Лаборатория экологии морского бентоса (гидробиологии)

Курс Let's discuss it! (2016)

Материалы курса 2017 года

Преподаватель: Полина Софронова

[развернуть всё][свернуть всё]

25.01.2016 Animal's dissection[развернуть][свернуть]

Are virtual dissection simulations an acceptable substitute for real animal specimens in schools?

(After http://www.nea.org/home/17249.htm)

Christopher Perillo, president of the Kenosha Education Association, Wisconsin, says YES.

Virtual dissection should be the only option. More students are choosing not to dissect once-living animals, and in some states, that choice is allowed by law. By providing virtual dissections, students don’t need to make complex ethical choices, and research shows that learning outcomes are as good or better with humane teaching resources. More than 6 million animals suffer needlessly every year for high school dissections. There’s nothing humane about prematurely ending a life and then using it “for science.”
I am a special education teacher. As a good educator, I’m required to adapt my lessons to meet the different needs of my students. Science teachers should do the same. Not all students want to become scientists, and to force them to participate in an distasteful and morally objectionable exercise is not giving young people the respect for their principles and opinions that they deserve.
Humans can choose to donate their bodies to science, but animals have no voice other than ours or our students’. Virtual dissection may not allow for the individual nuances found in real organs, but is a nuance worth a life? One may say that refusing to dissect animals is an emotional choice rather than an intellectual one; regardless of one’s opinion, I don’t believe children should be put in the position to choose intellect over heart for a grade.

Lisa Pennington, a special education teacher at Cactus Shadows High School in Cave Creek, Arizona, says NO.

Virtual dissection provides less experience than real specimens. Students learn better when they understand and can see the primitive structure of a frog’s lungs, or the fat lining in a cat’s abdomen. They know the texture of these organs and tissues by color and touch and understand what they do. The smell, feel, and texture cannot be duplicated in a virtual dissection.
There are some students who raise ethical questions, but usually their arguments are poorly formed. Death is a part of our existence and, as a scientist, I cannot imagine a nobler death for an animal than to be a part of the scientific education process. Teaching children to treat death in a respectful way helps them form the feelings, thoughts, and beliefs that are necessary for responsible interaction with nature.
Replacing dissection with virtual dissection artificially separates biology as a science from real life. Understanding feelings about life and death is just as important as personal experience with unpleasant side of scientific work and a necessary requirement of any biological scientist. In the case of our students, it is something that they need to learn in school before pursuing science at higher levels. Virtual experience is inadequate.


  • Is a nuance worth a life? — Стоит ли деталь жизни?
  • One may say... — Так как в английском нельзя построить предложение без подлежащего, безличные обороты вроде «Говорят...», «Считается...», «Можно сказать...» обязательно переводятся так: «People say...», «It is considered...» и — более официальный вариант — «One may say...»
  • I don’t believe children should be put in the position to choose intellect over heart for a grade. — Я не верю, что детей следует вынуждать (букв. ставить в положение) выбирать между разумом и сердцем ради оценки.
  • There are some students who raise ethical questions — Некоторые студенты поднимают этические вопросы.

(Чтобы увидеть ответ, выделите текст с помощью мыши)

  • Find the opposites of the following words in the text:
dead — live
morally objectionable — ethical
real — virtual
needless — necessary
more — less
intellectual — emothional
primitive — advanced

  • Find words with the same meaning as the following words:
result — outcome
moral — humane
variant — option
detail — part
too early — before
unpleasant — distasteful

  • Which of these statements are true and which are false?
Christopher Perillo argues that:
Using 6 million animals for high school dissections every year is needlessly expensive.FALSE
Children should be forced to make right ethical choices.FALSE
“For science” is not an adequate reason to end a life.TRUE

Lisa Pennington says that:
Vurtual dissection allows students to know the texture of inner organs and tissues by color and touch and understand their functions.FALSE
It is important for students to have an experience with both living and dead speciments before they pursue a scientific career.TRUE
Feelings, thoughts, and beliefs are not necessary for a future scientist.FALSE

1.02.2016 Ocean acidification[развернуть][свернуть]

What is Ocean Acidification?

(After http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/co2/story/What+is+Ocean+Acidification%3F)

The Chemistry

A pH unit is a measure of acidity ranging from 0-14. The lower the value, the more acidic the environment. Becoming more acidic is a relative shift in pH to a lower value.

When carbon dioxide (CO2) is absorbed by seawater, chemical reactions occur that reduce seawater pH, carbonate ion concentration, and saturation states of biologically important calcium carbonate minerals. These chemical reactions are termed «ocean acidification» or «OA» for short. Calcium carbonate minerals are the building blocks for the skeletons and shells of many marine organisms. In areas where most life now congregates in the ocean, the seawater is supersaturated with respect to calcium carbonate minerals. This means there are abundant building blocks for calcifying organisms to build their skeletons and shells. However, continued ocean acidification is causing many parts of the ocean to become undersaturated with these minerals, which is likely to affect the ability of some organisms to produce and maintain their shells.
Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the pH of surface ocean waters has fallen by 0.1 pH units. Since the pH scale, like the Richter scale, is logarithmic, this change represents approximately a 30 percent increase in acidity. Future predictions indicate that the oceans will continue to absorb carbon dioxide and become even more acidic. Estimates of future carbon dioxide levels, based on business as usual emission scenarios, indicate that by the end of this century the surface waters of the ocean could be nearly 150 percent more acidic, resulting in a pH that the oceans haven’t experienced for more than 20 million years.

The Biological Impacts
Ocean acidification is expected to impact ocean species to varying degrees. Photosynthetic algae and seagrasses may benefit from higher CO2 conditions in the ocean, as they require CO2 to live just like plants on land. On the other hand, studies have shown that a more acidic environment has a dramatic effect on some calcifying species, including oysters, clams, sea urchins, shallow water corals, deep sea corals, and calcareous plankton. When shelled organisms are at risk, the entire food web may also be at risk. Today, more than a billion people worldwide rely on food from the ocean as their primary source of protein. Many jobs and economies in the U.S. and around the world depend on the fish and shellfish in our oceans.


The pteropod, or “sea butterfly”, is a tiny sea creature about the size of a small pea. Pteropods are eaten by organisms ranging in size from tiny krill to whales and are a major food source for North Pacific juvenile salmon. The photos below show what happens to a pteropod’s shell when placed in sea water with pH and carbonate levels projected for the year 2100. The shell slowly dissolves after 45 days.

In recent years, there have been near total failures of developing oysters in both aquaculture facilities and natural ecosystems on the West Coast. These larval oyster failures appear to be correlated with naturally occurring upwelling events that bring low pH waters undersaturated in aragonite as well as other water quality changes to nearshore environments. Lower pH values occur naturally on the West Coast during upwelling events, but a recent observations indicate that anthropogenic CO2 is contributing to seasonal undersaturation. Low pH may be a factor in the current oyster reproductive failure; however, more research is needed to disentangle potential acidification effects from other risk factors, such as episodic freshwater inflow, pathogen increases, or low dissolved oxygen. It is premature to conclude that acidification is responsible for the recent oyster failures, but acidification is a potential factor in the current crisis to this $100 million a year industry, prompting new collaborations and accelerated research on ocean acidification and potential biological impacts.

