(Part 2) Best molecular biology books according to redditors

Started reading Quigley in Afghanistan years back. It is incredibly encouraging to see him discussed and up-voted on TRP.

Besides "Tragedy and Hope", the #2 book that forms the cornerstone of my political world view is The Molecular Vision of Life. Like Quigley, the scholarly credentials of this book are so solid that it is beyond reproach.

The Rockefeller foundation funded the "life sciences" for reasons other than pure charity. Surprise surprise.

Henry Pratt Judson, first choice for Rockefeller Foundation presidency:

"The real hope of ultimate security lies in reinforcing the police power of the state by training of the moral nature so painstaking and so widespread as to restrict these unsocial wants and substitute for them a reasonable self control."

You, gentlemen, have unsocial wants. It is socially desirable (for the elite) for you to be a sniveling Beta bitch. Please comply.

There are a lot of very crappy books about crystallography. Library loan before buying is recommended. My two personal favorites are Crystal Structure Analysis: Principles and Practice and Fundamentals of Crystallography. The former is a light, good introductory text whereas the latter is a slightly heavier read. :)

Molecular Biology of Aging. I own a copy and its a nice collection of seminal papers that acts as a great primer to learn about aging and longevity.

https://www.amazon.com/Molecular-Biology-SPRING-HARBOR-MONOGRAPH/dp/0879698241

I'm considering taking a class called Mathematical Methods in Biology, which will use this book: http://www.amazon.com/Mathematical-Methods-Biology-David-Logan/dp/0470525878

However, I've taken two differential equations courses: General Intro to Diff Eq and one in the electric engineering department focused on Fourier/Laplace Transforms and Recurrence Relations.

Furthermore, my completed mathematical courses include Analysis at Baby Rudin's level, Intro to ODE theory, and Number Theory.

Looking through the text, it all seems very basic and I don't think I would get much out of it. Would anyone familiar with Mathematical Biology mind looking through the text and see if it is indeed a good introduction and worthwhile for some one interested in the field?

That is a decent text book, and while not bleeding edge, will probably be fine for fundamentals.

Lewin's Genes is also pretty comprehensive and I think the most recent edition (12th) was published last year.

>methodically state the case for why creation is most likely and/or why evolution is unlikely.

You will find lots and lots of the latter. Very little of the former.

>I'd also be happy to read GOOD anti-creation books as well, provided they meet the above criterion of not being mocking.

Those would just be science books based on the academic literature, wouldn't they?

Here is my reading list form the past few months. These would be pro-evolution (a.k.a science). Creationism is mentioned in a few of them, but almost in passing because Creationism is simply not a factor in legitimate scientific research, so it gets pretty much no consideration.

Knock yourself out. ;)

• Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin - Also, watch the three part series that aired on PBS hosted by Neil Shubin.
  
  
• Endless Forms Most Beautiful by Sean B. Carroll - An in depth look into developmental evolution.
  
  
• The Universe Within: Discovering the Common History of Rocks, Planets, and People by Neil Shubin
  
  
• The Link by Colin Tudge and Josh Young
  
  
• Before the Dawn by Nicholas Wade
  
  
• Relics of Eden: The Powerful Evidence of Evolution in Human DNA by Daniel J. Fairbanks - This and the other Fairbanks book listed below are the only books on this list with the intent to refute what creationists contend. He does this not by presenting the creationist argument and then trying to refute. He does it by simply presenting the evidence that science has born out regarding human evolution and genetics.
  
  
• The Story of Earth by Robert Hazen - this is a cool book about the history of the Earth and life and how geology and biology worked in tandem with other factors to produce life from the point of view of a protein biologist.
  
  
• Life: A Natural History of the First Four Billion Years of Life on Earth by Richard Fortey - Good general overview of evolutionary and geologic history.
  
  
• The Cambrian Explosion: The Construction of Animal Biodiversity by Edwin Douglas - This is the most academic book in this list and, as such, is the most difficult to read. It is a concise look at what we know about the Cambrian Explosion from the scientific literature.
  
  
• Life's Ratchet by Peter Hoffmann - Very good book about how the chaos wrought inside cells by thermal motion at the molecular level leads to the ordered functioning of the machinery of life.
  
  
• What is Life? How Chemistry Becomes Biology by Addy Pross - Super interesting take on the question, "What is Life?" He comes to a very interesting conclusion which might have implications for abiogenesis research.
  
  
• The Machinery of Life by David S. Goodsell - A neat little book that gets you acquainted with what it's really like inside of cells. A good companion book to read with Life's Ratchet as they highlight different aspects of the same topic.
  
