Talk:2013 Group 1 Project

From CellBiology
Revision as of 14:53, 25 June 2013 by Z8600021 (talk | contribs) (→‎Images)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

2013 Projects: Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7

  1. Do not remove this notice {{2013 Project discussion}} from the top of the discussion page.
  2. Newest student comments should be entered at the top of this current page under the subheading "Student Discussion Area" (you cannot edit the sub-heading title).
  3. All comments should begin with your own signature button, that will automatically enter student number date/time stamp.
  4. Do not use your full name here in discussion, if absolutely necessary you may use first names only.
  5. Do not remove or edit other student comments.
  6. Use sub-headings if you want to add other draft information, images, references, etc.
  7. Only your own group members should edit this page, unless directed otherwise by the course co-ordinator.

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.

Week 2 Project topic selection, preliminary researching on the topic.

Week 3 By the next practical class (after the mid-session break) there should be sub-headings and content on your actual project page and interactions between individual group members on this discussion page.

Week 4 Each group member should now have selected 4 papers relevant to their section of the project. These, or any other papers, can now be used to generate content (text, images and tables) within the project page. Students can also work on additional sub-headings on the project page.

Week 8 Peer assessment of group project work.

  • Each student will carry out an assessment of all Group projects other than their own.
  • This written assessment should then be pasted on the actual project discussion page and your own individual student page.
  • The peer assessment for each project should be concise and include both positive and negative critical analysis of the current project status.
  • The actual assessment criteria (shown above) can be used if you like.
  • Each student assessment should be your own work and be completed before the next Lab.



Student Discussion Area

Peer Assessment

Group 1 Peer Assessment: Overall, the group project page has very good subheadings that would enable one to understand the topic well. However, upon closer look at the content, it seems that the project page is still incomplete especially in the History and Disease section. There also seems to be a lack of references in the content. It’s good that the group balances out the text with pictures. However, the pictures should be formatted properly such that they are in the correct position that they are intended to be on the project. It seems that the pictures are out of place on the page. A short description should also be included with each picture such that it gives the readers a clearer idea of what the picture is trying to show.

I like the way the information is presented under the History and Disease section in a table as it makes the content easier to read. The tables are also of a good colour scheme. The information presented was also well reference. I also like that the group has included current and future research sections as it gives a good idea of current issues and interests related to this topic.

--Z3330795 (talk) 14:29, 23 May 2013 (EST)

Group 1 -> Regulation of Cell Division

The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are not clearly described, the introduction should be more simple and a justification of the outline should be provided, ie. why have they chosen those subheadings Content is correctly cited and referenced, however there seems to be a lack of References, perhaps text use could be more efficient leaving out the "waffle" and sticking to shorter sentences.The wiki lacks figures tables and alternative methods of information. There is no evidence of research beyond the formal activities.This group does however relate the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of cell biology. In Summary the page provides good information however there is no evidence of above and beyond effort, more research needs to be done to establish better understanding for more simplistic explanation/ interpretation.

Group 1 Peer Mark

The introduction is a little bit basic in a good way. However, try and add a little bit of information that will introduce the ideas that will link to the ideas that you would be talking about for the whole project. The history table does not have enough information. I can see that two columns were left blank. Try and complete those as soon as possible because it looks unprofessional left blank and could affect your marks as well. The overall information in the body of the project lacks information. Try and expand your ideas especially for the Metaphase to Anaphase Transition topic. Also, try and complete the diseases table as well.

z3377769 Peer Mark

Group 1 peer review Are you sure you only want to do two key points? Your page looks very short compared to the other pages even though you have a very large topic. I understand you don’t want to be inundated with massive amounts of research so defining what you are going to discuss is a good idea, but I think one or two more regulatory mechanisms could be mentioned. 1. Content and writing - I would agree that they have been discussed but to be a little school marker-ish I think they have only been described as opposed to expanded on and discussed. o History  I think there could be a bit more history to discovery your topic but what you have is good. I also like the way you have referred back to the Timothy Hunt research in later sections. o Entry into m-phase:  Intro: Good, nice and simple. All I would say is maybe include the CDKs anagram in the intro to your section. Just so the reader can check back really easily if they forget.  Cyclins: As I said above its good that you have referred to Timothy Hunt’s experiment again, BUT that seems to make up a very large part of the section. For me this means you section is not related to cyclins but mostly about Mr Hunt.  CDKs: The first sentence by itself is good. As is the second. Both is a bit much I reckon get rid of the first, your project isn’t about the cell cycle (as a whole) it’s about regulation, so stick to that I say. All the information you have here is good but does it contribute to how the cellular replication is executed? Not for me at least.  In the intro you mentioned Mitosis promoting factor, but it doesn’t appear again o Metaphase to anaphase transition  Intro: why is it in brackets?  Anaphase: again I would have “The main function of the anaphase promoting complex (APC)…” just to make it clear, I know it’s obvious but it can’t hurt. If you know the other functions of the APC list it. If not, that’s fine. Also if you know what other proteins are degraded by APC bring it on, this is a guess but maybe in certain cases it will degrade what you have listed but under special circumstances it will degrade something else?  Spindle checkpoint: you have double spacing in the APC paragraph, consistentcy is good, and having the space breaks things up nicely makes it less dense. Thanks for including the anagram (SAC) in the second paragraph. I thought this section was about the transition from metaphase to anaphase, is this the right section to be talking about how anaphase is inhibited? o Mitogens and division  Intro: I reckon go with double spacing, just to break it up.I’m not fantastically literate but the first sentence of your third paragraph (The presence of mitogens…“) seems a little clumsy, I don’t really know what you are trying to say here. I vaguely know what you’re saying in the final sentence but it seems a bit convoluted. This intro is really good. Little bit of polish is all it needs  PDGF: “cells are removed without clotting to occur” makes perfect sense but it’s just not the best way to say it I don’t think. Maybe replace “cells are removed before clotting can occur”. Maybe have the definition of platelets in a glossary section? Not a biggie. This section is good but how does PDGF regulate cell division? I see you have extra bullet points, they all look like they will answer my question. Good work o Disease  This section is still in the works, that’s fine. Just remember how does it apply to regulatory mechanisms of cell division. o Current and future research  All I would say is I assume these ideas of future research has come from somewhere? Maybe whack some references in to show that these ideas are in the scientific community  All the current research stuff looks good, poses interesting questions. - You have done plenty of work but I think you need to go deeper into your topic, I just don’t think you have enough content. If need be steal what Dr Hill said in his lecture and go further. There is always some tidying up to do I would worry too much about there. Bring on the content.