Many marine organisms that produce calcium carbonate shells or skeletons are negatively impacted by increasing CO2 levels and decreasing pH in seawater. For example, increasing ocean acidification has been shown to significantly reduce the ability of reef-building corals to produce their skeletons. In a recent paper, coral biologists reported that ocean acidification could compromise the successful fertilization, larval settlement and survivorship of Elkhorn coral, an endangered species. These research results suggest that ocean acidification could severely impact the ability of coral reefs to recover from disturbance. Other research indicates that, by the end of this century, coral reefs may erode faster than they can be rebuilt. This could compromise the long-term viability of these ecosystems and perhaps impact the estimated one million species that depend on coral reef habitat.

Ocean Acidification: An Emerging Global Problem
Ocean acidification is an emerging global problem. Over the last decade, there has been much focus in the ocean science community on studying the potential impacts of ocean acidification. Since sustained efforts to monitor ocean acidification worldwide are only beginning, it is currently impossible to predict exactly how ocean acidification impacts will cascade throughout the marine food chain and affect the overall structure of marine ecosystems. With the pace of ocean acidification accelerating, scientists, resource managers, and policymakers recognize the urgent need to strengthen the science as a basis for sound decision making and action.

A logarithmic scale is a nonlinear scale used when there is a large range of quantities. Common uses include the earthquake strength (Richter scale), sound loudness, light intensity, and pH of solutions.

saturate — saturation — saturated насыщать
acid — acidification — acidic кислота
abundant обильный
build строить
congregate собирать(ся)
increase увеличивать(ся)
represent представлять, отражать
policymaker законодатель
saturate насыщать

(Чтобы увидеть ответ, выделите текст с помощью мыши)

Choose correct answer:
  • OA is caused by:
  • a) dumping dangerous chemicals into the ocean.WRONG
    b) high levels of carbon dioxide emission.RIGHT
    c) insufficient research of the topic.WRONG

    • OA impacts calcifying organisms by
    a) dissolving their shells and skeletons.RIGHT
    b) binding calcium carbonate minerals into compounds that can't be used by them.WRONG
    c) causing overabundance of calcium ions.WRONG

    • Increase of ocean acidity is historically connected to
    a) overfishing caused by population growth.WRONG
    b) shift of the attitude towards nature to more negligent and careless.WRONG
    c) dramatic industrial development and activity of humanity during the last two centuries.RIGHT

    Using information given in the text and additional materials, try to answer the following questions:

    1. How does ocean acidification impact marine life? Which organisms can benefit from this? Which organisms will suffer?
    2. How will the changes in marine ecology affect us?
    3. What can be done to counter the effects of ocean acidification? Can you, personally, do something to change this situation?

    8.02.2016 Genetically-modified foods[развернуть][свернуть]

    Genetically Modified Foods: Harmful or Helpful?

    (After Deborah B. Whitman review)

    What are genetically-modified foods?
    The term GM foods or GMOs (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques. These plants have been modified in the laboratory to enhance desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. The enhancement of desired traits has traditionally been done through breeding, but conventional plant breeding methods can be very time consuming and are often not very accurate. Genetic engineering, on the other hand, can create plants with the exact desired trait very rapidly and with great accuracy. For example, plant geneticists can isolate a gene responsible for drought tolerance and insert that gene into a different plant. The new genetically-modified plant will gain drought tolerance as well. Not only can genes be transferred from one plant to another, but genes from non-plant organisms also can be used. The best known example of this is the use of B.t. genes in corn and other crops. B.t., or Bacillus thuringiensis, is a naturally occurring bacterium that produces crystal proteins that are lethal to insect larvae. B.t. crystal protein genes have been transferred into corn, enabling the corn to produce its own pesticides against insects such as the European corn borer.

    What are some of the advantages of GM foods?

    The world population has topped 6 billion people and is predicted to double in the next 50 years. Ensuring an adequate food supply for this booming population is going to be a major challenge in the years to come. GM foods promise to meet this need in a number of ways:

    Pest resistance. Crop losses from insect pests can be terrible, resulting in great financial loss for farmers and starvation in developing countries. Farmers typically use many tons of chemical pesticides annually. Consumers do not wish to eat food that has been treated with pesticides because of potential health hazards, and run-off of agricultural wastes from excessive use of pesticides and fertilizers can poison the water supply and cause harm to the environment. Growing GM foods such as B.t. corn can help eliminate the application of chemical pesticides and reduce the cost of bringing a crop to market.

    Herbicide tolerance. For some crops, it is not cost-effective to remove weeds physically, so farmers will often spray large quantities of different herbicides to destroy them. An organisation called Monsanto has created a strain of soybeans genetically modified to be not affected by their herbicide product Roundup ®. A farmer grows these soybeans which then only require one application of weed-killer instead of multiple applications, reducing production cost and limiting the contamination of the environment by agricultural waste..

    Disease resistance. There are many viruses, fungi and bacteria that cause plant diseases. Plant biologists are working to create plants with genetically-engineered resistance to these diseases.

    Cold tolerance. Unexpected frost can destroy sensitive seedlings. An antifreeze gene from cold water fish has been introduced into plants such as tobacco and potato. With this antifreeze gene, these plants are able to tolerate cold temperatures that normally would kill unmodified seedlings.

    Drought tolerance/salinity tolerance. As the world population grows and more land is utilized for housing instead of food production, farmers will need to grow crops in locations previously unsuited for plant cultivation. Creating plants that can withstand long periods of drought or high salt content in soil and groundwater will help people to grow crops in formerly inhospitable places.

    Nutrition. Malnutrition is common in third world countries where impoverished peoples rely on a single crop such as rice for the main staple of their diet. However, rice does not contain adequate amounts of all necessary nutrients to prevent malnutrition. For example, blindness due to vitamin A deficiency is a common problem in third world countries. Researchers at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Institute for Plant Sciences have created a strain of «golden» rice containing an unusually high content of beta-carotene (vitamin A). Since this rice was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation, a non-profit organization, the Institute hopes to offer the golden rice seed free to any third world country that requests it. Plans were underway to develop a golden rice that also has increased iron content. However, the grant that funded the creation of these two rice strains was not renewed, perhaps because of the vigorous anti-GM food protesting in Europe, and so this nutritionally-enhanced rice may not come to market at all.

    Pharmaceuticals. Medicines and vaccines often are costly to produce and sometimes require special storage conditions not readily available in third world countries. Researchers are working to develop edible vaccines in tomatoes and potatoes. These vaccines will be much easier to ship, store and administer than traditional injectable vaccines.

    Phytoremediation. Not all GM plants are grown as crops. Soil and groundwater pollution continues to be a problem in all parts of the world. Plants such as poplar trees have been genetically engineered to clean up heavy metal pollution from contaminated soil.

    What are some of the criticisms against GM foods?

    Environmental activists, religious organizations, public interest groups, professional associations and other scientists and government officials have all raised concerns about GM foods, and criticized agribusiness for pursuing profit without concern for potential hazards, and the government for failing to exercise adequate regulatory oversight. It seems that everyone has a strong opinion about GM foods. Even the Vatican and the Prince of Wales have expressed their opinions.

