<p>I felt like there was absolutely no need to know ANY previous information, and most of the exam had to do with reading those super long introductory paragraphs. </p>
<p>So for anyone reading this who’s taking AP Bio next year: no need to learn in depth any material.</p>
<p>This year, my teacher did a great job going very in depth over everything we learned and making sure that we had memorized everything, even down to the smallest details. None of that was necessary for the AP test. A broad knowledge of biology is enough for this new AP Bio test.</p>
<p>So this is totally the wrong place to post this but I can’t figure out how to make a new thread so whatever… We’re doing post-AP projects in my Biology class, and I chose to do a survey of the new Biology that cropped up recently that makes the book outdated (e.g. four-stranded DNA). Are there any other things that you guys would be willing to point out for me? Again sorry about posting in the wrong thread…</p>
<p>I believe you are referring to guanosine quadruplexes (or tetraplexes) that form as a result of Hoogsteen pairing? Do you want to know more about them?</p>
<p>If you just want to demonstrate that your book is outdated, then depending on how old your book is (if you don’t use the 9th edition of Campbell) then it might be lacking information about things such as the trombone model of DNA replication, new DNA sequencing techniques, new types of RNA, DNA computing, iPS cells, or epigenetics. Your book might have the wrong number of ATPs generated for cellular respiration (if I remember correctly this still was still wrong in the 8th edition of Campbell). Some of these things aren’t necessarily really recent discoveries but they probably won’t be in your textbook unless your school has purchased the latest edition. Also I think the brainbow mouse is pretty cool and that’s from 2007.</p>