2. Referencing - Reference 19 isn’t right. I’ve had the same problem. - Everything else seems good. Looks like you all have done some reading and integrated different sources and ideas well. As far as number of sources goes, the more research the better I suppose. - Make sure you have all the reference stuff for images, your Metaphasecolchicine doesn’t seem to have copyright. Mark will be brutal on this. 3. Element of teaching in the page - I’ve learned things from this page. I think my understanding of this course has improved. The language you all use is clear, not too complicated, but also you’re not afraid to use technical language. 4. Presentation - Your presentation is ok. I recommend double spacing everywhere. The number and variety of pictures is good although given I think you should add more content, more pictures may be needed.

Peer 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.

For having chosen such a broad and difficult to cover topic, I think the website is progressing nicely. Seems that you guys are covering important areas that are key, but not so many that it becomes confusing - especially when we must keep in mind that the website is also being designed for people who may be new to the topic(1) Headings seem appropriate, although there is some overlap, perhaps current and future research should be divided into two separate headings so they may be both easier to follow and easier to find on the table of contents, it also seems to flow better. Tables are nice, I appreciate how they match and are not too bright nor too pale - however maybe the darker green makes it slightly harder to see the top row of the tables, but this is a minor thing. Images clearly explain what the words express, but more pictures would be nice! The inclusion of a movie/clip is an interestingly diverse take on our websites, and quite unique - I hope it will nicely complement the rest of the website as it is to be in the introductory section from what I can see. Seems like a fine way of introducing a new topic to someone who is learning, or even refreshing someone on something they may already be familiar with(2+4). Referencing seems done correctly, however may I suggest references are moved from the end of the sentence to inside the sentence? Also references 16 & 17 repeat in your reference list, just to remind you - this is easily fixable!(3) Research seems to have been done on your topic, but judging from empty sections and lack of references in the reference list so I can't judge too much because clearly its not yet near completion(5). With the topic being regulation of the cell cycle and our project topic being cell division, I'd say its very relevant. You guys talk about many of the things we discuss in class such as the cell cycle, checkpoints etc.(6) I hope to see students suggestions such as mine might help shaping your project, with a little more content and tweaking I think it should be a fine turnout!.

z3374507 assessment- Group 1

The key points of regulation during cell division have been addressed. The textual formatting is clear and uncluttered. It is clear that the group has done a significant amount of research. Their content is informative and relevant. Their use of informative diagrams (flow diagrams) makes it much easier to grasp the concepts being presented (e.g. bacterial destruction, neutrophil activation and adaptive immune responses).

In general the formatting could be improved by adding a few more images and arranging them on the page in a more visually pleasing way (e.g. change the positions of the images, don’t just put them to the right of the text).There are several areas of the page which may require referencing, in particularly there are a few images which lack copyright information. Also, adding a brief description to the images could make the page more viewer friendly.

Peer Assessment

Group 1- Regulation of Cell Division

The introductory paragraph is a good start, but needs some more work. Perhaps a little bit more description briefly summarising the other sections of the wiki page in the introduction would make it more substantial. It’s good to see that you have added some references with appropriate formatting in the introduction. There is also no image in this section, it would be nice to add an image or two to support the text. I’m curious to see what video you wanted to upload which you’re checking the copyright clearance for. It’s good you haven’t uploaded it yet since you’re not sure of the copyright.

The history section is lacking content. You need to add more years and descriptions of the discoveries in those years. Some of the spaces are still blank. It’s good that you have added correct references for each of the 5 discoveries you’ve mentioned so far. Perhaps adding some images to support some of the discoveries would make this section look more interesting. The table format is a good idea.

Entry into M-phase section is a good start, but it would be better to add a bit more detail. There is also a lack of references used, I only see 1 reference. The grey image from 1992 is not referenced correctly on the file page, you need to add the source and copyright information. The other colourful image of the cyclins is referenced correctly.

Metaphase to Anaphase transition is a good start with appropriate referencing, but needs a bit more description and you need to add some images to support the text to make it more interesting. Mitogens and Cell Division section is the best section so far in this wiki page. So far the information is sufficient with appropriate referencing. The image is also a good choice, however it does not have appropriate referencing, you need to add information about the copyright, whether reuse is allowed or not. You also need to add the student image template. The last two lines in this section I assume are points you are intending to elaborate more on.

The disease section significantly lacks information; there is only a 1 line description of one disease. You need to add more diseases and bit more detailed description, not just 1 line. The table format is a good idea.

