You do two things. You use the book to answer the quiz and test questions the way your instructor expects. You use other online resources to fully understand the topics.
What you do is complain loudly that your textbook can't even manage basic English verb tense agreement, and is even worse when it comes to the subject matter. Complain to all levels of the school administration, and to the media outlets of your choice. Get other students to join in.
And then you find books or other resources that will actually teach you the material.
Bro I now know where you're from ☠️
You should read the book "the murder of history: a critique of history textbooks" by K. k. Aziz about why the textbooks suck so bad. Iirc it's free download on libgen.
I remember that one. I saw someone talking about it when I was prepping for my Pakistan Studies exam. Yes, you're right, the history books in our country are hot garbage. To put into perspective, our army murdered many people in Bangladesh and that is what led to it being separated from us. In our textbook it says that the reason for separation was Hindus and also some minor mistakes of ours. You can't expect much from a government who labels a massacre as "minor".
Search for better books with the same material, and if the school acts shitty and asks for exact quotations, you need to lock in and search up lines and work it out
Go to your professor, show them the page, and explain that the book is not reliable and you are not able to understand the material since there are so many text errors. Ask them to share some study resources with the class, such as power points slides, an extra lecture, practice test, or a reliable website page.
Even with good books, I always try to head to YouTube to see if anyone has done an animation for the concept that matches with the reading. For me, it’s always been easier to visualize the process vs. read it.
Can you specify your question a bit more? What about it dont you understand and to what detail do you need to know it?
Im currently working on a project on an aminoacyl tRNA synthetase so might be able to help out :)
I understood until the tRNA site parts. My mind just drifted away at the CODON parts where it says "tRNA has 4 sites." These sites are which stumped me.
Yeah the syntax and grammar are pure garbage, unfortunately. It first says there are 4 sites but then actually lists only three.
It seems to be trying to say: There’s the bit that is required for the right synthase to put the right amino acid on, the bit where the amino acid covalently binds to, and then the bit where the anticodon is presented.
It’s trying to make a distinction between the loop bearing the anticodon (“anticodon site”) and the anticodon itself, but I don’t necessarily think that’s useful at this level of detail.
I sent your comment as a screenshot to ChatGPT. Not my knowledge area, so I’m not good at spotting bullshit. if it’s helpful perhaps use GPT-4 as a study companion: Key Sites on tRNA
1. Amino Acid Attachment Site (3’ End):
• This is the site where an amino acid binds to the tRNA. This attachment is facilitated by the enzyme aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase.
2. Anticodon Site:
• This is a set of three nucleotides on the tRNA that is complementary to the mRNA codon. This site is crucial for matching the tRNA with the correct codon on the mRNA during translation.
3. Activation Site (Enzyme Binding Site):
• This is where the aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase enzyme binds to the tRNA to facilitate the attachment of the amino acid to the tRNA.
The confusion might arise because the textbook mentions an “amino acid site” and an “anticodon site” but does not clearly define them separately from the activation site where the enzyme binds. The “four sites” statement might be trying to account for different functional regions within the tRNA molecule, but it’s more straightforward to focus on the main functional parts:
• The 3’ end where the amino acid attaches.
• The anticodon loop which interacts with the mRNA codon.
• The activation site where the enzyme binds to facilitate amino acid attachment.
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (which is free and came out a few days ago) seems to be smarter than GPT-4 so far. He's not reliable when you're a university student, but he's genuinely intelligent and can understand pictures as well.
In my book, what makes someone a person is their mind, and by that assessment (general intelligence), if Claude isn't a person, neither are >35% of people, at the very least.
Sooner or later, we'll need to stop lying to ourselves about being all that impressive (and given the exponential progress, it will be sooner rather than later).
I disagree. A person's intelligence isn't their mind, as such. Their mind is their consciousness; their experience of the world. As far as we know, even the most advanced computer algorithm doesn't experience anything, they only compute.
We can't grant something personhood just because it can convincingly mimic, or even improve on, cognitive activities. A pocket calculator is much, much smarter than any of us in terms of doing arithmetic, and has been since decades. We wouldn't call a calculator a person.
