Talk:2012 Group 7 Project

From CellBiology

Group Assessment Criteria 2012

  • The key points relating to the topic that your group was allocated are clearly described.
  • The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
  • Content is correctly cited and referenced.
  • The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student’s own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.
  • Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.
  • Relates the topics and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of cell biology.
  • Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer’s wiki.
  • Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.
  • The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.
  • Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with this sites wiki guidelines.


  • Z3332863 - 194
  • Z3333208 - 76
  • Z3411306 - 68
  • Z3333865 - 121

Total edits - 459

Project page has been accessed 9,000 times.

Positive Negative
  • Well structured project.
  • Clear layout.
  • Good balance between text and images.
  • Clearly organised tables.
  • Contribution from some group members.
  • Some images require more supporting information. Some sections would benefit from additional explanatory figures.


More than 1 Wikipedia image included in project.

  • Z3332863 - 5 images, 1 student drawn.
  • Z3333208 - 5 images,
  • Z3411306 - 1 student drawn image.
  • Z3333865 - 4 images.

Peer review

Please paste your peer review of our page below this section only. Thanks, Group 7


  • Intro should be brief and the pathway discussed should have a separate heading. I liked the drawing, its easy to process and follow, although the references were a bit confusing, would be better if it was in text citation.


  • Well written and referenced

Gene Description & Receptor Agonists

  • Lacking a bit of reference, Betas 1,2& 3 could use a bit more info. The table for Receptor Agonists is too bright but table layout is good.


  • Very detailed section, with relevant images,

Pathway & Normal function

  • good image albeit a bit confusing with lots of arrows but i understand its the pathway thats hard to grasp and not the picture Great job. This section is well written and well explained.

Abnormal function

  • great use of table - information easy to absorb. Very well researched and interesting topics on SCD and DCM


  • Sufficient info on each term to provide a good understanding to the overall topic

--- I think the page will look more complete without the student signatures

  • Introduction: I think this is too detailed and hard to read
  • History of pathway: love the details
  • Gene description: like the detail.
  • Receptor Agonists: I think there should be more information. The Beta 1,2,3 seems to have same natural Agonist, Synthetic Agonist, Non-specific Beta-blocker(nothing under this) and I don't see the point why this page is necessary. It can be simplified and added in to different section in one sentence.
  • Receptor Structure: like the overall detail
  • Pathway and Normal function: love the detail and the images that help to understand
  • Abnormal Function, Diseases and Treatments: like the structure, detail!

--Z3291200 16:17, 17 May 2012 (EST)


  • Seems to be a whole lot for just a summary of the report.
  • Image used here could be in the pathway section and needs a description and copyright notice.
  • Need to work on referencing


  • Should be in a table.
  • Good links to Nobel prizewinners.

Gene description

  • Good section for aiding your report. (this section not usual in other reports)
  • Maybe a little more description in this section.

Receptor Agonists

  • Description of what is happening here.
  • Nice use of table.

Receptor Structure

  • Good section, plenty of information.
  • Images are used very well here.

Pathway and Normal function

  • Great section.

Abnormal function

  • Good section, just needs tidying up.

A little more work into tidying everything up and fixing images and tables.


Extensive well organised information, the pictures used lack referencing, and students have their signature all over the page.


This section meets the criteria too, but I don’t know why students put their signature on the page.

Gene description

Well organised information, but lacks proper referencing. Good use of table

Receptor structure

This section is done properly, meets the criteria.

Pathway and normal function

Well structure well referenced

The whole projects is done properly, just needs a general editing to correct a few grammatical mistakes.

  • Intro – please proof-read. 3rd paragraph, last sentence ‘when the process IN not working correctly.’ And also the sentence after it, involced* spelling error. Also ‘the main the main’…. Mistakes like these in the intro, please proof read..

I think also you got a little carried away with the intro, we want a general summary of the whole thing not a summary of each section. Otherwise great intro, interesting to read, summarised what I’m about to read. Good stuff.

  • The receptor agonist section seems unfinished…
  • Overall: as it is a project report that you’d probably see on a wiki page, its not necessary to add your signature after each section. Also some of you didn’t do in-cite referencing, so please be sure to do this instead of writing all the references at the bottom of the subsection.

very well written project with enough detail, however please add to your glossary. Remember to put in any words that someone from a non-science background may not understand.

--Z3290558 09:15, 17 May 2012 (EST)

‘’’Introduction ‘’’– very well researched but too much information for an introduction, its purpose is to just briefly introduce

‘’’History of the pathway ‘’’– well covered

‘’’Gene description’’’ – very concise maybe consider putting the information in a diagram

‘’’Receptor Agonists’’’ – good use of visuals

‘’’Receptor structure’’’ – very clear

‘’’Pathway and normal function’’’ – maybe find or draw a few more diagrams just to further highlight and contrast things like the two regulatory mechanisms

‘’’Abnormal function, diseases and treatments’’’ – a very well referenced and informative table, toward of the end the amount of information is a little overwhelming maybe consider putting in another visual or so or put more colourful diagrams?

‘’’Overall’’’ – really great work, a lot of time and hard effort has gone into this

•Introduction: A substantial amount of information is placed in this section giving readers a good overview of the topic. I can see that there were 7 linked references at the bottom. It will be better if they were placed right after the sentences that contained the corresponding information.

•History Pathway: Good and well referenced timeline.

•Gene Description: The dot point format of this section made it easier to understand. Having pictures would make it look more interesting and help the audience have a visual representation of what is being described.

•Receptor Structure: The last subheading for Beta-1 Adrenoceptor lacks a lot of information considering that this is the main receptor that your group has chosen to focus as mentioned in the introduction.

•Pathway and Normal Function: This is one of the well done parts of your project. Much research was done and all presented information were cited properly.

•Abnormal Function: This is the best section of your project. This section showed depth about the topic and related how the signaling pathway can cause the mentioned disorders. A suggestion to make this part more interesting would be gross images of the diseases.

•Glossary: This section is looking good. I suggest to bold the terms so it will be easier to read through this section.

This project is looking good. There are bits and pieces that has to be tied up. In addition, you need to put attention in the formatting of your page(especially for the abnormal function section). Nevertheless, it is looking good with a great deal of information about the topic. Lastly, you do not have a current research subheading.

