User:Z5020356

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

Z5020356 (talk) 11:54, 10 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5020356 (talk) 11:34, 17 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5020356 (talk) 11:04, 24 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5020356 (talk) 11:11, 7 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5020356 (talk) 11:09, 14 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5020356 (talk) 11:27, 21 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5020356 (talk) 11:54, 28 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5020356 (talk) 10:56, 12 May 2016 (AEST)

Z5020356 (talk) 11:09, 2 June 2016 (AEST)


Laboratory 1 Assessment

PubMed Reference

prokaryotic cytoskeleton

Targeting the bacterial division protein FtsZ [1]

PMID 2675635

Katherine Ann Hurley, Thiago M A Santos, Gabriella M Nepomuceno, Valerie Huynh, Jared T Shaw, Douglas B Weibel Targeting the bacterial division protein FtsZ. J. Med. Chem.: 2016; PubMed 26756351


BioMed Central

Links

Carnegie stage table

Lecture 1

Testz8600021

What I've Learnt So Far

The anatomy of a cell is pretty interesting so far. I am looking forward to learning more about the cytoskeleton elements and their function to maintain cellular properties. In this Laboratory, I have learnt a lot about how to edit my individual page, linking and referencing. It is actually really fun and I anticipate that the group project will be very interesting to work on.

Images

[Flowers]

Student Images

MreB in bacteria.jpg


T M Johnson, R P Rapini, M Duvic Inflammation of actinic keratoses from systemic chemotherapy. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.: 1987, 17(2 Pt 1);192-7 doi: 10.1128/JB.02194-12

Copyright © 2013 Johnson 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.

Laboratory 2 Assessment

Localisation of FUS protein in synaptic vesicles of the Hippocampus[2]


Fused in Sarcoma (FUS) is a RNA/DNA-binding protein, involved in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disorders such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). In these disorders, FUS protein is accumulated and localised in the cytoplasm of synaptic vesicles in the neuron.

This study involved co-staining the FUS protein with Synaptophysin1 (SYP1), synaptic marker. After 14 days in vitro, there was a high co-localisation of FUS protein and the SYP1 marker, with regions of almost complete overlap. This suggests that FUS is localised within the axon terminal, close to the presynaptic SYP1 vesicle protein.

Laboratory 3 Assessment

Article 1

This article studied NK cells and their role in innate immunity; specifically their critical involvement in the viral infection, murine cytomegalovirus. NK cells and their receptors were initially classified according to tumor killing ability in vitro, however, the NK cell activation receptor, Ly-49H is also involved in providing innate immunity against murine cytomegalovirus. Ly-49H couples with immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motifs (ITAMs) which contains the transmembrane molecule required for signal transduction. So, NK cells use receptors with functional resemblance to the ITAM-coupled T and B cell antigen receptors that are involved in innate host defence. [3]


Article 2 This article reveals the depth of NK cell activation; controlled by a dynamic balance of promotive and inhibitory pathways, both of which are initiated when potential target cells are identified. Activating cell surface receptors on NK cells can lead to cytokine or chemokine secretion. Some cell surface receptors on NK cells initiate protein tyrosine kinase (PTK) -dependent pathways coupled with transmembrane signalling adaptors consisting of ITAMs. There are also additional cell surface receptors that are no directly coupled with ITAMs but also contribute to NK cell activation. Such molecules include NKG2D, integrins and cytokine receptors. NK cells also express cell surface inhibitory receptors that have an inhibitory effect on activating pathways. This inhibitory effect is achieved via protein tyrosine phosphatases (PTPs). The dynamic nature of NK signalling must be understood to better manipulate NK cell effector signaling pathways in future research. [4]


Article 3 This article explores the role of NK cells in multiple myeloma (MM). There is a suggested role for NK cells in MM since the IL-2–primed peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) treated with thalidomide (Thal) and thalidomide analogue, immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) demonstrated significantly increased lysis of MM cells. Inhibition assays revealed that NK-cell mediating killing was responsible for all cell lysis in MM; more critical than LAK-cell mediated killing, previously thought. This suggests that modulation of NK cell numbers may be important in MM and possibly other angiogenic disorders. [5]


