- 1 Lab Attendance
- 2 Individual Assessments
- 2.1 Lab 1
- 2.2 Lab 2
- 2.3 Super-resolution Microscopy
- 2.4 Lab 3
- 2.5 Lab 4
- 2.6 Lab 5
- 2.7 Lab 6
- 2.8 Lab 7
- 2.9 Lab 8
- 2.10 Peer Assessment
- 2.11 Group 1: Regulation of cell division
- 2.12 Group 2: Cytokinesis:
- 2.13 Group 3:Golgi Apparatus
- 2.14 Group 4: Spindle Apparatus
- 2.15 Group 6: Anaphase
- 2.16 Group 7: Mitochondria
- 2.17 Lab 9
- 3 References
Structural model of “bacterial microtubules.”
Pilhofer M, Ladinsky MS, McDowall AW, Petroni G, Jensen GJ. Microtubules in Bacteria: Ancient Tubulins Build a Five-Protofilament Homolog of the Eukaryotic Cytoskeleton. PLoS Biol. 2011 Dec 9; 9(12): e1001213. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001213
Copyright: © 2011 Pilhofer et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PMID 22162949 Structural model of “bacterial microtubules.”
Super-resolution microscopy is an important technique that has significantly helped researches with the diffraction barrier in microscopy. One of the super-resolution approaches used in "Maturation of active zone assembly by Drosophila Bruchpilot", was STED. The Drosophila melanogaster neuromuscular junction (NMJ) was used for genetic analyses of synapse structure and assembly in this study. The protein that the researchers examined at the neuromuscular junction in Drosophila was Bruchpilot (BRP) which is important for efficient neurotransmission. With the use of STED images of the active zone protein (Bruchpilot), it was found that they had a doughnut-shaped distribution centred at the active zones of the synapses. By examining the impact of various Bruchpilot mutants on synapse development (through the use of STED and other methods), the researchers have illustrated that the protein is a significant component of the T-bars. The T-bars have important impact on the motility of vesicles in the active zone.
--Mark Hill (talk) 14:09, 11 April 2013 (EST) This article uses stimulated emission depletion (STED) microscopy and a variety of other methods in its findings. Your explanation meets the assessment criteria, a minor point is you should have included the reference within the actual paragraph content as you would see in a research article or your group project.
Super-resolution microscopy is an important technique that has significantly helped researches with the diffraction barrier in microscopy. One of the super-resolution approaches used in "Maturation of active zone assembly by Drosophila Bruchpilot", was STED<pubmed>19596851</pubmed>. The Drosophila melanogaster neuromuscular junction (NMJ) was used for genetic analyses of synapse structure and assembly in this study. The protein that the researchers examined at the neuromuscular junction in Drosophila was Bruchpilot (BRP) which is important for efficient neurotransmission. With the use of STED images of the active zone protein (Bruchpilot), it was found that they had a doughnut-shaped distribution centred at the active zones of the synapses. By examining the impact of various Bruchpilot mutants on synapse development (through the use of STED and other methods), the researchers have illustrated that the protein is a significant component of the T-bars. The T-bars have important impact on the motility of vesicles in the active zone.
My first research article titled “The C-terminal domain of Nup93 is essential for assembly of the structural backbone of nuclear pore complexes” illustrates the significant role that Nup93 plays in Nuclear Pore Complexes (NPCs). The NPCs are essential component of the Nuclear envelope because they control what enters/leaves the nuclear envelope (i.e.‘gatekeepers’ of the NEs). They are imperative in the movement of proteins and nucleic acids between the cytoplasm and nucleoplasm. This study through, various scientific techniques (such as nuclear assembly reactions, dextran exclusion, cloning & transmission electron microscopy), have further supported the concept that the role of subcomplex Nup93, is crucial for NPC formation and function in Xenopus egg extracts. Moreover, the addition of Nup93 by itself is sufficient to make up for the loss of the Nup188-Nup93 and Nup205-Nup93 complexes. I believe this article will be very helpful for the sub-topic: Structure of NE because the researchers investigate one of the major subcomplexes that is essential to the function and assembly of the NPCs which in turn are imperative to NEs.Thus, I find this article quite inetersting and it may even be useful for some of the other sections.