    Environmental hazards

    Unintended harm to other organisms. Last year a laboratory study was published in Nature showing that pollen from B.t. corn caused high mortality rates in monarch butterfly caterpillars. Monarch caterpillars eat milkweed plants, not corn, but the fear is that if pollen from B.t. corn is blown by the wind onto milkweed plants in neighboring fields, the caterpillars could eat the pollen and die. Although the Nature study was not conducted under natural field conditions, the results seemed to support this viewpoint. Unfortunately, it is not possible to design a B.t. toxin that would only kill crop-damaging pests and remain harmless to all other insects. This study is being reexamined by the USDA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other non-government research groups, and preliminary data from new studies suggests that the original study may have been flawed. This topic is the subject of a debate, and both sides of the argument are defending their data vigorously. Currently, there is no agreement about the results of these studies.

    Gene transfer to non-target species. Another concern is that crop plants engineered for herbicide tolerance and weeds will cross-breed, resulting in the transfer of the herbicide resistance genes from the crops into the weeds. These «superweeds» would then be herbicide tolerant as well. Other introduced genes may cross over into non-modified crops planted next to GM crops. The possibility of interbreeding is shown by the defense of farmers against lawsuits filed by Monsanto. The company has filed patent infringement lawsuits against farmers who may have harvested GM crops. Monsanto claims that the farmers obtained Monsanto-licensed GM seeds from an unknown source and did not pay royalties to Monsanto. The farmers claim that their unmodified crops were cross-pollinated from someone else's GM crops planted a field or two away. More investigation is needed to resolve this issue.

    Reduced effectiveness of pesticides. Just as some populations of mosquitoes developed resistance to the now-banned pesticide DDT, many people are concerned that insects will become resistant to B.t. or other crops that have been genetically-modified to produce their own pesticides.

    Human health risks

    Allergenicity. Many children in the US and Europe have life-threatening allergies to peanuts and other foods. There is a possibility that introducing a gene into a plant may create a new allergen or cause an allergic reaction in susceptible individuals. A proposal to incorporate a gene from Brazil nuts into soybeans was abandoned because of the fear of causing unexpected allergic reactions.

    Unknown effects on human health. There is a growing concern that introducing foreign genes into food plants may have an unexpected and negative impact on human health. A recent article published in Lancet examined the effects of GM potatoes on the digestive tract in rats. This study claimed that there were valid differences in the intestines of rats fed GM potatoes and rats fed unmodified potatoes. Yet critics say that this paper, like the monarch butterfly data, is flawed. Moreover, the gene introduced into the potatoes was a snowdrop flower lectin, a substance known to be toxic to mammals. The scientists who created this variety of potato chose to use the lectin gene simply to test the methodology, and these potatoes were never intended for human or animal consumption.

    Economic concerns

    Bringing a GM food to market is a lengthy and costly process, and of course agri-biotech companies wish to ensure a profitable return on their investment. Many new plant genetic engineering technologies and GM plants have been patented, and patent infringement is a big concern of agribusiness. Yet consumer advocates are worried that patenting these new plant varieties will raise the price of seeds so high that small farmers and third world countries will not be able to afford seeds for GM crops, thus widening the gap between the wealthy and the poor. It is hoped that in a humanitarian gesture, more companies and non-profits will follow the lead of the Rockefeller Foundation and offer their products at reduced cost to impoverished nations.
    Patent enforcement may also be difficult, as the contention of the farmers that they involuntarily grew Monsanto-engineered strains when their crops were cross-pollinated shows. One way to combat possible patent infringement is to introduce a «suicide gene» into GM plants. These plants would be viable for only one growing season and would produce sterile seeds that do not germinate. Farmers would need to buy a fresh supply of seeds each year. However, this would be financially disastrous for farmers in third world countries who cannot afford to buy seed each year and traditionally set aside a portion of their harvest to plant in the next growing season. In an open letter to the public, Monsanto has pledged to abandon all research using this suicide gene technology.


    environment – environmental окружающая среда
    controversy – controversial полемика
    comsume – consumption поглощать
    enhance – enhancement улучшать
    crop plants сельскохозяйственные культуры
    staple food основной продукт
    desired trait желаемые свойства
    strain сорт
    field поле
    harvest собирать урожай
    concequences последствия
    drought засуха
    salinity соленость
    pest вредитель
    weed сорняк
    waste отходы
    pesticide пестицид
    herbicide гербицид
    malnutrition недоедание
    poverty бедность
    nutritional value питательная ценность
    allergicity аллергенность
    protein белок
    toxin токсин
    labeling маркировка, обозначение
    patent infringement нарушение патента
    royalties здесь: выплаты хозяину патента

    solve a cross-word puzzle (pdf, 198 kB)
    download solution (pdf, 95 kB)

    15.02.16 Beneficial parasites[развернуть][свернуть]

    Can parasites be beneficial?

    (After Mark Boyer).

    By definition, parasites form a relationship that's characterized by exploitation and dependence. They take advantage of their hosts, often leaving them sick and malnourished -- but usually not dead. Some of the creepiest examples of parasites turn their hosts into zombies, and like something out of a horror movie, they keep them alive while consuming them from the inside out.
    Parasites aren't all bad, though. In fact, some of them can actually be quite beneficial to humans and other living creatures. Five thousand years ago, doctors in Egypt thought leeches could cure many problems, from headaches to flatulence. We actually still employ leeches to help reattach severed fingers and to treat circulation disorders.
    Since the days of ancient Egypt we've learned much more about parasites and the ways they interact with humans and other creatures. As much as we hate to admit it, parasites are just as important to the natural order of things as any other living creatures, and some scientists have suggested that removing parasites from modern life can have serious consequences on human health. Humans have long been interested in turning the tables on parasites and getting them to help heal us, and as we get to better understand parasites we are able to use them in farming and other applications.

    Farmers use beneficial insects
    Perhaps the No. 1 area in which humans get parasites to do our dirty work is out on the farm. As anyone with a vegetable garden will agree, insect pests can wreak havoc on everything from fruit trees to squash, and they cause billions of dollars in crop losses each year. To deal with insect problems, many farmers spray their fields with poisonous insecticides. The problem: chemicals that are poisonous to tiny creatures like insects are generally bad for humans, too. But one of the few non-toxic weapons that farmers have in the fight against crop-killing bugs is parasites.
    Natural biological control isn't exactly a new technology – it has, of course, been around for millions of years – but employing beneficial insects to keep pest populations down is a relatively new practice. Some «beneficials» are simply predators of the insects that are harming the crops. Others are parasites, which have a different and often creepier relationship to their host.
    Aphids are some of the most harmful pests faced by fruit and vegetable farmers. They can be attacked using insecticides, but natural parasites can often be even more effective, because they have the ability to seek out aphids that might somehow avoid the spray. One such example is a tiny wasp, Aphidius ervi, which sneaks up on unwitting aphids, lays an egg in them, and then once the egg hatches, the larvae consumes the aphid from the inside out.
    Parasites are often employed as a last resort, like in Thailand in 2010, when a massive infestation of invasive mealy bugs threatened that country's tapioca crop. When no other pest-control methods worked, farmers engineered a sting operation, bringing in parasitic Anagyrus lopezi wasps, which, like the aphid parasites, lay their eggs right inside the mealy bugs' bodies. The parasites were very successful in controlling the mealy bug outbreak.

