User:Z3256682

From CellBiology

Hello Fellow Earthlings

--z3255682 05:44, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

How do you know I am from earth? --Mark Hill 07:22, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Lab 1

Question: What Cell Biology Journals allow reuse of acknowledged and correctly cited content?

Answer: Provided the content is properly acknowledged and cited, the Journal of Cell Biology, BMC Cell Biology and PLoS Journals (eg. PLoS ONE, PLoS Biology, PLoS Medicine) allow this reuse of its contents.

On the other hand, journals such as those from the Nature Group, Trends in Cell Biology and Cell require initial permission to be sought before any reuse.

--z3256682 08:22, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Lab 2

Attendance --z3256682 05:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Question: What are the "light" regions of DNA within the nucleus called?

Answer: The light-staining regions within the nucleus are called euchromatin. The dark-staining regions are called heterochromatin. Euchromatin is predominantly undergoing active transcription. --z3256682 06:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Lab 3

Attendance --z3256682 05:40, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Question: How do we know the hazards associated with research chemicals?

Answer: The laboratory is required to keep copies of relevant Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) of all potentially hazardous substances it contains or uses.

These MSDS list the hazardous substance's ingredients, chemical/physical properties, health hazards, safe use/handling instructions, and also, the manufacturer's name and contact details. --z3256682 06:13, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Lab 4

Attendance --z3256682 06:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Question: Identify an commercially-available antibody against an adhesion protein.

Answer: Plakophilin 1 (http://www.scbt.com/datasheet-33636-plakophilin1-10b2-antibody.html). This particular plakophilin antibody has a monoclonal IgG1 form, and was obtained from a mouse. Plakophilin plays a major part in the attachment plaque of desmosomes, particularly with desmoplakin stabilisation. --z3256682 06:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Lab 5

Attendance: I attended this Lab and completed the necessary individual assessment task provided by Dr Schevzov on transgenic/KO mice, however I did not place my attendance details here as indicated by Dr. Hill.

Lab 6

Attendance: I attended this Lab and completed the necessary individual assessment task provided by Professor Gunning, however I did not place my attendance details here as indicated by Dr. Hill.

Z3256682graph.JPG

Lab 7

Attendance: --z3256682 06:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Question: From today's confocal tutorial, identify an advantage to using each of the following objectives: Air, Water or Oil.

Answer:

- Air: Easiest to prepare and relatively accessible as minimal equipment required (ie. just air), however detail is worst.

- Water: Allows visualisation of live cells/organisms since cells are placed in their natural liquid medium.

- Oil: Best visualisation of cells as removes any disruption from air/dust between objective and specimen, however the oil preparation means the cells/organisms have to be dead/fixed so no real-time processes.

--z3256682 08:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Lab 8

Attendance: --z3256682 07:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Peer Assessment stuff: indicate which projects you have read on this page, and also be constructively critical and state the good points (put signature and then comments on Discussion after). - peer comments are at top of discussion (1st at bottom, most recent on top) DO NOT EDIT/MODIFY ANYBODY'S PROJECT OR COMMENTS! criteria follow http://cellbiology.med.unsw.edu.au/cellbiology/index.php?title=ANAT3231_Projects_2010

Group Project Peer Reviews

I have reviewed the following group projects and placed my comments on their Discussion page (dates of review are in parentheses):

- Group 1 - Fluorescent PCR (5th May 2010): Overall very good with strong diagrams to illustrate complex process.

- Group 2 - RNA Interference (5th May 2010): Clear and precise.

- Group 3 - Immunohistochemistry (6th May 2010): Well rounded understandable and really good.

- Group 4 - Cell Culture (6th May 2010): Very detailed, informative, but needs a little work but not that much.

- Group 5 - Electron Microscopy (6th May 2010): Lot of work, well-thought.

- Group 6 - Confocal Microscopy (9th May 2010): Overall good, a slight tweak in structure and glossary may be helpful.

- Group 7 - Monoclonal Antibodies (9th May 2010): Detailed, poor referencing, inconsistent in some parts, definitely needs cleaning up.

- Group 8 - Microarray (9th May 2010): Clear, concise and doesn't outstay its welcome :)

- Group 9 - Fluorescent Proteins (9th May 2010): Lots of research and work, poor referencing, some repetitiveness, no student image, needs cleaning up.

Lab 9

Attendance: I attended this Lab and waited till the end for Dr. Hill's brief critique of Group 10's project, however I did not place my attendance details here as indicated by Dr. Hill.

Question: What is the technological bottleneck common to all next generation sequencing (NGS) platforms?

Answer: The bottleneck faced by all NGS platforms is the extremely high amount of data produced, its storage, and ultimately, its interpretation which will prove very tedious. All the NGS platforms can produce usable data, but it will be up to the human operators/scientists to make sense of the data, and be able to apply the knowledge gained.

Stem Cell Lab

Attendance: --z3256682 03:43, 26 May 2010 (UTC)