After researching some papers on NE reformation, I came across a great research paper titled: “NSF- and SNARE-mediated membrane fusion is required for nuclear envelope formation and completion of nuclear pore complex assembly in Xenopus laevis egg extracts”. In their study, Baur and colleagues initialy investigated whether NSF had a potential role in the formation of the Nuclear Envelope. They utilised three different approaches to address this question. These included various sophisticated methods that involved dominant-negative NSFE329Qvariant, as well as cloning and expressing Xenopus laevis NSF (xNSF) to raise antisera in rabbits and finally using antibody to immune-deplete NSF from cytosol. One of their crucial findings showed that NE formation decreased when treated membranes were placed with NSF depleted cytosol. The work of this study illustrated, along with other important findings, that the NSF and SNAREs mediate NE formation and that the SNARE proteins need to be activated by the NSF ATPase. This research paper not only provides some recent scientific findings in relation to NE formation, it also provides a reasonable overview of NE formation after mitosis. Thus, I can use this research paper for one of the sub-topics that I am responsible for finding information on (NE reformation in cell division).
The above research article by Chen at al. (2011) provides a good overview of some of the important structures of the nuclear envelope and its function in the cell. It also highlights that Kv10.1 channels have important implication in cancer but may also play an important role in the nuclear membrane, namely the perinuclear and INM (of certain neurons). The location of this channel has been established through laboratory techniques such as immunostaining of neurons, transfected cells, as well as in vivo examination of KV.10 (through the use of fluorescent proteins).
The following primary research article “Temporal Differences in the Appearance of NEP-B78 and an LBR-like Protein during Xenopus Nuclear Envelope Reassembly Reflect the Ordered Recruitment of Functionally Discrete Vesicle Types” examines the structure and dynamics of nuclear envelope reformation in the Xenopus cell-free system via the use of various reagents such as mBA against two proteins of the endoplasmic reticulum and outer membrane, known as NEP-B78 and p65. They also investigate antibodies against the inner nuclear membrane protein lamin B receptor. One of their results illustrates the differences in the duration of the employment of membrane proteins to the surface of deondensing chromatin. The differences suggest the existence of 2 different vesicle types that are important for nuclear envelop formation. The procedure concerning the vesicles being recruited to the chromatin is a controlled process and NEP-B78 has an important role in assisting the vesicles to the surface of the chromatins etc. The research article also provides a brief summary of what occurs during the breaking and regeneration of the nuclear envelope in cell division which is quite useful for the subsections that I am responsible for.
Figure 1. Schematic view of model adopted for the NPC/NE system
Anti-γ-Catenin Antibody, clone 11E4 | MAB2083
Antibody Name: Anti-γ-Catenin Antibody, clone 11E4 | MAB2083
Antibody against: γ-Catenin
Antibody Type: Monoclonal Antibody
Species it is raised in: Mouse
Species it reacts against Human
- Western Blotting
Reference using Clone 11E4:<pubmed>10910767</pubmed>
Completed in-class assessment item on knock-out techniques.
1) Do you see any change in phenotype between Group A (Tm4 over-expression) and Group B (control)?
After examining the results in the graph above, it can be concluded that there is a difference in the phonotypical expression between Group A (cells with Tm4 over-expression) and the control group. Six different types of phenotypes were analysed in each group. The cells that over-expressed Tm4 displayed a higher number of cells with long extensions that were characteristically thinner and had more branches than the control group. The three most popular phenotypes in the control group were as follows: Broken fan (30%), stumped (28%) followed by Stringed (24%). In contrast, the major phenotypes in the Tm4 over-expressed cells were: stringed (26%), Broken Fan (24%) and finally pronged (22%). There was an increase in the percentages of pronged phenotype in cells with Tm4 over-expression (a difference of 10% from that of the control group).
2) If you see a difference, speculate about a potential molecular mechanism that has led to the change. If you don’t see a change speculate why that could be.
Tropomyosin consists of two very similar alpha-helical polypeptides warped around one another. It can be found in the grooves composed of F-actin strands. Specifically, (Tm4) is an isoform of the tropomyosin family of actin-binding proteins. We expected to see Tm4 overexpression in phenotypes that had greater branching and neurite growth and from the above results it appears that overall the broken fan phenotype in the control group was more prevalent than that of Tm4 expressing neuronal cells. This was not the case for the stringed phenotype. The results are somewhat close to what we expected as broken fans consist of neurites and lamella which are features consistent at the growth cone where Tm4 plays a crucial role in the development of neurites and lamella.  Furthermore, Tm4 are found to be concentrated at locations in which the neuron is growing such as at neurites. Moreover, there was an increase in the percentages of pronged phenotype in cells with Tm4 over-expression (approximately 10% greater than the control group). This may be suggestive of the importance of Tm4 over-expression in increasing the degree of branching in the phenotype. There was also a greater percentage of broken phenotype in the control cells then the group over-expressing (Tropmyosin 4). This could be partially related to the inhibitory impact of Tm4 on this particular phenotype. In addition, from the above graph it can be seen that fan phenotype was found to be equal in both groups of cells (6%); more similar data should be examined before making any conclusive statements in relation to this particular outcome as their could have been errors during counting process.
