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
What makes living systems different than non-living ones? Unfortunately this question is impossible to answer, at least currently. Instead, we must face computationally tangible questions based on our current understanding of physics, computation, information, and biology. Yet we have few insights into how living systems might quantifiably differ from their non-living counterparts, as in a mathematical foundation to explain away our observations of biological evolution, emergence, innovation, and organization. The development of a theory of living systems, if at all possible, demands a mathematical understanding of how data generated by complex biological systems changes over time. In addition, this theory ought to be broad enough as to not be constrained to an Earth-based biochemistry. In this dissertation, the philosophy of studying living systems from the perspective of traditional physics is first explored as a motivating discussion for subsequent research. Traditionally, we have often thought of the physical world from a bottom-up approach: things happening on a smaller scale aggregate into things happening on a larger scale. In addition, the laws of physics are generally considered static over time. Research suggests that biological evolution may follow dynamic laws that (at least in part) change as a function of the state of the system. Of the three featured research projects, cellular automata (CA) are used as a model to study certain aspects of living systems in two of them. These aspects include self-reference, open-ended evolution, local physical universality, subjectivity, and information processing. Open-ended evolution and local physical universality are attributed to the vast amount of innovation observed throughout biological evolution. Biological systems may distinguish themselves in terms of information processing and storage, not outside the theory of computation. The final research project concretely explores real-world phenomenon by means of mapping dominance hierarchies in the evolution of video game strategies. Though the main question of how life differs from non-life remains unanswered, the mechanisms behind open-ended evolution and physical universality are revealed.
ContributorsAdams, Alyssa M (Author) / Walker, Sara I (Thesis advisor) / Davies, Paul CW (Committee member) / Pavlic, Theodore P (Committee member) / Chamberlin, Ralph V (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
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
Variation in living systems and how it cascades across organizational levels is central to biology. To understand the constraints and amplifications of variation in collective systems, I mathematically study how group-level differences emerge from individual variation in eusocial-insect colonies, which are inherently diverse and easily observable individually and collectively. Considering collective processes in three species where increasing degrees of heterogeneity are relevant, I address how individual variation scales to colony-level variation and to what degree it is adaptive. In Chapter 2, I introduce a Markov-chain decision model for stochastic individual quorum-based recruitment decisions of rock-ant workers during house hunting, and how they determine collective speed--accuracy balance. Differences in the average threshold-dependent response characteristics of workers between colonies cause collective differences in decision-making. Moreover, noisy behavior may prevent drastic collective cascading into poor nests. In Chapter 3, I develop an ordinary differential equation (ODE) model to study how cognitive diversity among honey-bee foragers influences collective attention allocation between novel and familiar resources. Results provide a mechanistic basis for changes in foraging activity and preference with group composition. Moreover, sensitivity analysis reveals that the main individual driver for foraging allocation shifts from recruitment (communication) to persistence (independent effort) as colony composition changes. This might favor specific degrees of heterogeneity that best amplify communication in wild colonies. Lastly, in Chapter 4, I consider diversity in size, age, and task for nest defense in stingless bees. To better understand how these dimensions of diversity interact to balance defensive demands with other colony needs, I study their effect on colony size and task allocation through a demographic Filippov ODE model. Along each dimension, variation is beneficial in a certain range, outside of which colony adaptation and survival are compromised. This work elucidates how variation in collective properties emerges from nonlinear interactions between varying components in eusocial insects, but it can be generalized to other biological systems with similar fundamental characteristics but less empirical tractability. Moreover, it has the potential of inspiring algorithms that capitalize on heterogeneity in engineered systems where simple components with limited information and no central control must solve complex tasks.
ContributorsNavas Zuloaga, Maria Gabriela (Author) / Kang, Yun (Thesis advisor) / Smith, Brian H (Thesis advisor) / Pavlic, Theodore P (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
The flexibility and robustness of social insect colonies, when they cope with challenges as integrated units, raise many questions, such as how hundreds and thousands of individual local responses are coordinated without a central controlling process. Answering such questions requires: 1. Quantifiable collective responses of colonies under specific scenarios; 2. Decomposability of the collective colony-level response into individual responses; and 3. Mechanisms to integrate the colony- and individual-level responses. In the first part of my dissertation, I explore coordinated collective responses of colonies in during the alarm response to an alarmed nestmate (chapter 2&3). I develop a machine-learning approach to quantitatively estimate the collective and individual alarm response (chapter 2). Using this methodology, I demonstrate that colony alarm responses to the introduction of alarmed nestmates can be decomposed into immediately cascading, followed by variable dampening processes. Each of those processes are found to be modulated by variation in individual alarm responsiveness, as measured by alarm response threshold and persistence of alarm behavior. This variation is modulated in turn by environmental context, in particular with task-related social context (chapter 3). In the second part of my dissertation, I examine the mechanisms responsible for colonial changes in metabolic rate during ontogeny. Prior studies have found that larger ant colonies (as for larger organisms) have lower mass-specific metabolic rates, but the mechanisms remain unclear. In a 3.5-year study on 25 colonies, metabolic rates of colonies and colony components were measured during ontogeny (chapter 4). The scaling of metabolic rate during ontogeny was fit better by segmented regression or quadratic regression models than simple linear regression models, showing that colonies do not follow a universal power-law of metabolism during the ontogenetic development. Furthermore, I showed that the scaling of colonial metabolic rates can be primarily explained by changes in the ratio of brood to adult workers, which nonlinearly affects colonial metabolic rates. At high ratios of brood to workers, colony metabolic rates are low because the metabolic rate of larvae and pupae are much lower than adult workers. However, the high colony metabolic rates were observed in colonies with moderate brood: adult ratios, because higher ratios cause adult workers to be more active and have higher metabolic rates, presumably due to the extra work required to feed more brood.
ContributorsGuo, Xiaohui (Author) / Fewell, Jennifer H (Thesis advisor) / Kang, Yun (Thesis advisor) / Harrison, Jon F (Committee member) / Liebig, Juergen (Committee member) / Pratt, Stephen C (Committee member) / Pavlic, Theodore P (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
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