User:Z5018320

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.

Attendance

Z5018320 (talk) 11:53, 10 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:03, 24 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:01, 7 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:04, 14 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:12, 21 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:01, 28 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:02, 5 May 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:03, 12 May 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:02, 19 May 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:00, 26 May 2016 (AEST)

Z5018320 (talk) 11:06, 2 June 2016 (AEST)


Lab 1 Assessment

Search PubMed

Prokaryotic cytoskeleton

Eukaryotic cytoskeleton

PMID 26756351

<pubmed>26756351</pubmed>

BMC

How to make an in-text citation

Batcerial division protein FtsZ.[1]

Links

Cell Biology Introduction

[SMH]

Summary

So far I've learned how to create and edit my own wiki page, which is actually quite simple and has some very useful tools (such as the instant referencing of an article through it's PMID. I've also learned more about the types copyright that certain articles and journals have, and how to correctly follow them as to avoid copyright infringement.

Student Image

Effect of vancomycin and A. Crassna leaf extract.jpg

Effect of vancomycin and A. Crassna leaft extract Citation: [2]

Copyright: © Kamonwannasit et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/​licenses/​by/​2.​0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Lab 2 Assessment

Super-resolution examination of phalloidin-stained actin structures in human OCs exhibiting SZs or APs[3]

Deguchi et al. [3] investigated the bone-resorbing cells in humans known as osteoclasts which were grown and examined in-vitro by culturing them on a layer of bone nanoparticles milled from human cortical bone, and then examined with osteoclasts grown on cortical bone slices and glass. Their results showed that on average osteoclast size was larger when grown on a bone substrate instead of glass, and super-resolution examination revealed that there were more actin structures in those osteoclasts grown on bone. However the morphology and actin content was much the same between osteoclasts grown on nanoparticulate bone and bone slices.

The super-resolution microscopy also allowed insights into the bone resorption process itself since the number of actin patches were increased in osteoclasts grown on bone, they deduced that the actin patch is a vital organelle for resorption. In addition to this they also put forth a time controlled mechanism for bone resorption, whereby bursts of resorption are followed by cycles of accumulation of the acidic components necessary for the next cycle of resorption.

(5/5)

Lab 3 Assessment

Paper 1

Maioli et al. [4] found that there was a significant relationship between abnormalities of the pulmonary and cardiovascular systems in patients with sickle cells diseases. These abnormalities, which included acute chest syndrome, increased left ventricle size and decreased respiratory muscle strength, were observed using pulmonary function tests, chest computed tomography and echocardiography. In addition to this, it was also found that the severity of these abnormalities was greater in patients with sickle cell anaemia than those with other sickle cell diseases.

This relates to our subsection of diseases and abnormalities of red blood cells, as the genetic mutations that cause these phenotypic changes in RBCs can also result in pathological changes to the structure of the rest of the cardiovascular system.

Paper 2

Punzo et al. [5] investigated the previously identified causative relationship between SEC23B gene mutations and Congenital Dyserythropoietic Anaemia Type 2, a rare hereditary disorder affecting erythropoiesis and the morphology of erythroblasts in bone marrow. Through molecular analysis of DNA, RNA and proteins from the blood samples of patients with CDAII, they found four novel SEC23B mutations which leads to reduction of SEC23B mRNA transcript in erythroid precursor cells, and consequently a reduction in erythroblastoid protein levels.

3D rendered isosurfaces of RI maps of individual RBCs from (A) healthy, (B) IDA, (C) reticulocyte, and (D) HS red blood cells[6]

This again relates to the sub-section of diseases and abnormalities in red blood cells caused by genetic mutations.

Paper 3

Kim et al. [6] set out to characterise the morphological, chemical and mechanical properties of red blood cells using a new technology: common-path diffraction optical tomography (cDOT). They profiled the red blood cells from patients diagnosed with iron deficiency anaemia (IDA), high reticulocyte count and hereditary spherocytosis (HS), as well as healthy patients. The authors demonstrated how cDOT is able to perform single cell profiling for individual red blood cells and provide information on sphericity, surface area and membrane fluctuation, all of which are important for haemodiagnosis and better understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms behind human diseases.

This article therefore relates to the sub-section of current research being performed on red blood cells, particularly new technologies being employed.

Paper 4

Khoory et al. [7] examined the previously unknown relationship between red blood cells and the significant increase in the blood concentrations of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and ATP during acute and chronic inflammatory conditions. They found that ligation of glycophorin A (GPA) by antibodies initiated an intracellular increase in ROS production which triggers multiple signalling cascades (particularly caspase-3) and have detrimental effects on RBC membrane deformability and lipid mobility. The increase in ROS also caused significant ATP release from the RBCs, suggesting that RBCs are actually an important source of ATP as well as ROS, both of which are critical mediators responsible for endothelial cell activation.

This article and its results are therefore clearly related to the sub-section of red blood cell function


Lab 5 Assessment

Tm4vsControl.PNG

Lab 6 Assessment

  • Z8600021 Sorry I missed this assessment item in my first pass through. All OK (5/5).