  • Introduction: I am very impressed by the hand drawn image. It’s a good diagram to accompany the intro which is also very well written. Just note you should probably remove the student tags, and also the references should be in text rather than a bunch at the end of the section.
  • History: Well researched, however it would be easier to read if it were in a table format.
  • Receptor Structure: Very easy to read, and understandable. I like the colourful images, they break up the text very well. I’m not sure what the limit on wiki images are, but just be aware you have two in this section.
  • Pathway and Normal function: I like the use of external links, however I think it would look better if you put them at the end of the section. Overall the layout is very appealing with the use of bright coloured images and subheadings. The information is also easy to understand.
  • Abnormal function, Diseases and Treatments: The table is a great way of summarising the information. Just a suggestion about the referencing, I noticed that you have used the same reference and tagged each sentence. This isn’t very necessary, just simply add the reference at the END of the paragraph rather than at the end of each sentence. Overall, very well researched section.
  • Glossary: I suggest adding internal links, it makes it easier for the reader to understand the text without having to scroll down and look for the word.
  • References: a few need to be corrected and properly referenced: 5,7,8

-Introduction: I thought that the introduction was good to read and well presented. The information was clear and the images were good (needs references). I think that it is on the way but not yet complete.

-History: I thought that this section was really well done, well referenced.

-Receptors: I thought that this section was good, but unfinished. It had a lot of subheadings, which I thought was ok, because it gave me a break and let me take in information a bit at a time, rather than a huge blob. The table was good, but very vague.

-Pathway: I thought that the pathway was really good, missing some references.

-Normal functions: I thought that this section is well done. It is clear and easy to read.

-Abnormal function: I thought that this section was good. You can see it was well researched and on its way. It is still lacking some more research and a bit of formatting.

- I thought that overall this project was good. It does need some more work and to be formatted correctly.

Overall an impressive project page which has satisfied all the components of the assessment. The use of colour in the tables in sections such as ‘Receptor Agonists’ and ‘Abnormal function’ etc really draws the readers attention so well done! Some minor changes can be done in order to create a useful wiki page, such things as tabling the history section can achieve an appeal to the section and removing the signatures of each students underneath some sections as it looks really messy.

The content in this page is well researched and demonstrates a lot of initiative with the hand-drawn images. The tables are bright and easy to read, and the images are well selected and are strongly linked to the written content. The amount of content shows the extend of research and it is clear that a lot of effort has been put into it.

Area of improvement: the structure and organisation of content makes the information overwhelming and exhausting to read. The long paragraphs could be summarized by the use of tables, diagrams (a picture says a thousand words!), bolded text to highlight key points and more subheadings to break up the paragraphs.


  • Introduction: Needs a sentence at the beginning to explain how the 3 receptors are related to each other.
  • History: Well researched and I like how you have included links to the research articles.
  • The Gene Description and Receptor Agonist sections could be merged into one table.

I'm impressed at the number of student drawn images. They are very helpful in helping me to visually picture the explanations given. However, you still need to remove at least one wikipedia image. We are only allowed one on the page before being marked down. Also, the non-student drawn images still need proper captioning and citation.

The "receptor structure" section was very informative, and I'm looking forward to when the beta-1-adrenoceptor structure section is complete. As for the "pathway" and "normal function", I think they should be divided up into separate sections for clarity. It would also be nice to add a section at the bottom outlining the research being conducted in this field nowadays. But overall, good effort.

  • Pros
    • Clear and simple student-drawn images
    • Lots of information included, reflects amount of research done
    • Content correctly cited and referenced
    • Found the “Abnormal Function, Diseases and Treatments” sections very interesting and well-written
  • Cons
    • Maybe consider using more tables/dot points or summarising information a bit more; some of the sections are very dense

The outline is great and organised. The way the information continues to flow in order make the page easy to follow. The hand drawn images make everything easy to understand. I find these simple diagrams better than complicated images.

More tables and dot points would benefit your page as it would make the information easier to follow. Having said that, dont alter the information too much as it is very detailed and informative.

It is great to see that you have included information under each diagram and image. The explanation you have provided sometimes seem to be too simplistic. Considering that you have the glossary of term at the bottom which explain the words, do not hesitate to include jargon when explaining these images.

The referencing and copyright information for the images seem to be correct. What was particularly good was that you referenced what the handdraw image were based on.

The external links provide with good information. Using these links, I found that some information could be beneficial for your page. The identification of drugs make the page even more interesting.

Where is your current and future research information. Please include information about research groups and institutes which are leading the way in today's research, and their accomplishment.

Overall great work, it really does show that you have put in a lot of work.

Best of luck with the rest of the assignment.


  • direct internal links to pictures are good, makes it easy to locate related pictures
  • good tables
  • properly cited
  • well researched looks like you guys put a lot of effort into it.

Possible improvements

  • I think the picture descriptions should be moved to the picture’s page rather than referred directly on the main project page. The main page can still have a general overall summary of the image as it does seem relevant, maybe just remove the direct references to the image. The ‘adrenoreceptor’ image should probably have a legend, brief description also. specifically steps in the intro for relating to the GPCR process-student image
  • receptor structure section well researched and extensive, good relevant pics
  • history section could be improved by putting it into a table to make it more appealing to readers.
  • maybe incorporating dot point format as well as the paragraphs you already have for signaling pathway section. This will make it easier to read.
  • check spelling and grammatical errors.
  • bolded glossary words

References in the introduction need to be put with the text they refer to. Remove the ‘signatures’ within the text and leave the signatures for the discussion page. ‘Beta-adrenergic receptors’ isn’t finished. Large sections of text are difficult to read and understand, and even though it is evident a lot of research has gone into this project, perhaps some sections should be summarised a bit more. Creative use of student images.