Article 4 This study investigated the role of NK cell in human HLA haplotype-mismatched haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Specifically the roles of the three major NK alleles; HLA-C group 1, HLA-C group 2, and HLA-Bw4. The study revealed that out of 60 donor recipient pairs, a prediction of 20 donor recipient pairs would cause graft versus host (GVH)/graft versus leukemia (GVL) reactions. There was an absence of GVH disease, however, there were high frequencies of NK clones detected which killed recipient’s target cells. These same NK clones also killed allogeneic leukemia. Overall, this study determined that a GVL effector may be operational in operational in HLA mismatched haematopoietic cell transplants. [6]

Laboratory 5 Assessment

[1] Morphology of overexpressed TM4 cells compared to wldtype B35 cells.jpg

Laboratory 6 Assessment

Antibody of NK cell

CD56, or commercially known as ALEXA FLUOR® 647, is a monoclonal antibody specific to the the NK cell CD56.

A datasheet for CD56 can be found here: CD56 Datasheet

The antibody is mouse anti human type; that is the primary antibody has been raised in a mouse. The antibody reacts and recognises CD56 (aka NCAM). The CD56 molecule is a cell surface glycoprotein expressed on NK cells. Three isoforms of CD56 exist:

1. The largest 180kD form, in neurons

2. 140kD isoform, in haemopoietic cells

3. 140 and 180kD isoforms in the CD56 protein

In neuronal tissues, CD56 mediates homophilic and heterophilic adhesion which is critical in neural development. [7]

Some studies have suggested that CD56 is expressed in the follicular thyroid and may have a role in autoimmune diseases of the thyroid. CD56 is expressed in a range of tumours such as in the lung and natural killer cell lymphomas. [8]


  • Z8600021 needed to also include possible applications of the antibody (4/5)

Peer Review

  • Z8600021 These are well balanced critical reviews, well done. (18/20)

Group 1 Information: For the most part the information was well presented and explained sufficiently. Some parts were a little difficult to understand. Definition of scientific jargon was a lacking in some parts compared to others which contributed to misunderstandings. For instance, what exactly are polypoid cells? In comparison, there were areas where terms were thoroughly defined. Most of all, the definition of megakaryocyte was very well done, even presenting its latin derivation. More elaboration in some areas are required. For example, dense granules has a rushed introduction and explanation. I was also confused whether they were the same as dense bodies/ delta granules later mentioned. Mostly coherent passages, however at times it was difficult to understand derive the main point. For example, the sentence “The vesicular stage in the formation of platelets are found in this area with vesicles of about 400 A showing to be present as they align in rows.” was very confusing to me. Perhaps also, the TGF-β-SMAD signalling pathway should be explained better. The phrasing of “nuclear-localized phosphorylated SMAD2/3 (pSMAD2/3)” is too convoluted and does not add to my understanding of TGF-β-SMAD signalling. It was only upon further research that I even understood what SMAD2/3 had to do with TGF-β-SMAD signalling and subsequently with HSCs and MKs. Depth of Research: Overall, very detailed and well researched as shown by the depth of information in the historical timeline alone. The development and maturation process section was very detailed and histological images aided in the understanding of the text. The pathology section lacks the detail of the rest of the sections however is headed towards the right direction. Readability and Conciseness: Overall, there was a logical progression to the information presented with the signalling section being most readable. However, some areas could use a more logical sequence. For example, in the introduction the sentence starting with “They have a lobulated nucleus” does not logically flow with the rest of the sentence. To improve readability, sentences can be made more concise and to the point. Even with simple revision of sentence structure as for “They have a lobulated nucleus” to “They have lobulated nuclei” will improve the readability and conciseness of information presented. In the title “Maintenance of Haematopoietic Stem Cells” adding the abbreviation (HSC) may improve the readability of subsequent text whereby there is extensive use of the abbreviated version. Some sentences could use more commas to improve readability— “MK cells function is to maintain the normal blood platelet count, which is done by mature MK cells releasing approximately 20-30x 10- platelets/L of blood per day.” Overall, good grammar and spelling. There were a few spelling errors throughout which can be fixed simply by proof-reading. e.g.— “Further the alpha granules express the adhesion molecule P-selectin and CD63”

