From CellBiology


My Student Page

Group Projects
This year's main topic is Blood Cell Biology. Each group should discuss with group members the specific sub-topic that will be covered by their project.

Here is a list of some of the cell types (Structure and Function)

Cell Type (PuMed citations)

Below are the groups to which students have been randomly assigned. You should now on the project discussion page add your own suggestion for a specific topic. Once your group has agreed on the topic, add this as a heading to the project page before Lab 3.

2016 Projects: Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7

Group 1: User:Z5017493 | User:Z3330991 | User:Z5020043 | User:Z5020175 | User:Z3489355

Group 2: User:Z5018320 | User:Z5015980 | User:Z3376375 | User:Z3461106

Group 3: User:Z5019595 | User:Z5019962 | User:Z5018925 | User:Z3461911

Group 4: User:Z5020356 | User:Z3463895 | User:Z3376502 | User:Z3423497 | User:Z5021149

Group 5: User:Z5015719 | User:Z3462124 | User:Z3463953 | User:Z5017292

Group 6: User:Z5018866 | User:Z3329177 | User:Z3465531 | User:Z5105710

Group 7: User:Z5021060 | User:Z5016365 | User:Z5016784 | User:Z3414546 | User:Z3417773

Group Assessment Criteria

Group Assessment Criteria

  1. The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.
  2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
  3. Content is correctly cited and referenced.
  4. 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.
  5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.
  6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of cell biology.
  7. 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.
  8. Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.
  9. 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.
  10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines.
Individual Lab Assessments
Lab 8 Assessment
2016 Lab 8 - Lab 8 Assessment (to be completed before Lab 9)
  1. Add your peer assessment to your own student page to the site.
  2. Add your peer assessment to each project discussion page to the site.
Lab 6 Assessment
2016 Lab 6 -
  1. Identify an antibody against your group blood cell protein that is commercially available.
  2. Add a link to the original data sheet page and identify the type of group blood cell protein.
  3. Include the following information: type of antibody (polyclonal, monoclonal), species raised in, species reacts against, types of application uses, and if available any reference using that antibody.
Lab 2 Assessment
2016 Lab 2 - Super resolution microscopy
  1. Find a recent research article (not review) that uses super resolution microscopy technique.
  2. Write a brief summary of the paper (referenced) and what the super resolution microscopy technique showed.
    1. This should not simply be the abstract of the paper.
    2. This can be 2-3 paragraphs no longer.
  3. Include a super resolution microscopy image from the paper.
    1. Therefore the paper must be from a source that you can reuse.
    2. Image uploaded as in Lab 1 (summary box - description/reference/copyright/student image)
    3. Image should appear as a "thumbnail" (thumb) next to your paper summary (with citation legend) See Test page
Lab 1 Assessment
2016 Lab 1 - Lab 1 Assessment (to be completed before Lab 2) The test page I set up in the Lab
  1. Add your own student page to the site.
  2. Add your signature for Lab attendance.
  3. Add a sub-heading.
  4. Add an external Link.
  5. Add an internal Link.
  6. Add an image from PubMed, PloS or BioMed Central journal related to prokaryote cellular component. Make sure it includes both the reference and copyright information, with the file and where it appears on your page.


Z5017292 (talk) 11:53, 10 March 2016 (AEDT) Z5017292 (talk) 11:07, 17 March 2016 (AEDT) Z5017292 (talk) 11:20, 24 March 2016 (AEDT) Z5017292 (talk) 11:00, 7 April 2016 (AEST) Z5017292 (talk) 11:12, 14 April 2016 (AEST) Z5017292 (talk) 11:03, 28 April 2016 (AEST) Z5017292 (talk) 12:07, 5 May 2016 (AEST) Z5017292 (talk) 11:10, 12 May 2016 (AEST) Z5017292 (talk) 11:10, 19 May 2016 (AEST) Z5017292 (talk) 11:08, 2 June 2016 (AEST)

  • Z8600021 Attended 10 practical classes. If you had put a space between each line it would be easier to read.

Lab 1 Assessment

Search PubMed

Prokaryotic Cytoskeleton

PMID 26756351


BioMed Central


Carnegie stage table

Lecture 1

SMH Sydney Paper


What I've Learnt So Far

Today I've learnt how to make shortcuts to links on a wiki page that will be a very useful skill for the upcoming group work assessment. I also learnt how to navigate my way through a wiki page and edit my own page. I've learnt referencing shortcuts to PubMed articles which was amazing and time saving.