  • Introduction has a decent amount of information and nice images [although these are lacking copyright info], however it is evident the formatting has yet to be cleaned up, with the citations not placed correctly – they should be put after the ideas, or at the very least at the end of the paragraph [not best situation] not in a line after the paragraph. The signatures lying around also suggest a need for a clean up
  • History section is well cited, with good use of external links; however a bit of a cleanup is needed here as well
  • Gene description is brief [this may have been what you are aiming for] again however it seems less like a wiki page if you keep saying “this group project” , while this is a group project, the page itself is a wiki not an essay/presentation. Fix up citations as opposed to giving external links
  • Section seems unfinished, perhaps some text to accompany the table would be good, as it stands to the uneducated observer the table seems to say nothing much at all
  • Receptor structure section shows promise, however there appears to be a lack of citations, especially earlier in the section, and a need for a cleanup here as well
  • Pathway and normal function section seems well done, being one of the cleaner sections, however the 1st paragraph under inhibitory pathway section is missing citations, and there are still a few signatures lying around
  • Abnormal function section is nice, apart from the cleanup still required, brief summarizing table, followed by more in-depth, well cited information is very good. Bit of formatting required near the 1st image to fix up aesthetics, including the citation which needs to be fixed up.

A very well planned and researched page...seems like all the group members have put effort into it.

Fine tuning of the page is required by getting rid of the signs.

The balance between pictures and text is good to.

The introduction should be brief and an have too much information in it. Make it a little concise if you can because it makes it very tedious to read.

The self drawn diagram is very good and all the pictures have correct citations.

For all the information provided the journal articles used are very less for e.g. the 1st para of inhibitory pathway has no citation at all and the regulation of beta arrestin has one article ref. Maybe you should have another article that just confirms the studies of this one.

There is no future perspective part...I dont know if that is compulsory but adding that will highlight your paper more.

  • The title is a bit complicated. Maybe you could simplify it like it is on the web page to just G-protein (Beta adrenergic). Also the introduction contains too much information, although all well written. This information can be supplemented elsewhere nicely. A brief summary would be better in this section. Also the references should be integrated throughout the text not just listed at the end.
  • History section is very good. A picture or table may make it more appealing to the reader.
  • The subheadings of you project all reflected very interesting insight into your topic. I liked the description of the genes and I especially liked the colour used for the receptor agonists section.
  • The justification at the beginning of the receptor structure section was good and the pictures in this section were well referenced and helped me understand the complicated information presented in the text.
  • The pathway/normal function section was very detailed and you could tell the writer had a comprehensive understanding of what they were presenting. I was very impressed with the student drawn images in this section. However, I think the regulatory mechanisms could have their own subheading just to break the information up a bit.
  • The abnormal function section was very impressive and elaborate. I am glad you provided a summary table to supplement the text which illustrates that extensive research has been done.
  • The glossary is very good, as are the references however check 7 and 8 as they are just websites.

  • Introduction: Wow! The amount of detail in this introduction is fantastic but overwhelming. I think your introduction would be most effective if you provided an overview of GPCRs and beta-adrenergic receptor and then a paragraph outlining the aims of your page to orientate your audience. The first three paragraphs under GPCRs are fantastic and exemplify the amount of detail you need in the introduction – it should be very general and broad. You can explain the specifics of GPCR signalling in subsequent sections. Beautiful student drawn image! Kudos to the creator!
  • History: This is a fairly good and succinct timeline.
  • Gene description: Great content – you could perfect this section by incorporating the information into a table format with images showing the genes themselves if possible.
  • Receptor agonists: You’ve made a good start on this section but I don’t quite understand its purpose. Perhaps you could write a couple of sentences explaining the table.
  • Receptor structure: Another wonderful image! The variation of subheadings, images, dot points and paragraphs was refreshing – good job.
  • Pathway and normal function: I think you’ve done a great job of incorporating many student drawn images that are both relevant and visually appealing. Although the content in this section has been well researched, the structure of stimulatory and inhibitory pathway segments could be more user-friendly if presented in bullet points or a numbered list format. On the other hand, the regulatory mechanism segment has been structured beautifully and reflects an appropriate way of presenting information on signalling pathway.
  • Abnormal function, diseases and treatments: It is evident that a lot of effort and research has gone through composing the content in this section. All it really needs is some editing and restructuring to fine tune the appearance.

The status of this project page is very close to the finished product which is a great achievement to have at this point. As a group, your teamwork is evident through the progress you’ve made which means you can spend the next week simply tweaking and finetuning your page. Outstanding effort Group 7!

I really like the introduction. It is clear, and nicely explained. Great student drawings as well. However, it needs to be proof-read, and include more in-text citations. One word of advice - please remove all the signatures from the project page as this is not visually pleasing. The history is comprehensive, and I like the fact that it includes external links. The genes description is basic, but good, however, it could use an image to make it more visually pleasing. I'm not too sure if the section on receptor agonists is complete. If there are no specific beta-blockers, then do not include this in your table. In fact, given that each subtype has the same information associated with it, I don't think it is necessary to include a table. Try to incorporate this information in another section. The part on receptor structure is well-formatted, and the images are nice, but unfortunately they cannot both be from Wikipedia. The section on pathway and normal functioning is nicely explained and detailed, and it includes more student images - which is great! Abnormal function, disease, and treatments includes a lot of information and is well-referenced, and the images include the necessary reference and copyright information, but the formatting needs some work as it is not visually pleasing (what to put in bold, location of pictures, etc.). Finally, the glossary is great, but the names of things should be in bold, simply so that it is easier to read.

Group 7

• Most key points are present except for current and future research which are important, we’re all keen to know what direction this topic is going in the future

• The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs demonstrates appropriate level of understanding of the signalling pathway which is the focus and it suitably provides a teaching element- if i wanted to get a quick detailed grasp on beta-1-adrenoreceptors, then this page would provide just that

• Student drawn diagram is excellent, showing that care, time and detail are going into this projects compilation. This is also demonstrated by

• Relates the topics and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of cell biology

• If possible it’d be good to have macroscopic images for the diseases involved with you pathway, for example, show us a hypertophic heart or a dilated heart along side a normal, just to hit home the severity of the effects that can happen when a normal cellular signalling pathway has turned defective

• Well done on the drug inclusion to treat the diseases you mentioned. The drugs are most often aimed at the signalling pathways.That way on your page we get the physiological pathway, the pathological pathway when the normal pathway is disrupted and then the pharmalogical pathway which is when the drugs get involved. You know students know there stuff when they can talk about the physiological, pathological and pharmalogical pathways involved in a disease. This is evidence of great research.

