Places like 123people aggregate content from other sites and tend to
spam people they aggregate from (plus allow others to spam through
their system - pretty sure their one of the sites I deleted a profile
from due to spam, never having even made one there to begin with) -
LinkedIn isn't the same, they create profiles at a user's request and
keep spam to a minimum by either hiding your contact info by default
and charging something like $10 or $30 a month to contact 3-10 people
(something like that, it's been awhile since I paid for their "In
Message" service), I've never failed to get a response from someone
via LinkedIn, you can probably get a response from Bill Gates via
LinkedIn if you find his actual profile.
On Feb 5, 4:01 am, Mega <masterstorm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I saw him on 123people and thought about registering...
> But then I browsed his public profile and as I clicked on one article,
> it said ''member couldn't be found''. The same happened with his other
> articles.
>
> I think he has abadonned his profile there....
>
> Is anyone registred at linkedIn?? To see if his profile hasn't been
> deleted.
>
> _____
>
> You said it, the plants they are now producing are very dim. So it
> would be less problem that they're propagated because when the company
> brings out the brightly glowing plants, consumers would like that even
> more.
>
> On 5 Feb., 04:54, Anselm Levskaya <levsk...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I don't know much about the state of this particular company, but what
> > they're trying to do is pretty hard.
>
> > Having used the lux operon before in bacteria, the first thing to note
> > is that it's pretty dim, even at the maximum output levels in a
> > healthy, dense culture. It's much less bright than a glowstick, say.
> > Requiring very dark adapted eyes to appreciate.
>
> > Getting a healthy dose of photons out of a biochemical pathway
> > requires a lot of energy. I imagine simply putting the lux pathway
> > into plants didn't result in a species bright enough to really impress
> > a consumer market. It will take a lot of work to direct more of the
> > plants' resources into the precursors necessary to fuel the
> > photochemical event.
>
> > Almost all bioluminescent systems use a catalytic enzyme called a
> > "luciferase" that activates a species specific "luciferin" with an
> > electron-donor that ultimately ends up generating a peroxide
> > intermediate with strained bonds whose decay is high-energy enough to
> > cause a singlet-state excitation and quick photo-emission.
>
> > The lux system typically only generates 10^3 photons/sec/bacterium,
> > which can briefly result in a dim glow in a dense oxygenated culture
> > (10^12 bacteria/mL * 10^3 = 10^15, but only when you shake them to
> > oxygenate all the cells). Some species of krill and fish can push
> > 10^12 photons from their light emitting organs ~continuously.
>
> > Note that 1 lumen is ~ 10^15 photons/sec, and a weak nightlight bulb
> > is typically around 10^17 photons/sec, so we're talking about subtle
> > effects here. American fireflies can pulse brighter by controlling
> > the photochemical reaction rate and can get up to 10^14 photons/sec.
> > I'm not sure what the bioluminescent record holder is. These bugs
> > probably control brightness by constricting oxygenation of their
> > photocytes, wherein the luciferase is found near peroxisomes and the
> > luciferin is bunched up in cytoplasmic granules.
>
> > Here are some general refs:http://anselmlevskaya.com/papers/bioluminescence.pdf - marine
> > bioluminescence reviewhttp://www.photobiology.info/Viviani.html-discussion of terrestrial
> > bioluminescence
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.
0 comments:
Post a Comment