    Parasites might cure autoimmune diseases
    Most sane people would never intentionally infect themselves with a parasite. But what if we told you that some types of parasites could actually help you? In recent years, scientists have discovered that certain parasites have the ability to interfere with autoimmune diseases.
    One of the pioneers of this type of radical parasite therapy research is Tufts University gastroenterologist Joel Weinstock, who had a revelation of sorts when exploring the question of why diseases, from asthma to multiple sclerosis, are on the rise in developed countries but not in undeveloped parts of the world. Weinstock discovered a possible answer: worms.
    Weinstock's theory – which is still being tested and hasn't yet been proven – is that there's a direct correlation between a lack of intestinal worms and a rise in autoimmune diseases.
    Weinstock began thinking about helminthic therapy in the early 1990s, when he noticed how prevalent inflammatory bowel disease had become in North America. At the same time, he realized that parasitic worms, or helminths, have a unique effect on their human hosts. Instead of inducing inflammation (the body's normal response to invasion), they actually calm the immune system. According to the theory, because people have lived with helminths through much of history, the human immune system has evolved to fight them, and when worms are removed entirely, the body's immune system turns against itself. Helminthic therapy, or worm therapy, may emerge as a legitimate field of medicine, but it's still very new and few studies have been done to date.
    Parasites have many talents. Some researchers believe that their curative abilities aren't limited to autoimmune diseases. Some intestinal worms are also believed to cure allergies, which share some characteristics with autoimmune diseases.
    Jasper Lawrence made worm therapy for allergies famous a few years ago. Suffering from asthma and allergies, Lawrence heard about the theory that hookworms could cure allergies, so he traveled to Africa and walked around with his shoes off in several open-air toilets. After successfully contracting hookworms, Lawrence reported that his allergies had subsided, and he recently told the public radio program Radiolab that he hasn't had an asthma attack or allergy symptoms since his visit to Africa.
    Convinced that hookworms are the answer to the world's allergies and asthma, Lawrence (who isn't a doctor) returned to North America and began shipping orders of hookworms to allergy sufferers, delivered in the form of a patch, for about $3,000 per treatment. But when the Food and Drug Administration found out of Lawrence's little side project, he fled to Mexico and then flew to England, where he was born.
    Lawrence's story is rather gross and definitely a bit sad, but the underlying fact is that intestinal worms might provide important clues about how allergies work. Because of new research, as well as personal stories like Jasper's, the hygiene theory which states that cleanliness and the lack of childhood exposure to bacteria and parasites leads to increased incidents of allergies and autoimmune diseases is gaining wider acceptance. Several different studies are currently underway to look at how parasites like hookworms might be able to cure allergies and asthma, but nobody has definitively proven that hookworms are the answer.

    Decreasing parasite diversity might have harmful consequenses
    The research team of Dr. Pieter Johnson from University of Colorado, Boulder examined how diversity affects the abundance of the most dangerous parasites and the overall fitness and survival of the host species — in this case, the Pacific chorus frog (Pseudacris regilla). According to their research, increases in parasite diversity almost always decreased the level of parasite infection, including that of the most dangerous species. For example, when a chorus frog was introduced to all six types of parasites simultaneously, the infection rate was 42 percent lower than for frogs infected with just one type of parasite.
    Parasites have typically been thought of as harmful by definition. Consequently, disease control efforts have often been very nonspecific — wiping out all parasites, for example, which may have the unintended effect of making a bad infection worse by eliminating inter-parasite competition.
    For example, researchers have found that in more highly diverse communities with more species of birds and mammals, the abundance of the ticks that are infected with the bacterium that causes Lyme disease is greatly reduced, which provides a buffer against infection for humans.
    Conversely, in highly disturbed areas with lower diversity, there is a greater abundance of hosts like the white-footed mouse, which is particularly adept at transmitting Lyme disease back to ticks, leading to a greater risk of infection for humans.


    Sting operation is a type of a deceptive operation in which a law-enforcement officer or a cooperative member of the public play a role as criminal partner or potential victim and go along with a suspect's actions to gather evidence of the suspect's wrongdoing.
    Autoimmune diseases arise from an abnormal immune response of the body against substances and tissues normally present in the body.
    Inflammatory bowel diseases is a class of autoimmune diseases in which the body's own immune system attacks elements of the digestive system.
    Lyme disease (Lyme borreliosis) is an infectious disease caused by bacteria of the Borrelia type transmitted to humans by the bite of infected ticks of the Ixodes genus.
    Multiple sclerosis is a disease in which the insulating covers of nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord are damaged. This damage disrupts the ability of parts of the nervous system to communicate, resulting in a wide range of signs and symptoms, including physical, mental and sometimes psychiatric problems.
    Hookworm disease is an infection by a parasitic bloodsucking roundworm.It is a leading cause of maternal and child morbidity in the developing countries of the tropics and subtropics. In developed countries, hookworm infection is rarely fatal, but anemia can be significant in a heavily infected individual. Hookworm infection is a soil-transmitted helminthiasis and therefore classified as a neglected tropical disease.
    Helminth is a general name for a number of pasrasitic worms that live in human intestines.

    dependence зависимость
    take advantage of пользоваться, эксплуатировать
    host хозяин
    leech пиявка
    headache головная боль
    flatulence метеоризм, газы
    admit признать
    turn the tables on поменяться ролями
    cure, heal лечить
    squash тыква
    employ применить
    keep down подавлять
    harm вред
    aphid тля
    avoid избегать
    last resort крайнее средство
    infestation заражение
    mealybugs (Pseudococcidae) мучнистые червецы
    revelation откровение
    on a rise на подъеме
    intestinal worms кишечные черви
    entirely полностью
    curative целебный
    hookworm disease анкилостомоз
    subside ослабевать, убывать
    сonvinced убежденный
    shipping orders
    patch пластырь
    find out обнаружить
    overall в целом
    wipe out уничтожить
    simultaniously одновременно
    rate степень
    unintended ненамеренный
    eliminate уничтожить, исключить
    tick клещ

    Do you remember these words? What do they mean?
    beneficial, suffer, abundance, harmful, decrease, creepy, consequences, pest, crop, chemical

    (Чтобы увидеть ответ, выделите текст с помощью мыши)

    Choose correct answer:

    • The area where we use parasites for our advantage the most is:
    A. medicineFALSE
    B. agricultureTRUE
    C. chemistryFALSE

    • Which of these statements is TRUE? Choose one.
    A. Natural biological control is a new technology that has been developed in this century. FALSE
    B. There is no examples of successfully employing parasites for agricultural pest control. FALSE
    C. Parasites are a non-toxic weapon that farmers can use in the fight against crop-killing bugs. TRUE

    • Which of these statements is FALSE? Choose one.
    A. The third part of the text is full of unproven theories and blatant speculations. TRUE
    B. Information given in the third part of the text is enough to prove that helmints have a beneficial effect on sufferers of autoimmune dideases and allergies. FALSE
    C. Personal experiences and anecdotes in the third paragraph are not considered valid scientific proof. TRUE

    • Disease control efforts can be harmful because:
    A. they are non-specific and eliminate all parasites, destroying inter-parasite competition. TRUE
    B. they are non-specific and harm not only parasites but also their hosts. FALSE
    C. they are non-specific and harm not only parasites and their host but also people who live in the area. FALSE

    What is the creepiest parasite you know? Why do you think so?
    Give examples of parasites that are lethal for the hosts and parasites that depend on the host survival. What are the general differences between their strategies?

    29.02 Allergy[развернуть][свернуть]


    (After ...)