How to Make an in-text Citation

Bacterial Division Protein FtsZ.[1]

Individual Assessments

Lab 1

  • Z8600021 Image reference, copyright and student template with the file summary you have uploaded. You do not need copyright on your own page. (5/5)

200px] Early stages of cyanobacterial cell death visualized by the Annexin V-EGFP assay.[2]

Article Source: Multiple Modes of Cell Death Discovered in a Prokaryotic (Cyanobacterial) Endosymbiont Zheng W, Rasmussen U, Zheng S, Bao X, Chen B, et al. (2013) Multiple Modes of Cell Death Discovered in a Prokaryotic (Cyanobacterial) Endosymbiont. PLoS ONE 8(6): e66147. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0066147 PMID 23822984

© 2013 Zheng 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.

Lab 2

  • Z8600021 Good paper summary. Image reference, copyright and student template with the file summary you have uploaded. You do not need text reference on your own page,, just the pubmed formatted form. (5/5)

Summary of Article: STED Super-Resolution Microscopy of Clinical Paraffin-Embedded Human Rectal Cancer Tissue

300px. STED super-resolution microscopy of mitochondria in the rectal Muscularis externa demonstrates high structural preservation of the stored paraffin-embedded tissue.[3]

This article explains how STED super-resolution microscopy has been used to overcome the limitations in resolution that is present in optical microscopy. The article focuses on using STED microscopy to view human tissue that has been removed from patients during cancer surgery, and comparing these to light microscopy images of the same tissues.

STED microscopy stands for stimulated emission depletion microscopy, and has shown to be effective in viewing formalin fixed and paraffin embedded rectal cancer tissues that have been stored in a repository for up to 17 years. Rectal cancer tissue was chosen for the study because of its high incidence rate in developed countries. In this study, the mitochondira in the Muscularis externa of the rectum was observed using both confocal microscopy and the STED microscopy. The results revealed that in the confocal image recordings, sub-mitochondrial proteins were basically indistinguishable, whereas the higher resolution images made possible by the STED microscope showed distinguishable sub-mitochondrial proteins and how they were distributed.

Human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) positive rectal carcinoma tissue were also examined using both confocal microscopy and STED super resolution microscopy. The confocal images showed HER2 as being expressed in the tumour cells but not in the surrounding non-malignant cells. The STED microscopy images showed extra details however, that were impossible to see in the confocal images. The STED images showed HER2 positive vesicle like structures, and hinted at the possible presence of individual HER2 protein clusters.

These results indicated that STED super resolution microscopy is a suitable method for viewing tissue samples that have been stored for decades. There are millions of samples in biorespositories around the world that could potentially be viewed at a higher resolution than ever before.[3]

Article Source: STED Super-Resolution Microscopy of Clinical Paraffin-Embedded Human Rectal Cancer Tissue. Ilgen P, Stoldt S, Conradi L-C, Wurm CA, Rüschoff J, Ghadimi BM, et al. (2014) STED Super-Resolution Microscopy of Clinical Paraffin-Embedded Human Rectal Cancer Tissue. PLoS ONE 9(7): e101563. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0101563 PMID 25025184

Lab 3

  • Z8600021 Image reference, copyright and student template with the file you have uploaded. Please avoid using acronyms (MC) without any explanation. The article summaries are related to the group project. (5/5)

Summary of Four Research articles on the Sub-Topic Mast Cell Pathology.

Article Source: Blockade of Mast Cell Activation Reduces Cutaneous Scar Formation Chen L, Schrementi ME, Ranzer MJ, Wilgus TA, DiPietro LA (2014) Blockade of Mast Cell Activation Reduces Cutaneous Scar Formation. PLoS ONE 9(1): e85226. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085226

PMID 24465509

This research article explores the role of Mast cells in tissue repair, and particularly their influence on the formation of scar tissue. Mast cells are among the first cells to respond to any trauma to the body and initiate an immune response. They are present in scar tissue and the activated cells can cause excess inflammation and scar tissue to develop. This study used mice to demonstrate the effect of Mast cells on scar tissue formation. The mice were injected with a Mast cell inhibitor called disodium cromoglycate (DSCG). They were injected shortly before receiving a small 3mm incisional wound, and then given additional doses after the wounding. The results showed that the DSCG treated mice showed a reduced scar width compared to the control group. The wound breaking strength was not affected by DSCG as both the DSCG treated group and the control group displayed similar wound strength. There was less wound inflammation in the DSCG treated mice but the Mast cell inhibitor DSCG did not affect re-epithelialisation. These results suggest that Mast cell blockade has an affect on the formation of scar tissue as it reduces scar tissue formation but does not weaken the healed wound. This article is quite relevant to my topic sub-section ‘Mast cell pathology’ as it examines the role of Mast cells in tissue repair and concludes that these cells do in fact have an effect on tissue repair and scar formation. Mast cells are often seen as important in hypersensitivity reactions, so it is nice to get information on their role in other processes such as inflammation and repair.[4]