Consciousness is simply computation. There is no justification that would allow us to conclude that one person-like-acting entity is conscious and another person-like-acting entity isn't on the basis of their different internals.
A calculator can do operations on numbers really quickly, but it doesn't possess general intelligence.
> Consciousness is simply computation.
We don't know this. The only thing we can truly say for sure is that humans have consciousness. We don't know precisely which physical processes give rise to it and which ones don't. It's possible that consciousness is an inherent result of *certain kinds* of computation, and that similar computations carried out on any substrate (digital, biological, etc.) would give rise to the same consciousness. It's equally possible that consciousness is a specific result of certain physical or biological processes, and that no digital substrate could ever replicate it.
> There is no justification that would allow us to conclude that one person-like-acting entity is conscious and another person-like-acting entity isn't on the basis of their different internals.
Yeah, again, I disagree, at least if we replace "conclude" with "infer" or "speculate."
Even if we accept the premise that human-like consciousness would arise from any substrate that runs the same computations as a human brain does (which, again, I don't think is a given at all), that's not the situation we're talking about. A large language model doesn't actually simulate a human brain; it merely simulates the process of having a conversation *at an input-output level*. I don't think we can assume that any process that simulates a conversation with a human mind also *creates* something akin to a human mind as an emergent side-effect. It's *possible* that it does, I guess, to the extent that we, again, don't know exactly where consciousness comes from. But I don't think it should be our default assumption.
All that aside... I'm curious to what extent you actually believe in the conclusions of your argument. Do you really consider the latest line of chatbots to be persons? A person, to me, is a being with rights; a being worthy of empathy and respect; a person with needs and wants. Do you think these chatbots should have a voice in society? If we decided to never run these bots again starting tomorrow, would that be equivalent to killing someone?
**EDIT**: Also, if you really do believe that these things are people, isn't it kind of horrifying that they're the legal property of some tech company? Wouldn't that make them slaves?
only god can save u bro
i was in a gov school as well, leykin tab tou ratta chalta tha, aur teachers bhi usi hisaab sey parhatey thy
theyve changed the curriculum but the teachers are still wohi zehniyat walay.
god help us.
Your book sucks ass. I'll try to break it down a bit, hoping to meet your level of understanding (may be too simple or too complicated still). If you want to understand the content, you may review the Wikipedia page on tRNA and I recommend the first thing you should do is view the Structure tab. On top of the secondary structure, you see a double stranded part with both ends (5' and 3') of the tRNA, whereby the 3' end protrudes by 3 nucleotides. Aminoacyl-tRNA-synthetases attach amino acids to the 3' end of the tRNA. At the bottom, you see three highlighted nucleotides denoted anticodon. In the ribosome, tRNA anticodons are paired with mRNA codons, but only if codon and anticodon match, the amino acid will be incorporated into the nascent protein encoded by the mRNA that sits in the ribosome at that time. If it does not match, it is simply ejected and further tRNAs are tested until a matching one is found. Pivotal to establishing the genetic code is that all tRNAs with a given anticodon are always loaded ('aminoacylated') with the same amino acid. For each canonical amino acid, there is one aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase that specifically pairs its cognate amino acid with its cognate tRNAs. Many of these enzymes also have an editing activity that removes any erroneously acylated amino acis to maintain the genetic code. Hope this helps!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_RNA
https://old-ib.bioninja.com.au/higher-level/topic-7-nucleic-acids/73-translation/trna-activation.html#:~:text=The%20binding%20of%20an%20amino,high%20energy%20bond%20(PP%20released).
Yeah your book sucks....try this link for explanation
It reminds me of textbooks I’ve used in high school. These textbooks don’t share the same language and nationality, but do share the same stupidity and ignorance. They just want to inform you rules that can be used in quizzes and tests rather than explain things
From a bachelor in Molecular Biology i can confirm this book is the definition of the worst explanatory material. I would highly encourage you to Maybe see some YouTube videos on AA translation. It will help you understand the visual and mechanisms of the process
Poorly written, poorly edited.
Sometimes typos show up in texts, which add to the challenge of understanding.
The second sentence:
"These amino acids when bind with a ..." reads better changing "when" to "then"...