Group 2 Information: Did a very good job of defining scientific jargon and terminology before explaining further details, enhancing my overall understanding of all concepts. Just one example of that was in the “Function” section —“Transferrins are plasma proteins that transport iron into immature red blood cells. Transferrin receptors upon erythrocytes do not interact with iron but regulate and control the uptake of iron by most cells.” The sequence of information presented was orderly and logical making it quite easy to understand, despite the lack of supporting images and/videos. In particular the information in the “Diseases and Abnormalities” section was presented in a very easily understandable manner, despite the complexity of some of the processes. Depth of information: There was good depth of research sufficient to gain sufficient understanding without being overwhelmed with irrelevant details. There was great depth and scope of reading and research as shown by the variety of references used. Conciseness and Readability: Overall, most paragraphs had an organised flow of information and direction which enhanced the readability of long sections of text. Generally very readable with nice, consistent narrative voice throughout. Perhaps, more paragraphing could enhance the natural flow of information and to break up large chunks of text. Use of sub-sectioning could improve the organisation of information such as for “Deformability/ Fluidity” and “Structure” under the heading “Membrane Composition” Also, the relevance of the information in the ‘Buffering Ability’ subsection should be reviewed Current research lacks detail and needs refinement but is headed towards the right direction. The lack of spelling and grammatical errors made text very easy to read and professional. Layout and Images: Layout was neat and organised with good use of headings and expansion tables. There was good use of images to support corresponding text. Images were labelled well and were relevant to the topics presented. There was also correct use of citation and referencing. Perhaps more judicious use of subheadings could help organise information better. Referencing: Abundant references presented and correctly placed throughout the text. Referencing was generally consistent and orderly.

Group 3: Information: Information was presented well, in a logical sequence. Scientific jargon was defined throughout to enable understanding of the finer details. Depth of information: There was good depth of research sufficient to gain good understanding of main concepts. The “Role in Disease” section needs refinement but is headed towards the right direction in terms of relevance and detail. Conciseness and Readability: Overall, paragraphs had an organised flow of information and direction which enhanced the readability of long sections of text. The use of bullets in the “Types of B-cells” section enhanced the readability of text. Very good paragraphing to highlight new points and progression of information. The lack of spelling and grammatical errors made text easy to read and professional. Layout and Images: Layout was neat and organised with good use of headings and expansion tables. There was good use of images to support corresponding text. Images were labelled well and were relevant to the topics presented. There was also correct use of citation and referencing of images. Referencing: There are many large paragraphs of text which lack references that need to be included. Other than that, referencing was generally consistent and orderly.

Group 5: Information: Information was presented well, in a logical sequence. Scientific jargon was defined throughout to enable understanding of the finer details. Some parts may require further explanation of relevance to create better understanding. For example, in the “Function” section, terminology such as TGF-ß1 was quite poorly explained. Depth of information: There was good depth of research to gain sufficient understanding. However, at times the abundance in detail was a bit overwhelming. There was great depth and scope of reading and research as shown by the variety of references used. Conciseness and Readability: Overall, paragraphs had an organised flow of information and direction which enhanced the readability of long sections of text. The use of tables summarised information well in a concise and readable manner. Very few spelling and grammatical errors made text easy to read and professional. Layout and Images: Layout was neat and organised with good use of headings and expansion tables. There was good use of images to support corresponding text. Images were labelled well and were relevant to the topics presented. There was also correct use of citation and referencing of images. Good use of hyperlinking to support further understanding of text. Referencing: There was extensive referencing throughout paragraphs of text. Referencing was also correct, generally consistent and orderly.

