Morgan Q. Goulding

Morgan Q. Goulding

Americus, Georgia

Georgia Southwestern State University

Assistant Professor

More

Haven't backed any projects yet! 

Published on Sep 11, 2019

Why Snails Kill 200 000 People Every Year

Nothing to report from the lab right now - I just want to advertise a video tutorial on schisto that was released last month. 'The Second Deadliest Animal on the Planet.'

Group 6 Copy 83
Published on Sep 03, 2019

No effect in second trial

After feeding on a strict diet of heat-treated dsRNA-expressing E. coli for 15 days, snails were returned to their normal Romaine lettuce regimen. During the following week, experimental snails pro...

Group 6 Copy 28
Published on Jul 25, 2019

Trial #2 - feeding begins

Snail-targeting and control E. coli strains were grown overnight at room temperature with aeration, in 1L flasks containing 240ml LB, ampicillin 0.1mg/ml, tetracycline 0.01mg/ml, IPTG 1mM, to OD600...

Group 6 Copy 164
Published on Jul 22, 2019

Starting second trial

Apologies for the delay, PI has been busy (teaching full time, setting up research lab and imaging facility, supervising two undergraduate research projects, moving family into house, then out agai...

Group 6 Copy 188
Published on Nov 29, 2018

Trial #2 coming up...

Plan: double the amount of dsRNA food per snail - to hit them harder!keep snails in large petri dishes instead of (potentially toxic) plastic cupstreat snails in pairs - to encourage reproductionta...

Group 6 Copy 94
Published on Oct 28, 2018

Update: No exciting results

Snail genes targeted:A: Nonmuscle Myosin II; C,D: MRCK; F: ROCKSunday 10/219pm: Single snails placed in 220ml well water in cups with ~1.3ml chow (mixture of heat-killed E. coli pellet + 1ml lettuc...

Group 6 Copy 132
Published on Oct 22, 2018

Nibbles

Group 6 Copy 92
Published on Oct 21, 2018

Snails Fed

Using food processor, finely chopped 30g Romaine lettuce leaves (no ribs); steeped the chopped lettuce in 55g hot (70-80C) LB agar for 15 minutes, filtered through a coffee filter. Added 1ml filtra...

Group 6 Copy 139
Published on Oct 21, 2018

First Harvest

First Harvest, 10am today. OD600 = 0.9. Cells pelleted at 4C, 3000xg 15 minutes with slow deceleration (brake setting #3). Supernatants decanted, leaving about 250ml. Tubes stored at 4C. Now to mix...