Current and future research section also lacks information. Current research only has 1 line from only 1 reference to a research paper. There are no other references and no detailed description. You need to find some current research papers and describe their findings. Future research also needs some references, perhaps describe some relevant research done already and then talk about what more topics can be researched in the future based on those findings. The cell division phases image at the bottom of the current research section seems a bit out of place. The image however is nice and has the appropriate referencing. I think it would be more suitable in the introduction section.

Overall the project is a good start but needs more work.

z3374087 assessment

At first glance the history provided seems to short and brief but this may be attributed to the fact that they haven’t finished it yet. Seeing as this topic is on cell division it is very broad and the introduction seems too short and does not address the topic sufficiently. The entry into M-phase and ‘metaphase to anaphase transition’ both address the topics very well and are very descriptive. Sufficient visual pictures are presented to keep the viewers engaged and understanding what the content means. The mitogens section however requires 1 or 2 more related pictures so that the viewer understands what the specific content means. The current and future research seems a bit too short. It would be good if they provided 203 more examples along with external links and a short description of the aims and results of these research articles. The references seem fine and referenced correctly. Overall this is project has come along greatly. With s few more pictures and specific content I can see this getting a Distinction at least for sure.

Peer Marking Assessment

It is obvious that you have done a fair amount of research into the regulation of cell division. However something which stood out to me from the introduction was the lack of references. You should look at referencing every new point you make on the page, and the first two paragraphs of the introduction have no references listed. The references you have used appear to be referenced correctly and you have used journal articles as opposed to website. Your history section looks good, but I'm assuming it is still unfinished. I liked the brief description that you made for each date which makes it easy and interesting to read. The images you have used appear to be referenced correctly with the copyright information which is good. The only suggestion I would have is to have a title underneath the image on the actual page so that we know what we are clicking I.e. fig 1 shows this... Another suggestion is to add some more images as I find this breaks up the text and also helps us understand what you're writing about. In regards to your current research section, I'm not entirely sure why you were listing points? Was that what one research article was about or is that a list of articles? This should probably be made a bit clearer and again referenced. Another thing i noticed is that you dnt have a glossary which is a good way to explain uncommon words. I think that its well written and easy to understand but even in the introduction There are several words such as cell division and mitogens which would be good to put in the glossary section. Overall Ithink you've done a good job and if you fix up the images, glossary and the referencing then it should be a great page to read.


The group page discusses regulation of cell division and presents relevant subtopics that will aid in the understanding on the subject. However, upon closer observation of the subheadings, it is noted that it does not include complete information. The introduction section does what it is supposed to do, giving a brief overview as to the process. It ends rather abruptly which provides evidence that the section is not complete yet. Group members should not include notes irrelevant to the material (e.g. “cells dividing movie-need to check copyright”), could be written on discussion page. History table is also missing important recent events. Sections leading up to History of Platelet-Derived Growth Factor seemed to be sufficiently completed with helpful information though lacking enough detail on the transition from metaphase to anaphase. Disease section done poorly and current research points to address should be posted in discussion. While brief, the future research information posted was helpful. Content that was included were all correctly referenced. Though incomplete, tables did provide relevant information and diagrams added did help in the understanding and explanation of the topic. Discussion page does indicate that there was some good brain-storming between the members. Overall, there still has to be some work to be done before the due date in over a week but through the peer review assessment, the group should receive adequate critique to get them on their way.

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 1 Peer review


• The introduction was clear and concise. I think it summed up the topic nicely.

• An image in the introduction could be an eye catching visual stimulus to grab the attention of the audience


• Nice colour scheme

Entry into M phase • I think a relevant image would have really enhanced this section. E.g. e.g. image showing CDK and cyclin interaction.

• The reader may not have any previous knowledge of the topic. Terms like G2, M phase etc could be explained through an external link.

• The information was clearly well researched and presented concisely which I liked.

• The images are relevant however they have not been cited properly. Also the information this section is lacking referencing.

Metaphase to anaphase

• I feel that a few introductory sentences about the metaphase to anaphase transition would benefit the reader.

• A relevant image would help to break up the text.

• The information is well referenced.


• This section was written well and structured nicely. The definition also helped to quickly bring the reader ‘up to speed.’ But perhaps the definition could have acted as an introductory sentence instead of a stand alone piece of information at the top.


• Disease in table form is a great idea. It breaks the information up for the reader and prevents the page from being Current/ future research

• Current research needs more information. The information in future research was good but there are no citations present.

Further comments:

• The group appears to have done some extensive research.

• to improve on 'peer teaching' element, they could have included explanations with the images. This would show their understanding of the diagram and how it relates to their topic.

• some of the references appear multiple times in the list.

• A brief table of history would be helpful for the reader to show the evolution of knowledge on this topic

• A glossary would also help the reader

Group 1 Hey guys, cool project page.

The introduction is succinct and to the point, highlighting the two regulatory checkpoints that are described later.

  • To draw readers in maybe you could include an image of one of the key scientists that you mention in your history timeline beside your introduction.

The timeline is looking good, unfinished but don’t worry, plenty of time left.

Is the ‘Reider and Palazzo’ image supposed to be formatted next to the timeline? The image needs some work with referencing (both in the thumbnail and actual image reference description, it’s also missing the student image template, all of the copyright information and the student description of the image.

Entry into M-phase maybe to add a bit of body to this short introduction you can quickly go over the end of G2 phase/entry into M-phase (cell growth, protein synthesis) and this is where you can then introduce MPF’s (B1/CDK1?) etc.