--- Group7:

- excellent student drawn images

-very good use of subheadings to organise your information

- use of a table for the history section may be useful to break up text and be visually pleasing

- the external links used throughout are effective and helpful

- a separate intro that is more general and precise may be useful

- perhaps save the detailed receptor descriptions for a separate section coupled with information about the structure

- abnormal function section is well researched and comprehensive

- make glossary words bold

- maybe work on formatting in the current research section

Group 7 feedback: -Introduction: The introduction had sufficient detail and presentation. The images were good and specifically the hand drawn image that complemented the introduction. I would stress a little more on the referencing.

-History: This section was done at a sufficient level and referenced.

-Receptors: This section was well done however it still remained unfinished. It had many subheadings which didn't seem to bother me as the content was split into a variety of categories allowing for a logical sequence of events to be understood. The table seems to add some of that emphasis however it lacked detail.

-Pathway: This section was done well, and understood clearly, however I would place more emphasis on the referencing. Specifically for this section.

-Normal functions: I thought that this section was also well done, it was clear and concise, and flowed really well.

-Abnormal function: This section needs a little bit of formatting, however a great deal of research seems to be put on this part which is clearly shown by the referencing and the flow of the content.

- Overall, I would be happy with this project as it went through material in sufficient detail, allowing for the reader to understand what the project is all about. I think with more research and diagrams, as well as referencing, the project will be ready for submission.

Our thoughts

Hey all,

I have edited my section - put down whether references were reviews or not, added heaps of info to the pictures, etc. Please check your references! And add all the required info to your pictures. If you come across any words that we can add to the glossary them please put them in.

M--Z3333865 16:03, 26 May 2012 (EST)


I'm thinking make it Saturday night or so.. Just have to add more info to my pictures and we have to check references and do the layout etc. And add to the glossary! Maybe Saturday at 8pm or so?

M--Z3333865 21:13, 25 May 2012 (EST)

Hi guys,

Mark said he will shut off the website whenever we send him an email saying that we're ready. Should we send him an email by tomorrow or Saturday? I do think we're done. put on discussion board when you guys want a deadline.J --Z3332863 16:59, 24 May 2012 (EST)

hi guys

Thanks so much for taking into consideration the peer reviews, I think we have honestly taken the advice of our peers and fixed our page as per suggestions. We have changed formatting, tables, added images and altered the content slightly. Not long to go now. Good work everyone!!

C--Z3333208 14:40, 24 May 2012 (EST)


I've uploaded some images but I can't get it onto our page. i don't know why. Can we work this out in the lab. J--Z3332863 09:10, 24 May 2012 (EST)

me again, also I figured out how to changed the distance between introduction and History and changed it, so that the table is left-justified and added some information about current discoveries and research, feel free to add additionals V.--Z3411306 22:34, 23 May 2012 (EST) I like the table too, also the colours!! But why is the History part not left-justified? I tried to fix it, but I don't know how... :( Also, I am still not sure about what you all think about the text next to the table??? Shorten? Delete?... V. --Z3411306 20:45, 23 May 2012 (EST)

Hi m,

I stuffed up my table when i was adding some new things there. I still want the Hot pink headings you added but now it's gone. How do you add that again? Sorry.

J. --Z3332863 20:42, 23 May 2012 (EST)

Hi M,

Love the colours! I think our project looks so completed. I'm going to put some flow charts in but I'm not sure if they're necessary. I'll add in a Future directions section tonight and tomorrow morning. I'll get to the G2/G4 lab room tomorrow 10:00am and after to make some final changes (as long as there's no classes in there).

J --Z3332863 19:31, 23 May 2012 (EST)

Hey all,

I changed the history and put it into a table :) wasn't sure about the colours so let me know if you think I should change that.

M. --Z3333865 16:48, 23 May 2012 (EST)

Hello girls,

hope you are all doing well. Sorry for the late reply, but I have six assignments only this week (which I am not used to from back home...).

Well, I read through all the peer-reviews and made a tally sheet about the critics on the too long introduction or from those who liked it. It is equal. I don't know, if I should shorten it now or leave it. I will prepare an overview for the introduction with bullet points for tomorrow and we can decide together if we use this or leave it - or maybe use both.

I will correct the references in the introduction as well as the spelling mistake I made. I am sorry for that. I will ask my roommates tonight to read over it.. English is not my first language so I would appreciate it if you guys could just scan it.

Also I will add information to the picture...

Shall I continue to give further information about the table and the image you postet C., or should I just write some general information? Those, who are interested can then read on in the seperate parts.

See u tom, V. --Z3411306 15:46, 23 May 2012 (EST)

Hey team,

I just put my section (pathway and normal function) in dotpoints which makes it look heaps better. Also included more references which I looked at when compiling my section.

J., I made your images into 'thumbs' and changes them to 600px. Now pretty much all of our pics are on the right-hand side. Looks a bit more organised.

With the pics of nobel prize winners.. You can't get copyright permission from the official nobel prize website. Any thoughts?

M. --Z3333865 11:05, 23 May 2012 (EST)


I hope everyone is well! i was just summarising the comments of peer review so we have a basic checklist before submission.. I have a few suggestions that i will post here, hopefully each person can fix their section before lab on thursday and then during lab we can finalise everything, here we go:

Intro: too long, needs to be brief, we may need to consider making it a section called OVERVIEW (think about it and will decide on thursday).. Also we need in text citations not six at the end of the section. History: if anyone has time put in a table so more appealing as people keep saying!!, also maybe see if we can get a couple pics of noble prize winners etc. Gene description i honestly think is fine as is, no more info needed as it is simple straight ward facts interaction table (ME) i need to complete this - ( so many people thought it was vague,, haha obvious coz its incomplete! God some reviews are so crap )) Receptor (ME) need to remove small image, add new images, talk more about b1 specifically under its subheading

Pathways, both section info and detail is great, add images if you can, gross images were suggested which i suggested last time, so e.g. of a human heart with disease or asthmatic bronchiole... need a current research section, J i think u sed u could do that since u looked at a lot of new research. remember just list article followed by brief paragraph stating wat its about, and its significance to society i suppose.