  
• Evolving by Daniel J. Fairbanks
  
  
• Neanderthal Man: In Search of Lost Genomes by Svante Paabo - Very interesting book about the drama, blood, sweat and tears, Dr. Paabo shed to develop the techniques to sequence ancient DNA. You simply won't find books like this and Your Inner Fish above amongst Creationist literature because they simply don't do what these scientists do out in the field and in the lab.

It's a fascinating molecule with entire books dedicated to it (example). Here are the results of some publications I've read up on in the past about buckyballs, one of which summarizes much of the proposed medicinal applications for the molecule.


Buckyball Cage:

• The cage acts as an isolation chamber that unstable atoms and metals can be imbedded inside (endofullerenes/metallofullerenes). This can then potentially be used as imaging contrast agents for MRIs or for x-ray imaging
  
  
• Drug molecules could be attached to the fullerene via covalent bonding, and the fullerene can then be attached to an antibody where it can deliver the medication (localization)
  
  
• Metallofullerenes might be able to carry radioactive elements straight to cancerous tissues to prevent outside harm with treatments like traditional chemotherapy
  
  Absorbs free radicals and superoxides while being otherwise relatively unreactive ("radical sponge"):
  
  
• Buckyballs are such good antioxidants because they have a large quantity of low lying lowest unoccupied molecular orbitals that can allow them to take in electrons from other molecules. Below are some hypothesized and tested medical applications.
  
  
• One such application could be to prevent cell damage from ionizing radiation from the sun. With respect to skin cancer and other skin diseases, buckyballs can act as a protectant against harmful UVA radiation by eliminating the harmful effects of reactive oxygen species and ionizing radiation. During the first step of apoptosis, the mitochondrion loses its membrane potential integrity from the free radicals. Buckyballs have been shown to have the ability to localize within a cell’s mitochondria to prevent these apoptotic injuries that are a primary result of UVA radiation and excessive sun exposure
  
  
• A cortical infarction is a collection of harmful radicals that accumulate in the brain and cause the tissue to die from lipid peroxidation. In an experiment to prove the radical-absorbing nature of buckyball derivatives, rats that had cortical infarctions were treated with functionalized buckyball solutions and were eventually free of nearly all the dangerous lipid peroxidation that would have otherwise caused serious mental deficits
  
  
• Parkinson’s Disease is believed to be caused by free oxygen radicals that damage lipids, DNA, proteins, and the mitochondria of the first step of the electron transport chain in the brain. Free-radical accumulation is a major sign of aging. Multiple Sclerosis is believed to be caused by free radicals oxidizing the myelin sheath of nerve cells. Potential for buckyball use in these?
  
  
• On an important sidenote, Buckyballs may accumulate in tissue and be toxic
  
  Functionalization:
  
  
• Buckyballs are, of course, extremely nonpolar, so for medicinal purposes they must be "functionalized," which means adding sidechains that give it some polar properties so it can dissolve in water and be used in cells. This is typically done by adding amino acids to the buckyball, adding hydroxide groups to make it a fullerenol, or adding charged ionic chains to the molecule. It is also believed that free radicals accumulating in the body is a major sign of aging. This has given the buckyball the nickname of "radical sponge."
  
  Source for above information
  
  Antiviral Properties:
  
  
• Derivatives of buckyballs have been show to suppress the replication of HIV by making complexes with HIV protease
  
  
• Source
  

Life on the edge

My boss actually just wrote a pretty comprehensive book on experimental biophysics, which has detailed explanations of the biology in particular, as it's meant for physical scientists. I don't know how widely distributed it is yet, but if you could find it in a library, it might give you a better idea of some of the stuff that goes on. I did my undergrad in physiology and physics (one of the standard joint majors at my university), and now I'm officially in the physics department for my PhD, though my research involves physics, chemistry and biology.

Also, check out r/biophysics.

Fun fact: I made the graphic on the book cover in Powerpoint for an entirely unrelated thing, and had no idea it would be on there. If I'd known, I would have made it a lot better.

There are some good laboratory manuals that explain the principals behind many common protocols. In molecular biology, "Maniatis et al" is the grand-daddy of them all. In microbiology, Bergey's Manual is the go-to for identifying micro-organisms. You can probably find these in your library if there are not copies in your lab already.

It's a long time since I needed these, so there may be better manuals out there by now.

I definitly agree with this, the r/Biology has some recomended books as well, this one (https://www.amazon.com/Molecular-Biology-Gene-James-Watson/dp/0805396039/ref=mt_paperback?_encoding=UTF8&me=&dpID=51DrYpfnqgL&preST=_SY344_BO1,204,203,200_QL70_&dpSrc=detail) is $8 for a soft cover (not including shipping) and a few other books, if you like those you could try taking a class or two, and if you absolutely love it you can take more for a degree ( and get Amazon Prime to get more books!) Best of luck on the new endeavor!