CDK’s – I think this should be written in full – Cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK’s), as it is a sub-heading. There are no references in this section, still time though ;-) The info included here is good, although a little more detail would be nice explaining the role of Cyclin B /CDK1.

Need to fix up reference for “Expression of cyclins in cell cycle” image, can’t just include the hyperlink.

Anaphase promoting complex gap between the first sentence and the following sentence is HUGE, amiright. “Activator subunits, cdc20 and cdh 1, drives the APC.” This is a very abrupt way to end the section, probably not the best way.

No need to define what mitogens are in the body of the text, you can include this in the glossary. Edit – I see now you don’t have a glossary. Best to include one of those. Other acronyms used in this section also need to be included in the glossary (FOS, MYS genes)

Disease – along with the description, could probably include a few images with each disease mentioned?

Current and future research – links and a brief description of each article would be good here.

In all nice work, keep going, the page will look good once finished. A read through is required once you have finished to fix up some grammatical errors.

Group 1 Peer Review
• Good introduction – Sums up what will be on the page well. Informative without being too detailed
• Some sentences were a tad long and were a little confusing to read. Separating some of the longer sentences into two shorter ones would make this intro even better
• A simple picture in the introduction would break up the text nicely
• Pleasing to the eye – Nice colours and succinct info drew my attention and made me want to read into it.
• Obviously, some more information needs to be added to the last 3 rows.
Entry into M phase
• The intro to this section needs to be a little more informative, to assume the readers know nothing about cell biology. What is a G2 phase? What is M phase? Why shouldn’t replicated DNA be damaged and why are key regulators required for this transition?
• Cyclins – Good information, informative and succinct.
• CDK – Once again, good info and succinct. It might be good to add what CDK stands for and why it is called that.
• Pictures are good. Relevant, eye catching and simple.
• The second picture should be a ‘thumb’, much like the first one. The other pictures of the page should be thumbs too so that you can add a little information to what the picture is.
• Overall, the information in this section is lacking some citation.
Metaphase to anaphase
• Im confused by the text in brackets here. Is this an error?
• An introduction would benefit this section well, explaining what metaphase and anaphase are and why the complex and checkpoint are relevant to this part.
• Good information. A picture could help break up the text.
• I like the definition that started this section. Simple yet effective.
• The ‘mitogens’ section is very well written. It was an enjoyable read, and was structured nicely. A picture here could be nice. And just a slight spelling error in the first paragraph, ‘Mitogens effect cell division by overcoming the intracellular…’ should read ‘mitogens AFFECT cell division’.
• PDGF history – This section was well written too. Overall, a good section. A few more citations here wouldn’t hurt.
• A good idea – Listing diseases that can occur involving cell division and putting it in table form is not something I would’ve thought of. Very creative, very relevant. I will be looking forward to seeing this table once it is completed.
• It might make the table even better to add a ‘treatment’ column. But once the table is complete, it may not need it. Your call. Current/future research
• Current research requires more detail
• Future research was good. With a bit more citation, it will be perfect.

Peer Assessment Group 1-Regulation of Cell Division


  • As this topic is specific to cell division more than the others i think its safe to say that you could incorporate a brief overview of the cell cycle.
  • An image here would also be very helpful. Maybe an image of the cell cycle that you made/drew yourself.
  • The use of the video is excellent however its not up yet.


  • History is incomplete and needs to be completed after 1992.
  • Each date is referenced and is relevant to what is discussed.
  • The light green colour is sufficient to read the information.

Entry into the M phase

  • This part lacks some references.
  • Futhermore you need to explain what M phase and the G2 phase is. You can either do this in the Introduction part or in this part. I see you have put up a small image of the cycle however you havnt explained the basic activities that happens in the cycle eg the M cycle is the mitotic part.
  • The information on the CDKs and Cylins is good as it covers what they are however you have put in history of the Cyclins in this part and i feel maybe the history should be posted in the history sub heading.
  • The student image uploaded isnt referenced properly. You need to description of the image (roughly a paragraph), copyright information, student image information etc.
  • I see you have referenced and copyrighted the image of the cycle however you might want to make it a thumb so theres information under it.

Metaphase to Anaphase Transition

  • Why is there text in the brackets? You might want to talk about what was done in that study and write a paragraph on it.
  • Information is to the point however i feel like its lacking (how is the spindle check point activated?)

Mitogens and Cell Division

  • Im sorry i dont understand Entry into Start? (Start of what).
  • The paragraphs about Mitogens is very succinct and flows very well.
  • The PDGF paragraph is also very well written and the image used is relevant to the information presented.
  • There are points at the end of this section that should be elaborated on.


  • Table format is excellent however it restricts the amount of information you can give. If you dont want to give a lot of information on the disease then the table is perfect.
  • The table needs to be completed

Current and Future Research

  • Good starting point however maybe have some specific references to the current and future research.


  • Number 20 has nothing there.

Overall This project is written well and certain parts just need to be completed. Just fix up certain things such as referencing and uploading the images properly and adding more images. Also add some more references if possible.

Group 1 Introduction was good, informative and alluding to what is going to be presented. History table uncompleted. Would be good if you went through the cell cycles from beginning to end and if the most important cyclins and CDKs were listed and when they were most important in the cycle. It's quite a sporadic page and not following a format that can really be followed. Not everything that was said in the intro was addressed. The Mitogens section was really well written and very logical. Great examples used to describe it and was actually really interesting. Need more diseases and your research is all everywhere. Possibly get some more references for the other parts except Mitogens. Some of the pictures weren't properly referenced. If you followed the intro you would have a stunning page. I think it needs to be more researched.