    What does the word «allergy» mean?
    The word allergy is defined in medical dictionaries as «a hypersensitive state». Allergy is derived from the Greek allos, meaning other, and ergon which means work. If a person has an allergic reaction to something, what they are really experiencing is an altered, or exaggerated reaction. Thus, the allergy patient lives in an altered state of hypersensitivity.
    The word allergy is not prejudiced with regard to its causes. So, allergy type reactions can be induced by either immune mechanisms (too much allergy antibody IgE) or by a direct hypersensitivity to an irritating fume, vapor or medication (as occurs with codeine and strong perfumes).
    What causes allergy?
    Allergic reactions are caused by the interaction of a person’s immune system with the outside world. Foreign proteins can cause an immune reaction in an individual. If the immune reaction induced by these foreign proteins, otherwise referred to as allergens, involves IgE antibodies, then the possibility exists for an allergic reaction to occur. Any substance which is able to induce a person to make an allergy antibody type of immune reaction is referred to as an allergen.
    The most common causes of allergy and asthma symptoms are allergens derived from pollens, molds, house dust mites, animal danders and insects. The most frequent foods responsible for causing allergic reactions are nuts, peanuts, milk, egg, wheat and soybean proteins. Unfortunately, latex and some food preservatives may also induce allergy symptoms. These preservatives include metabisulfite and monosodium glutamate.
    The most common cause of allergy on planet earth is the house dust mite. The house dust mite produces allergenic proteins primarily in its droppings, or fecal pellets
    What are the most common allergic diseases?
    The most common diseases caused by allergy mechanisms are those of hay fever (allergic rhinitis), asthma, eczema (allergic dermatitis), contact dermatitis, food allergy and urticaria (hives).
    Allergy really has different names depending upon where in your body the reaction is occurring. If an allergic reaction occurs in your nose, eyes and sinuses physicians will call it allergic rhinitis. If the allergic explosion is occurring in the lungs, we call it asthma. All of these allergic diseases are inflammatory in nature. That is to say, there is inflammation characteristic of allergy immune mechanisms occurring in those parts of your body when we give the condition the above scientific names.
    How are allergies treated?
    Allergy treatments involve 3 fundamental principles. First, avoidance of the known irritant or allergen responsible for inducing the state of hypersensitivity. Second, when avoidance of a specific allergen source such as house dust or certain pollens is impossible, then drug therapy is used. Finally, when avoidance and drug therapy fail to control the inflammation involved in a person’s allergic disease, specific allergen immunotherapy (otherwise known as allergy injections) are used to help prevent the progression of the allergic disease.
    It is important to point out that allergen immunotherapy is the only treatment available today that can actually change a patient’s immune system back toward normal. Also, it is most important to remember that all allergic diseases, such as hay fever and asthma, are chronic long-standing diseases which require long-term management to better control and prevent the inflammatory mechanisms.
    What is a sensitizer? How does it work?
    A sensitizer, or allergen, is usually a smaller protein or at times a carbohydrate (sugar substance) which is capable at very small concentrations of inducing excessive immune responses in a genetically predisposed individual. Allergy is a heritable trait but it is not necessary to have the genetic predisposition to develop an allergy.
    Some sensitizing agents can directly cause release of histamine from allergy cells even without allergy antibodies. These substances are referred to as irritants or nonspecific reacting materials.
    Is there a time of year when allergies are more of a problem?
    The allergy season really never ends. Springtime is the tree pollen season. Summertime is the grass and weed pollen season. In the fall, people can experience a mold allergy season, and finally in the wintertime, people who suffer from allergies will go into the «indoor allergy season». The most common indoor aeroallergens which can produce hay fever, sinus and asthma symptoms are those of the house dust mite, cockroach droppings, indoor mold spores and pet animals.
    Can a person outgrow an allergy?
    Most people grow into allergy, not out of it. One can, however, lose a sensitivity to certain foods if one totally avoids the offending food allergen. This occurs in most children who have the unfortunate experience of having hives due to cow’s milk. Later in life that same person who had hives early in infancy can tolerate milk and other cow proteins.
    Unfortunately, one cannot totally avoid exposure to certain pollens, molds and dust and thus, year after year having been repeatedly exposed to these airborne proteins allergic individuals continue to have allergic diseases due to their continuous or repeated exposure to these aeroallergens.
    Allergy does not discriminate on the basis of age. Allergic reactions can develop at any time in life whether it be age one day, one year, 20 years, 40 years or 60 years. The peak age at which allergy develops, however, is in the late teens. For reasons yet unexplained, the immune system of a 19 year old is most able to produce IgE allergy antibody responses.
    Are there any long-term effects from allergic reactions?
    Allergic reactions which occur in the sinuses or the lungs repeatedly year after year may actually result in a change in the anatomy of the body part being affected. For example, if asthma symptoms are allowed to occur without adequate control, then the inflammation involved in the disease will cause the lungs to misbehave forever regardless of continued therapy. In the past it was believed that asthma did not result in emphysema. However, recent research has indicated that a patient suffering from asthma which is out of control may develop a form of emphysema, or fixed airways disease, which is not reversible.
    Asthma by its very definition, means a reversible airway obstruction which is accompanied by allergic inflamation in 90% of the cases.
    What allergies cause fatal reactions?
    The most common causes of fatal allergic reactions include severe reactions to foods such as shellfish, peanuts and cod, or to stinging insects such as yellow jackets and fire ants.
    Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that happens fast and may cause death. The term comes from the Ancient Greek: ana «against», and the Ancient Greek: philaxis «protection». It typically causes more than one of the following: an itchy rash, throat or tongue swelling, shortness of breath, vomiting, lightheadedness, and low blood pressure. The mechanism involves the release of mediators from certain types of white blood cells triggered by either immunologic or non-immunologic mechanisms.
    The primary treatment of anaphylaxis is epinephrine injection into a muscle, intravenous fluids, and positioning the person flat. Other measures, such as antihistamines and steroids, are complementary.
    Worldwide, 0.05–2% of the population is estimated to experience anaphylaxis at some point in life. Rates appear to be increasing. It occurs most often in young people and females. Of people who go to hospital with anaphylaxis in the United States about 0.3% die.
    Patients with life-threatening allergic reactions to antibiotics or bee sting reactions should definitely wear ID bracelets and should carry with them an emergency kit containing epinephrine. If you have had a severe allergic reaction in the past, you should have available in your home at all times an adrenaline kit for self-administration should it become necessary.

    derived произведенный от
    altered измененный
    exaggerated преувеличенный
    prejudiced предубежденный (здесь: не обращая внимание на возраст)
    irritating — irritant раздражающий
    fume дым
    vapor пар
    occur случаться
    pollen пыльца
    mold плесень
    spore спора
    dander перхоть
    dust mite пылевой клещ
    wheat пшеница
    induce вызывать
    refer to... as называть ….; говорить о... как
    frequent частый
    sinus придаточная пазуха носа
    avoid избегать
    excessive излишный
    predisposed предрасположеный
    heritable наследуемый
    regardless несмотря на
    reversible обратимый
    cod треска
    yellow jacket шершень
    intravenous fluid внутривенная жидкость
    complementary дополнительный
    emergency kit аптечка

    Look it up! Use Internet to find out what are these:
    Allergy antibody IgE
    Allergen immunotherapy

    14.03.16 Measurments of Science[развернуть][свернуть]

    Measurements of Science

    The impact factor (IF) of an academic journal is a measure reflecting the average number of citations to recent articles published in that journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field, with journals with higher impact factors deemed to be more important than those with lower ones.
    In any given year, the impact factor of a journal is the average number of citations received per paper published in that journal during the two preceding years. For example, if a journal has an impact factor of 3 in 2008, then its papers published in 2006 and 2007 received 3 citations each on average in 2008. The 2008 impact factor of a journal would be calculated as follows:

    2008 impact factor = A/B

    A = the number of times that all items published in that journal in 2006 and 2007 were cited by indexed publications during 2008.
    B = the total number of «citable items» published by that journal in 2006 and 2007.