Group 6: Information: Overall, information was presented well, in a logical sequence. Scientific jargon was defined well however some simplification of information may be required. This would increase understanding of the main points which was lost in the technical jargon used. Depth of information: There was good depth of research shown. However, at times the abundance in detail was a bit overwhelming. The “Crispr/Cas9 and T Cells” subsection in the “Current Research” section requires further detail and elaboration but is headed towards the right direction. Conciseness and Readability: Overall, text was quite difficult to read. The lack of paragraphing and concise sentence structure contributed to this. Perhaps better use of subheading, tables and even expandable sections can better summarise information in a more readable manner. There were very few spelling and grammatical errors made which was quite professional. Layout and Images: Layout was consistent throughout. There was good use of images to support corresponding text. Images were labelled well and were relevant to the topics presented. There was also correct use of citation and referencing of images. Referencing: There was extensive referencing throughout paragraphs of text. Referencing was also generally consistent and orderly however the repetition of “as review in…” is unnecessary if the text itself is referenced.

Group 7: Information: Overall, information was presented well, in a logical sequence. Depth of information: There was good depth of research shown and sufficient to gain sufficient understanding without being overwhelmed with irrelevant details. Conciseness and Readability: Overall, text was very easy to read. This was assisted by the good use of subheading questions such as “What role do the components play?” which enhanced the readability of following text. Paragraphing and concise sentence structure also contributed to good readability. There is good use of tables, expandable sections and bullet points to summarise information. Also, there were very few spelling and grammatical errors made which was very professional. Layout and Images: Layout was consistent throughout. There was good use of images to support corresponding text. Images were labelled well and were relevant to the topics presented. There was also correct use of citation and referencing of images. Referencing: There was extensive referencing throughout paragraphs of text. Referencing was also generally consistent and orderly however the repetition of “as review in…” is unnecessary if the text itself is referenced.

References

  1. Katherine Ann Hurley, Thiago M A Santos, Gabriella M Nepomuceno, Valerie Huynh, Jared T Shaw, Douglas B Weibel Targeting the bacterial division protein FtsZ. J. Med. Chem.: 2016; PubMed 26756351
  2. Michael Schoen, Jochen M Reichel, Maria Demestre, Stefan Putz, Dhruva Deshpande, Christian Proepper, Stefan Liebau, Michael J Schmeisser, Albert C Ludolph, Jens Michaelis, Tobias M Boeckers Super-Resolution Microscopy Reveals Presynaptic Localization of the ALS/FTD Related Protein FUS in Hippocampal Neurons. Front Cell Neurosci: 2015, 9;496 PubMed 26834559
  3. M G Brown, A O Dokun, J W Heusel, H R Smith, D L Beckman, E A Blattenberger, C E Dubbelde, L R Stone, A A Scalzo, W M Yokoyama Vital involvement of a natural killer cell activation receptor in resistance to viral infection. Science: 2001, 292(5518);934-7 PubMed 11340207
  4. Eric Vivier, Jacques A Nunès, Frédéric Vély Natural killer cell signaling pathways. Science: 2004, 306(5701);1517-9 PubMed 15567854
  5. F E Davies, N Raje, T Hideshima, S Lentzsch, G Young, Y T Tai, B Lin, K Podar, D Gupta, D Chauhan, S P Treon, P G Richardson, R L Schlossman, G J Morgan, G W Muller, D I Stirling, K C Anderson Thalidomide and immunomodulatory derivatives augment natural killer cell cytotoxicity in multiple myeloma. Blood: 2001, 98(1);210-6 PubMed 11418482
  6. L Ruggeri, M Capanni, M Casucci, I Volpi, A Tosti, K Perruccio, E Urbani, R S Negrin, M F Martelli, A Velardi Role of natural killer cell alloreactivity in HLA-mismatched hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Blood: 1999, 94(1);333-9 PubMed 10381530
  7. C E Moolenaar, E J Muller, D J Schol, C G Figdor, E Bock, D Bitter-Suermann, R J Michalides Expression of neural cell adhesion molecule-related sialoglycoprotein in small cell lung cancer and neuroblastoma cell lines H69 and CHP-212. Cancer Res.: 1990, 50(4);1102-6 PubMed 2153450
  8. W J Mooi, S S Wagenaar, D Schol, J Hilgers Monoclonal antibody 123C3 in lung tumour classification. Immunohistology of 358 resected lung tumours. Mol. Cell. Probes: 1988, 2(1);31-7 PubMed 2837665