Kierszenbaum, Abraham L., and Laura L. Tres. Histology and cell biology an introduction to pathology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders, 2012. Print.
Completed in-class activity worksheet
Group 1: Regulation of cell division
- Introduction: The introduction needs to be edited as there are a couple of grammatical errors. Also, it would be a good idea to include a couple of more relevant references in the introduction to avoid any copyright issues but to also correctly acknowledge where the text came from. Otherwise, the introduction is good as it provides a brief overview of the regulation of cell division and what the page will be focusing on.
- History: This needs to be completed and also it’s important to keep in mind that recent discoveries are crucial to include in the table. Discoveries after the year, 1992 and up to now, needs to be included to ensure that the information are up to date and in pace with current research. Nonetheless, I really like the colour that you have chosen for the history table because it makes the information stand out very well.
- Entry Phase: I personally recommend this group to include a definition for the G2 phase and other key words (probably it’s a good idea to make a link to the glossary for these words). This makes the information more understandable especially for people who are not familiar with cell division.
- Cyclins: It’s a good idea to make the word the sea urchin eggs in italics. Further, I think it’s best to revise the fourth sentence, make it more concise and don’t use the word ‘’’he’’’ too many times. It seems that only 1 reference is used for the entire paragraph, I highly recommend that at least 1 or 2 other references should be used if the information wasn’t just taken from that one source. This ensures that credit is given to the people that came up with the discoveries/ information.
Further, it appears that the first image does not have any student description of what it is representing (and the original description of the image is not provided either). It’s important to ensure that a relevant description (preferably in your own words) accompanies the image so the reader can understand what it is illustrating. CDK’s: This sentence, ‘’’ enzymes that present throughout the...’’’ should be written as ‘’’ enzymes that are present throughout the...’’’ it’s important to re-check the information to ensure any grammatical errors are corrected. Again, the image is good BUT needs to include an appropriate description of what it is showing. You need to have an explanation accompanying it, even if it’s very brief as this is part of the assessment criteria. Also, Ithe following sentence is written by itself in brackets without further elaboration: (In Reider and Pallazo's 1992 paper, a set of stills from a time lapse showing the effect of the drug colchicine to keep cells at metaphase and study the Spindle Checkpoints.) This sentence needs to be placed in a relevant context and not left there by itself.
- Anaphase Promoting Complex: Unfortunately, it seems like this subheading has some information missing, the very first and last sentence are not part of any paragraphs and are here in isolation. Information under this subheading needs to be reorganized and MORE information needs to be included as it is a very short description. Maybe you could explain how cdc20 and cdh 1 help with the function of APC.
- Spindle Checkpoint: Information under this sub-section is much better and more detailed. Though I believe more information should be included as it is still short.
- Mitogens: I personally think more effort was put into writing up the information for this sub-heading (Mitogens) than any other ones. It has relevant information and a good, detailed description is provided for the reader. This should be used as an example to write up the information for the other subheadings. Though I think it would be better to not include the word ‘’’definition’’’, remove it and just say what mitogen is.
- History of Platelet-Derived Growth Factor (PDGF): This has relevant and detailed information. Though the final paragraph is quite short and thus more information should be included. Unfortunately, the image ‘’’platelets’’’ has no relevant information to accompany it. A written description of the image would add more value to it and also explains how it relates to the information in that particular section.
- Disease: I like the idea of using a table for this sub-section; though ensure that you finish the table as it is incomplete and needs further description of the diseases.
- Current and Future Research: Basically, this part of the project is incomplete and needs more information. Though a positive aspect of this part is that the image has relevant description! That’s what all the other pictures need to include so the reader knows why they are part of the information (i.e. helps them to understand the image and its relevance to the given information). Also the sub-heading, Future, needs to include references and the first sentence needs to be revised.