    The h-index is an author-level metric that attempts to measure both the productivity and citation impact of the publications of a scientist or scholar. The index is based on the set of the scientist's most cited papers and the number of citations that they have received in other publications. The index can also be applied to the productivity and impact of a scholarly journal as well as a group of scientists, such as a department or university or country. The index was suggested in 2005 by Jorge E. Hirsch, a physicist at UCSD, as a tool for determining theoretical physicists' relative quality and is sometimes called the Hirsch index.
    The definition of the index is that a scholar with an index of h has published h papers each of which has been cited in other papers at least h times. Thus, the h-index reflects both the number of publications and the number of citations per publication. The index is designed to improve upon simpler measures such as the total number of citations or publications. The index works properly only for comparing scientists working in the same field.

    Impact Factor, Citations — Can Science Be Saved From Itself?
    Not many people would know the peculiar vocabulary used to evaluate scientists.
    ‘H index’, ‘impact factor’ and ‘citation number’ are some of the snazzy phrases that are now ubiquitous in the world of science. Not all scientific papers are born equal — some are ground-breaking, while most are an incremental advance – and these scales have been developed to help determine the ‘impact’ of the scientific articles that are published.
    Few would doubt that measuring the impact of scientific output is an important thing to do. Substantial sums of public monies are apportioned to science, and it is critical that these funds are invested in research that will provide the greatest benefit to our world. These scales – or, to use their more formal title, ‘scientific metrics’ — provide one way of ensuring this accountability.
    But like many measurement tools that once had a noble purpose, they are vulnerable to gaming.
    Michelle Dawson and Dorothy Bishop appeared to have identified such a case in the field of developmental disabilities. An Editor of two journals in the field appears to have used these journals to improve his scientific metrics.
    I won’t repeat their research here, but here are a few key pieces of information that came to light. During the years 2010-2014:

    1. The Editor published 142 articles in the two journals for which he was Editor-in-Chief. This is an enormous amount of research to publish, and it is not common practice for Editors to publish prolifically in the journals they edit;

    2. More than 50% of the references in these articles cited his own work. Citing one’s own previous research is not uncommon, but the more usual level of self-citation is about 10%; and

    3. More than 50% of the articles were accepted by the journal within one week of submission, and many were accepted on the same day as submission.

    This is unusually quick, and even the most significant journals, which have the most resources require weeks for the process of peer-review. (The Editor was not the sole beneficiary of this short peer-review time. I, myself, was a minor author of a paper that was accepted by one of these journals in 2009 after 5 days, but had another paper in 2014 that underwent lengthy review. A quick look at the Table of Contents of these journals, shows that a very short time between the data of ‘paper submission’ and the date of ‘paper acceptance’ is quite common).
    One of the results of these actions is that the Editor and a few of his colleagues have attained science metrics that are off the charts.
    There are many troubling things about the statistics. Some of the concerns are localized to the poor judgment of a few scientists, while other concerns have broader implications for the future of science. On this latter issue, it is the third point above that worries me the most.

    Peer review
    Thousands of column inches have been taken by scientists and policy-makers discussing the pros and cons of peer review. What remains after the hullabaloo has died down is the unanimous agreement that peer review remains the best means currently available for ensuring that science is done in the best way.
    So much of science is played ‘above the shoulders’. Ideas are formulated and agonized about, all within the confines of the scientist’s head. Calm and methodological evaluation of the ideas and data by other people with similar expertise is important to ensuring the accuracy and quality of the work.
    Peer review is sometimes slow and often infuriating, but it is always necessary for good science.
    In the case highlighted by Dawson and Bishop, it is highly unlikely that high quality peer-review could have occurred within the one week (or one day) from article submission to article acceptance.

    Who are the victims?
    One school of thought is that this is a victimless crime. Yes, this is not the way the system was intended to work, but in the end, is this really hurting anyone?
    I can’t agree with this view. First and foremost, scientists owe it to the general public to ensure that the science they read and use (and that they often fund) is as accurate as possible. Proper and thorough peer review is an important step in that process.
    Another potential victim are the scientists who have published in these journals and now feel that their work is devalued by this information. Without question, the greatest burden here falls on early career scientists, who must prove the importance of their work in order to secure jobs in the cut-throat world of science.
    My feeling is that many early career scientists will feel let down by the reputational damage these journals have done.

    Hyperinflation in the number of journals
    Another issue raised by this experience is the impact of the recent and dramatic increase in the number of scholarly journals. There are now far more possibilities for researchers to publish their work, and there is intense competition amongst publishers to attract scientists to their journals. It would be a rare day when I wouldn’t receive at least 5 emails inviting me to publish in journals I’ve never heard of, often in research fields completely different to my own.
    To give you an idea of how much things have changed, a senior colleague of mine recently reflected that she remembers when it was common place for tenured Professors to have a total of 5 published articles.
    Compare that with statistics from Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) on the 2014 recipients of Early Career Fellowships, which provide a salary for researchers who have ‘held their PhD for no more than 2 years’. Successful applicants in Basic Science had an average of 9 papers. Successful applicants in the field of Public Health had an average of 14 papers.
    I’m not necessarily of the opinion that having more outlets to publish scientific research is a bad thing. Science, when done well, is best situated in the open domain rather than in a file drawer of a moldy lab. Published and accessible data gives humanity the best chance of building on that knowledge.
    But there is a concern that an increase in the number journal articles may correspond to a decrease in the standards of peer review. As far as I am aware, there is no hard evidence to support this hypothesis, but the logic behind it is clear: If there are more papers to be reviewed, but the same number of scientists to review them, then the quality and/or quantity of reviews may be compromised.
    Last year, I received 54 invitations from journals to review a manuscript. Because of time constraints, I accepted just over a quarter of these invitations (n = 15). I assume that the manuscripts that I was unable to review were done so by another scientists, but I also expect that these scientists had the same time pressures as me.

