Data Display Analysis and Interpretation - Relationship Between Body Length and Skull - Statistics Assessment Answer

Assessment Task:

Part A: Data display, analysis and interpretation
This part is worth 50% of the re-sit mark and should be submitted by email as a Word document to  alison.graham@ncl.ac.uk by 2 pm on Wednesday 7 th August 2019.

The aim of this exercise is to enable you to show your ability to:

• use Excel to manipulate data and produce appropriate figures to illustrate results
•  incorporate Excel figures into a Word document
•  use Minitab to carry out statistical analyses
•  interpret data and report results in the correct style

Measurements were taken from naked mole rats (Heterocephalus glaber). The variables are body length (L) and skull width (SW), for non-reproductive males, non-reproductive females, reproductive males and reproductive ‘queen’ females. All measurements are in mm. Each pair of body length and skull width measurements were taken from the same individual. Analyse the data and report the results in the style of the data analysis Methods and Results sections of a journal paper. Use the information and examples from BIO1010 data analysis practicals to produce graphs and report statistics in an appropriate format. The results should include (but are not limited to):

•  Descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation.
•  A bar chart, with standard error bars, showing mean body length in the 4 samples.
•  Assumptions tests for normality and equal variance, to justify doing t tests.
• A t test for a difference in mean body length between non-reproductive and reproductive males.
•  A t test for a difference in mean body length between non-reproductive and reproductive females.
• A figure to illustrate the relationship between body length and skull width for the 4 samples.
•  Text that refers to the figures and explains what they show.

Results do not have to be presented in the order given above and you can report and illustrate additional analysis of the data set that you find interesting.

Part B: Mini Review
This part is worth 50% of the re-sit mark and should be submitted by email to alison.graham@ncl.ac.uk

While studying for your degree, you will use many different information sources. One of these will be literature reviews. Literature reviews, also called scientific reviews and review articles, are described by Johnson and Scott (p 31) as being a piece of writing that “brings together, in a single article, a synthesis of a large number of individual research papers. The approach of these articles is usually designed to enable someone with some knowledge of the field, but not necessarily at a very detailed level, to derive a picture of the current ideas and developments within that field without having to read all the individual research papers.”

You are required to write a mini-review on naked mole rats and cancer. Cancer has never been observed in naked mole rats - what are the suggested reasons for this? You should write a mini-review that discusses the current hypotheses behind this phenomenon, all of which should be backed by experimental evidence. Here are two papers on this topic to get you started (you do not necessarily need to cite these in your final review):

Seluanov A, Hine C, Azpurua J, Feigenson M, Bozzella M, Mao Z, Catania KC, Gorbunova V (2009) Hypersensitivity to contact inhibition provides a clue to cancer resistance of naked mole-rat. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106:19352-19357 Tian X, Azpurua J, Hine C, Vaidya A, Myakishev-Rempel M, Ablaeva J, Mao Z, Nevo E, Gorbunova V, Seluanov A (2013) High-molecular-mass hyaluronan mediates the cancer resistance of the naked mole rat. Nature 18:346-349

You should decide on a narrative for your mini-review and use enough scientific papers to provide evidence support your “story”. You may need to read around the subject before you decide on the final papers to include in your mini-review. You need to analyze and interpret the content of the papers you are studying in order to produce a fully integrated account of what they represent collectively.

You should primarily cite published articles from scientific journals in your review, not books or websites. Books and reputable websites can be used but the majority of
references should be to primary research papers published in peer-reviewed journals. There is useful information relating to this assignment on Blackboard. This includes a talk given by Caroline Crow from the Writing Development Centre on “Writing a mini-review”. The slides and link to the ReCap recording are on Blackboard. This will help you to understand what a mini-review is and how to go about writing one. Examples of published reviews are also on Blackboard. Marking criteria for the review are given on the following pages.

Your review should be organised as follows:

1.  Write your name, student number, tutor’s name and the text word count at the top of the first page.
2.  Begin with a concise but descriptive title that informs the reader about the content of the review.
3.  Then write an introductory paragraph (or two) that introduces the topic and sets out the scope of the review.
4.  Follow this with a main body made up of different sections with sub-headings of your choice.

 Include at least one figure or table, either of your own making or taken from one of your sources. This must have a legend or heading composed by you (remove the
original one if your figure or table is taken from a source) and include a reference to the original source (e.g. Author date) if appropriate. Figures and tables should be
labelled as Figure 1, Table 1, etc. You must refer to the figure or table in the text and position it appropriately in your document.

 Finish your text with a concluding paragraph (or two), for instance highlighting established findings, uncertainties, disagreements, gaps in current knowledge or
next steps. Do not introduce new information. The conclusion must relate to the main body of the text.

 List your references in full (your citations should mainly be to peer-reviewed papers) using the style outlined in the Biology/Zoology Guidelines for Presentation of
Written Work (modelled on the style used in the Journal of Comparative Physiology A)). All sources used in the review must be listed in the reference list.

Your review should be written in a scientific style (see Chapter 6 of Johnson & Scott). As with all written work, the format (including referencing style) should follow the information given in the Biology/Zoology Guidelines for Presentation of Written Work. A copy of this document is on Blackboard. Use 12 point Times New Roman or 11 point Calibri font with at least 1.5-line spacing throughout. In case of any contradictions between Johnson and Scott and the Biology/Zoology Guidelines, please follow the Biology/Zoology Guidelines. Avoid using any direct quotes from the papers.

The text must be no longer than 1500 words (excluding the title, text in any figures or tables themselves or their legends, and the reference list). The word count does include any section headings you use and in-text citations.

This Statistics Assessment has been solved by our Statistics experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.

Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.