It would be a good idea to dedicate a section of this project to the Glossary. Important words should be defined in this area. Also, there are no student images; a requirement for this project is to have student drawn images. Finally, some external links should be included (if available) in the relevant sections or even at the end of the page to make it more educating and appealing to the reader.
Group 2: Cytokinesis:
- Cytokinesis: I like the information that has been provided for cytokinesis but unfortunately it does not tell the reader the actual purpose of the wiki page is or how cytokinesis will be explored in the context of cell division. The image is relevant and I like the fact you have included a good, detailed description of what the image is signifying. Though no reference is used in the introduction which I believe needs to provided for copyright reasons.
- History: The table of history is incomplete. There are only two entries; more information should be included and it is important to provide up-to-date information as well. The history section could be improved by adding more entries after 1972. Though the colour scheme for the table is good as the information can be easily seen.
- Mechanisms: It’s good that they have you have included a cartoon depicting the steps in cytokinesis with relevant information. Though It would be good if you could provide an EM or another image relating to this section. Also there is a lot of information in this section and this may not be very user friendly as they would have to read a lot of texts. I suggest simplifying the information a little and adding a student drawn image depicting the various structures described. Also, I think more references are needed for this section as the long paragraph included only one reference.
- Microfilament organization: The information is concise but you need to include references as there are no references used! Furthermore, I strongly suggest to you to find an image relevant to microfilament assembly and include that in this section. Not only does it add value to the layout but it also makes it more user friendly.
- Animal Vs Plant Cells: Since this part of the project page aims to explore the differences of cytokinesis in both animals and plants, I strongly recommend you to use a table with a good colour scheme to represent this information. There are lots of information in the other sections of this page, so to make it more reader friendly, you should consider a table instead to describe the differences of cytokinesis in animals and plants.
- Cytokinesis Failure: The use of images is great but more elaboration on what the images are presenting would be great. You have provided a description of an experiment conducted by the researchers, which is a good idea but I think the information needs to be revised and simplified. It can really confuse the reader if they are not familiar with the scientific jargon that’s there. Nonetheless, as a whole, this section demonstrates good research but again the expression of ideas in a concise manner is somewhat lacking.
- Current Research: A few external links have been provided which I think is a very good way of directing the reader to further information on current research in this area. Though I suggest that you include some form of graphs or other relevant data to support the research outlined in this section.
- Glossary:The glossary provides definitions for a number of words which I think is a very good thing to see as you are helping the reader to better understand this page but you need to complete it.
Group 3:Golgi Apparatus
- Introduction: The introduction makes clear the aim of the page and that it will be exploring the processes of mitosis in regards to the Golgi apparatus. Though I recommend including another reference in the second paragraph when you are actually describing the Golgi apparatus.
- Structure: This section is well written, it is concise but I think the sentence ‘’’ These are known as cisternae.”’ needs to be linked to the third sentence as they both talk about cisternae. Also, it’s good to use variations in the length of your sentences but avoid using two short sentences one after another; you should elaborate on them. The image has no accompanying description; you should provide a relevant description of what the image is representing. Maybe you could point out to the Golgi apparatus and expand on it a bit more.
- Function: I think an alternative word should be used to the word ‘’’sums’’’, how about using the word ‘’’signifies’’’? Also, when you talk about cell trafficking, maybe you should be more concise with describing this process and try and find a relevant image to go with the information that you have provided.
- History: You need a range of entries that should be well referenced and compiled. I like the design of the table however I think the history section should placed after the introduction and not after the Function. Also, it needs to be completed and it’s a good idea to elaborate on the vesicular transport hypothesis or maybe it’s significance to the Golgi Apparatus.
- Models of division: When you are talking about the methods of division that different organelles use (which I think is not very necessary for this section), it’s a good idea to use a table as there are a lot of written information in the other sections. Also, using a diagram to depict one of the described models would be a good thing as well.
- Morphology and Molecular Mechanisms: This section is well researched and the cartoon images are good but unfortunately no description has been provided as to what they show or how they relate to the processes in the Golgi apparatus. Though one of the images contains a brief description of what they signify and its relevance to the content presented which is a very good thing to see.
- During Cell Division: The information under this sub-heading needs to be more concise, you can easily confuse the reader if you provide the names of too many proteins (which you have) or too much information related to them. Since you are describing, CDK1, P115 etc. You should consider a table to present this information, a table makes it more user friendly and easier to understand as it is organised well.