    Can the scientific system be rescued?
    Many in the field have become concerned about the ‘growth economy’ of science and the meaningless pursuit of attractive science metrics. In 2012, a group of editors and publishers of scholarly journals met at the Annual Meeting of The American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) and produced the San Francisco Declaration of Research Assessment (DORA).
    The document was mainly concerned with explicating the deeply flawed scientific metric of the journal ‘impact factor’. But there was also a strong emphasis on encouraging the scientific world not to connect funding decisions and job appointment/promotion considerations to the ‘quantity’ of research output, and instead focus on the ‘quality’.
    In a nutshell, research ‘quality’ could be described as how the piece of research has influenced the body of knowledge and its impact in the world.
    Many funding bodies around the world have adopted the DORA guidelines, and have started changing the way that scientists apply for funding. As an example, Australia’s NHMRC now requires scientists to emphasize the quality of their previous research output rather than just the quantity. Stable funding is the lifeblood of research, and so the NHMRC wields real power in their attempt to change how science is evaluated, and thus the publishing culture within research.
    But is it the case that the horse has already bolted, and we are only now rousing to close the gate? If successful applicants for Early Career Fellowships (less than 2 years post PhD) are already averaging 10 or more papers, can that standart ever be lowered?
    As scientists, we strive to conduct meaningful research that impacts the world. Science metrics have become an powerful distraction to how we go about achieving that aim. But, unfortunately, it is a distraction that we can’t avoid. There are too few jobs, and is far too easy to be out of one.
    Nevertheless, I am hugely optimistic that the scientific system can be rescued from the gaming of science metrics. With the leadership of funding bodies such as the NHMRC, the right incentives are now being created for scientists to do what they started their careers for.

    impact повлиять, воздействовать
    measure – measurement измерить
    cite – citation цитировать
    recent недавний
    relative относительный
    important – importance важный
    field здесь: область науки
    average средний
    receive принять, получить
    metric метрика, измерение
    attempt попытаться
    scholar ученый
    tool инструмент
    determine определить
    reflect отразить
    snazzy броский
    equal равный
    ground-breaking новаторский; здесь: научный прорыв
    advance продвигать(ся), прогрессировать
    scale шкала
    substantial существенный
    provide обеспечивать
    ensure гарантировать. обеспечивать
    accountability ответственность, подотчетность
    noble purpose благородное предназначение
    vulnerable уязвимый
    cheating мошенничество
    developmental disabilities отклонения в развитии
    editor редактор
    came to light обнаружилось
    submit – submission отправить, подать
    accept принять
    significant значительный
    require требовать
    sole beneficiary единственный, кто получил выгоду
    undergo – underwent проходить
    attain достигать
    poor judgment плохие решения
    worry беспокоить(ся)
    victim жертва
    crime преступление
    intend намереваться, планировать
    accurate точный
    devalue обесценивать
    cut-throat беспощадный
    let down подвести
    competition конкуренция
    attract привлекать
    tenure в Америке и Канаде — пожизненный контракт с университетом
    salary зарплата
    situated быть расаположенным, находиться
    open domain всеобщее достояние
    file drawer дкаф для документов
    accessible доступный
    concern беспокоить
    correspond соответствовать
    peer review рецензирование
    as far as I am aware насколько я знаю
    PhD ученая степень, примерно соответствует кандидату или доктору наук

      *Do you know these words? Can you use them in a sentence?
    benefit discuss science develop policy-maker quality provide avoid consider

      *How do you call this form? Can you put the verbs in this form yourself?
    We discuss interesting topics in this class.
    Interesting topics are discussed in this class.
    They developed a deadly super-virus.
    A deadly super virus was developed by them.
    Mom provides me with food.
    I am provided with food by my mom.
    She will avoid genetic engineering.
    Genetic engineering will be avoided by her.
    publish, use, receive, measure, suggest, apply, cite, submit, impact


    1) Are all scientific papers equally important? How can you measure impact of a scientific paper?

    2) Choose a correct answer:
    (Чтобы увидеть ответ, выделите текст с помощью мыши)

    • Impact factor is used to:
    A. Measure scientific impact of a scientist or a group of scientists.WRONG
    B. Measure scientific impact of an academic journal. RIGHT

    • Impact factor shows:
    A. How often information published in the journal is used by other scientists in their research. RIGHT
    B. How much money is received by scientists who publish their work in these journals. WRONG
    C. How many awards a journal has. WRONG

    • H-index is used to:
    A. Measure scientific impact of a scientist or a group of scientists. RIGHT
    B. Measure scientific impact of an academic journal. WRONG

    • To have a high h index a scientist should have:
    A. Many published papers. NOT CORRECT
    B. Many citations of his paper in other scientific works. NOT CORRECT
    C. Both many publications and many citations. CORRECT

    3) Answer these questions using information in the text.
  • What are the reasons the author gives to explain the importance of impact factor, h index and other similar metrics? Name two.
  • Calculate the average amount of articles the cheating Editor published per year. How many articles have you written during years 2010-2016?
  • How did the Editor achieve a high number of citations of his or her work?
  • How did the Editor achieve a high amount of publications?
  • Using the story of the cheating Editor as an example, explain how impact factor and h index are vulnersble to cheating.

  • 4) Are these sentences true or false? Correct false sentences.
  • The author thinks this kind of cheating is a victimless crime. FALSE. The author doubt that statement and says that scientist, especially early-career ones are affected
  • The author thinks this kind of cheating hurts the ability of scientists to ensure the accuracy of papers they write and use. TRUE
  • The author says that senior scientists' reputation can be seriously damaged by bad publishing standarts. FALSE. Author doesn’t state this
  • Recent increase of the number of scientific journals is not connected to impact factor and h index usage. FALSE. Author says that there is a connectivity between number of journal and impact-factor hunting
  • The necessity to increase impact factor motivates authors of scientific papers to try and persuade journals to publish their work.FALSE. This statement is not made by the author in this issue.
  • The necessity to increase impact factor motivates journals to try and attract more authors of scientific papers. TRUE
  • It became easier to publish you work. FALSE. Author gives only one example of this
  • The increase in number of publications definitely causes the decrease of their quality. FALSE. Author only suggests it

  • 21.03 Course summary[развернуть][свернуть]

    Topic-specific vocabulary

    1. Ocean Acidification
    acid – acidification – acidic кислота
    calcium – calcify – calcifying
    carbon dioxide углекислый газ
    dissolve растворять(ся)
    shell раковина
    skeleton скелет

    2. Genetically Modified Products
    allergenicity аллергенность
    crop plants сельскохозяйственные культуры
    desired trait желаемая черта
    drought засуха
    gene ген
    genome геном
    herbicide гербицид
    labeling маркировка, обозначение
    malnutrition недоедание
    modify модифицировать
    nutritional value питательная ценность
    patent infringement нарушение патента
    pest вредитель
    pesticide пестицид
    poverty бедность
    protein белок
    royalties выплаты хозяину патента
    salinity соленость
    staple food основная еда
    toxin токсин
    waste отходы
    weed сорняк

    3. Role of Parasites in Ecosystems
    aphid тля
    autoimmune disease аутоимунное заболевание
    competition конкуренция
    diversity разнообразие
    host хозяин
    intestinal worms кишечные черви
    intestines кишечник
    parasite load паразиты, населяющие один организм (букв. «груз паразитов»)
    parasite паразит
    take advantage of пользоваться, эксплуатировать

    4. Allergies
    anaphylaxis анафилактический шок, сильная аллергическая реакция
    autoimmune автоимунный
    dander перхоть
    dust mite пылевой клещ
    emergency kit аптечка
    fume дым
    heritable наследуемый
    induce вызывать
    insect bite укус насекомого
    irritating — irritant раздражающий
    mold плесень
    pollen пыльца
    predisposed предрасположеный
    protein белок
    spore спора
    vapor пар
    wheat пшеница

    5. Impact factor and h-index
    academic journal научный журнал
    accountability ответственность, подотчетность
    cheating мошенничество
    cite – citation цитировать
    fund финансировать
    impact влияние
    peer review рецензирование
    publish публиковать
    reference list список литературы
    submit подавать на публикацию