Group 1 Introduction

  • it's a little long but I do remember Dr. Mark Hill saying this is a complicated subject.
  • It does need a picture just to grab our attention.
  • Get rid of the Dr. Mark Hill that's been there for a month =)


  • Good colours, very easy on the eyes.
  • Still some work to be done.
  • Maybe a picture of one of the scientist could be very nice.

Entry into M-phase

  • I feel it goes straight into the topic without a real explanation at the start. It is catered to uni students than high school students so we should have pre-knowledge, but maybe a strong start.
  • The rest of the section is nice to read and easy to learn.
  • Missing references.

Metaphase to Anaphase Transition

  • I'm going to assume the words in the brackets are just notes and are going to be followed up later as a paragraph.
  • Reading it, it looks like it's lacking information. Though, you don't want to overcomplicate it so I can understand the simplicity.
  • Needs an image.

Mitogens and Cell Division

  • Definition doesn't need to start. You can just add it into the paragraph or can add a glossary section for that.
  • It's very detailed so I can't help notice that it could use more references to back up the info.


  • Obviously it's going to come together later.
  • I would like to see some pictures for each disease in the table, that would really be nice.
  • Metaphasecolchicine.jpeg is not copyrighted or referenced properly at all. There is no info and needs to be fixed ASAP due to copyright infringement.

Current and Future Research

  • Have you thought of possibly putting this section into a table form? It could break up the text and be much easier to read.

Formatting Issues

  • All images should have at least one sentence described in the uploader's words and a signature at the end.
  • Reference 20 has come out blank because of the line used,<ref><pubmed>NBK268776</pubmed></ref>, though if I input <ref><pubmed>268776</pubmed></ref> it comes out as a different article which I think does not relate to the subject: [1]. You might have to backtrack the exact article that you were trying to reference.
  • Repeated references in the "References" section. To fix this issue, you have to go back to when the first time you used the reference. At the moment it looks like this:


You have to give the reference a name, to do this change the first line like so:

<ref name="PMIDXXXXX"><pubmed>XXXXX</ref>

It's preferable to rename the reference under the PMID to avoid confusion. From there, to continue using the same reference you have to type and replace this simple line:

<ref name="PMIDXXXXX"/>

This will clean up the reference list and avoid the repeated reference. Note that if you reorganise page content, ensure that the first instance of the reference has the ref name tag <ref name="PMIDXXXXX">.

  • You need at least one student drawn picture.

"Note that the group project requires the inclusion of at least one student drawn image (from the group)."

Refer to this part of the website for tips:

  • For all images you should put it in a thumb picture so you can provide a quick explanation and also use the reference line after that description. It should look like this:

[[File:picture.jpg|thumb|short description of picture being displayed<ref><pubmed>XXXXX</ref></pubmed>]]

  • All references should be directly after the full stop (it's a little format issue but will be noticed).

  • Needs more images, I know it can be hard finding images with copyright being the main issue but there are other ways to get some relevant pictures:

--Z3293267 (talk) 16:40, 22 May 2013 (EST)

Peer assessment:


  • The introduction is sound, highlighting the importance of regulating cell division and listing the topics that will be discussed.
  • I feel as though a brief overview of the cell cycle may be helpful either in the intro, as a separate subheading on its own or in the relevant subheadings.
  • Could use an image here, perhaps a diagram of the checkpoints


  • I see that the timeline isn’t completely finished but so far the discoveries discussed are relevant to the topic and are summarised well (i.e. to the point and of a good length). However, there seems to be quiet big gaps in time, especially 1983-1992, may want to revisit this and add dates in between.

Entry into M-phase:

  • May want to discuss what M-phase is briefly (what it stands for and what happens in it etc.)
  • The use of subheadings in this section is good
  • The phase-contrast photomicrograph image has not been properly formatted in that it’s lacking the info needed for it to be used on the page, i.e. reference, copyright clearance, student image statement, description of the image in own words. Also the thumb on the actual project page could be a little bigger and the caption a little more descriptive
  • May want to discuss what exactly cyclin A, B, D and E do, i.e. the CDK’s they activate and when and what. This does this could be done in reference to the accompanying image
  • The CDK info has no reference
  • The student image statement is missing from the cyclin expression image and it has not been properly referenced

Metaphase to Anaphase Transition:

  • Info is succinct and to the point
  • Could perhaps add a research study to show the activity of the complex or checkpoint
  • Could use an image to break up the text a bit

Mitogens and Cell division:

  • I don’t think the word “definition” is necessary, could just go straight into what mitogens are
  • Some citations may be missing for some paragraphs?
  • Could use another image to break the text up towards the beginning of the section
  • Clear and concise explinations
  • Good use of subheadings
  • Could explain a lot of the jargon in the glossary
  • Could some of the history of the PDGF be added to the timeline?
  • The schematic could use a legend that summarises the image in your own words, also the student image statement is missing


  • I feel this section needs a lot more work, only one disease is briefly touched on

Current and Future Research:

  • Good start, maybe consider summarising a few recent research papers and linking to them
  • While the image in this section is great, it looks like it can’t be used because you have written “Copyright © 2003, Rights Managed by Nature Publishing Group” which is not a clearance statement. May want to ask about this.

Overall I feel that the project is on its way to being complete, there’s good use of subheadings, info is succinct and easy to understand and there are good images to accompany the text. I feel that some of the sections could be expanded on a little further, maybe add a few more research studies and perhaps you may need more references. You might want to revisit the images to make sure all the info required is there and also a glossary could be very useful.

