From CellBiology

Lab Attendance

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:54, 14 March 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 16:09, 21 March 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:11, 28 March 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:06, 18 April 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:06, 2 May 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:17, 9 May 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:47, 16 May 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:07, 30 May 2013 (EST)

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2013 (EST)

Individual Assessments

Lab 1


Reference Uniting sex and eukaryote origins in an emerging oxygenic world

Copyright © 2010 Gross and Bhattacharya; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 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 work is properly cited.


Jeferson Gross, Debashish Bhattacharya Uniting sex and eukaryote origins in an emerging oxygenic world Biology Direct 2010, 5:53


--Mark Hill (talk) 18:46, 2 May 2013 (EST) This reference has not been entered correctly. See reference format shown below.


Lab 2

--Mark Hill (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2013 (EST) Part 1 of this assessment was to update the reference citation for the image uploaded in Lab 1. See my comment above. Your selected paper and explanation for Part 2 is fine, though you do not need to have the reference cited twice. Please see me or read the online help if you are still having problems with this aspect of the online work.

Nathan C. Horton, Stephen O. Mathew, Porunelloor A. Mathew Novel Interaction between Proliferating Cell Nuclear Antigen and HLA I on the Surface of Tumor Cells Inhibits NK Cell Function through NKp44 <pubmed>23527218</pubmed> [1]

The research article above used confocal microscopy to identify new interactions between PCNA and HLA I on tumor cells to inhibit NK cell functions (which help fight against infections and cancer). The confocal microscopy allowed the researchers to visualize the surface and pockets in the cells that the PCLA and HLA I were proliferating. The reserachers were able to view the interactions of the live cells and imaged tumor cells from breast cancer and prostate cancer through the confocal microscope.

Lab 3

[2] <pubmed>4358429</pubmed> This article addresses the role of adenosine 3',5'-cyclic monophosphate (cAMP) in the regulation of cell division. It had been previously found that the stimulation of cell division required the decrease in intracellular levels of cAMP and the experiments also showed that the addition of proteolytic enzymes stimulated cell growth and division. cAMP, derived from ATP is an important in many processes through signal transduction.

[3] <pubmed>23565292</pubmed> The article covers the development of a screening method for the identification of bacterial cell division genes and regulators using E. coli clones, specifically in the regulation of the polymerization of FtsZ, which acts to split the cell wall and separate the DNA into daughter cells. The screening revealed known and previously unknown gene regulators in the bacerium and the authors intend the research to be applied to antibiotic development.

[4] <pubmed>22532834</pubmed> This article outline the use of computational modeling to visualise spacial regulation through the microtubial network. The experiment shows that the mitotic spindle can cause strong separation effects in the germ plasm in the embryo, asymmetric division in the neuroblast, among other findings. The computational model suggests that changes in the microtubule network are critical to spacial regulation in cell division, creating a "docking platform" for molecules to create a structured cytoplasm.

[5] <pubmed>22912800</pubmed> This article researches the less understood topic of the topological distributions in proliferating and quiescent cells. The quiescent cells have fewer sides than their proliferating neighbors. Through computational models, the experiment shows that cell topology and boundary tension between the sides of proliferating and quiescent cells play important roles in the regulation of cell division.


A computer-simulated model of intracellular spacial localization by the microtubule network. Reference: [6] <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>

Lab 4

Anti-Cell adhesion molecule 4 antibody (ab109767)


Description: The Anti-Cell adhesion molecule 4 antibody, also called CADM 4 antibody, is used in oncoprotein and suppressor research as a tumor suppressor. It is involved in cell to cell adhesion and had calcium and magnesium - independent adhesion activity. It has the antibody isotype IgG (immunolobulin G), a single, "Y" shaped antibody. It is expressed in the brain, prostate, and kidney and is localized in the membrane.

Species raised in: Goat

Species reacts against: Human (Predicted to work with: Mouse, Rat, Dog, Pig)

Types of application uses: WB, IHC-P, ELISA

Journal articles that use antibody: none to date.

Lab 7


Percentage of phenotypes, where series 1 = TM4 cells and series 2 = Control cells.

1 = A "Fan"
2 = B "Broken Fan"
3 = c "Stumped"
4 = D "Pronged"
5 = E "Stringed"
6 = F "Pygnotic"

Question: Do you see a change in phenotype A and B?

Group A contained more of phenotype D and E (Pronged and Stringed) while group B contained more C And D (Stumped and Pronged)and well as many branching type E (Stringed). The Group B cells are very elongated.

Speculate a potential molecular mechanism to explain the change:

The phenotype differences could be due to the over-expression of TM4, leading to changes in the structure of the neurites, such as the differences in branching and stringing length.