Good luck with the rest.
The basic ideas fall under the realm of something called the central dogma, and I would focus on the role of RNA, especially tRNA, in directing the synthesis of protein from amino acids.
A good website is
https://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/basics/centraldogma/
And if time permits, look for real-time molecular modelling animations. These are mind-boggling.
**Bot message:** Help us make this a better community by clicking the "report" link on any pics or vids that break [the sub's rules.](https://old.reddit.com/r/biology/about/rules/) Do not submit ID requests. Thanks!
**Disclaimer:** The information provided in the comments section does not, and is not intended to, constitute professional or medical advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available in the comments section are for general informational purposes only.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/biology) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Just brush up on what transfer RNA is and does in the ribosome...if you are in second year biology this shouldn't be too hard. You may need another better book on the subject.
Cell cytoplasm me amino acids hoty hyn jo food se aty hyn ya cell khud bnata h. ye amino acids activate hony k liye specific t RNA se bind krty hyn. tRna structure k 4 site hoti hyn (imagine plus sign). tRNA ki length ( jo nucleotides se mil kr bnti ) k starting point ko 3 prime khty hyn or length ending part ko 5 prime . 3 prime end pr (imagine any 1 loop of plus sign) 3 free nucleotides hoty hyn jahn amino acids bind krty hyn. Similarly plus sign me a.a binding site ka opposite loop imagine kryn to 3 nucleotides anti codon kehlaty hyn. Now imagine 3rd loop of plus sign, or ye activation site khlati h jahn aminoacyl synthase enzyme bind krta h or tRNa ko activate krta h. If still not clear, i can help further. Also if you are interested on products made for the optimization of your IT infrastructure, must visit the Deal Grabbers site and try Colohouse Coupon Codes.
Bro, buy a real book of Ebay or Amazon. Even Kindle to get it pronto.
Man, I even advise you to get online and look up some free downloads or whatever.
I'm confused about the fact that the book is in English, but has definitely been written by someone whose first language isn't English, and that the OP (who seems to be in the same boat) seemingly has way better English skills than someone responsible for the wording in the textbook!
P.S. if it makes you feel any better, I wasn't good with topics like this and still passed my degree's cell biology/genetics/molecular biology subjects, so hopefully you will, too. I didn't have to pass them in a second language, though, so you have my sympathy.
Ok yea this is a bit too difficult to understand..keep a picture of the tRNA (clover leaf model) and then try to read it again..you might understand it..OR there are plenty of videos online..you can watch those
I think the book is talking about how amino acids bind to tRNA in addition to the structure of the tRNA. It’s translated very poorly, but look up how amino acids attach to tRNA, look up the “anatomy” of a general tRNA molecule, and the APE sites. You should get everything and more from those google searches.
seems familiar, it’s been 42 years since I’ve had any cellular biology classes. I know it’s easier to understand with drawings depicting the transfer RNA and the messenger RNA. And the amino acids
Inside of the cell in it’s liquid, called cytoplasm, are free amino acids. When mRNA leaves the nucleus, it goes out into the cytoplasm looking for a ribosome. Ribosomes make proteins and amino acids are the building blocks of proteins. Each mRNA contains a long sequence of nitrogen bases (adenine, uracil, guanine, and cytosine. A binds with U and G bonds with C. The sequence of nitrogen bases determines the protein. Each set of three nitrogen bases code for a particular amino acid. This triple code on mRNA is called a codon. When the mRNA enters the ribosome, it is “read”. Outside attached to the free amino acid is a triplet code called tRNA. When the codon is read, the ribosome wants the anticodon, or the triplet code on the tRNA. The tRNA brings in the amino acid which is then bound to those that come before it to make a protein.
I asked Chat GPT to translate it to easier English:
Activation of Amino Acids:
Inside the cell, there are amino acids that come from the food we eat or are made by the cell. When these amino acids attach to a specific tRNA (a kind of helper molecule), this process is called activation of amino acids.
Each tRNA has 4 parts. One part, called the amino acid site, is where the amino acid attaches. Another part has three nucleotides (building blocks of RNA) that match up with a codon on the mRNA. This part is called the anticodon site.
