Group15: Interacting amino acid replacements allow poison frogs to evolve epibatidine resistance


Edmund D. Brodie III. 2009. Toxins and venoms. Current Biology Volume 19 (Issue 20): R931-R935. DOI: 10.1016

Rebecca D. Tarvin, Cecilia M. Borghese, Wiebke Sachs, Juan C. Santos, Ying Lu, Lauren A. O’Connell, David C. Cannatella, R. Adron Harris,  Harold H. Zakon. 2017. Interacting amino acid replacements allow poison frogs to evolve epibatidine resistance. Science Volume 357 (Issue 6357): 1261-1266. DOI: 10.1126

Rebecca D. Tarvin, Juan C. Santos, Lauren A. O’Connell, Harold H. Zakon, David C. Cannatella.  2016. Convergent Substitutions in a Sodium Channel Suggest Multiple Origins of Toxin Resistance in Poison Frogs. Molecular Biology and Evolution Volume 33 (Issue 4): 1068–1081. DOI: 10.1093

4.4(88.89%) 9 votes
This entry was posted in Poison mutations. Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Group15: Interacting amino acid replacements allow poison frogs to evolve epibatidine resistance

  1. Hayden says:

    Very high quality video, it was interesting to me how an organism’s own poison could affect itself, but it made sense based on what we had learned in class that the organisms had to become resistant to its own poison over time.

  2. Abigail says:

    The idea for the setup of the video is great! However, I think your execution of it could be a little better in order to make the message easier to understand.

  3. Nylah says:

    Informative and nicely laid out, however I would work on recording in a way where the audience cant see you reading off of a paper, it was distracting for me. Second one of the visuals (the frog tree) was blurry and hard to see, so maybe find a better one.

  4. Alyssa says:

    I felt like there was a lack of flow throughout the video. For that reason, it could’ve been executed in a better way. Also, more visuals (graphs, images, etc.) would have been helpful. Overall, the video provided adequate information about the experiment and related it back to the class but this, in particular, should’ve been further developed.

  5. Ian says:

    Overall good video. I feel like starting the video with images may have been a little more interesting to entertain the audience instead of sitting there talking to the camera.

  6. Elizabeth says:

    I wish the visuals were more incorporated into the video, i feel like the pics were just flashed on the screen without flowing and transitions

  7. Sara says:

    The information was well portrayed. I thought adding a person drawing out the diagrams was an interesting addition.

  8. James says:

    Flow was good, but the experiment could have been explained better.

  9. Pratima says:

    The video was very high quality, and the background music was appealing.

  10. Kevin says:

    I really enjoy the video. It had a “PSA type” feel with the background music and how the beginning was set up. I thought it was really informative, but the only issue I had was the picture that were inserted. It could use some visual indication to point out certain things that the speaker was discussing at the time.

Leave a Reply