Generally: More pics- proper copyright, sizing more dot points or numbering or formatting to make thick slabs of text easier to read. check spelling and grammatical errors bold glossary terms ALL Drawings if student made, write that under the image. ALL images plz make a brief caption under each image, and description when you click the image to find out more info and only 1 wiki image which I'm using (as discussed)

I think our page is one of the better ones, i hope we can finalise everything in time and submit a greater project, we all put in the effort it should pay off!! Good work everyone, C u all Thursday

Thanks C --Z3333208 01:37, 23 May 2012 (EST)

Hi everyone,

So with one week to go, i think we should each focus on finalising our individual sections, as we discussed we can do the final editing of layout and etc pictures on thursday during lab. I will go ahead and remove all signatures as we discussed yesterday in person. If anyone needs any help just post up and we will all help. In regards to intro I'm not sure wat u guys want to do, if you want to shorten it or keep it long, i think we should remove subheading of Beta adrenoceptor, because it only has one sentence below. ? As for the wiki image i hope its ok if i use it in the structure section.

Thaanks C --Z3333208 11:23, 18 May 2012 (EST)


With regards to the picture - you can change the name by clicking on the picture and then click on edit (top right). Once we get our feedback we'll have a look at all the minor details :) When it comes to the table - maybe use the same in-text citations as those used in the text. Can't go wrong with that! It's better to provide too many references than not covering ourselves and being accused of plagiarism...

--Z3333865 20:39, 12 May 2012 (EST)

I just copied this away from our site, so that it looks nicer: … working more on table V. --Z3411306 14:18, 10 May 2012 (EST)


I love the picture too. I'm sorry I haven't been around - I had 4 tests this week!about the tables - do we need in text citations for the tables? Since we have that for the text below, can we skip that? I asked mark last time and he said we should reference the the table contents so I'm a bit confused.

J --Z3332863 10:46, 10 May 2012 (EST)

Hey, I realized too late to add "self produced" so it got the other name now. The only way to change that would be, delete it completely and add it new. Shall I do that? And for the link: I was wondering if it is possible to click on "picture" and then the picture I drew would maximize itself. Don't know, if thats possible at all. And M., sure I can draw another picture :) Just let me know, what you want! See you tomorrow, V.--Z3411306 17:19, 9 May 2012 (EST)

Hi Guys,

Im sorry i haven't done much last few days, I'm quite sick! i love the picture, just maybe add to the image page that it is self produced so mark knows. And references your right V, we need to fix them. As for the internal link, I'm not sure i understand what you mean, do u mean a link to a picture on another wiki page? Goodwork everyone,

C --Z3333208 13:19, 7 May 2012 (EST)

Hey V,

Nice picture! It looks amazing :). I might need you to draw a simplified picture for the role of Beta-arresting in 'normal pathway'. Will let you know once I finish editing it. Also, yes we have to change the references.. Probably finish all the info and pictures first though and then focus on the little things to improve our page:)

M. --Z3333865 17:08, 5 May 2012 (EST)

I tried to make an internal link to the picture- Does one of you know how that would work? I tried it with pasting the link and with the usual "page-link". Both did not work, I think it is different for pictures. I thought it would be nice, if you could click on "picture" and then it maximise in size. V --Z3411306 11:49, 5 May 2012 (EST)

Me again, I saw that some of the references are mentioned several times. I think we should upgrade that. V. --Z3411306 23:32, 4 May 2012 (EST)

Hey, I worked all day on a self-made picture and I hope you all like it. It felt like it took me years :D I will work on some inscription and last editings and upload it then. Also I read one of the more general articles you posted in here and I will change the introduction slightly. Also I thought, that I might write in the introduction, why we are doing this and give a forcast about what you all worked on. Or do you think that would not be necessary since we hace an abstract? Let me know what you are thinking. Enjoy your weekends :) V- --Z3411306 20:57, 4 May 2012 (EST)

Hey all, i think we should remove Adrenergic receptors within the human body" picture that i put in intro, it says pretty much what the table does and mark said he doesn't want pic of the same thing.. let me know..

Im also thinking maybe ill add receptor agonist and beta blocker as one table! i can take care of that!

M this is an article i found a while back


-article for signalling, receptor silencing (via arrestin) generalised article. --Z3333208 20:59, 2 May 2012 (EST)

Hi M,

no worries! you can put it under normal pathway thats fine, if you need any help i could help you.. as for the agonist section i think we should keep it as i don't think it links well with gene.. ill be doing that section this weekend hopefully.. as for b2 because its in arterioles it really affects cv system, i don't think u need to mention it, i think its pretty much same pathway- n plus its in the table i uploaded! Let me kno how you go..i think tomorrow during lab we should spend ten mins afterward really working out if anyone is having trouble and anything else each person can work on.. did you have the notes on GPCR from phar last sem? i think they will help V... ok see u tomoro.. keep up the good work!

Cya C--Z3333208 20:14, 2 May 2012 (EST)

Hey C,

Thanks for the external link, thats heaps good:) Also, in addition to my text I will put the steps in dotpoint formation to make it easier. Could we have regulation as a subheading in normal pathway? Cause I'm going to expand upon the inhibitory pathway as well.. might be good to then discuss the regulation of the normal pathway (both when stimulated and inhibited).

I saw you mention B2 to J in regards to the heart and heart failure. In normal function I mention Beta-adrenergic receptors in general and B1 in more detail. Should I also put more detail down on B2? Or do we keep it simply as an interesting fact which we quickly mention in abnormal function as it is linked to disease and B1?

Thanks, M --Z3333865 20:55, 1 May 2012 (EST)

Hey all, i was wondering if anyone knows how to make a table on wikipedia.. i made a table in word and wanted to put it under the sub heading adrenoceptors, but i didn't know how. :( --Z3333208 20:24, 1 May 2012 (EST)

Hi J, i just read an article about how AR in the heart are both B1 and B2, <pubmed>14985822</pubmed>.

It shows how both pathways are different (GS v Gi) and how when both pathways are damaged it leads to chronic heart failure. It also goes on to say that medication should consist of beta blockers targeting both receptor subtypes.. I think J, you may be able to use it in abnormal function/pharmacological relevance.