Lab 8

Peer Reviews:

Group 2 Introduction - Good intro. It’s concise and reads well. The picture attached is relevant and clear. The only remark I would make is that there are no references in the introduction. History - Well referenced and relevant but maybe a little too short. Not sure if this is due to the fact that there isn’t much history on the topic but I feel that there should be more than 3 historical points. Mechanisms - Nicely formatted and easy to read. No complaints - the section had all of the proper citations and the diagram aids the section well. Nice job linking terms ot the glossary. Microfilament organization - Needs Citations! The section isn’t as large as the others, but the information is there. I would change some of the formatting to make it easier on the eye. Animal vs Pant cells - Really easy to read. Very detailed. The images really help with the understanding, but maybe some real-life images to make the section more interesting? Also in need of citations! Cytokinesis failure - No complaints. this section is well referenced, easy to read, and very concise. Current and future research - more images would be nice. Other than that, good section. Great project! Just needs some finishing touches like images. Don’t forget to cite!!!

Group 3 Intro - A little short, but well written and informative. I would like to see more citations for specific statements. Structure - Good referencing and info. The image is okay but a little plain. Maybe you could find a better one? Function - Well written and referenced. It’s a little too blocky in appearance. Maybe break it up to make it easier to read? History - Nice. Some points need proper citation. I’d like to see it moved upwards on the page, probably after the intro. Models of Division - Short but well written and referenced. Images would be nice but not really required here. Morphology and Mol. Mech. - Great formatting. It reads very well. All the proper citations and helpful images are there. Current and Limitaions of Models - Well Done, nice image. Research - a little bare. would like to see more research and maybe an image.

Group 4 Intro - Photo is way too big. Needs citations. Other than that, good intro! Historical research - Good but there’s a ton on here about cells and cell division but not too much on the actual topic. Great images. Structure - Good research and referencing. It’s just a little too hard to read. I would change the formatting a bit. Function - Well done. Nice section. Could use more references. Mech - No complaints here. Good use of images. Current and Future Research - Nicely done. Complications - Cool little bit at the end, Really informative.

Group 5 Introduction - Awesome diagram. I like how detailed the intro is. Historical background - really nice. everything looks to be in order. Nice formatting and good referencing here. Structure - Nice, except for the section on the outer nuclear membrane. It’s very short, I feel like there’s more than one sentence worth of information available here. NE at the onset of mitosis - Good section. could use a photo, but since the section is so short, it’s not terribly necessary. Breakdown of nuclear envelope - Well researched section, nice referencing. My only problem was that some of the sections are very heavy and dense. If the information could be shortened it would make a better read, but not a big problem. You have a couple of blank sections at the end...? Mitotic functions - No complaints. Well done here. Reformation of NE - NIce sub-heading breaks. Well written and referenced. Open vs closed mitosis - could use with a little formatting/ editing but the information is there and well written. Abnormalities - awesome, I feel like a photo would be nice and not too hard to find for this section.

Group 6 - Intro- Needs citations, info is good but I feel like the intro doesn’t really cover the basis of the project. Also needs work in formatting/ subheadings to make the page look nicer. Meiosis vs Mitosis - References! Also a little more detail, information, and images would work well here. History - should probably move this up to come after the intro. A little short, and nothing in recent history here. Meta to Ana transition - Very short. Pretty sure there’s more information here. Prose style needs work. Process of Chromatid Separation - MIssing a ton of references here. Anaphase to Telophase - Again, a little short, I think more information or a good image would be nice here. Kinetochores - Good section. Clear and concise with references. Chromosomal Motors - Well written and referenced. good section Molecular Aspects - Nice formatting and separation of the subjects. Nice and easy to read and undertand. Defects - Well done here. References and images are good and the information is good. Research - Great formatting and really recent research as well as future suggestions (awesome).

Group 7 Introduction- Good intro. The image needs a caption or something to help explain. Structure - Good writing and referencing. Maybe some formatting to make it look prettier/ easier to read. Overall nice and concise. Function - Nic formatting and separation of topics here - there was a ton of info and this made the reading easier.. Good diagram History - Great coverage here. Nice referencing and very informative. During Division- Well written and referenced. could use an image or two because it’s quite a bit of information. An image would break it up nicely. Fission and Fusion- Really nice formatting - made it nice and simple. No complaints for this section. Significance - Some bits need references for specfic statements. Disease - INteresting little bit here at the end. I found it very informative and it ties the project together nicely.





Red White Blood cells 01.jpg

Red White Blood cells 01.jpg
Red White Blood cells 01.jpg


  • a bullet point
  • some text
  • some more words
  • text
    • subtext
      • subsubtext
  1. one
  2. two
  3. three
    1. <pubmed>23527218</pubmed>
    2. <pubmed>4358429</pubmed>
    3. <pubmed>23565292</pubmed>
    4. <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>
    5. <pubmed>22912800</pubmed>
    6. <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>