
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:38 am
- Thanked: 31 times
- Followed by:5 members
- GMAT Score:730
here you go :TOPGMAT wrote:Hi,
I want to go through more such manhattan study hall lectures.
Do we have to register for it? Any links about the same would
be of great help.
Thanks,
TOPGMAT
https://www.manhattangmat.com/thursdays-with-ron.cfm
make sure u watch the elluminate version.
-
patanjali.purpose
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
- Thanked: 114 times
- Followed by:12 members
-
patanjali.purpose
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
- Thanked: 114 times
- Followed by:12 members
Lets try another passage:
-------------
Bernard Bailyn has recently reinterpreted the early history of the United States by applying new social research findings on the experiences of European migrants. In his reinterpretation, migration becomes the organizing principle for rewriting the history of preindustrial North America. His approach rests on four separate propositions.
The first of these asserts that residents of early modern England moved regularly about their countryside; migrating to the New World was simply a "natural spillover." Although at first the colonies held little positive attraction for the English-they would rather have stayed home-by the eighteenth century people increasingly migrated to America because they regarded it as the land of opportunity. Secondly, Bailyn holds that, contrary to the notion that used to flourish in America history textbooks, there was never a typical New World community. For example, the economic and demographic character of early New England towns varied considerably.
Bailyn's third proposition suggests two general patterns prevailing among the many thousands of migrants: one group came as indentured servants, another came to acquire land. Surprisingly, Bailyn suggests that those who recruited indentured servants were the driving forces of transatlantic migration. These colonial entrepreneurs helped determine the social character of people who came to preindustrial North America. At first, thousands of unskilled laborers were recruited; by the 1730's, however, American employers demanded skilled artisans.
Finally, Bailyn argues that the colonies were a half-civilized hinterland of the European culture system. He is undoubtedly correct to insist that the colonies were part of an Anglo-American empire. But to divide the empire into English core and colonial periphery, as Bailyn does, devalues the achievements of colonial culture. It is true, as Bailyn claims, that high culture in the colonies never matched that in England. But what of seventeenth-century New England, where the settlers created effective laws, built a distinguished university, and published books? Bailyn might respond that New England was exceptional. However, the ideas and institutions developed by New England Puritans had powerful effects on North American culture.
Although Bailyn goes on to apply his approach to some thousands of indentured servants who migrated just prior to the revolution, he fails to link their experience with the political development of the United States. Evidence presented in his work suggests how we might make such a connection. These indentured servants were treated as slaves for the period during which they had sold their time to American employers. It is not surprising that as soon as they served their time they passed up good wages in the cities and headed west to ensure their personal independence by acquiring land. Thus, it is in the west that a peculiarly American political culture began, among colonists who were suspicious of authority and intensely anti-aristocratic.
-------------
Can we discuss primary purpose, main idea, purpose of 4th paragraph here
My take in next post
Thanks
Patanjali
-------------
Bernard Bailyn has recently reinterpreted the early history of the United States by applying new social research findings on the experiences of European migrants. In his reinterpretation, migration becomes the organizing principle for rewriting the history of preindustrial North America. His approach rests on four separate propositions.
The first of these asserts that residents of early modern England moved regularly about their countryside; migrating to the New World was simply a "natural spillover." Although at first the colonies held little positive attraction for the English-they would rather have stayed home-by the eighteenth century people increasingly migrated to America because they regarded it as the land of opportunity. Secondly, Bailyn holds that, contrary to the notion that used to flourish in America history textbooks, there was never a typical New World community. For example, the economic and demographic character of early New England towns varied considerably.
Bailyn's third proposition suggests two general patterns prevailing among the many thousands of migrants: one group came as indentured servants, another came to acquire land. Surprisingly, Bailyn suggests that those who recruited indentured servants were the driving forces of transatlantic migration. These colonial entrepreneurs helped determine the social character of people who came to preindustrial North America. At first, thousands of unskilled laborers were recruited; by the 1730's, however, American employers demanded skilled artisans.
Finally, Bailyn argues that the colonies were a half-civilized hinterland of the European culture system. He is undoubtedly correct to insist that the colonies were part of an Anglo-American empire. But to divide the empire into English core and colonial periphery, as Bailyn does, devalues the achievements of colonial culture. It is true, as Bailyn claims, that high culture in the colonies never matched that in England. But what of seventeenth-century New England, where the settlers created effective laws, built a distinguished university, and published books? Bailyn might respond that New England was exceptional. However, the ideas and institutions developed by New England Puritans had powerful effects on North American culture.