Ta, Cya C --Z3333208 09:13, 1 May 2012 (EST)

To M, i hope you don't mind i added a external link to a picture from the online version of MCB, under your section..MCB - Figure 20-16- Activation of adenylyl cyclase following binding of an appropriate hormone (e.g., epinephrine, glucagon) to a Gs protein – coupled receptor a link to an illustration of the activation of adenylate cyclase. A MOVIE OF EXTRACELLULAR SIGNALLING IS ALSO PRESENT WITHIN THIS LINK

Also i was wondering when you get a chance may you could change the word passage of you text, what i mean is maybe you could add steps for the actual pathway so its easier to read as an e.g. (step 1;agonist bind.. step 2:,,,,)

And if you could add a couple subheading in your section. Mark said he did want to see sub-headings.. lastly with your file u uploaded, can you just add to file description that it is student drawn so he knows.

To V,

As we discussed today, and i gave you some basic information to add to intro. I found in one of the online book a link to the info, which you could use as a reference, but we can't use any of the images in the books... MBoC - Some G Proteins Signal By Regulating the Production of Cyclic AMP

And too all, i was just uploading some images and playing around with the sizing.. Keep up the good work ! Sorry if i seem like I'm nagging

Thanks, C. --Z3333208 18:14, 30 April 2012 (EST) --Z3333208 19:14, 30 April 2012 (EST)

To J,

As we discussed in the lab, I was going to mention not only activation of normal pathway but also inhibition. But when I look at your part on abnormal function it mentions reduced excitability, not inhibition.. so how am I linking this to yours? Inhibition is simply Gi protein which inhibits adenylate cyclase, therefore no cAMP is produced and no signalling occurs. Please let me know your thoughts on additional things to write about that are significant when comparing normal and abnormal function :)

Thanks, M --Z3333865 11:42, 30 April 2012 (EST)


so i was just thinking mentioning something about other beta receptors so we have some more topics to actually talk about, was looking at the length of last years projects,, so long!! but i know its not quantity but quality too...

With references wen you add them they automatically readjust the numbering and every things its so simple its great!! best part of the assignment. But i don't really get wat ur saying J.

Great pic M, very nice work..

Glossary is easy i don't mind if its long or short, i don't think its worth as much though so i don't think were expected to define each scientific term..

If V you are reading, hope you are well, and if your having any issues or finding anything hard let us know I'm sure were all willing to help anyway we can..

Ta, C --Z3333208 21:48, 25 April 2012 (EST)


Can we put references in our text which link to the same reference in our list? (as in: can we get the same number in our text instead of continued numbering of the same reference?) - please look at history section.

Thanks :) M

Hey all,

Yes, I'm working on a student drawn image of the normal pathway. It takes some time though cause I want it to be understandable with different colours etc and not too simplistic. Also, I will change my reference now.. I only used 1 so far though (for normal function). Once I add more info to it I will add in more references :). And with the glossary of we need to assume that our audience has no prior knowledge of biology or do they have the same levels of understanding as us students? Cause that makes a big difference...

Thanks, M. --Z3333865 18:22, 24 April 2012 (EST)

Hi C,

I just talked to Mark about focusing on B1 and changing our title slightly to say 'with a B1 focus'. It's hard to talk about other B receptors normal pathway and structure and abnormal function in a 'brief' way. You can't talk about half a pathway nor can you talk about a disease without mentioning epidemiology, pathogenesis, etc. We'll see. if we have time maybe we can add some other things about other Bs - the more info the better.

with references, will it change the numbers we inserted into our text if we all put the references together?

cheers, J

--Z3332863 14:49, 24 April 2012 (EST)

Everyone, was just wondering if you could reference into the references section, not each section with their own, just type [1]

This will automatically make the reference appear in reference section. Thanks C --Z3333208 18:59, 23 April 2012 (EST)

Hi again, i want to upload a picture of structure but i don't want to upload one I'm not allowed. So can anyone just clarify for me, I can only use images from the 4 journals that allow reuse of the info? the ones we looked at in first lab?

hi i didn't do normal pathway. but i suggested we talk about other receptors (b2) coz we don't need to be so specific to b1 all the time just with specific signalling. I think it'll be good to cover the range of beta in general after all thats the title of our receptor group.. just briefly... C--Z3333208 17:38, 23 April 2012 (EST)


whoever wrote Normal Pathway - do you think you can draw or write a flow chart showing the pathway? Like 'the agonist binds the receptor --> g protein is activated --> Alpha subunit turns the next protein on'. I think it would be a good way to summarise what you've written. It can just be a flow chart drawn in paint or word.

Cheers, J. --Z3332863 14:15, 21 April 2012 (EST)


Are we planning to talk about the B2? I thought we were focusing on B1 receptor. If we're doing b1, any abnormalities should effect every organ except for heart and kidneys. Best place to start B2 is lungs and asthma. I will add a couple more abnormalities and diseases of B1 over this weekend. --Z3332863 10:19, 21 April 2012 (EST)

Hi just found three full access articles, seem easy to read, they follow the history of GPCR, which i think is all we really need for the history section. don't think we need to make it to specific.

Stefano Costanzi, Jeffrey Siegel, Irina G Tikhonova, Kenneth A Jacobson Rhodopsin and the others: a historical perspective on structural studies of G protein-coupled receptors. Curr. Pharm. Des.: 2009, 15(35);3994-4002 PMID:20028316

  • An article about history of GPCR generally

Edgar Jacoby, Rochdi Bouhelal, Marc Gerspacher, Klaus Seuwen The 7 TM G-protein-coupled receptor target family. ChemMedChem: 2006, 1(8);761-82 PMID:16902930

Graeme Milligan, Evi Kostenis Heterotrimeric G-proteins: a short history. Br. J. Pharmacol.: 2006, 147 Suppl 1();S46-55 PMID:16402120

  • Another 2 appear easier to read

cya monday C --Z3333208 21:10, 20 April 2012 (EST)

Hi guys, So i was talking to J in the lab, and we think that we might need some more information to actually mention, we have thought about receptor regulation (for example how to turn if off) , we already discuss receptor function/activation, so i think we can make a sub heading of receptor regulation, making mention of B arrestin. i want to have a look to see if there are any b2 not in the heart- and any abnormal function..

Anyways good luck all! C --Z3333208 18:47, 20 April 2012 (EST)

Hi guys I'm sorry I've been so slack with contacting I just completed two mid sem exams today!! Im still reading up on structure but will definitely have something compiled by tomoro. I don't have the old course notes... does anyone else?? It C.. maybe if this is not too late we can meet ten mins before lab tomorrow and really work on an outline of things that need to be done and what sections still need to be completed.. Cyas tomorrow.. C --Z3333208 21:41, 18 April 2012 (EST)

I am not sure anymore how to relate the source with the picture. I found this picture in for the introduction and it is allowed to use it when the source is mentioned. Can one of you explain me how that works?

