QuaesitUM The Undergraduate Research Journal of The University of Memphis Spring 2018 http://www.memphis.edu/quaesitum/ i QuaesitUM is an annual publication that provides an academic forum where University of Memphis undergraduate students can showcase research from all disciplines. QuaesitUM © 2018 Te University of Memphis http://www.memphis.edu/quaesitum/ ISSN 2375-5423 ii Editorial Board Editor-in-Chief Dr. Sage Graham Technical Editor Scott Dutt iii To Our Readers When we began Quaesitum (“The Q”) fve years ago, our vision was to represent the ways that students across disciplines at the University of Memphis exemplify quality research. We sought papers that provided new and innovative approaches to scholarship – new perspectives, new ex- perimental designs, new tested results. As we noted then, the name of the journal, Quaesitum (v. to seek or to ask), captures the essence of scholar- ship – the drive for exploration and the inquisitiveness that fuels academic work. As Zora Neal Hurston put it, “Research is formalized curiosity. It is poking and prying with a purpose.” In this, our ffth volume, we have compiled a collection of papers that represents the high caliber of work that our students produce. Person- ally, the journey of the past fve years has been very fulflling, as I have witnessed our students growing from being solely ‘consumers’ of knowl- edge, to contributors and producers who engage in the scholarly ‘conver- sation’ that helps us better understand the world around us. This conversa- tion stretches across disciplines as diverse as Biology, Women’s Studies, Linguistics, Biomedical Engineering, Hospitality & Resort Management, Economics, and Civil Engineering, and speaks to an interdisciplinarity that can only make our efforts stronger. As the journal continues to grow, it is our hope to expand the disciplines represented here to showcase the breadth and depth of exceptional scholarship produced by our students across all areas of study. The past fve years would not have been possible without the invaluable contributions of many, many people. First, I would like to offer my sincerest thanks to the Director of the Helen Hardin Honors College, Dr. Melinda Jones and the Technical Editor, Mr. Scott Dutt. Their contri- butions and hard work have been, and will continue to be, vital to The Q’s iv success. The three of us would also like to express our appreciation to the Provost, Dr. Karen Weddle-West for continuing the administrative support that makes Quaesitum possible. Mr. Gary Golightly continues to inspire with innovative and en- ergetic cover designs that spark the imagination, and we are grateful for his ongoing support for this project. Dr. Jasbir Dhaliwal once again has provided the fnancial support that allows us to offer ‘best paper’ awards – a much appreciated way for us to reward excellence in our authors. We could not produce this journal without submissions, and we would therefore like to express our appreciation to the faculty sponsors who have invested in their students’ work and prepared them to be pub- lished authors. The quality of the submissions speaks to their commitment to both our undergraduates and the larger mission of the University to encourage our students to be Dreamers, Thinkers, and Doers. We are also extremely grateful to our faculty reviewers, who help us maintain the academic rigor that allows us to highlight our students’ best work: Dr. Carmen Astorne-Figari, Dr. Shelby Crosby, Dr. Eugene Eckstein, Dr. Donghee Kim, Dr. Joseph Lariscy, Dr. Martin Lipinski, Dr. Keith Martin, Ms. Kendra Murphy, Dr. Jamie Sabel, Mrs. Brannen Varner, and Dr. John Williams. The students themselves naturally also deserve great praise. Their hard work in both their research projects and in the publication process has, we hope, prepared them to continue their enthusiasm for exploration, whether that occurs in further graduate study or employment ‘in the feld.’ It is our hope that these authors will inspire others to contribute to future issues, and for their commitment, we offer our congratulations and thanks. Dr. Sage Lambert Graham Editor-in-Chief v Table of Contents Engineering Sciences Evaluation of Two Different Neutralization Methods for Kevin Patel 1 Chitosan Coatings Lift Walker: Developing an Inexpensive and Lightweight Tyler Rist 16 Stand-Assist Device Job Growth in Freight Operations: The Role of Andrew Robinson 36 Technology Life and Health Sciences Relationships Among Ovary, Secondary Sex Character- Peyton Murin 62 istics, and Embryo Output in The Transparent Casper Zebrafsh The Effect of Leucine Supplementation on Liver Protein Aaron Persinger 74 Synthesis in a Cancer Cachexia Model vi Social and Behavioral Sciences An Analysis of Breastfeeding Initiation Trends of Shelby Anna Church 92 