Main focus of the project is clearly stated in introduction. Table summary is concise. The explanation of each subheading is easy to understand and flow. The structure of the content is well organized. Need to add some more diagrams. There's some spelling errors that need to be corrected. Citation(s) under CDK subheading? -- --

Discussion Area

--Z3240911 (talk) 06:30, 21 May 2013 (EST) Sounds good see you all then :)

--Z3465159 (talk) 10:33, 20 May 2013 (EST)Just a reminder that we are meeting tomorrow (Tues 21st May) in the library from 12-2, so I have made a room booking in GSR214, which is on second floor of the library. Hope to see you all there! :-)

--Z3465159 (talk) 18:28, 16 May 2013 (EST) ok I have added some events in the "History" table, I know the colours are not matching, but we will fix it later once all data are collected, cause I really dont wana spend one hour matching colours of the rows of N

--Z3331321 (talk) 13:45, 16 May 2013 (EST)Hey guys. how much info do we need on it today? I haven't had much time to do a lot of research but I have uploaded a bit. I'm fine with covering PDGF. Also, how do you reference an online book? I just copied and pasted the websites for now but i'll fix them later on. See you soon! SF

--Z3240911 (talk) 08:08, 16 May 2013 (EST) Sorry to hear that you are ill, I hope you get better soon :). The peer-review today is on the page content rather than our summaries on articles. But if your summaries are relevant to a section you should put the information in that section, just reference it with the number rather than listing the whole reference above it. Cheers, MB

--Z3465159 (talk) 20:48, 15 May 2013 (EST) Hi MB :) thank you for organizing this. Yeah I am happy with my part,so I will start searching information for it this weekend, I should have started today but unfortunately got ill and don't know if I can even come uni tomorrow, but I will try my best! :-) ohh one more thing, so you wanted us to move the 4 articles from the project page and paste it here, but how would other peers review our page? or they wont review it now, may be from next Thursday, yeah? Anyway I will move it for now ;)

--Z3240911 (talk) 09:56, 14 May 2013 (EST) Hey guys, so I'll be putting my stuff on the page on Thursday, but before I do the intro it would be good to know if everyone is OK with the plan. Just post on here if you are clear about the section you're doing. Remember this prac class involves the review of our pages by other students in the course and we have to have something on there. Also, If everyone can move the four article summarries off the main page into the sub heading on this discussion page that would be awesome. Cheers, MB

--Z3240911 (talk) 12:23, 10 May 2013 (EST) Hey everyone, so after the lab yesterday we've decided to focus on specific topics within the regulation on cell division. I'll do the introduction and current/future research, in which I'll outline that we're just covering specific sections rather than the entire topic.

Z3465159- we were thinking that you could maybe cover the checkpoint on the entry into M-phase (I know it's change from history, but to cover enough material I think we need to split it up this way).

Z3451879- You're going to cover the spindle checkpoint/APC.

Z3331321 - You're doing how mitogens can regulate cell division with some in depth detail on something like PDGF.

For each of the sections note down the history and that way we can all have input with that.

I think we just need to start putting content on and as we go we can decide how much detail we need. We need to have a lot of content on before Thursday next week, or we are going to loose marks. Pictures and figures are also important. Cheers, MB

--Z3240911 (talk) 10:53, 8 May 2013 (EST) Hey guys, I just made an area at the bottom for us to move our lab 4 stuff into. I'm moving mine off the main page because I'm starting to put some content into the page itself.

--Z3451879 (talk) 13:03, 2 May 2013 (EST) K, sounds like a plan. I was just about to post some research I did over our 2 weeks absence but I think we should have a group meeting today in lab about what exactly needs to be done by each person and what specific topics we'll be covering as well as talking to the professor and asking what he thinks about tweaking the topic. I'm on board though! see you guys today - CA

--Z3240911 (talk) 19:39, 18 April 2013 (EST) Hey guys, so due to the huge nature of the regulation of cell division, I think we should focus on some of the key regulatory checkpoints and complexes for intracellular and the key parts of extracellular. We just have to specify in our introduction that we are not addressing all regulatory components of cell division. I was thinking that we should focus on the checkpoint and associated CDK's for the entry into cell division and the spindle checkpoint/activation of APC. There are cyclins that play a role in these two checkpoints and we can also incorporate the extracellular influences. Let me know what you think. Cheers, MB

--Z3451879 (talk) 15:29, 12 April 2013 (EST) So I'm just going to put my assessment from Lab 3 here in the discussion since I think that was what we were actually supposed to do? haha. Just to be sure:

[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> --Z3240911 (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2013 (EST) Yeah, I've been looking at lots of different articles and trying to do some stuff on current research, I started with a really broad approach and there is just so much information out there, I've just focused on the current research of the APC for now, and I'll do more in time, its hard to tell what can be considered as part of our topic and what is starting to talk too much about other parts of cell division. Anyway, I should have my summaries up tonight. MB

--Z3465159 (talk) 16:27, 10 April 2013 (EST) Thanks for that MB!...same I am about upload mine soon, but obviously it is not finalized yet, and plus we need feedback from our lecturer about this.

--Z3331321 (talk) 15:48, 10 April 2013 (EST) Hey guys. I've uploaded 2 of the articles/paragraphs so far. I will obviously change them when we start writing the report. I've sort of just summarised each article so far but haven't completely got what I need from them yet. I'm doing the other 2 now =]. SF

--Z3240911 (talk) 14:36, 10 April 2013 (EST) I think he said he wasn't going to tell us a word number for the paragraphs. Just write what you think an make sure you cover what you need to. Cheers, MB

--Z3465159 (talk) 00:04, 9 April 2013 (EST) How long should be each of those paragraphs? any idea? i.e how many words

--Z3465159 (talk) 20:43, 8 April 2013 (EST) I think I solved my own problem :) I found some information on how those regulators of cell were discovered and their roles in cell division till now, so it is all good now, but you are most welcome to suggest any feedback once I upload the information.

