Scioly.org

Thank you so much! Where are the research papers posted?

kevintovar28 wrote:Thank you so much! Where are the research papers posted?

You can use this link. This site has a lot of very useful info across all aspects of the event.

I'm trying to make my model, but it says I need a mini toober that's 168 cm long (5.5 feet) and the biggest one in my kit is only 4 feet?? Am I missing a piece or just totally messing something up?

eagerlearner102 wrote:Just wondering, how are you guys studying the biochemistry part of the test? I took some practice tests like MIT, Florida, Princeton, Long Island and I have to admit some of the questions were pretty hard (Gibbs Free Energy, total charge of peptide, psi/phi angle).

I would go through wikipedia and Klein Organic Chemistry if you can.

For now, I am going over MIT Courseware lecture notes and transcripts.

I do have a foundation in biochemistry. However, I would like to know more about it in detail. Which chapters do you suggest me to go over? I only have 5 days left XP.

Also, aside from reading the research paper by Yang and Patel for AcrIIA4 and watching videos on MSOE, what other resources did you guys use to study for CRISPR?

Every time my team and I get our test results, we never got back our grading rubric for our Pre-Builds or On site builds. I am wondering what Judges are looking for more specifically in these Pre-Builds and On Site Builds.

NovaBro wrote:Every time my team and I get our test results, we never got back our grading rubric for our Pre-Builds or On site builds. I am wondering what Judges are looking for more specifically in these Pre-Builds and On Site Builds.

You're not really supposed to have the rubric/know what the judges are looking for. I think part of the reason that the Prebuild weighting was dropped was because some teams got their hands on the rubric when they weren't supposed to. Just do the best you can.

Some people were going to get their hands on the rubric eventually, if not almost certainly. I have, and I never ever specifically tried to.
This website: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5595222/ gives many side chains and residue lengths that can go for extra credit. (as well as give much needed knowledge of AcrIIA4's inner workings)
Plus it's all up to perception. They look for folds and loops, and correct starting and end points, correct chirality of alpha helices and correct amount of turns, etc.
However, it doesn't mater how good the model is if your judges misgrade it, and they will (as a rule) always do this.
Unless they're a veteran of the event many fold, most people can't grade a protein correctly for the life of them (even I get confused, though I've done this event at 5 or 6 competitions now).