- Current Model for Behaviour during Mitosis: The first paragraph does a very good job at explaining the process that both plant and animal cell undergo during mitosis. The final paragraph needs to include references as it does not have any reference! Otherwise very well researched information and I really like the image which has a very well written description. Also, the use of subheadings is very user friendly.
- Limitations of Current Models: It’s good that you have explained the differences between the Disappearance model and the Continued Presence Model. If you could include an image showing one of the processes then that would be great. Also, it would be useful if you could link some of the words to the glossary section such as: Sar1p DN as many readers would want to know what it means.
- Areas of Future Research: It appears that the first dot point needs to be elaborated as it has no explanation. Also for the second dot point it would be good if you could include a diagram such as a graph, depicting some of their current results in the area. This would make it more understandable and user friendly for the potential reader. The external links are fantastic but the glossary needs to be completed.
Group 4: Spindle Apparatus
- Introduction: I think your introduction has good information but I think you’ve focused more on mitosis and meiosis than the actual Spindle Apparatus. You only have two sentences about the spindle apparatus and the sentences have a couple of grammatical errors as well. But more importantly, you have not stated the purpose of the wiki page or how you will explore the function of the spindle apparatus. Finally, I think using three images in the introduction isn’t a good idea because you haven’t even described the spindle apparatus etc. Also, for two of the pictures you haven’t actually referred to them at all- there are no student description of what they are illustrating. Maybe consider placing them under the subheading: Function as there are no images there and it’s properly more related to that section.
- History: Your history has been very well researched up to the year 1997, but there is no information after this date, Ensure that you complete this and try to add some recent discoveries closer to 2013- this will add more value to your information as well.
- Structure: This section has not only been researched well but also very well presented. I like how you go into details about what the spindle is composed of and their significance. Also, the images are fantastic; you’ve actually provided a relevant description of what they show. The external link is great as well but unfortunately a couple of your paragraphs only have one reference which needs to be addressed.
- Function: You should be careful not to repeat some of the information that is already stated about the Spindle Apparatus, e.g. that it is composed of microtubules etc. Also, you need to use more than one reference because your first paragraph has no reference and the following two have one each. To prevent copy right violations etc. you need to cite your sources correctly and sufficiently. Also, it would be a good idea if you used one of the images from the introduction for this part of the page as they are more relevant to the information presented here. Alternatively you can include a student drawn image (you need to have at least one suitable image somewhere on your project page- see the marking criteria).
- Mechanisms of Formation: As I’ve mentioned earlier, it is important not to repeat the information that has already been stated in the above subheadings. Also you need to include a couple of more references in your first paragraph unless you have used only one source to write the whole paragraph (which is not a good thing to do). Though it’s good to see that you talk about the microtubule self-organisation model and you’ve actually elaborated on the Ran-GTP and the CPC cascade, this helps the reader to better understand the rest of the information. Finally the images are relevant and they have a student description as well.
- Current research: I admire the fact that you have include data from the actual research papers to support the information that you have provided. The line graph is also a good and your explanation of Myo10 in the meiotic spindles is good.
- Complications: How about you put this information in a table format? Not only will it make the information appear more organised but also easier for the reader to read as there. For example, making a table that has the following sub-headings: Lissencephaly and Microencephaly but the main heading should be neurological diseases.
- Glossary: It’s a really good idea that you have a glossary there as it is part of the criteria but you probably need to add a some more definitions.
Group 6: Anaphase
- Introduction: the first few sentences are a good way introducing the anaphase process and when it starts. However, the rest of the paragraph should be edited because you haven’t actually discussed why the spindle fibres are an essential part of anaphase or why you should even focus on them. You’ve just described their function and I don’t think you need to go into that much detail at this stage. Also, you have to state the aim of the wiki page and what aspects of anaphase you will be exploring (this helps to orientate you reader and also set the context for the upcoming information). There is an uploaded image that has no description at all. You really do need to describe what the image is illustrating so it becomes more meaningful to the reader. Also, ensure that you provide correct referncing with the images that you upload.
- Meioses Vs, Mitosis: This information should ideally come after the History table. Also, maybe you could talk about the processes of meioses and mitoses and then talk about the importance of anaphase in these processes.
- History: Unfortunately you only have three entries and it only goes up to 1943. You need to research further and make sure you add recent discoveries as well. Though I like the colour which you have used for the table as it makes the information nice and easy to read.