--Z3465159 (talk) 18:46, 8 April 2013 (EST) Hey guys I am really confused now!.. can someone clarify few things for me?, I am doing the "history" part of our topic. Do I just research the history of cell division OR I need to find historical information about the regulators of cell division such as proteins, growth factors and mitogens?.

--Z3240911 (talk) 15:21, 8 April 2013 (EST) Hey guys, I think we upload the links to the articles and the summary in our section of the page, ie intracellular, etc. I've only been doing reading as my mid-session break was full of the bacteria and disease labs... I'm hoping to get mine done on Wednesday, sorry for being a bit last minute but yeah. From what I've been reading we have a good topic with lots of information to draw on. Cheers, MB

--Z3465159 (talk) 15:56, 7 April 2013 (EST) Hopefully I will start tonight, cause I just recovered from a surgical tooth extraction :( anyway we have to upload the descriptions on discussion page as well as on your own page.

--Z3451879 (talk) 12:52, 25 March 2013 (EST) Sounds good! If we all agree, maybe we should all start looking into the topic/ reading up so we can have some sub-topics in mind when we see each other at lab?

--Z3240911 (talk) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (EST) Hey everyone, I've been looking at a few topics and though maybe centrosomes maybe an option to discuss. With centrosomes we could look at the cancer aspect in the current research section, ie, centrosomes as a cancer therapy target. Just a thought. Cheers.

Z3331321 (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2013 (EST) Hey guys. Hope you all had a good easter break. has anyone started looking for articles yet? and where do we upload them when we do find them? SF--

Lab 4 Submission

--Z3240911 (talk) 10:44, 8 May 2013 (EST)

Just wanted to move this submission off the wiki page itself.

4 articles relating to Extracellular regulation of cell division:

[7] <pubmed>2259205</pubmed> This article puts forward a model that hypothesizes that extracellular regulation of cell division and differentiation acts through only two communication channels. They consist of a “series of redundant components: extracellular messenger hormones; these hormones' receptors; cytoplasmic proteins activated by the hormone-receptor complex; and trans-activating nuclear regulatory proteins.” The channels in this model are labeled as such: "D" ("differentiate"), includes transforming growth factor-beta as one of its hormones; the other, labeled "G'" ("growth") includes epidermal growth factor. The article uses a cell type in an adult mammal capable of either division or differentiation, which in this case is a stem cell from an epithelium. The principal prediction of this hypothesis is that when appropriate experimental conditions are implemented the addition of various ratios of D- and G-class growth factors will lead to different consequences.

[8] <pubmed>11134534</pubmed> Protein phosphorylation/dephosphorylation reaction is an important factor in the regulation of cell division. Entry into mitosis in dividing eukaryotic cells is controlled by the M phase-promoting factor. Cdc2 protein kinase and cyclin B are the main constituents of this factor and acts by phosphorylating substrates that are essential for the completion of mitotic processes. This article explores the effects of PKN in the control of mitotic timing by inhibition of Cdc25C on Xenopus egg extracts. The results of this experiment suggest that PKN does in fact efficiently phosphorylate Cdc25C in vitro, demonstrating that PKN directly inhibits Cdc25C activity by phosphorylation. The results also showed that microinjections of the active form of PKN inhibit cell division of the Xenopus Embryo, therefore having an effect on the regulation of cell division.

[9] <pubmed>3598205</pubmed> An important factor that is necessary for an animal cell to proliferate is nutrients. However nutrients on its own is not enough, therefore cells receive stimulatory extracellular signals via mitogens from other cells. Mitogens act in a way to overcome intracellular braking mechanisms that block progression through the cell cycle. One of the first mitogens to be identified was platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF). The main relevance of this article to our project is their examination of the effect of PDGF on cell division in human skin and scar tissue fibroblasts. The results of this experiment showed that PDGF stimulated cell division more efficiently in normal human skin fibroblasts than in scar tissue fibroblasts.

[10] <pubmed>22586473</pubmed> EGF is a mitogen that can activate any type of cell to divide, including epithelial and non-epithelial cells. This article focuses on the effect of Epithelial Growth Factor (EGF) on the division frequency of Germline Stem Cells (GSCs) in testes of Drosophila melanogaster. The results showed that EGF does in fact regulate the division frequency of GSCs and that regulation of division frequency is a specific role for EGF signaling. The results also portray that GSC division frequency is under genetic control of the highly conserved EGF signaling pathway

Microinjection of active PKN.jpg

Microinjection of the active form of PKN inhibits cell division of the Xenopus embryo. (A) Effects of microinjection of the active form of PKN on cell division of Xenopus embryos. Control buffer, 0.75 ng per embryo of GST/PKN () or 4 ng per embryo of GST/PKN ()-K644E, was injected into one blastomere at the two-cell stage. Embryos were photographed 5 h after fertilization. Arrows indicate the position of injection. GST/PKN () and GST/PKN ()-K644E are indicated as PKN and PKN(KN), respectively. (B) Dose dependency of the active form of PKN for cleavage arrest of Xenopus embryos. The indicated amounts of GST/PKN () were microinjected as in A. A typical result of three independent experiments is shown.