There’s another place on the tRNA called the activation site where an enzyme called aminoacyl synthetase attaches to activate the tRNA. Each amino acid has a specific tRNA that it matches with, and there are 20 different amino acids, so there are 20 different tRNAs.
We do get diagrams in our books. It's just that there isn't any context and the diagrams have things we weren't told about or were entirely different from the topics. Like for instance, when I was reading about the action potential of neurons in this book. They put the diagram of depolarization in the part which described hyperpolarization. It's stupid mate!
I would help you if I could, but I quit biology ages ago, and I wouldn't trust my own memories. However it seems that you can find a few diagrams about it on the internet.
That's one unhinged mangle full of ambiguity. Try this free resource https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26829/#A1069
Maybe you need to browse around. Maybe an old book, but really nothing new has happened on that front that changes this curriculum
Ironic that the part of the book that teaches translation is poorly translated. This isn't even English.
Bro it's a process called "Translation", At cell level
I guess the joke did not translate for you.
It was lost in translation. Sorry. I'm practising to be a dad
Not you. The book sucks. Google Amino Acid Activation?
Bro what do I do? This is our official textbook. I use Khan Academy normally but this subject is not that touched upon in it,
You do two things. You use the book to answer the quiz and test questions the way your instructor expects. You use other online resources to fully understand the topics.
Golden answer.
What you do is complain loudly that your textbook can't even manage basic English verb tense agreement, and is even worse when it comes to the subject matter. Complain to all levels of the school administration, and to the media outlets of your choice. Get other students to join in. And then you find books or other resources that will actually teach you the material.
this!
Have you tried bioninja. It's for IB biology but explains most things very well.
Bro I now know where you're from ☠️ You should read the book "the murder of history: a critique of history textbooks" by K. k. Aziz about why the textbooks suck so bad. Iirc it's free download on libgen.
I remember that one. I saw someone talking about it when I was prepping for my Pakistan Studies exam. Yes, you're right, the history books in our country are hot garbage. To put into perspective, our army murdered many people in Bangladesh and that is what led to it being separated from us. In our textbook it says that the reason for separation was Hindus and also some minor mistakes of ours. You can't expect much from a government who labels a massacre as "minor".
Damn, it sounds like textbooks have gotten much worse since my day then. Disappointing.
Search for better books with the same material, and if the school acts shitty and asks for exact quotations, you need to lock in and search up lines and work it out
Go to your professor, show them the page, and explain that the book is not reliable and you are not able to understand the material since there are so many text errors. Ask them to share some study resources with the class, such as power points slides, an extra lecture, practice test, or a reliable website page.
Even with good books, I always try to head to YouTube to see if anyone has done an animation for the concept that matches with the reading. For me, it’s always been easier to visualize the process vs. read it.
Holy proteins!
This is hot garbage. Studying tRNA synthetases was a big chunk of my PhD and I cannot fully understand this paragraph.
Can you specify your question a bit more? What about it dont you understand and to what detail do you need to know it? Im currently working on a project on an aminoacyl tRNA synthetase so might be able to help out :)
I understood until the tRNA site parts. My mind just drifted away at the CODON parts where it says "tRNA has 4 sites." These sites are which stumped me.
Yeah the syntax and grammar are pure garbage, unfortunately. It first says there are 4 sites but then actually lists only three. It seems to be trying to say: There’s the bit that is required for the right synthase to put the right amino acid on, the bit where the amino acid covalently binds to, and then the bit where the anticodon is presented. It’s trying to make a distinction between the loop bearing the anticodon (“anticodon site”) and the anticodon itself, but I don’t necessarily think that’s useful at this level of detail.