The two canonical molecular bio texts are "Alberts" (Molecular Biology of the Cell by Alberts, et al) and Lodish (Molecular Cell Biology by Lodish et al).

These may not be specific enough if you want in-depth info on a particular area, but they'll get you started on just about anything you want to know.

Can't believe I forgot ants. Big red and black carpenter ants down to tiny little sugar ants (good luck keeping them out). Time to read Honey Bee Pests, Predators, and Diseases again.

I've been reading your posts and it seems you have a fundamental misunderstanding, or lack of, of evolutionary biology. If I thought what you thought about evolutionary biology, I would completely agree it was absurd. The good thing, is that it doesn't say what you think it does. I am also going to address your issues with logic/rationality.

>Assume evolution didit (tm) and created all life we see is absurd.

Aside from the fact that the absurdity of something doesn't mean it isn't true, you demonstrate misunderstanding #1.

Evolution is not the study of the origin of life.

>When we have empirical evidence of a mechanism capable of generating novel cell types, tissue, organs,

This is why the discovery of DNA was such a huge deal. Prior to its discovery people knew that inherited traits changed over time. But no one knew how. Then we discovered DNA. Do you not believe that DNA combined with sexual reproduction is capable of generating a change inherited traits?

Or do you believe this change is not sufficient to generate, say an eye, from a population of organisms that do not have an eye?


>Assume evolution didit (tm) and created all life we see is absurd.

As has been said, just because a hypothesis is absurd, does not mean it is false.

>"Micro-evolution" if you will is what I am okay with.

Could you explain the distinction between macro and micro evolution, and why one is wrong?


>On the other hand we see that same adaptation having deleterious effects. How can something so harmful be used as an explanation for the diversity we see in life?

I'm not exactly seeing what you mean here. You seem to be implying it is the adaptation that is harmful? Is that what you mean? Ignore whether or not adaptations evolve, but look at the adaptations creatures in the world have. While they may be "harmful" in some sense (say that bee stingers kill the bee), that is irrelevant, it allows the species to keep reproducing.

>>Therefore, it should be everyones default position that we were created by a designer

If we have no evidence, our default position should be to say "I don't know" and hold no belief.

>So, please provide empirical evidence of a mechanism capable of generating novel cell types, tissue, organs, and body plans

You might be interested in doing some serious studying in the field of molecular biology and evolution. You will learn both the evidence for, and the how.

>http://www.amazon.com/Molecular-Evolution-Wen-Hsiung-Li/dp/0878934634

The Eighth day of Creation was given to me when I was doing biochemistry as an undergrad. It is rather old, published in 1979, but it is a veritable who's who of the early days of biochemistry. Focuses quite a bit on the personalities of the scientists.

If you ever read Quantum Evolution (a book that's not nearly as difficult as the title suggests) the author postulates that our conscious mind is linked to the quantum realm. It would be totally bitchen if after we die our minds return to the quantum world where everything is freaky-deaky and you can do anything you want because the normal laws of physics don't apply.

This book explains PCR in an awesome way- theoretical rather than practical- but was SO useful for me!

Hey H0RSED1K it's good to hear that I'm not the only one who feels this way.

I just want to graduate as soon as possible - I'd rather spend 40 hours a week working and getting paid, then 80 hours a week studying and paying for it.

One text we used in one of my classes was great, it is Molecular Biology of the Cell
I would love to read this entire text over an 8 month period or so, and complete the problems book

I feel that this would solidify my basic knowledge in biology.
Following this I would be able to target specific areas of interest.

I'm having errors accessing my Amazon wish list, but some of the books I can remember are as follows:

• Introduction to Biological Physics for the Health and Life Sciences
  
  
• Lab Ref, Volume 1: A Handbook of Recipes, Reagents, and Other Reference Tools for Use at the Bench
  
  
• Power, Sex, Suicide
  
  
• Short Protocols in Molecular Biology
  
  Also, you can consult some of the free courses online (MIT's OCW, Coursera.org, iTunes U, Open.edu) and once you obtain the syllabus you can review the material at your leisure. There are also sites like BenchFly.com, Jove.com that have videos of lab techniques and experiments. I presently don't have the time to review these in detail, so they are on my post-graduation queue.
  
  If you want to do this right, you'll probably have to hire a tutor to answer questions you might have.

Start on wiki for the basics, and I would also advise trying to go to a few lectures on them.

This book may help you.

The first chapter of this book does a very good job of explaining this. The first chapter is available in the amazon preview.