300px] Light photomicrographs of metachromatic MCs in mesenteries by toluidine blue staining. [5]

Article Source: Mast Cells Modulate Acute Toxoplasmosis in Murine Models Huang B, Huang S, Chen Y, Zheng H, Shen J, et al. (2013) Mast Cells Modulate Acute Toxoplasmosis in Murine Models. PLoS ONE 8(10): e77327. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077327

PMID 24146978

This study examines the role of Mast cells in the pathogenesis of the disease Toxoplasmosis. The researchers infected mice with toxoplasma gondii and injected them with either a Mast cell inhibitor or a Mast cell activator, and then compared the levels of inflammation and parasite burden in the subjects. The results of the study revealed all of the infected mice died within 9-10 days regardless of what treatment they were given. Interestingly, the infected control mice showed severe inflammation and necrosis in the liver, but even more severe inflammation and necrosis was detected in the infected mice treated with the Mast cell activator. Conversely, the mice treated with the Mast cell inhibitor showed only mild inflammation and less necrosis. The infected mice treated with the Mast cell activator showed increased levels of parasite burden whereas the infected mice treated with the Mast cell inhibitor showed a decrease in parasite burden. These results suggest that Mast cells play an important role in parasite clearance and the inflammatory process associated with Toxoplasmosis. This indicates that Mast cells could be a potential topic for further research into controlling Toxoplasmosis.

This article is relevant to the pathology of mast cells as it demonstrates the role they play in defence against parasites. This shows that Mast cells can be quite diverse in function. It is interesting to have an article that explores the role of Mast cells in parasite defence because it shows they have a different function to the previous article that was summaries, which described their role in tissue repair. [5]

Article Source: Familial Occurrence of Systemic Mast Cell Activation Disease Molderings GJ, Haenisch B, Bogdanow M, Fimmers R, Nöthen MM (2013) Familial Occurrence of Systemic Mast Cell Activation Disease. PLoS ONE 8(9): e76241. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0076241

PMID 24098785

This article focuses on systemic Mast cell activation disease (MCAD) and particularly whether it can be inherited or not. Prior to this study, knowledge of familial occurrence of MCAD was very limited, but now it is thought that it may be more frequent than anticipated. The study analysed 84 patients who have MCAD and tested their first-degree relatives for the disease. The results showed that 74% of the patients had at least one relative who also had the disease. The study suggests that the prevalence of MCAD is higher among families who contain a MCAD sufferer than just the general population. This could point to a genetic link to familial occurrence as opposed to just an environmental link. This study could be a stepping stone to more research into inheritance of MCAD. This article is relevant as it explains a disorder associated with Mast cells and provides a possible explanation of how to disease is contracted. It could be interesting for the group project to include information about MCAD as it explores the effects of Mast cells on the body when they are not functioning properly. [6]

Article Source: Apoptosis and Pro-inflammatory Cytokine Response of Mast Cells Induced by Influenza A Viruses Liu B, Meng D, Wei T, Zhang S, Hu Y, et al. (2014) Apoptosis and Pro-inflammatory Cytokine Response of Mast Cells Induced by Influenza A Viruses. PLoS ONE 9(6): e100109.doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0100109

PMID 24923273

The aim of this article is to investigate the role of Mast cells in response to Influenza A infection. The article notes that Mast cells are believed to contribute to the pathogenesis of Influenza A virus, and so the study seeks to understand their contribution in further detail. The results of the study revealed that the H1N1, H5N1 and H7N2 viruses could cause mast cell apoptosis. This study was the first to uncover this information. The researchers also found that different strains of the Influenza virus caused different levels of Mast cell apoptosis. The production of the virus was impaired when the apoptosis of Mast cells was inhibited. The results of this study shed light on the role of Mast cells in defending the body against influenza, in particular how apoptosis affects the pathogenesis of influenza. This article is relevant as it demonstrates apoptosis in Mast cells, which is a defence mechanism that the cells can use when the body is under the threat of a disease. It is also interesting to have information on how Mast cells behave when under the threat of the Influenza virus because it is such a prevalent disease in the world. [7]