County, TN Women from 2007 to 2015 Skeptical Sisterhood: A Sociohistorical Analysis of Tierica Gibson 110 Identity Arrangements and the Schism between Black and White Feminists An Argument for Reducing Value Added Tax Rates in Eithel Mc Gowen 138 Developing Countries: The Uruguayan Case “Ur so Hawt:” The Presentation of Gender in Online Aston Patrick 162 Game Streaming Professional Selection Criteria of Hospitality Programs: Anqi Wang 192 A Comparison of Undergraduate and Graduate International Students Publication & Review Process Faculty Review Board 215 Submission Guidelines 219 vii Kevin N. Patel graduated from the University of Memphis in May of 2018 with a major in Biomedical Engineering and minors in Chemistry and Biology. He graduated summa cum laude with Biomedical Engineer- ing Departmental Honors and University Honors with Thesis, and served as Student Marshal for the Herff College of Engineering during com- mencement. Throughout his time at the University of Memphis, he has been involved in multiple Biomaterials research projects under Dr. Joel Bumgardner and has presented his work at multiple conferences, including the 2018 Society for Biomaterials Conference in Atlanta, Georgia. He will attend medical school at the University of Tennessee Health Science Cen- ter beginning fall 2018. He hopes to apply the skills he has gained through experimental research and the Biomedical Engineering curriculum as a practicing physician. Kevin’s paper received a Quaesitum outstanding paper award. viii Kevin Patel Evaluation of Two Different Neutralization Methods for Chitosan Coatings Faculty Sponsor Dr. Joel Bumgardner 1 2 Abstract Chitosan has been investigated as a coating for musculoskeletal implants due to its osteoconductive and local drug delivery properties. Since chi- tosan is dissolved in dilute organic acid, the residual acid components must be removed post-coating, which is typically done using alkali and/or ethanol treatments. Neutralization affects coating surface chemistry, adhe- sion, swelling, and other properties. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of NaOH neutralization versus phosphate buffer neutraliza- tion on solution cast coatings on commercially pure titanium. Properties evaluated were contact angle, swelling/drug release, coating adhesion, cell attachment, and cell proliferation. Results show that phosphate buffer- neutralization produces coatings with properties that are more favorable for implant device applications. 3 Introduction Chitosan, a versatile biopolymer derived from chitin, has been investigat- ed as a coating for musculoskeletal and dental implants due to its osteo- conductive and local drug or growth factor delivery capabilities [1, 2]. To produce chitosan coatings, chitosan is typically dissolved in dilute organic acid, which protonates the amino groups of the molecules. Following sub- strate coating, the residual acid components must be removed to prevent harmful acidic salts from leaching out [3]. Neutralization of the residual acidic components is typically com- pleted with alkali and/or ethanol treatments. Many different methods of neutralization have been used in the literature; however, the neutralization method can affect coating properties such as surface chemistry, adhesion, swelling, and many others [4-6]. Coating properties that are favorable for musculoskeletal and dental implant devices include good coating adhesion strength to be able to withstand the implantation process and mechani- cal forces when in use. The coating must also be able to show good cell attachment and growth to promote osseointegration of the implant device. In addition, since chitosan coatings are extensively investigated for deliv- ery of local therapeutic agents, the coatings must also be able to swell and absorb these agents and passively release them over an extended period of time [7-9]. It was previously shown that the adhesion strength of chitosan coatings can be approximately tripled when bonded to cp titanium via si- lane reactions [10]. This involves bonding chitosan molecules to cp titani- um via silane molecules. Consequently, the method used to neutralize the coating must not be detrimental to these silane bonds. In this study, the most common neutralization method, NaOH, was compared to neutralization using a potassium phosphate buffer, which is a less common method for neutralizing chitosan coatings [7]. Properties evaluated included contact angle, swelling, protein release, coating adhe- sion, cell attachment, and cell growth. The Saos-2 osteosarcoma cell line (obtained from American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, VA) was used in this investigation, as this is a well characterized human cell line that presents similar proliferation and mineralization