ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
This collection includes most of the ASU Theses and Dissertations from 2011 to present. ASU Theses and Dissertations are available in downloadable PDF format; however, a small percentage of items are under embargo. Information about the dissertations/theses includes degree information, committee members, an abstract, supporting data or media.
In addition to the electronic theses found in the ASU Digital Repository, ASU Theses and Dissertations can be found in the ASU Library Catalog.
Dissertations and Theses granted by Arizona State University are archived and made available through a joint effort of the ASU Graduate College and the ASU Libraries. For more information or questions about this collection contact or visit the Digital Repository ETD Library Guide or contact the ASU Graduate College at gradformat@asu.edu.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Biology
Description
Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that interact with the hormone system to negative effect. They ‘disrupt’ normal processes to cause diseases like vaginal cancer and obesity, reproductive issues like t-shaped uteri and infertility, and developmental abnormalities like spina bifida and cleft palate. These chemicals are ubiquitous in our daily lives, components in everything from toothpaste to microwave popcorn to plastic water bottles. My dissertation looks at the history, science, and regulation of these impactful substances in order to answer the question of how endocrine disruptors appeared, got interpreted by different groups, and what role science played in the process. My analysis reveals that endocrine disruptors followed a unique science policy trajectory in the US, rapidly going from their proposal in 1991 to their federal regulation in 1996, even amid intense and majority scientific disagreement over whether the substances existed at all. That trajectory resulted from the work of a small number of scientist-activists who constructed a concept and category as scientific, social, and regulatory. By playing actors from each sphere against each other and advancing a very specific scientific narrative that fit into a regulatory and social window of opportunity in the 1990s, those scientist-activists made endocrine disruptors a national issue that few could ignore. Those actions resulted in the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, a heavily-criticized and ineffective regulatory program. My dissertation tells a story of the past that informs the present. In 2018, the work of researchers, public media, and policymakers in the 1990s continues to play out, evident in the deep scientific division over endocrine disrupting effects and the inability of the European Union to settle on even a definition of endocrine disruptors for regulation purposes.
ContributorsAbboud, Alexis J (Author) / Maienschein, Jane A (Thesis advisor) / Crow, Michael M. (Committee member) / Hurlbut, J. Benjamin (Committee member) / Marchant, Gary E (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
Understanding changes and trends in biomedical knowledge is crucial for individuals, groups, and institutions as biomedicine improves people’s lives, supports national economies, and facilitates innovation. However, as knowledge changes what evidence illustrates knowledge changes? In the case of microbiome, a multi-dimensional concept from biomedicine, there are significant increases in publications, citations, funding, collaborations, and other explanatory variables or contextual factors. What is observed in the microbiome, or any historical evolution of a scientific field or scientific knowledge, is that these changes are related to changes in knowledge, but what is not understood is how to measure and track changes in knowledge. This investigation highlights how contextual factors from the language and social context of the microbiome are related to changes in the usage, meaning, and scientific knowledge on the microbiome. Two interconnected studies integrating qualitative and quantitative evidence examine the variation and change of the microbiome evidence are presented. First, the concepts microbiome, metagenome, and metabolome are compared to determine the boundaries of the microbiome concept in relation to other concepts where the conceptual boundaries have been cited as overlapping. A collection of publications for each concept or corpus is presented, with a focus on how to create, collect, curate, and analyze large data collections. This study concludes with suggestions on how to analyze biomedical concepts using a hybrid approach that combines results from the larger language context and individual words. Second, the results of a systematic review that describes the variation and change of microbiome research, funding, and knowledge are examined. A corpus of approximately 28,000 articles on the microbiome are characterized, and a spectrum of microbiome interpretations are suggested based on differences related to context. The collective results suggest the microbiome is a separate concept from the metagenome and metabolome, and the variation and change to the microbiome concept was influenced by contextual factors. These results provide insight into how concepts with extensive resources behave within biomedicine and suggest the microbiome is possibly representative of conceptual change or a preview of new dynamics within science that are expected in the future.