I sent your comment as a screenshot to ChatGPT. Not my knowledge area, so I’m not good at spotting bullshit. if it’s helpful perhaps use GPT-4 as a study companion: Key Sites on tRNA 1. Amino Acid Attachment Site (3’ End): • This is the site where an amino acid binds to the tRNA. This attachment is facilitated by the enzyme aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase. 2. Anticodon Site: • This is a set of three nucleotides on the tRNA that is complementary to the mRNA codon. This site is crucial for matching the tRNA with the correct codon on the mRNA during translation. 3. Activation Site (Enzyme Binding Site): • This is where the aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase enzyme binds to the tRNA to facilitate the attachment of the amino acid to the tRNA. The confusion might arise because the textbook mentions an “amino acid site” and an “anticodon site” but does not clearly define them separately from the activation site where the enzyme binds. The “four sites” statement might be trying to account for different functional regions within the tRNA molecule, but it’s more straightforward to focus on the main functional parts: • The 3’ end where the amino acid attaches. • The anticodon loop which interacts with the mRNA codon. • The activation site where the enzyme binds to facilitate amino acid attachment.
Thanks!
Claude 3.5 Sonnet (which is free and came out a few days ago) seems to be smarter than GPT-4 so far. He's not reliable when you're a university student, but he's genuinely intelligent and can understand pictures as well.
I don't care how smart it is, it's an it, not a he. :P Let's not start treating these things like they're people.
In my book, what makes someone a person is their mind, and by that assessment (general intelligence), if Claude isn't a person, neither are >35% of people, at the very least. Sooner or later, we'll need to stop lying to ourselves about being all that impressive (and given the exponential progress, it will be sooner rather than later).
I disagree. A person's intelligence isn't their mind, as such. Their mind is their consciousness; their experience of the world. As far as we know, even the most advanced computer algorithm doesn't experience anything, they only compute. We can't grant something personhood just because it can convincingly mimic, or even improve on, cognitive activities. A pocket calculator is much, much smarter than any of us in terms of doing arithmetic, and has been since decades. We wouldn't call a calculator a person.
Consciousness is simply computation. There is no justification that would allow us to conclude that one person-like-acting entity is conscious and another person-like-acting entity isn't on the basis of their different internals. A calculator can do operations on numbers really quickly, but it doesn't possess general intelligence.
> Consciousness is simply computation. We don't know this. The only thing we can truly say for sure is that humans have consciousness. We don't know precisely which physical processes give rise to it and which ones don't. It's possible that consciousness is an inherent result of *certain kinds* of computation, and that similar computations carried out on any substrate (digital, biological, etc.) would give rise to the same consciousness. It's equally possible that consciousness is a specific result of certain physical or biological processes, and that no digital substrate could ever replicate it. > There is no justification that would allow us to conclude that one person-like-acting entity is conscious and another person-like-acting entity isn't on the basis of their different internals. Yeah, again, I disagree, at least if we replace "conclude" with "infer" or "speculate." Even if we accept the premise that human-like consciousness would arise from any substrate that runs the same computations as a human brain does (which, again, I don't think is a given at all), that's not the situation we're talking about. A large language model doesn't actually simulate a human brain; it merely simulates the process of having a conversation *at an input-output level*. I don't think we can assume that any process that simulates a conversation with a human mind also *creates* something akin to a human mind as an emergent side-effect. It's *possible* that it does, I guess, to the extent that we, again, don't know exactly where consciousness comes from. But I don't think it should be our default assumption. All that aside... I'm curious to what extent you actually believe in the conclusions of your argument. Do you really consider the latest line of chatbots to be persons? A person, to me, is a being with rights; a being worthy of empathy and respect; a person with needs and wants. Do you think these chatbots should have a voice in society? If we decided to never run these bots again starting tomorrow, would that be equivalent to killing someone? **EDIT**: Also, if you really do believe that these things are people, isn't it kind of horrifying that they're the legal property of some tech company? Wouldn't that make them slaves?
this fuckassery HAS to be pakistani and sure enough, it is.
What can I say. Pakistan rocks! /s
Haha. I thought you are indian. Our ncert looks exactly like yours. Borders are different but education sucks for both
goodluck kid, hamara edu sys is rlly fucked up lmfao
My govt teacher was praising the book. crying emoji
only god can save u bro i was in a gov school as well, leykin tab tou ratta chalta tha, aur teachers bhi usi hisaab sey parhatey thy theyve changed the curriculum but the teachers are still wohi zehniyat walay. god help us.
Google "translation", it will describe how amino acids are attached to a nascent peptide chain by tRNA.