Although Bailyn goes on to apply his approach to some thousands of indentured servants who migrated just prior to the revolution, he fails to link their experience with the political development of the United States. Evidence presented in his work suggests how we might make such a connection. These indentured servants were treated as slaves for the period during which they had sold their time to American employers. It is not surprising that as soon as they served their time they passed up good wages in the cities and headed west to ensure their personal independence by acquiring land. Thus, it is in the west that a peculiarly American political culture began, among colonists who were suspicious of authority and intensely anti-aristocratic.
-------------
Can we discuss primary purpose, main idea, purpose of 4th paragraph here
My take in next post
Thanks
Patanjali
-
patanjali.purpose
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
- Thanked: 114 times
- Followed by:12 members
patanjali.purpose wrote:My take:
-------------
Bernard Bailyn has recently reinterpreted the early history of the United States by applying new social research findings on the experiences of European migrants. In his reinterpretation, migration becomes the organizing principle for rewriting the history of preindustrial North America. His approach rests on four separate propositions.
Point:
BB - considers migration - principal for rewriting NA history. Approch - 4 propositions
The first of these asserts that residents of early modern England moved regularly about their countryside; migrating to the New World was simply a "natural spillover." Although at first the colonies held little positive attraction for the English-they would rather have stayed home-by the eighteenth century people increasingly migrated to America because they regarded it as the land of opportunity. Secondly, Bailyn holds that, contrary to the notion that used to flourish in America history textbooks, there was never a typical New World community. For example, the economic and demographic character of early New England towns varied considerably.
Point - describe 1 & 2 propositions
Bailyn's third proposition suggests two general patterns prevailing among the many thousands of migrants: one group came as indentured servants, another came to acquire land. Surprisingly, Bailyn suggests that those who recruited indentured servants were the driving forces of transatlantic migration. These colonial entrepreneurs helped determine the social character of people who came to preindustrial North America. At first, thousands of unskilled laborers were recruited; by the 1730's, however, American employers demanded skilled artisans.
Point - 3rd proposition
Finally, Bailyn argues that the colonies were a half-civilized hinterland of the European culture system. He is undoubtedly correct to insist that the colonies were part of an Anglo-American empire. But to divide the empire into English core and colonial periphery, as Bailyn does, devalues the achievements of colonial culture. It is true, as Bailyn claims, that high culture in the colonies never matched that in England. But what of seventeenth-century New England, where the settlers created effective laws, built a distinguished university, and published books? Bailyn might respond that New England was exceptional. However, the ideas and institutions developed by New England Puritans had powerful effects on North American culture.
Point - 4th proposition - colonies half-civilized EU. New Eng Puritans has impact on NA
Although Bailyn goes on to apply his approach to some thousands of indentured servants who migrated just prior to the revolution, he fails to link their experience with the political development of the United States. Evidence presented in his work suggests how we might make such a connection. These indentured servants were treated as slaves for the period during which they had sold their time to American employers. It is not surprising that as soon as they served their time they passed up good wages in the cities and headed west to ensure their personal independence by acquiring land. Thus, it is in the west that a peculiarly American political culture began, among colonists who were suspicious of authority and intensely anti-aristocratic.
Point - further substantiate his point of 3rd para that West/England had significant impact on NA
Primary Purpose: Discuss BB interpretation of US hisroty with respect to migration. Should it be discuss or evaluate?
Main Point: Migration has impact on Early US history. West culture has significant impact on NA
Purpose of 4th para: Further substantiate author's point (mentioned in 3rd para) that west as significant impact on NA
Pls give your views
-------------
Can we discuss primary purpose, main idea, purpose of 4th paragraph here
Thanks
Patanjali
-
Target2009
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 574
- Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:47 pm
- Location: USA
- Thanked: 29 times
- Followed by:5 members
All looks fine but I think above is Final Para Purpose. 4th para introduces & elaborate BB's 4th propositions.patanjali.purpose wrote: Purpose of 4th para: Further substantiate author's point (mentioned in 3rd para) that west as significant impact on NA
Regards
Abhishek
------------------------------
MasterGmat Student
Abhishek
------------------------------
MasterGmat Student
-
patanjali.purpose
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 784
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 3:51 am
- Thanked: 114 times
- Followed by:12 members
Target2009 wrote:All looks fine but I think above is Final Para Purpose. 4th para introduces & elaborate BB's 4th propositions.patanjali.purpose wrote: Purpose of 4th para: Further substantiate author's point (mentioned in 3rd para) that west as significant impact on NA
Oh thanks. I agree with your comments on purpose of 4th para.
I wanted to mention purpose of 5th para.