--Z3411306 16:40, 15 April 2012 (EST)

Some of you said, that you would have some papers at home about earlier courses that thought you about GPCR and I wanted to ask if you can bring them to the Lab on Thursday, so that I can have a look.

Thank you for your feedback, I will take that into consideration and change it for the better.

--Z3411306 16:20, 15 April 2012 (EST)

what do you mean by 'in paper' - as in we print our sections out?

with the introduction, I think you should also mention the what are the subtypes of GPCR - like B and Alpha adrenergics, where they are. You should also include a picture of GPCR. There are also different types of G protein Alpha subunits like Alpha s, alpha i and alpha q. They all start different signalling pathways. I think B 1 is alpha q but I'm not sure. Can you please check up on that? I know what you write in intro will overlap with sopme of the other sections but it's like a very brief overview. May be suggest the aim of this page - what are we trying to explain about the GPCR? --Z3332863 12:07, 15 April 2012 (EST)

Hey, sorry for the late reply. As allready discussed in the lab I try to summarize the GPCR in the introduction. Is there anything else what u want me to look for? Also I wanted to ask if you can bring the material that you have about the G-protein in paper to the next lab, as we agreed in last lab? --Z3411306 21:43, 14 April 2012 (EST)


To upload a picture, you must save the picture onto desktop/documents,/etc. Go to 'Toolbox' on the left and click 'upload file' under that. Put the directory in using 'browse'so they know where the picture is saved. Click Upload. Copy the title 'File: ...' and past that into your page/grp page using File:... click save and it should be on your page. cheers, J. --Z3332863 14:51, 14 April 2012 (EST)


With clinical aspects I was thinking we could mention how to deal with the abnormal function - what drugs to use etc, but also epidemiology maybe? But if you want you can put it all together to have the two abnormalities with consequences etc mentioned separately..

ALSO! Could someone explain again how to upload a picture..?

Thanks :)

--Z3333865 17:42, 12 April 2012 (EST)


Can we merge abnormal function of the beta 1 with Clinical aspects? So if we have deficient Beta 1, we would get cardiac failure while over-reactive beta 1 gives hypertension. Can we put them under 1 heading? If not, what extra info should I be putting in Clinical aspects? maybe symptoms of cardiac failure? Let me know what you think. --Z3332863 14:19, 12 April 2012 (EST)

Hey! Firstly, no, we are not allowed to use nature articles.. Secondly, in regards to the table.. all of the Beta-adrenoceptors act via Gs and cAMP, not through phosphatidylinositol (think that is alpha-AR). I thought we were only discussing beta, and more specifically beta-1..? Please let me know what you think. If that pathway does occur within beta-AR can you please put up a link to that article? Thanks!

--Z3333865 10:42, 7 April 2012 (EST)

Me again, I know that last time we met up and discussed this project, we didn't know if we had enough sections. Im thinking maybe we can briefly in a table format describe the differences with the two transduction pathways that G proteins receptors are involved in; the cAMP signal pathway and the phosphatidylinositol signal pathway... I think that will be something basic and relevant to the whole concept behind the assignment, i.e. signalling pathways!

Anyways off now.. C --Z3333208 21:59, 6 April 2012 (EST)

Hi everyone. Hope start of the break has been good. I am currently looking into structure of the receptor, I found an article which conducted extensive studies of the turkey b1 receptor. I will have a read of the article you poster up as well. as for the genes, if you can find them easily i don't think it will hurt to post the information about it. Was wondering if someone can remind me, are we allowed to use nature articles for this project, i don't seem to remember.

Thanks, hope u have great break --Z3333208 20:35, 6 April 2012 (EST)

Hey all,

I was looking for articles on the function and found some info on the gene.

Should we mention genes of all of the different beta-adrenergic receptors (1, 2, 3)?

Otherwise it will only be a tiny part of our project..

Also, here is an amazing article on the structure and function: [ Structure and function of G protein-coupled receptors Strader, C D ; Fong, T M ; Tota, M R ; Underwood, D ; Dixon, R A Annual review of biochemistry, 1994, Vol.63, pp.101-32]

For full text please find access through the UNSW online library

--Z3333865 09:04, 6 April 2012 (EST)


So, because GPCR is such a large area we're all a bit unsure of what to write.. We'll discuss things with Mark during our lab - to see what the best approach would be. I was just thinking that we can't talk about every single receptor individually.. it may be better if we give a general overview and then talk about one in more detail. At least we will know what to focus on when looking for articles etc.

Also, I'm trying to find info regarding history but it's quite hard.. so please add info there if you find something :)

See you all 10 minutes before the lab!

--Z3333865 09:31, 4 April 2012 (EST)


I found some papers for heart failures associated with beta 1:


This paper talks about how people with cardiac failures have a lower density in Beta 1 receptors and activated adenylate cyclase. also how pressure-overloaded right ventricles (those that have primary pulmonary hypertension) cause decrase in adenylate cyclase activity, leading to failing right ventricles.


This article found that it is the combined effects of increased Beta ARK (B adrenergic receptor kinase - inactivated the B receptor) expression and reduced Beta 1 receptor expression causing Heart failure.


This paper talks about how Anti- B1 receptor antibodies cause haert failure.

Hey all!

because there are so many different Beta-adrenergic receptors in all different tissues, we should focus on one specifically. There are lots of articles on Beta(1)-adrenergic receptors in the heart and its connection to cardiac failure. Beta-1 Adrenoceptor. We should divide the tasks between us all. Please write down the part you will do behind your initial. Write down your information under the subheading of this page, but please also have copy of it on your student page as a backup. If you find a reference which is relevant to another part, please let the other team member know :)

M - Pathway and normal function of Beta(1)-adrenergic receptors in the heart

J - I'm happy to do the Abnormal function of Beta 1 in the heart and Introduction . Are we purely focusing on beta 1 of the heart? I'm thinking of mentioning other Beta receptors in my intro. --Z3332863 15:09, 31 March 2012 (EST)

C - I think i might look at abnormal functioning of beta 1 in other tissues other than cardiac. Can i suggest that J you look at beta 1 in the whole cardiovascular system, so blood vessels... thanks cya u guys on thursday . are we still meeting ten mins before lab on thursday? --Z3333208 20:17, 3 April 2012 (EST)

V - I will write the introduction and I will draw the picture. If there is anything left, just let me know!--Z3411306 21:43, 14 April 2012 (EST)

Thank you!!