    General vocabulary

    abundance – abundant изобилие
    accept принять
    accessible доступный
    accurate точный
    acid – acidification – acidic кислота
    advance продвигать(ся), прогрессировать
    allow разрешать
    attempt попытаться
    attract привлекать
    average средний
    average средний
    avoid избегать
    become становиться
    beneficial благоприятный, выгодный
    benefit выгода, польза
    competition конкуренция
    complex сложный
    concern беспокоить
    consequences последствия
    consider считать(ся)
    consume – consumption поглощать
    controversy – controversial дискуссия, спор
    correspond соответствовать
    crime преступление
    cure, heal лечить, вылечить
    decrease снизить(ся), уменьшить(ся)
    depend on зависеть от
    dependance – dependent зависимость
    deserve заслуживать
    determine определить
    devalue обесценивать
    develop развивать(ся)
    ecosystem экосистема
    eliminate уничтожить, исключить
    employ применить
    ensure гарантировать, обеспечивать
    environment – environmental окружающая среда
    equal равный
    equal равный, одинаковый
    experience опыт
    harm вред
    harmful вредный
    harmless безвредный
    helpful полезный
    imagine представлять, воображать
    important – importance важный
    increase увеличивать(ся)
    infect – infestation – infected заразить
    intend намереваться, планировать
    irritate – irritating – irritant раздражать
    lethal смертельный
    measure – measurement измерить
    metric метрика, измерение
    necessary необходимый
    noble благородный
    object возражать, протестовать
    opinion мнение
    prove доказать
    provide обеспечивать
    provide обеспечивать
    quality качество
    quantity количество
    receive принять, получить
    recent недавний
    reflect отразить
    refuse отказывать(ся)
    relative относительный
    replace заменять
    represent представлять, быть представителем
    require требовать
    require требовать
    responsible ответственный
    scale шкала
    science – scientist – scientific наука
    significant значительный
    skill навык
    specimen образец
    substantial существенный
    suffer страдать
    survival выживание
    survive выжить
    tool инструмент
    understand понимать
    use использовать
    useful полезный
    useless бесполезый
    victim жертва
    vulnerable уязвимый

    04.04 Exercises[развернуть][свернуть]


    (Чтобы увидеть ответ, выделите текст с помощью мыши)

    1. Choose a correct variant.

    2. * In some countries it's __legal to drink alcohol.
      — un WRONG, — aWRONG, — ilRIGHT
    3. She works for a __national company.
    4. — multiRIGHT, — biWRONG, — uniWRONG
    5. Oh no! I made a mistake. I'll have to __do all my work.
    6. — overWRONG, — reRIGHT, — outWRONG
    7. I __slept this morning and was late for work.
    8. — outWRONG, — reWRONG, — overRIGHT
    9. You can't go into a bar. You're __age.
    10. — overWRONG, — underRIGHT, — subWRONG
    11. He's got some great __workers.
    12. — coRIGHT, — conWRONG, — superWRONG
    13. I'm sorry, but I __agree with you.
    14. — nonWRONG, — disRIGHT, — underWRONG
    15. Why don't we meet for __dinner drinks?
    16. — super-WRONG, — re-WRONG, — pre-RIGHT
    17. They serve __sized portions of chips in that restaurant.
    18. — over-WRONG, — unWRONG, — super-RIGHT
    19. Her work is __standard.
    20. — subRIGHT, — deWRONG, — preWRONG
    21. She's a famous scient__
    22. — ismWRONG, — istRIGHT, — icianWRONG
    23. My brother is a music__
    24. — istWRONG, — antWRONG, — ianRIGHT
    25. Loyal__ is important for friends.
    26. — mentWRONG, — nessWRONG, — tyRIGHT
    27. The company has plans for expan__.
    28. — sionRIGHT, — ityWRONG, — nessWRONG
    29. There's been an improve__ in the situation.
    30. — nessWRONG, — mentRIGHT, — shipWRONG

    31. Fill the table with missing forms.
    32. Verb Noun Adjective
      benefit benefit beneficial
      depend dependence dependent
      infect infection infecting/infected
      irritate irritant irritating
      cite citation cited

    33. Fill in the spaces in the text using a form of the word in brackets.

    34. It is no exaggeration (EXAGGERATE) to say that the world has become a global village. Modern methods of communication (COMMUNICATE) have made the world much smaller and the problems we face, such as pollution (POLLUTE) are not restricted to this country. The destruction (DESTROY) of the rainforests in Brazil is everyone's problem and the starvation (STARVE) which is common in many African countries is a challenge for Europe too. The extinction (EXTINCT) of rare species is a tragedy for the planet as a whole and the exhaustion (EXHAUST) of oil supplies will shake the foundation (FOUND) of the world's economy.
      The protection (PROTECT) of the environment is the responsibility (RESPONSIBLE) of all nations, rich and poor. However, uncontrolled economic competition (COMPETE) between strong and weak nations leads to the creation (CREATE) of greater unequality (EQUAL) between the rich and poor nations of the world.


    35. Rewrite the sentences in passive voice

      • Julia rescued three cats. Three cats were rescued by Julia.
      • Maria crashed into the blue car. The blue car was crashed into by Maria.
      • Steven has forgotten the book. The book has been forgotten by Steven.
      • The girls had lost the match. The match had been lost by the girls.
      • The teacher is not going to open the window.The window is not going to be opened by the teacher.

    36. Rewrite the sentences using the words in brackets. Do not change the meaning of the original sentences.

      • Kate isn’t interested in history. (not like) Kate don’t like history.
      • My parents are in Europe at the moment. (travel) My parents are travelling in Europe.
      • The dog is quiet now. (not bark) The dog is not barking now.
      • What’s your opinion of the show? (think) What do you think about the show?
      • We are regular visitors to London. (often) We visit London often.
      • Sue can’t open the door because she’s in the bath. (have) Sue can’t open the door because she’s having the bath.
      • Nina was walking to work in the snow. (while) While Nina was walking to work, it was snowing.
      • We stayed at home because of the rain. (was) We stayed at home because it was raining.
      • It was midnight, but we continued to work. (at) It was midnight, but we were at work.
      • Kate finished her project during her favorite TV show. (watching) Kate finished her project watching her favorite TV show.

    37. Ask all possible questions about the sentence.

      • At a nature conservation course you will learn and understand how to save endangered animals.
      • Charles Darwin published his book “On the origin of species” in United Kingdom on 24 of November 1859.
      • Przewalski's horse population in the wild was restored by using 15 specimens captured around 1900.


    38. Which words are these?

      • Allergenicity is an ability to cause allergies. (13 letters)
      • Acidification is a decrease of pH of something. (13 letters)
      • Crops are plants we grow to eat and to use for other purposes. (5 letters)
      • A pest is an organism harmful to agriculture. (4 letters)
      • An autoimmune desease is a desease caused by immune system making a mistake and attacking its own organism. (10 letters)
      • Diversity is a variety of something – for example, organisms in an ecosystem. (9 letters)
      • A host is an organism that is exploited by a parasite. (4 letters)
      • An anaphylaxis is a very strong and lethal allergic reaction. (11 letters)
      • A hereditable trait is a trait that can be passed from parent to offspring. (11 letters)
      • To fund something means to give money to finance it. (4 letters)

    39. Write antonyms

    40. to forbid — to allow/ to permit
      beneficial — harmful
      simple — complex
      to decrease — to increase
      to destroy — to create
      harm — benefit

    41. Write synonyms

    42. metric — scale / measurement
      helpful — beneficial
      to employ — to use / to apply
      deadly — lethal / fatal
      to disagree — to object
      instrument — tool