Lab 5

A Comparason of Neuroblastoma morphologies in Group Tm4 over expression-mice and wild-type.PNG

Project Peer Reviews

Group 1- Megakaryocyte

  • I really like the banner, it looks like someone spent a fair amount of time designing it. It really makes the page look inviting
  • The history section isn’t referenced at all. I think for each year and the discovery that was made there should be a reference to the original research article that made the finding.
  • In the introduction, Hematopoietic is spelt incorrectly. Its has been written as ‘ Haematopoeitic’. Also a few terms in the introduction such as 'bone marrow homeostasis' are in quotation marks that Im not sure are necessary.
  • Under the structure heading, there is one sentence about structure and the other is about function, maybe move that sentence about function to the section on function. Also in the structure section, Megakaryotcyte is abbreviated to before it is explained what Mk stands for, I know its in the gloassary but maybe you can say Megakarcyocte (MK) first, then continue using that abbreviation ‘MK’.
  • There might be a few too many sub headings in the structure section, as some of the headings only have one sentence underneath, maybe they don’t need their own subheading
  • The essential thrombosis section –the whole paragraph should have in-text citations but they are completely absent. I think the references should be in text and then there would be no need for a collapsible reference section at the bottom of the paragraph and those references could be included at the very bottom on the page in the references section.
  • A few of your pictures could include a reference in the legend and remove the ‘figure 1, figure 2 etc. ’ as its irrelevant.
  • So many words and/or terms are written in quotation marks, particularly in the platelet function section which I think shouldn’t be in quotation marks. E.g. words like ‘plasmin’.
  • Under the Osteoporosis section, those sentences need references.
  • I like the future of Megakaryocytes section, I think its great that you’ve included that.
  • I like that a glossary is included although its not fully complete it looks good.
  • The references look like good solid references, maybe in general just there is a relatively small number of them.

Group 2- Red Blood Cell

  • I like the banner, it is a great first thing to look at when you see the page.
  • The introduction is good but the last sentence is incomplete.
  • In the history section, a lot of the same references have been used for multiple years and findings. Maybe you could try to find the research paper that made each finding and reference that for each one.
  • The structure section is nicely done, it is easy to understand yet not too simplified.
  • Under the function section, try reworking the very first sentence, it’s just a little convoluted. Also the last sentence under gaseous exchange, I’m not sure whether it’s just unfinished but it seems a little out of place.
  • Maybe try reworking the first sentence under regulatory functions, I’m not sure it makes sense.
  • Under buffering ability, I think maybe the 2,3-diphosphoglycerate (DPG) is the start of an unfinished sentence, otherwise it looks a bit out of place.
  • The picture next to Erythrocyte production needs a reference and a legend underneath it, other than that the synthesis and Regulation section looks really good and thorough.
  • Maybe a video could be added somewhere, maybe to do with synthesis or regulation, or even gaseous exchange.
  • The diseases and abnormalities section is great, the information Is well written and explained. I like the collapsible table of symptoms.
  • I like that a current research section is included, however maybe instead of just summarizing one research paper, you could include a few brief summaries of current research papers that are relevant.
  • The references are well organized and look quality.

Group 3- B Lymphocytes.

  • The banner looks really good although I’m not sure you included all the copyright information when uploading it.
  • The introduction needs to include references in it, there are not citations at all.
  • The history section is missing references and is incomplete.
  • The development section looks great and is references but it would be good to add the numbered references so there is a link to them at the bottom of the page in the reference section.
  • Under the location and Activation section there needs to be references.
  • The types of B cells section looks good, its nice and concise.
  • Again there are no references in the structure section. I like the summary table of the B cell surface molecules but it also needs to be referenced, as does the picture to the right of it.
  • A video could be added, maybe in the function section to help explain what they do.
  • the immunodeficiency section needs to be filled in, but seems like an interesting section to have.
  • I like that the ‘other significant findings’ section is included. It makes the page interesting and is well written.
  • I like the subheadings chosen and how the page has been structured, however a lot of sections are missing references completely, or aren’t referenced with a number and link to where it is in the reference list at the bottom of the page.
  • The reference list needs to be more extensive which will look better when all the in text citations are added.

Group 4- Natural Killer Cells.