--Z3333865 12:46, 31 March 2012 (EST)

Hi all, I am finding papers on receptor structure of GPCRs/adrenergics and normal function of GPCR. Can we look for papers to cover all those areas listed so we don't miss out anything? If any of you have started your research, can you let everyone know so we don't research the same thing? Thanks. J

Hey all,

In the lab we mentioned chemotaxis as one of the possible topics for our group project. Now, I was just thinking.. chemotaxis were discussed in microbiology and are related to bacteria. So we would probably be better of looking at signalling within/between eukaryotic cells.

Something that might be good to research: the internal and external signalling pathways leading to apoptosis.

See you all on Monday :)

--Z3333865 13:34, 17 March 2012 (EST)

We have decided on GPCR :) What about Beta-adrenergic signaling and its regulation?!

--Z3333865 15:19, 22 March 2012 (EST)

Papers for group assignment: GROUP 7


This primary article investigates G-protein coupled receptors and the mechanism of binding of drugs to these receptors at an atomic level. One of the pathways for travel includes association with a vestibule on the extracellular surface of the receptors; a method used by several different drugs, including beta-blockers binding to beta-adrenergic receptors.


This primary article investigates an activation mechanism for the β(2)-adrenergic receptor. It is known that G-protein coupled receptors change from active to inactive states and vice versa due to drug actions, though recent crystalline structures do not reveal the mechanism of transition. Atomic simulations in this paper that the first structural changes during receptor activation often take place on the intracellular side of the receptor, far from the drug-binding site.


This review article addresses the development of Beta-blockers, the way in which they have evolved up until now and the direction in which we are headed regarding their future uses. Some concepts include receptor selectivity, agonistic and antagonistic actions, ligand-directed signalling, and how these characteristics could be useful in fighting diseases related to beta-adrenergic receptors, such as cardiac failure and osteoporosis.


This review article addresses the possible relationship between polymorphisms in the β2 adrenoceptor gene and various individual responses to short-acting and long-acting Beta2-agonists. These drugs are used in the treatment of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to dilate the airways and protect them, despite their associated side-effects, such as increased mortality. Although currently genetic testing is very limited, it is hoped that in the future we can predict the individual responses to these drugs based on the genotype of the β2 adrenoceptor gene.

--Z3333865 10:31, 28 March 2012 (EST)

'Papers for group 7 assignment': <pubmed>21857662</pubmed> This paper talks about how the different conformations of the B adrenergic receptor can be induced by different ligands. This is important for our project because it explains the mechanisms underlying the activation and function of tis GPCR

<pubmed>1974837</pubmed> This paper gives a great overview of the structure and function of the B Adrenergic receptor. It talks about how cAMP acts as a secondary messenger and desensitisation of the receptor.

<pubmed>20975248</pubmed> This paper talks about the B3 adrenergic receptor and its role in controlling Ca ion concentrations in cardiomyocytes. This is immportant as improper regulation of Ca ions can lead to chronic heart failure. This is useful for our section on abnormalities and disease associated with our receptor.

<pubmed>2551839</pubmed> This article explains the inositol 1,4,5 triphosphate system of B adrenergic signalling and its role in muscle contraction. This gives more information about the downstream effects of the B adrenergic receptor.

--Z3332863 13:42, 27 March 2012 (EST)

[1] <pubmed>22242170</pubmed> This paper provides a good overview about G protein-coupled receptors.

[2] <pubmed>16183910</pubmed> This paper shows an overview about the functions that G protein-coupled receptors fulfill, for example modulation of synaptic transmission, hormone release and actions, regulation of cell contraction and migration,cell growth and differentiation.

[3] <pubmed>15914470</pubmed> This paper gives information about diseases in relation with GCPb receptors.

[4] <pubmed>12177051</pubmed> This paper provides information about interactions between G protein-coupled receptors and other enzymes. It is important to get an overview about the different influences and interactions between GPCR and other factors.

z3411306 --Z3411306 20:45, 24 March 2012 (EST)

Hi guys these are the articles that i found. I noticed you guys have found a lot on structure, how the receptor actually works (conformational changes etc), and drug interactions. I found two articles linking two very common diseases to B GPCR abnormalities, i also looked at beta arrestins and in general the location of GPCR in the cell.

1. <pubmed>20351116</pubmed>

A primary article linking defective GPCR to heart failure. This can be used for abnormal receptor function section

2. <pubmed>12648290</pubmed>

A review article about how Beta Gpcr linked to asthma, can also be used for the abnormal receptor functioning section.

3. <pubmed>16460808</pubmed>

This is also a review. It initially gives a brief and then detailed information on arrestins which are proteins which bind to GPCR and inhibit their action. They are vital in signal transduction pathways, and I think that it will be necessary for us to discuss their role.

4. <pubmed>9398661</pubmed>

The article above is a primary article which investigated the location of GPCR in the plasma membrane. I think it will be good to add in the intro sections, that overall there was no specific location for the receptors morphologically.

Also found a article with few good images about the actual configuration of the receptor in different states. We can use such images along side the section for structure. <pubmed>22031696</pubmed>

And the following articles i think may be useful, but are more complicated i thought id post them up maybe a few of us can have a go at understanding them better. They are generally concerned with beta arrestins, internalisation, regulation of the signal transduction pathway. <pubmed>15634674</pubmed> <pubmed>9145918</pubmed>

--Z3333208 22:16, 28 March 2012 (EST)


(identify which specific aspect of the pathway)

History of pathway


Time-line of discoveries

Gene description



Receptors etc

Molecules and proteins involved - interactions, etc

Normal function

Abnormal function

Clinical aspects

Glossary of terms

(dot points with small description)


as an example when you add a reference - see discussion edit mode


  1. <pubmed>12324352(as example)</pubmed>
  2. <actual reference>

Somewhere in project has to be at least one student drawn image!

With the pictures: add category