It would make sense, given that the event is run by the Milwaukee School of Engineering.kentuckyfan1001 wrote:Isn't the state supervisor the national event supervisor in Wisconsin?Steelfoam wrote:I guess this could be a serious problem in states with multiples regionals that do matter. In wisconsin, I dont think any of the tests were modified. The state supervisor was a hard grader though.
Protein Modeling C
-
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 1075
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 4:47 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: MA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
Protein Modeling Event Supervisor 2015
MA State Science Olympiad Tournament
MIT Invitational Tournament
--
Ward Melville High School Science Olympiad 2010-2012
Paul J Gelinas JHS Science Olympiad 2007-2009
MA State Science Olympiad Tournament
MIT Invitational Tournament
--
Ward Melville High School Science Olympiad 2010-2012
Paul J Gelinas JHS Science Olympiad 2007-2009
-
- Member
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:35 pm
- Division: C
- State: WA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
I have a question. Would you say the rules limit all of your explanations and everything to the 3" x 5" card?
I saw a few at State that had other diagrams on stuff on the bottom of their box. It obviously doesn't matter anymore, but we had been operating on the assumption that you had to squeeze everything you wanted to say onto that one card, front and back. Has everyone else been thinking that?
I saw a few at State that had other diagrams on stuff on the bottom of their box. It obviously doesn't matter anymore, but we had been operating on the assumption that you had to squeeze everything you wanted to say onto that one card, front and back. Has everyone else been thinking that?
-
- Member
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:02 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: WI
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
It didn't look like it was the national supervisor for some reason. (the state supervisor was a bit too old... and also had a pair of "this event is over" sunglasses :p)Phenylethylamine wrote:It would make sense, given that the event is run by the Milwaukee School of Engineering.kentuckyfan1001 wrote:Isn't the state supervisor the national event supervisor in Wisconsin?Steelfoam wrote:I guess this could be a serious problem in states with multiples regionals that do matter. In wisconsin, I dont think any of the tests were modified. The state supervisor was a hard grader though.
In general, make sure your explanations are as concise as possible, meaning that they all fit onto the card. Some supervisors will accept explanations beyond the notecard, but others probably won't (according to the national supervisor - I had the chance to ask her some questions).Press_Tilty wrote:I have a question. Would you say the rules limit all of your explanations and everything to the 3" x 5" card?
I saw a few at State that had other diagrams on stuff on the bottom of their box. It obviously doesn't matter anymore, but we had been operating on the assumption that you had to squeeze everything you wanted to say onto that one card, front and back. Has everyone else been thinking that?
Nathan Hale HS SciO
2011 - Regionals/States: Anat/Phys [1/1!!!], Chem Lab [1/2]
2012 - Regionals/States: Chem Lab [1/6 >_< ], Forensics [2/1!!!], Protein [1/2], Team [9]
2013 - A/P, Chem Lab, 4N6, TPS, C/A (trial)
2011 - Regionals/States: Anat/Phys [1/1!!!], Chem Lab [1/2]
2012 - Regionals/States: Chem Lab [1/6 >_< ], Forensics [2/1!!!], Protein [1/2], Team [9]
2013 - A/P, Chem Lab, 4N6, TPS, C/A (trial)
-
- Member
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:00 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: WA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
I would assume that the diagrams fall under the category of "creative additions." At nationals last year there were quite a few among the top teams that had accompanying posters, if I remember correctly.Press_Tilty wrote:I have a question. Would you say the rules limit all of your explanations and everything to the 3" x 5" card?
I saw a few at State that had other diagrams on stuff on the bottom of their box. It obviously doesn't matter anymore, but we had been operating on the assumption that you had to squeeze everything you wanted to say onto that one card, front and back. Has everyone else been thinking that?
(State, Nationals)
2013: Astro (2, 6) / Chem (2, 5) / Circuits (8, 36) / Diseases (1,1) / Fermi (N/A, 24) / Materials (1, N/A)
2012 : Astro (1, 11) / Chem (N/A, 13) / Diseases (3, 1) / Optics (2, 3) / Sounds (2, 1)
2011: Astro(2,11) / Diseases (1,27) / Optics (1,13) / Proteins (2,15)
2013: Astro (2, 6) / Chem (2, 5) / Circuits (8, 36) / Diseases (1,1) / Fermi (N/A, 24) / Materials (1, N/A)
2012 : Astro (1, 11) / Chem (N/A, 13) / Diseases (3, 1) / Optics (2, 3) / Sounds (2, 1)
2011: Astro(2,11) / Diseases (1,27) / Optics (1,13) / Proteins (2,15)
-
- Member
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:35 pm
- Division: C
- State: WA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
See, if I were a judge, I would interpret "creative additions" as representations of some molecular structure added to the protein itself.
-
- Member
- Posts: 68
- Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 9:02 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: WI
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
That's what I also think. The 3-fold displays, posters, diagrams, walls of text, etc are probably mainly used to appeal to the subjective nature of the scoring process by making everything look nice, while all of the explanations are still on the notecard.Press_Tilty wrote:See, if I were a judge, I would interpret "creative additions" as representations of some molecular structure added to the protein itself.
