What "this" refers to here?

Forums: Grammar, Esl, English
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Does it refer to the fact "that the DNA-break machines are anchored at the axis to position the breaks right within the recombination inhibiting zone?"

Context:

Franz Klein concludes: "We think that the DNA-break machines are anchored at the axis to position the breaks right within the recombination inhibiting zone. This may attract the sister chromosome loop, which remains trapped in the recombination inhibiting zone by one of the two ends flanking the break, while the second end docks off to form a search tentacle for finding the paternal chromosome. We have evidence for many details of this scenario -- but most importantly, the inhibition of the involvement of the sister breaks down, if the anchoring of the DNA-break machines is defective. This indicates that anchoring may be indeed a key mechanism to control the sister. The result of a sister, hyperactive for DNA-break repair in meiosis is the death or severe impairment of the developing embryo."

More:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110809104254.htm

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 3 • Views: 756 • Replies: 9

No top replies

Yes.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Thanks.
What does "dock off" mean in "while the second end docks off to form a search tentacle for finding the paternal chromosome " in the context?

A ship docked ===>>> the ship anchored at the dock;
A ship docked off ===>>> the ship pulled its anchored and left drifted?

1 Reply

@oristarA,

No. The verb "to dock" also means to cut off. For example, when the tails of sheep are cut off, the sheep are said to have been docked. If a deduction is may from your paycheck because you were late, or damaged your employer's property, it is said that your pay was docked.

The author seems to mean that that portion detaches itself. You should understand, though, that this is an awkward usage. I've never know "to dock" in the sense of to cut off to be used as a reflexive verb, and it looks very awkward to me. People who write scientific journals are notoriously inept writers.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Thanks

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

People who write scientific journals are notoriously inept writers.

That's because they don't believe in Jesus.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Effen they did, then all of their dreams would come true!

Dropkick me Jesus, through the goal posts of life . . .

0 Replies

@oristarA,

Quote:

People who write scientific journals are notoriously inept writers.

Setanta keeps mouthing this piece of claptrap but he never provides any explanation or proof.

How could the writer be accused of being inept when that same writer is directly quoting Franz Klein?

A guy as inept as Setanta, when it comes to analyzing language, really ought not to be throwing stones.

Quote:

The author seems to mean that that portion detaches itself. You should understand, though, that this is an awkward usage. I've never know "to dock" in the sense of to cut off to be used as a reflexive verb, and it looks very awkward to me.

There doesn't appear to be a reflexive use here. This is technical stuff, not at all easy to grasp the meaning. To me it doesn't seem that the author describes the portion detaching itself -

"which remains trapped in the recombination inhibiting zone by one of the two ends flanking the break, while the second end docks off to form a search tentacle for finding the paternal chromosome"

It seems to say, as does the article taken in its entirety, that one end anchors the sister chromosome loop "which remains trapped". The other end docks, that is anchors/attaches itself so that it can send out a search tentacle.

When this anchoring is defective, then there is a problem.

In order to find out the actual meaning of 'dock' as it is used here, I think that
you should write the magazine, Ori.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
People who write scientific journals are notoriously inept writers.

Setanta keeps mouthing this piece of claptrap but he never provides any explanation or proof.

How could the writer be accused of being inept when that same writer is directly quoting Franz Klein?

A guy as inept as Setanta, when it comes to analyzing language, really ought not to be throwing stones.

Quote:
The author seems to mean that that portion detaches itself. You should understand, though, that this is an awkward usage. I've never know "to dock" in the sense of to cut off to be used as a reflexive verb, and it looks very awkward to me.

There doesn't appear to be a reflexive use here. This is technical stuff, not at all easy to grasp the meaning. To me it doesn't seem that the author describes the portion detaching itself -

"which remains trapped in the recombination inhibiting zone by one of the two ends flanking the break, while the second end docks off to form a search tentacle for finding the paternal chromosome"

It seems to say, as does the article taken in its entirety, that one end anchors the sister chromosome loop "which remains trapped". The other end docks, that is anchors/attaches itself so that it can send out a search tentacle.

When this anchoring is defective, then there is a problem.

In order to find out the actual meaning of 'dock' as it is used here, I think that
you should write the magazine, Ori.

We've got our mentor JPB here.
But it seems that she keeps docking off the forum.

1 Reply

@oristarA,

Bravo, Oristar! I couldn't have said it better myself.

0 Replies

What "this" refers to here?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know