  • I really like the banner, especially that it has a white background so you can’t tell where the border of the picture is.
  • The introduction is maybe a little bit too brief, although I think it should be concise maybe some more general information could be included.
  • The history section is also very brief. Maybe a few more years could be included as there is a 20 year gap between the last and second last findings.
  • Under structure, a citation could be added in the legend of the picture that is on the right. Also in this section, the bullet points could maybe be formatted in a clearer way, its hard to tell that there are three points trying to be made as they don’t look grouped together.
  • The receptors section is unfinished and a citation can be added to the legend of the picture here.
  • Under the function section, there are 3 main functions listed, however the functions that are explained are very different. I think for the three functions you listed, you should then use those as subheadings and explain them.
  • Maybe a video could be added somewhere, perhaps in relation to function.
  • I think the Rheumatoid Arthritis section needs more than one reference. It is a large chunk of writing so more references would show there has been a lot of research done, otherwise it looks like you’ve gotten all of the information about RA from just one paper.
  • The summary table of NK cells in disease is good but maybe you could include a sentence just explaining that the table was taken from another source.
  • Type 1 diabetes and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus is incomplete.
  • The current research section is great to have, however the first paragraph isn’t really explaining what current research is going on. Maybe introduce the research being done to begin with.
  • The glossary needs to be filled out but it’s great to have it included.
  • The reference section looks good, maybe more can be included as there is a lot of text relative to the amount of references listed.

Group 6- T Lymphocytes.

  • The banner looks great, great picture and colours.
  • Maybe the history section could be moved so that it is under the introduction, to give a little overview of the history before people read on to the structure and function. The history table looks great and the information is good however.
  • I like the video under the introduction, it gives a good overview and puts T lymphocytes in context.
  • The structure and function section needs to be reworked just a tiny bit, it just needs a proof read because the sentences are not comprehensive. The information is good it just needs to be more cohesive. The section is well referenced though.
  • The development section is really well written and referenced.
  • The types of T cells section is missing references in the first paragraph as well as in the T helper section. The title ‘Type of T-cells’ should maybe be changed to ‘Types of T-cells’, and the paragraph under that is quite substantial, maybe only a brief introduction to the different types is needed.
  • The collapsible information on T helper cells is great and is very extensive but is maybe too detailed and unnecessary.
  • For each type of T cell, maybe include structure as well as just function under the heading, instead of putting the structure in the collapsible information. So then the viewer can see structure and function straight away, and only open the collapsible information if they are interested in finding out more.
  • The clinical implications and disease heading has nothing under it.
  • The picture next to the CAR race title needs a reference in the legend.
  • I like the links to the university research going on at different institutions, maybe make the title of the collapsible thing more concise though.
  • The final thoughts section seems a bit irrelevant.
  • The glossary needs to be filled in but it’s great to see it included.
  • The reference list is extensive which is great, however some of the references used are from websites and even Wikipedia pages. Maybe try to only use research articles. Also some of the references in the list have a number but nothing next to it, i.e. 204 and 205.
  • It’s really obvious that a lot of work and time has been spent on this page which is impressive.

Group 7- Eosinophil

  • The banner is really nice, the white background looks great and makes the banner blend into the page.
  • The history table needs to be completed, and maybe some of the information is a little too detailed, such as the 1879 box.
  • All of the pictures on the page need to have a citation added in the legend.
  • Maybe an introduction could be included to give a brief overview to begin the page with.
  • A specific function section could be included.
  • Maybe the structure should be introduced before the birth, life and death in the body section just to give people some background knowledge on what the cell looks like.
  • There are a lot of pictures on the page, pictures are great however they seem to overpower the page because it looks like there isn’t much text in comparison.
  • the granule section could maybe be formatted a bit better, there are a lot of dot points followed by a single sentence then another dot point and it doesn’t look consistent.
  • The time lapse video doesn’t play, it comes up with an error. Also underneath that, the viral, fungal and bacterial headings are maybe unnecessary as they only have 1 sentence under each. They could be added together and made into one concise paragraph under one heading.
  • In asthma, MBP is talked about but I don’t think it’s been explained what it stands for.
  • The pink table at the end looks a little out of place, also maybe reference it a bit differently, as opposed to just having the website link underneath.
  • In the reference list there are gaps with no information e.g. reference 30, and reference 15 isnt showing up correctly.


  1. <pubmed>26756351</pubmed>
  2. <pubmed>23822984</pubmed>
  3. 3.0 3.1 <pubmed>25025184</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>24465509</pubmed>
  5. 5.0 5.1 <pubmed>24146978</pubmed>
  6. <pubmed>24098785</pubmed>
  7. <pubmed>24923273</pubmed>