Nathan Hale HS SciO
2011 - Regionals/States: Anat/Phys [1/1!!!], Chem Lab [1/2]
2012 - Regionals/States: Chem Lab [1/6 >_< ], Forensics [2/1!!!], Protein [1/2], Team [9]
2013 - A/P, Chem Lab, 4N6, TPS, C/A (trial)
2011 - Regionals/States: Anat/Phys [1/1!!!], Chem Lab [1/2]
2012 - Regionals/States: Chem Lab [1/6 >_< ], Forensics [2/1!!!], Protein [1/2], Team [9]
2013 - A/P, Chem Lab, 4N6, TPS, C/A (trial)
-
- Member
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:15 pm
- Division: C
- State: WI
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
No, the person who was at the Wisconsin State tournament was not the national event supervisor. I don't think you get any extra points for posters, however it might help explain your model more?Phenylethylamine wrote:It would make sense, given that the event is run by the Milwaukee School of Engineering.kentuckyfan1001 wrote:Isn't the state supervisor the national event supervisor in Wisconsin?Steelfoam wrote:I guess this could be a serious problem in states with multiples regionals that do matter. In wisconsin, I dont think any of the tests were modified. The state supervisor was a hard grader though.
2013 State,Nats: Disease (2,31) Dynamic (1,8) Forensics (1,4) Chem Lab (-,35)
(region, state, nats)
2012: Disease (1st, 9th,15th) Exp Des (1st,2nd, 21st) Protein (1st,1st,11th) Dynamic (1st,2nd, 21st) Forensics (1st, 6th, 2nd!!!)
2011 Nats: Crime 8th Exp 9th, Orni 11th, CJAP 18th, Disease 19, Dynamic 20
(region, state, nats)
2012: Disease (1st, 9th,15th) Exp Des (1st,2nd, 21st) Protein (1st,1st,11th) Dynamic (1st,2nd, 21st) Forensics (1st, 6th, 2nd!!!)
2011 Nats: Crime 8th Exp 9th, Orni 11th, CJAP 18th, Disease 19, Dynamic 20
-
- Member
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 5:15 pm
- Division: C
- State: WI
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
Sorry for posting twice in a row but, does anyone know what part or parts of MHC we are supposed to model for the national onsite?
2013 State,Nats: Disease (2,31) Dynamic (1,8) Forensics (1,4) Chem Lab (-,35)
(region, state, nats)
2012: Disease (1st, 9th,15th) Exp Des (1st,2nd, 21st) Protein (1st,1st,11th) Dynamic (1st,2nd, 21st) Forensics (1st, 6th, 2nd!!!)
2011 Nats: Crime 8th Exp 9th, Orni 11th, CJAP 18th, Disease 19, Dynamic 20
(region, state, nats)
2012: Disease (1st, 9th,15th) Exp Des (1st,2nd, 21st) Protein (1st,1st,11th) Dynamic (1st,2nd, 21st) Forensics (1st, 6th, 2nd!!!)
2011 Nats: Crime 8th Exp 9th, Orni 11th, CJAP 18th, Disease 19, Dynamic 20
-
- Member
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 12:06 am
- Division: Grad
- State: WA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
The file is 1hsa.pdb; of course, they won't let us know what section we're modeling until the actual competition.Steelfoam wrote:Sorry for posting twice in a row but, does anyone know what part or parts of MHC we are supposed to model for the national onsite?
As for the discussion on creative additions, the goal of the case was to show the bigger picture of the protein. Depending on the judge, they may or may not give you points for it. But hey, if it doesn't hurt then why not? Posters are a little more iffy...
I'm quirky like a quark.
-
- Member
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:46 pm
- Division: C
- State: MO
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Protein Modeling C
1. At Nationals, is it likely there will dock points based on whether your helices are 3_10?
2. Do they count Cys285 and His237 as TWO different creative additions if I explained the role of each residue separately on my note card? (I'm lazy-- trying to get as many free points as possible haha )
3. Would coloring the H-bonds responsible for the dimerization of Chain A and B count as "creative additions" if I explained why those are important?
4. Will it count as a creative addition if I attach something to the active site and just say on my note card that it's the Asp-x-x-Asp recognition site. Or does it have to be more detailed (like part of a real protein that gets cleaved by caspase-3) to receive credit
As you see, my team will probably not place that high at nationals -- so help would be appreciated answering my lazy-bum questions.
2. Do they count Cys285 and His237 as TWO different creative additions if I explained the role of each residue separately on my note card? (I'm lazy-- trying to get as many free points as possible haha )
3. Would coloring the H-bonds responsible for the dimerization of Chain A and B count as "creative additions" if I explained why those are important?
4. Will it count as a creative addition if I attach something to the active site and just say on my note card that it's the Asp-x-x-Asp recognition site. Or does it have to be more detailed (like part of a real protein that gets cleaved by caspase-3) to receive credit
As you see, my team will probably not place that high at nationals -- so help would be appreciated answering my lazy-bum questions.