- Metaphase to Anaphase transition: Your information is great but you have quite a few grammatical errors. There are a few sentences which you need to use a full stop and NOT a comma. Also, maybe you should consider re-naming the image because the title ‘further history’ does not explain much about the image and you have not included any description.
- Process of sister chromatid separation: You’ve explained this section well and you have made clear the importance of sororin protei in the sister chromatid separation though you really do need to cite where you got the information from for the very first paragraph. Also, your image has no description and again this is not going to contribute positively to the information that you have written.
- Anaphase to Telophase: Maybe it would be a good idea if you actually mentioned what telophase is and why it is preceded by anaphase as you start by explaining how the transition from anaphase to telophase occurs. Once again, there is an image with no description whatsoever; you need to provide some sort of explanation of what is illustrating and maybe its importance in this context.
- Kinetochores: I like how you’ve actually explained what kinetochores are and its importance in anaphase and I am pleased to finally see an image with a description of what the picture is actually showing! Also, maybe you should consider joining the following subheading, chromosomal motors, together as that are both short.
- Molecular Aspects of Anaphase: I strongly recommend a table for the information presented under this partiucluar subheading. You mention various molecules and proteins (e.g. separase, APC/c) which are best explained in table. Though it’s good that you have referenced them properly, something that needs to be corrected in other parts of the page.
- Defects resulting from anaphase malformation: I can see that this part of the page has been well researched but I think it is not user friendly and not as effective as it should be. You really do need to cut down on the amount of information that you have provided. Be more succinct with how problems can arise when the chromosomes do not properly separate in anaphase. It’s great to see descriptions accompanying the images that you have uploaded.
- Current research: You’ve done a very good job for this section, recent information has been provided on the research that is happening in this area.
- The glossary This appears to be almost completed but you should try to directly link some of the words in the information above to the glossary. Also, there is no student drawn image which is something that needs to be addressed.
Group 7: Mitochondria
- Introduction: Your introduction is well written because it does explain the importance of mitochondria, e.g. it’s an organelle that is involved in the generation of ATP and basically the survival of the organism more or less depends on it. Though the very last sentence has a few grammatical errors that need to be corrected and you have not made the aim of the wiki page clear (you need to state that you will be exploring the mitochondria etc.) Also, your image has not been uploaded properly (there is a thumbnail error, so please ensure your fix this before next week!)
- Structure: I can see that you have some good information on the different structures of the mitochondria (Inner and outer membrane, the matrix etc. ) though maybe it would be more effective and clear if you present the information in a table format. Divide the table into different headings suc as descriptions and function, and then talk about each of the structures. Also, try to include an image of mitochondria or even draw one yourself because you need to include at least one student drawn image.
- Function: the opening sentence is very long and also when you talk about glycolysis, you shouldn’t really be using the word ‘’’I’’’. Also, maybe it’s a good idea to link glycolysis with the citric acid cycle (combine the information) as you have to many sub-sub headings. Also, you’ve provided some god images that show the mitochondria and illustrate the TCA cycle but you haven’t provided any descriptions to explain what they are presenting (some reader may not know that it is the TCA cycle). Also, the information in this part of the project page has hardly provided any references which need to be addressed.
- History: Your history section is has a great colour scheme but unfortunately you haven’t provided any information after the year 1996. You need to complete the table with relevant and up to date discoveries etc. Also, I think it would be much better if you placed the information straight after the introduction.
- Mitochondrial fission and fusion: So here you have some great information about the different genes and proteins involved in fission and fusion such as the Fzo1, Mfn1 et. Which I recommend would be more user friendly and better explained if you use a table to present the information. Divide the table into similarities and differences between the fission and the fusion processes. Finally, it is good to see that you have explained what the image is showing- you need to do this with all of the images on the page.
- Physiological division in human diseases: This section has been well referenced though maybe it would be a good idea to cut back on some of the information on Drp1 because you go into a lot of detail which is not very user friendly. Also, the information for neurodegenraqtion mechanisms needs more references; there is only one reference for the entire paragraph.
- Extra comments: On your wiki page you need to include a sub-heading for current research and glossary and you should provide the relevant information for each section. Also, you do not have any student drawn images (which is essential to include). Finally, I strongly recommend including an external link to a YouTube video on the function of the TCA cycle because your information can confuse students and wiki users that are not familiar with the TCA cycle.
Completed in-class activity worksheet
- <pubmed>PMC2132889 </pubmed>