ContributorsAiello, Kenneth (Author) / Laubichler, Manfred D (Thesis advisor) / Simeone, Michael (Committee member) / Buetow, Kenneth (Committee member) / Walker, Sara I (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
In most diploid cells, autosomal genes are equally expressed from the paternal and maternal alleles resulting in biallelic expression. However, as an exception, there exists a small number of genes that show a pattern of monoallelic or biased-allele expression based on the allele’s parent-of-origin. This phenomenon is termed genomic imprinting and is an evolutionary paradox. The best explanation for imprinting is David Haig's kinship theory, which hypothesizes that monoallelic gene expression is largely the result of evolutionary conflict between males and females over maternal involvement in their offspring. One previous RNAseq study has investigated the presence of parent-of-origin effects, or imprinting, in the parasitic jewel wasp Nasonia vitripennis (N. vitripennis) and its sister species Nasonia giraulti (N. giraulti) to test the predictions of kinship theory in a non-eusocial species for comparison to a eusocial one. In order to continue to tease apart the connection between social and eusocial Hymenoptera, this study proposed a similar RNAseq study that attempted to reproduce these results in unique samples of reciprocal F1 Nasonia hybrids. Building a pseudo N. giraulti reference genome, differences were observed when aligning RNAseq reads to a N. vitripennis reference genome compared to aligning reads to a pseudo N. giraulti reference. As well, no evidence for parent-of-origin or imprinting patterns in adult Nasonia were found. These results demonstrated a species-of-origin effect. Importantly, the study continued to build a repository of support with the aim to elucidate the mechanisms behind imprinting in an excellent epigenetic model species, as it can also help with understanding the phenomenon of imprinting in complex human diseases.
ContributorsUnderwood, Avery Elizabeth (Author) / Wilson, Melissa (Thesis advisor) / Buetow, Kenneth (Committee member) / Gile, Gillian (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019
Description
This dissertation investigates how ideas of the right relationships among science, the public, and collective decision-making about science and technology come to be envisioned in constructions of public engagement. In particular, it explores how public engagement has come to be constructed in discourse around gene editing to better understand how it holds together with visions for good, democratic governance of those technologies and with what effects. Using a conceptual idiom of the co-production of science and the social order, I investigate the mutual formation of scientific expertise, responsibility, and democracy through constructions of public engagement. I begin by tracing dominant historical narratives of contemporary public engagement as a continuation of public understanding of science’s projects of social ordering for democratic society. I then analyze collections of prominent expert meetings, publications, discussions, and interventions about development, governance, and societal implications human heritable germline gene editing and gene drives that developed in tandem with commitments to public engagement around those technologies. Synthesizing the evidence from across gene editing discourse, I offer a constructive critique of constructions of public engagement as expressions and evidence of scientific responsibility as ultimately reasserting and reinforcing of scientific experts' authority in gene editing decision-making, despite intentions for public engagement to extend decision-making participation and power to publics. Such constructions of public engagement go unrecognized in gene editing discourse and thereby subtly reinforce broader visions of scientific expertise as essential to good governance by underwriting the legitimacy and authority of scientific experts to act on behalf of public interests. I further argue that the reinforcement of scientific expert authority in gene editing discourse through public engagement also centers scientific experts in a sociotechnical imaginary that I call “not for science alone.” This sociotechnical imaginary envisions scientific experts as guardians and guarantors of good, democratic governance. I then propose a possible alternatives to public engagement alone to improve gene editing governance by orienting discourse around notions of public accountability for potential shared benefits and collective harms of gene editing.
ContributorsRoss, Christian (Author) / Hurlbut, James B. (Thesis advisor) / Maienschein, Jane (Thesis advisor) / Collins, James P. (Committee member) / Crow, Michael M. (Committee member) / Sarewitz, Daniel R. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description
Evolutionary theory provides a rich framework for understanding cancer dynamics across scales of biological organization. The field of cancer evolution has largely been divided into two domains, comparative oncology - the study of cancer across the tree of life, and tumor evolution. This work provides a theoretical framework to unify these subfields with the intent that an understanding of the evolutionary dynamics driving cancer risk at one scale can inform the understanding of the dynamics on another scale. The evolution of multicellular life and the unique vulnerabilities in the cellular mechanisms that underpin it explain the ubiquity of cancer prevalence across the tree of life. The breakdown in cellular cooperation and communication that were required for multicellular life define the hallmarks of cancer. As divergent life histories drove speciation events, it similarly drove divergences in fundamental cancer risk across species. An understanding of the impact that species’ life history theory has on the underlying network of multicellular cooperation and somatic evolution allows for robust predictions on cross-species cancer risk. A large-scale veterinary cancer database is utilized to validate many of the predictions on cancer risk made from life history evolution. Changing scales to the cellular level, it lays predictions on the fate of somatic mutations and the fitness benefits they confer to neoplastic cells compared to their healthy counterparts. The cancer hallmarks, far more than just a way to unify the many seemingly unique pathologies defined as cancer, is a powerful toolset to understand how specific mutations may change the fitness of somatic cells throughout carcinogenesis and tumor progression. Alongside highlighting the significant advances in evolutionary approaches to cancer across scales, this work provides a lucid confirmation that an understanding of both scales provides the most complete portrait of evolutionary cancer dynamics.
ContributorsCompton, Zachary Taylor (Author) / Maley, Carlo C. (Thesis advisor) / Aktipis, Athena (Committee member) / Buetow, Kenneth (Committee member) / Nedelcu, Aurora (Committee member) / Compton, Carolyn (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2023