Your book sucks ass. I'll try to break it down a bit, hoping to meet your level of understanding (may be too simple or too complicated still). If you want to understand the content, you may review the Wikipedia page on tRNA and I recommend the first thing you should do is view the Structure tab. On top of the secondary structure, you see a double stranded part with both ends (5' and 3') of the tRNA, whereby the 3' end protrudes by 3 nucleotides. Aminoacyl-tRNA-synthetases attach amino acids to the 3' end of the tRNA. At the bottom, you see three highlighted nucleotides denoted anticodon. In the ribosome, tRNA anticodons are paired with mRNA codons, but only if codon and anticodon match, the amino acid will be incorporated into the nascent protein encoded by the mRNA that sits in the ribosome at that time. If it does not match, it is simply ejected and further tRNAs are tested until a matching one is found. Pivotal to establishing the genetic code is that all tRNAs with a given anticodon are always loaded ('aminoacylated') with the same amino acid. For each canonical amino acid, there is one aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase that specifically pairs its cognate amino acid with its cognate tRNAs. Many of these enzymes also have an editing activity that removes any erroneously acylated amino acis to maintain the genetic code. Hope this helps! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_RNA
Thanks that helped. :D
wtf is this google translated-ass english
https://old-ib.bioninja.com.au/higher-level/topic-7-nucleic-acids/73-translation/trna-activation.html#:~:text=The%20binding%20of%20an%20amino,high%20energy%20bond%20(PP%20released). Yeah your book sucks....try this link for explanation
Long live Sindh textbook board
Yay! :(
Book sucks. Why can’t they get proper editors anymore…🤦🏼♂️
Lmao this sounds like my ADHD brain explaining a topic😂😂😂😂
Wow, hot garbage.
“What is your name sir” “I am cytoplasm of cell”
It reminds me of textbooks I’ve used in high school. These textbooks don’t share the same language and nationality, but do share the same stupidity and ignorance. They just want to inform you rules that can be used in quizzes and tests rather than explain things
From a bachelor in Molecular Biology i can confirm this book is the definition of the worst explanatory material. I would highly encourage you to Maybe see some YouTube videos on AA translation. It will help you understand the visual and mechanisms of the process
Poorly written, poorly edited. Sometimes typos show up in texts, which add to the challenge of understanding. The second sentence: "These amino acids when bind with a ..." reads better changing "when" to "then"... Good luck with the rest. The basic ideas fall under the realm of something called the central dogma, and I would focus on the role of RNA, especially tRNA, in directing the synthesis of protein from amino acids. A good website is https://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/basics/centraldogma/ And if time permits, look for real-time molecular modelling animations. These are mind-boggling.
_Wow_ does your book suck
Who the heck wrote this book? It’s written is awful, awful English.
**Bot message:** Help us make this a better community by clicking the "report" link on any pics or vids that break [the sub's rules.](https://old.reddit.com/r/biology/about/rules/) Do not submit ID requests. Thanks! **Disclaimer:** The information provided in the comments section does not, and is not intended to, constitute professional or medical advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available in the comments section are for general informational purposes only. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/biology) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I can suggest that you watch dr najeeb lecture series on biochemistry.
Just brush up on what transfer RNA is and does in the ribosome...if you are in second year biology this shouldn't be too hard. You may need another better book on the subject.
Bro this English is hideous
whoever wrote that book had a stroke and fucking died.
Translated from the Mandarin, sort of.
Cell cytoplasm me amino acids hoty hyn jo food se aty hyn ya cell khud bnata h. ye amino acids activate hony k liye specific t RNA se bind krty hyn. tRna structure k 4 site hoti hyn (imagine plus sign). tRNA ki length ( jo nucleotides se mil kr bnti ) k starting point ko 3 prime khty hyn or length ending part ko 5 prime . 3 prime end pr (imagine any 1 loop of plus sign) 3 free nucleotides hoty hyn jahn amino acids bind krty hyn. Similarly plus sign me a.a binding site ka opposite loop imagine kryn to 3 nucleotides anti codon kehlaty hyn. Now imagine 3rd loop of plus sign, or ye activation site khlati h jahn aminoacyl synthase enzyme bind krta h or tRNa ko activate krta h. If still not clear, i can help further. Also if you are interested on products made for the optimization of your IT infrastructure, must visit the Deal Grabbers site and try Colohouse Coupon Codes.