Name: Anti-Red Blood Cells antibody (ab34858)

Type: Polyclonal IgG

Species raised in: Rabbit

Species reactivity: Human

Applications: Agglutination assays

Reference: <pubmed>22532802</pubmed> Data sheet: [ab34858]

Peer Reviews

  • Z8600021 I enjoyed reading your peer assessments. You have provided a detailed, but brief feedback. This is about the length of critical assessment that students will work through. (18/20)

Group 1

The introduction provides a solid basic overview of megakaryocytes and the history section is very comprehensive. The structure section is detailed and informative, however it doesn't seem to provide any details of the cytoskeleton or the cell membrane of a megakaryocyte. An electron micrograph or diagram of a megakaryocyte and a platelet should also be in this section (although there is a histological image later). Furthermore, the entire structure section only cites one article which is rather old; references to more recent articles are needed and the reference tag should be placed before a period (e.g. [1].). In your developmental section I would also place a note to refer to figure 3 as a summary of the developmental stages of the megakaryocyte. The section on the TPO receptor doesn't appear to have any references at all. The numbering of your figures is out of order, and two of your figures have the same number. If you say "Many studies have illustrated that" or "Megakaryocytes have been shown to" then perhaps you should link to these articles immediately following the statement, or say that "authors et al. have shown" (this particularly applies to a couple of the function sections). The osteoporosis section doesn't seem to be completed although I'm sure it will be later.

Overall I think it's a good page: the images that are there are useful, the current research section was nice and brief, and the glossary is a nice touch. I felt that the developmental section and the platelet function sections were the strongest. However some of the earlier sections are in desperate need of revision of spelling and grammar.

Group 3

The page is very detailed and provides all the information you would want, however the references are just not there. There are only 18 references for your entire page which is clearly not enough. Some parts do have in-text citations but these should be coded as reference tags, and most sections don't have references at all. The history section is sparse and needs to be added to, and the page needs more images as a whole to accompany the huge blocks of text and make the information easier to digest. The images that you have uploaded, while useful, need to have their information properly filled out (i.e description, reference and copyright), and I believe that the image on B cell development is copyrighted without a creative commons license meaning you can't use it. A self drawn or modified image is also required, and the banner should be made smaller. A couple of the disease sections need to be finished, and a few spelling/grammar issues need to be sorted (proof read the page).

Group 4

I found the topic to be very interesting and your page quite informative. The historical findings table could be added to, particularly in the gap between 1980 and 2007. The page definitely needs more images to complement all the information, such as an electron micrograph of a NK cell and an illustration of the cell membrane receptors/proteins (the one you have right now just lists the receptors). The images that you do have need to be resized to make a couple of them a little larger (and the banner smaller), and the copyright information needs to be added to the image descriptions. A hand drawn image is also required, although I do see the reminder for this on the page. There are a couple of empty subheadings that need to be completed, and the glossary will be a nice touch once it's finished.

As a whole the page needs more article references (34 is ok but more will be better). The disease section in particular needs more reference tags throughout the body of each paragraph rather than just one at the end, and if this one reference is a review article then you need to go back and find the original source that the review is citing (just look at the review's reference tags) and cite that source instead of the review. This alone will bulk up your own references section. There are spelling and grammatical errors that also need to be ironed out. Other than that I actually like your page and look forward to seeing it completed.

Group 5

The page is greatly detailed and it is clear that an extensive amount of research has gone into it. There is good use of tables to summarise information and break up the blocks of text. The self-adapted image was also well done. There are some issues in regards to referencing. The reference tags should be placed before the period as a standard convention, and the reference coding needs to be reviewed as there are multiple copies of references to the same source in the references section which does not look good. I'm not sure if Mark gave the approval for links to Wikipedia pages. If so then it's a nice touch, but if not then you may have to bring it up with him again or remove them.

The haematopoetic lineages image appears to be copyrighted. I've read the permissions page and the full line says that you may only "print or download content for scholarly use" and then later says that "you may not copy or display all or any content from the site in any medium". It's hard to interpret and you might want to ask Mark about it, but since it's not under a creative commons license I would be reluctant to use it. Similarly the copyright statement in the mast cells in asthma image says nothing about you being able to reproduce that image, only that it is free to access on PMC and I'm fairly certain anything from Nature is copyrighted. The glossary is a good idea but you need to add more terms and definitions to it. In terms of spelling and grammar errors there were few to none that I could pick up on so well done there.

Group 6

This is definitely the most detailed page, and you only need to look at the number of references to know that a great deal of research has gone into it. I see that you have listed some websites and textbooks in the references section. If you have used these as sources of information then you should be aware that Mark has frowned upon the use of these in the comments on previous years projects. The code for reference number 204 needs to be fixed as it doesn't show anything in the references section. The glossary has obviously not been started. The images you have compliment the text very well especially the self-created image.

However the T cell SEM image may infringe copyright as I'm not so sure that posting it on this website is considered private use although I could be wrong. Similarly the copyright information for the CD4/CD8 receptor image does not detail any open access rights or creative commons license. Having said that, I think that the list of active research with links is a nice touch, as is the collapsible tables that contain a staggering amount of information in themselves, and I don't think you have to worry at all about doing well in this assignment.

Group 7

It appears that most of the information about eosinophils are there, however it could be presented a little better. There are too many little subheadings which would be better presented in a table, such as "What role do the components play". A short introduction before the history table would also be nice to summarise the most basic information before going into the more complex details, and the history table itself needs to include more recent findings from the 20th and 21st centuries. The banner image should be resized to make it a bit smaller, and all other images should be thumbnails with a descriptive line underneath. I don't believe you've added a self-created image yet either. In regards to the lineages and skin lesions figures, I don't think Mark approves of using images from Wikipedia even if they are free of copyright. I think you should also add a section at the end for any current or recent research being performed on eosinophils, and the sections on viral and bacterial infections seem very hollow and could do with some more information. The codes for reference numbers 15 and 30 need to be fixed as well.

References

  1. <pubmed>26756351</pubmed>
  2. <pubmed>23962360</pubmed>
  3. 3.0 3.1 <pubmed>26935172</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>26969771</pubmed>
  5. <pubmed>22208203</pubmed>
  6. 6.0 6.1 <pubmed>25322756</pubmed>
  7. <pubmed>26784696</pubmed>