Powel et al. look at the genetic factors that lead to melanoma, a skin cancer in swordtail fish caused by incompatible alleles. It focuses on species of Xiphophorus (swordtail fish) that naturally hybridize within their own population, not represented by the parent population. The study shows that the hybrids have conflicting genetic traits (alleles) linked to an increased risk of developing melanoma and exhibit unique pigmentation patterns. The researchers had a goal of studying how these species breed and face reproductive barriers to gain insight on the individual genes that are responsible for the distance in the related species.
The research was completed using controlled breeding experiments and genomic analyses. The study found that the hybrids had incompatible alleles from both parent species. This causes disruptions in the cellular process related to the development of pigment cells, leading to the uncontrolled and dangerous overgrowth of pigment cells, a characteristic of melanoma. Degradation of the fin was found to play a role in lack of survival for the hybrids. The researchers used the Dobzhansky-Muller model as a comparing framework on why distant related species created hybrids with low viability. However, experimental work to support the model is slim.
Due to divergence of related model species, data to back the model has become unclear. Most of the mapped incompatibilities are now species that no longer hybridize. Powell et al. look at breeding of Xiphophorus birchmanni and Xiophophorus malinche. These two species naturally hybridize and have a subset of viable and fertile offspring. However, results found that in some populations, males were developing melanoma before sexual maturity, interfering with continuing the lineage.
Moreover, further research found the phenotype of a dark blotch on the caudal fin is derived from X. birchmanni. This spot is called spotted caudal and allowed Powell et al. to further genetic mapping from the macromelaocyte cells that made up the spotted caudal. Hybrid populations of X. birchmanni exhibited spotting at different and growing phenotypes than the stable phenotype of the parent. Observation in the lab showed the spots growing over a 6-month period in hybrids, which were linked to the overgrowth of the macromelaocyte.
The results highlight the necessity of understanding genetic compatibility and the effects of hybridization in marine biology, as the parent species X. birchmanni has never been recorded to have melanoma. Researchers noted ultraviolet radiation and natural carcinogens cannot be key contributors to the dramatic difference in melanoma rates between the parent and hybrid species.

    In conclusion, the study serves as a compelling example of how natural hybridization can unveil intricate genetic interactions that contribute to disease, reinforcing the importance of genetic diversity in comprehending health of related species breeding and divergence. The authors advocate for continued research to investigate the byproduct of their findings for conservation strategies and the management of hybrid populations. 

Reference
Daniel L. Powell et al., Natural hybridization reveals incompatible alleles that cause melanoma in swordtail fish. Science 368, 731-736. 10.1126/science.aba5216 (2020).

Daniel L. Powell et al., Natural hybridization reveals incompatible alleles that cause melanoma in swordtail fish. Science368, 731-736. 10.1126/science.aba5216 (2020).

Primary articles are reports of scientific findings that are original to the knowledgeable publishers. These articles aim to advance fields in science and focus on new data and analysis. The content shares direct scientific knowledge on new discoveries, including an explanation of the procedure and results. The concept is that the discoveries can be replicated by other experts via following the procedures outlined in the primary article. Normally, the discoveries are credited through evaluation by other related experts, identified as peer-reviewed.

Review articles summarize existing scientific literature on specific topics. Their main goal is to bring together published research and provide an overview of a scientific subject. While they might not cover every detail, these articles are helpful learning tools that give useful insights into the current knowledge in the field.

When a researcher intends to submit their work to a scholarly journal, they must follow a process known as peer review. The researcher prepares a paper outlining their procedures and results, while keeping the target publication in mind. After submission, the journal editor evaluates whether the research aligns with the publication’s focus. If deemed suitable, the research paper is then sent to experts in the relevant field for further review. The experts evaluate the research by posing a series of questions aimed at assessing its originality, significance, logic, and methodology. This step is where the term ‘peer’ in ‘peer review’ is founded, as reviewers are expert peers in same field as the submitting researcher.  Next, if the research receives approval from the experts, it is

then returned to the editor, typically with recommendations for revisions. This process is very selective and once research is back to the editor it is still unlikely to be officially approved. After months or even years, if the editor approves the research following revisions, it will be published and officially designated as peer-reviewed.

From the provided articles, the primary article is, “Base editing of hematopoietic stem cells rescues sickle cell disease in mice,” as it details a specific procedure from a first-person perspective, presenting the results, data, and participants. The review article is “Hematopoietic Stem Cell Gene-Addition/Editing Therapy in Sickle Cell Disease” as it discusses multiple advancements in treating sickle cell disease, including citations to credit the information, and it does not provide detailed descriptions for conduction of procedures.

After receiving an associates of science degree while playing volleyball, my not-too-distant plans were to become an X-ray associate to an MRI technician. I have spent the past 3 years working in a hospital and an outpatient diagnostic imaging facility to prepare for my future, though two years in, realization set in. While waiting to hear about my application status for a radiography program, the reality was, I was not excited about the possibility of being accepted. I reflected on the environment I had experienced and the growth I had obtained working with technicians of all imaging modalities with great fondness and gratitude, but I was missing the signs where my personality and intentions really stood. 

I found myself in a place of raw honesty after not getting accepted by just one rank. While I loved patient care and aimed to be a positive moment in rough times, life slammed me into a place of close reliability to those I aided. I could continue to become an X-ray Technician, even though my heart now empathized and hurt a different way with each case, or I could take time to reevaluate.

Not too long after, the signs that were always there made themselves clear. Part of my personal foundation had always been with aquatic life and the ocean. I grew up raising a variety of fish, from indoor tanks to outdoor ponds, which led to my first marine biology class and educated-interest in marine animals. At the beginning of my teen years, I saved to buy my own saltwater tank. Caring for and learning about the world of marine life, from fish to corals, turned into a seven-year hobby. Not only did I have a history of caring for marine life, I have always had an at-home-feeling of being in the ocean and observing what sea life is in the surroundings. With this realization, I knew I had to look into what a career involving this passion would include.

• Gene Expression Diagram
• The Great Research Project
• A Biomolecule
• A Plant Cell
• DNA Replication Model