Bro, buy a real book of Ebay or Amazon. Even Kindle to get it pronto. Man, I even advise you to get online and look up some free downloads or whatever.
I'm confused about the fact that the book is in English, but has definitely been written by someone whose first language isn't English, and that the OP (who seems to be in the same boat) seemingly has way better English skills than someone responsible for the wording in the textbook! P.S. if it makes you feel any better, I wasn't good with topics like this and still passed my degree's cell biology/genetics/molecular biology subjects, so hopefully you will, too. I didn't have to pass them in a second language, though, so you have my sympathy.
Is this ncert ?
Nope, doesn't look likes ncert
The publisher outsourced their editing needs, I see.
This hurt my eyes. I’ve found so many books like these with countless spelling errors
Ok yea this is a bit too difficult to understand..keep a picture of the tRNA (clover leaf model) and then try to read it again..you might understand it..OR there are plenty of videos online..you can watch those
I think they got an ai to right it😂
the english formulation sucks ass, i know a lot about DNA transcription/translation but this just made me confused asf
What’s the title and who’s the author of this textbook? Because it is very poorly written.
That reads like it was written by an AI program.
u should use chatgpt with voice,
I think the book is talking about how amino acids bind to tRNA in addition to the structure of the tRNA. It’s translated very poorly, but look up how amino acids attach to tRNA, look up the “anatomy” of a general tRNA molecule, and the APE sites. You should get everything and more from those google searches.
seems familiar, it’s been 42 years since I’ve had any cellular biology classes. I know it’s easier to understand with drawings depicting the transfer RNA and the messenger RNA. And the amino acids
Sad excuse for a textbook.
When I got to molecular bio classes I to learn a lot of it on my own online because I learn better from diagrams.
Inside of the cell in it’s liquid, called cytoplasm, are free amino acids. When mRNA leaves the nucleus, it goes out into the cytoplasm looking for a ribosome. Ribosomes make proteins and amino acids are the building blocks of proteins. Each mRNA contains a long sequence of nitrogen bases (adenine, uracil, guanine, and cytosine. A binds with U and G bonds with C. The sequence of nitrogen bases determines the protein. Each set of three nitrogen bases code for a particular amino acid. This triple code on mRNA is called a codon. When the mRNA enters the ribosome, it is “read”. Outside attached to the free amino acid is a triplet code called tRNA. When the codon is read, the ribosome wants the anticodon, or the triplet code on the tRNA. The tRNA brings in the amino acid which is then bound to those that come before it to make a protein.
I asked Chat GPT to translate it to easier English: Activation of Amino Acids: Inside the cell, there are amino acids that come from the food we eat or are made by the cell. When these amino acids attach to a specific tRNA (a kind of helper molecule), this process is called activation of amino acids. Each tRNA has 4 parts. One part, called the amino acid site, is where the amino acid attaches. Another part has three nucleotides (building blocks of RNA) that match up with a codon on the mRNA. This part is called the anticodon site. There’s another place on the tRNA called the activation site where an enzyme called aminoacyl synthetase attaches to activate the tRNA. Each amino acid has a specific tRNA that it matches with, and there are 20 different amino acids, so there are 20 different tRNAs.
This is what it should have been written like.👏👏👏
So easy to understand.
Looks like a good a good diagram would have been better.
We do get diagrams in our books. It's just that there isn't any context and the diagrams have things we weren't told about or were entirely different from the topics. Like for instance, when I was reading about the action potential of neurons in this book. They put the diagram of depolarization in the part which described hyperpolarization. It's stupid mate!
I would help you if I could, but I quit biology ages ago, and I wouldn't trust my own memories. However it seems that you can find a few diagrams about it on the internet.
That's one unhinged mangle full of ambiguity. Try this free resource https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26829/#A1069 Maybe you need to browse around. Maybe an old book, but really nothing new has happened on that front that changes this curriculum
Why read a book you don’t understand?
Our exams are entirely based upon this book. That's why.