EPA-RFP
The effect of myotonia on
muscle mass in myotonic goats
Table
of Contents:
1)
Abstract
2)
Research Plan
3)
Resume
4)
Current and Pending Support
5)
Budget
6)
Budget Justification
7)
Quality Assurance Statement
Winningham Dobbins, Sarah
Lynn
931-537-3916
slwinningh22@tntech.edu
Permanent U.S. Citizen
Hometown:
Bachelor’s Degree in Health Science Biology
May 2004
Undergraduate
Department of Biology
August 2003-December 2003
Abstract
Myotonic goats possess a genetic mutation which inhibits
muscle relaxation after muscle stimulation occurs. This characteristic leads to
an overall increase in muscle contraction over the lifespan of the goat, which
leads to increased muscle tone and therefore muscle mass.
Research Plan
Project Cost: See Budget, below. Estimated $72,900 .
Project Summary
The genetic condition of myotonia inhibits the relaxation of muscles in the affected myotonic goat (Tapscott, et al 2001). Through measurements of height, weight, length, circumference, and body fat, muscle mass will be estimated and compared. I expect to find the muscle mass of the myotonic goat larger than the muscle mass of the non-myotonic goat.
The objective of
this study is to find whether the genetic condition of myotonia
increases muscle mass. The findings may have a direct impact on the use of myotonic goats as meat goats, and an indirect impact on the
study of myotonia congenita
in humans.
I
project that the myotonic goats will have increased
muscle mass in comparison with the normal goats because of the increased
overall stimulation.
Methods and Materials
Using a standard
tape measure, measurements were taken from the hoof to the shoulder and the
rump to the chest of each myotonic goat. The
measurements were recorded in the data table.
The same measurements were then taken from the normal goats and recorded
in the data table. The tape measure was also used to measure the circumference
of legs, neck, and chest from each goat. Skinfold measurements were taken from all four limbs and torso using skinfold calipers. The goats were then weighed on a
standard scale. All data was recorded as measured (Ellis 2001).
After acquiring
all the necessary data, the numbers were analyzed to estimate muscle mass using
a standard bar chart. The chart shows a clear representation of muscle mass as
a function of circumference, size, and height to weight ratio, and allows
comparison between normal and myotonic goats (Swantek, et al 1999).
Expected Results and Benefits
The objective of this study is to find
whether the genetic condition of myotonia increases
muscle mass. The findings may have a direct impact on the use of myotonic goats as meat goats, and an indirect impact on the
study of myotonia congenita
in humans.
I project that the myotonic goats will have increased muscle mass in
comparison with the normal goats because of the increased overall stimulation.
Keywords
myotonic goat, fainting goat, myotonia, muscle mass
|
164 |
|
Phone (931)537-3916 • E-mail slwinningh22@tntech.edu |
Sarah Winningham Dobbins
|
Employment |
|
|
|
August 2003—present UCHRA Cookeville, Tennessee data entry clerk § Responsible for Emergency Relief Information for over a thousand clients |
|
August 2002—present Lab instructor §
Responsible for teaching Biology
labs to undergraduates Education |
|
|
|
August 2000—May 2004
Bachelor Degree in Biology § Summa Cum Laude |
|
E References |
|
|
|
------Dr. Michael Joseph Redding Department of Biology, TTU (931)372-5555 ------Dr. John Harris Department of Biology, TTU (931)372-5555 ------Ms. Sandra Carter Supervisor, UCHRA (931)528-5555 |
Current and Pending Support
None at this time
|
|
Proposed
Budget |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Category |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries
& Wages |
First Year |
|
Second Year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional |
$10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Technician |
$10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secretarial |
$10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Graduate Student(2) |
$15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Student Hourly |
$3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
$48,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits |
$15,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travel |
$2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Expendables |
$1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expendables |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Computer |
$500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplies & Expenses |
$1,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copying & Telephone |
$600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tuition & Fees |
$2,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
$4,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Direct Costs |
$70,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indirect
Costs |
$2,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Costs |
$72,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Budget Justification
N/A
Quality Assurance Statement
As a biologist in today’s fast-changing technology, I must be committed to
keeping up with standards in the health field. This includes proper care of
animals and humans alike, and proper understanding of new methods and
technology available for new studies.