Group 6 Copy 65
Show more updates
Today (Tuesday 30 July): uneaten portions replaced with fresh helpings. (Same batch of gelled bacteria suspension, but kept at 4C for the past five days.)
Jul 30, 2019
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Here's a silent movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njQdmhfAyRc
Jul 30, 2019
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Here's a movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIOkVtCXdxY
Jul 29, 2019
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Here's a movie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As7Rq1lBCR4
Jul 29, 2019
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
PS. For gel analysis of DNA and RNA, planning to try this newish method that is supposed to be a lot faster and better than what everybody always does! Here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15517972
Jul 25, 2019
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Nicole, thanks for your comment. Science is often negative results. Negative results are good. The best kind of negative result allows us to confidently conclude: A does NOT cause B. You get this conclusion only with a carefully controlled experiment. Everything - every thing! - has to be constant, except for variable A, which is well-defined. (Of course, phenomenon B has to be well-defined too!) (To be extra sure, you need a 'positive control' where factor X should reliably cause phenomenon B. Just to make sure everything else is set up right.) If factor A has no effect on phenomenon B, then, hooray! you have falsified a hypothesis about how something works. A is not a cause of B. Move on to the next hypothesis about what causes B. Most new hypotheses are easily shown to be wrong. Keep going through the wrong ones until you find any that do not seem wrong. In the case of my first trial with the bacterial food and snails, we aren't talking about such a well-controlled experiment. Many variables are uncontrolled and/or undefined. Even observable effects are not very well defined. That's OK, because THIS IS NOT SCIENCE. This is, in fact, what we call ENGINEERING. This is the game where we are aiming at a desired practical GOAL, and not urgently caring about how everything works in between a design and its result. The earliest attempts at human flight, for example, failed to consider a lot of variables that have since been considered - and maybe more that have yet to be considered. But if a human got to fly a little bit (hopefully landing safely) it was considered a *positive* result - an approximation of the desired goal. And then the tinkering would go on to improve it. For the snail feeding RNAi project, the good news is that the first trial had some obvious flaws, and the second trial can easily fix these. Since this work is not being done in a well-equipped molecular lab, it will contain unanswered questions, such as: are the bacteria making any dsRNA, and if so, how much? Does this material survive the food-making process? How much of it gets eaten by snails? How much of the ingested material makes it into the snail's gut? How much of this gets transported to cells throughout the snail's body? This engineering project cares only about two questions. Are we producing dsRNA? and does it have an effect on the snails!
Dec 18, 2018
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Nicole, thanks for your comment. Science is often negative results. Negative results are good. The best kind of negative result allows us to confidently conclude: A does NOT cause B. You get this conclusion only with a carefully controlled experiment. Everything - every thing! - has to be constant, except for variable A, which is well-defined. (Of course, phenomenon B has to be well-defined too!) (To be extra sure, you need a 'positive control' where factor X should reliably cause phenomenon B. Just to make sure everything else is set up right.) If factor A has no effect on phenomenon B, then, hooray! you have falsified a hypothesis about how something works. A is not a cause of B. Move on to the next hypothesis about what causes B. Most new hypotheses are easily shown to be wrong. Keep going through the wrong ones until you find any that do not seem wrong. In the case of my first trial with the bacterial food and snails, we aren't talking about such a well-controlled experiment. Many variables are uncontrolled and/or undefined. Even observable effects are not very well defined. That's OK, because THIS IS NOT SCIENCE. This is, in fact, what we call ENGINEERING. This is the game where we are aiming at a desired practical GOAL, and not urgently caring about how everything works in between a design and its result. The earliest attempts at human flight, for example, failed to consider a lot of variables that have since been considered - and maybe more that have yet to be considered. But if a human got to fly a little bit (hopefully landing safely) it was considered a *positive* result - an approximation of the desired goal. And then the tinkering would go on to improve it. For the snail feeding RNAi project, the good news is that the first trial had some obvious flaws, and the second trial can easily fix these. Since this work is not being done in a well-equipped molecular lab, it will contain unanswered questions, such as: are the bacteria making any dsRNA, and if so, how much? Does this material survive the food-making process? How much of it gets eaten by snails? How much of the ingested material makes it into the snail's gut? How much of this gets transported to cells throughout the snail's body? This engineering project cares only about two questions. Are we producing dsRNA? and does it have an effect on the snails!
Dec 18, 2018
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
The hope is to shut down the action of a gene that is essential for life. The expected results of this gene shutdown would be (a) embryos fail to develop; (b) adult snails cease to lay eggs; (c) adult snails die.
Oct 28, 2018
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
The LB agar contains yeast extract, so it has some of that funky odor that helps make beer so attractive.
Oct 22, 2018
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Now we wait. It might take a week or so to see results. I will check every day for egg masses, mark them with the date, and check on embryo development. If nematodes are a guide, embryo lethality should be the first sign of gene inactivation.
Oct 21, 2018
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Transgenic lettuce is an alternative. But more expensive.
Oct 21, 2018
Eco-friendly and affordable molecular weaponry against snails that transmit schistosomiasis
View comment
Consciousness-raising on water quality in the USA! We need more like this. Keep up the good work!
Aug 30, 2018
Testing Water Quality and Its Correlation with Disease Diagnoses in Weakley County, TN
View comment
Show more comments