[11] <pubmed>11134534</pubmed>


Copyright © 2001, The National Academy of Sciences

4 Articles relating to current and future research

[12] <pubmed>21439394</pubmed> The article gives an in depth summary of the different mechanisms of inhibition and activation of the spindle-checkpoint and the Anaphase Promoting Complex (APC) and how the two regulatory components of cell division impact on one another. When the spindle-checkpoint is activated, it inhibits the activation of APC, thus keeping the cell from transitioning between metaphase and anaphase. The spindle-checkpoint is only inactivated when all kinetochores of sister chromatids are attached to microtubules stemming from opposite chromatids. The mechanism of the activation and inactivation of the spindle checkpoint is addressed with discussion of how a single unconnected kinetochore can activate the spindle checkpoint as well as how the spindle-checkpoint is silenced. Lastly, the authors address where research can go in future studies and outline questions that remain unanswered with respect to the mechanisms of the spindle-checkpoint and APC.

[13] <pubmed>11389834</pubmed> The article presents the discovery of a new early mitotic inhibitor, Emi1. Emi1 inhibits the Anaphase Promoting Complex (APC) by binding to Cdc20, a component which is essential for the activation of APC [14]. APC is an important regulatory complex in cell division as it triggers the transition between metaphase and anaphase, but there has been some unknown components surrounding the mechanism of its activation. The discovery of this inhibitor answers some of the questions about how APC is regulated and activated but there are questions left unanswered. Firstly, a question that may be asked with regards to destruction of the protein is what happens if the protein isn't destroyed after its interaction with Cdc20? The presence of nondestructable isoforms of the protein results in somatic cells not being able to commence through mitosis. The protein, after removal, is destroyed by proteolysis, mediated by the attachment of ubiquitin. Further mechanisms surrounding Emi1's destruction are being pursued by the authors. Another question that presents itself is are there any other inhibitory mechanisms or proteins interacting with Emi1?

[15] <pubmed>22357967</pubmed> The article looks at particular mechanisms of regulation of the two E3 enzymes Skp1–cullin1–F-box complex (SCF) and the anaphase promoting complex (APC) with regards to ubiquitylation. As discussed in the summary of the above article [16],if certain components such as Emi1 are not destroyed by ubiquitin-dependent mechanisms, then the cell cannot progress through cell division. This reinforces the importance of ubiquitin-dependant destruction of inhibitory proteins and hence the importance of the enzyme cascade leading to ubiquitylation. The article discusses new signals and specific targeting of cell division regulators and groups together ubiquitylation enzymes that work in collaboration. Despite giving an overview of the current understanding of the regulation of SCF and APC, it was made clear that there is still a plethora of information to be uncovered in the topic in terms of cross-talk and mechanisms.

[17] <pubmed>17443180</pubmed>

The article addresses the interaction between the spindle-checkpoint and the progression of the cell cycle from metaphase to anaphase via the activation of the anaphase promoting complex. In particular the impact of a particular inhibitor, USP44, and its mechanism of inhibition is discussed

File:USP44 activity is cell-cycle regulated and is required for proper spindle checkpoint function and anaphase timing..jpg

Title: Anaphase initiation is regulated by antagonistic ubiquitination and deubiquitination activities Author: Frank Stegmeier, Michael Rape, Viji M. Draviam, Grzegorz Nalepa, Mathew E. Sowa et al. Publication: Nature Publisher: Nature Publishing Group Date: Apr 19, 2007 Copyright © 2007, Rights Managed by Nature Publishing Group

[18] <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.

[19] <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.

[20] <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.

[21] <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: [22] <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>


[23] <pubmed>22046431</pubmed> Some of the regulators in cell division are mitogen, growth factors, cyclins and cyclins dependent kinases. Mitogen is a substance that stimulates cell division. The first mitogen-activated protein kinase to be discovered was ERK1 (MAPK3) in mammals in 1980s. After identification of the first member of MAPK family, six different MAPK cascades were then categorised in mammals such as ERK1/2, ERK3/ERK4, ERK5, ERK7/8, JNK and P38. A further study was carried by Meng Li, Jun Liu and Chiyu Zhang at Jiangsu University in China to investigate the evolutionary History of the vertebrate mitogen activated protein kinases’ family. Their experiment explains MAPK role in eukaryotic cellular regulation and shows a comparison between vertebrate MAPK family members and invertebrate MAPK family members. Interestingly according to their study the vertebrates had substantially more MAPK family members than invertebrates. This study is relevant to the history of regulation of cell division because it illustrates where the MAPK families were originated from particularly in vertebrates and how well they are conserved.

Phylogenetic tree of Vertebrate MAPK family .jpg

Maximum likelihood (ML) phylogenetic tree of the vertebrate MAPK family. The ML tree was constructed based on the protein sequences of the MAPK family using PHYML v2.4 with 100 bootstrap replications. The tree is unrooted and only the bootstrap values >70% are shown at interior nodes. The MAPK protein sequences from mammals, amphibians/reptiles and teleosts are marked in blue, green and red, respectively. The scale bar indicates the branch length that corresponds to 0.2 substitutions per site. The species and accession numbers are listed in Table S1. The corresponding amino acid sequence alignment is provided in Figure S2. The abbreviations used are as follows: Hsa, Homo sapiens; Mamu, Macaca mulatta; Ptr, Pan troglodytes; Mumu, Mus musculus; Rno, Rattus norvegicus; Oan, Ornithorhynchus anatinus; Mdo, Monodelphis domestica; Bta, Bos taurus; Clu, Canis lupus familiaris; Eca, Equus caballus; Oar, Ovis aries; Ssc, Sus scrofa; Dre, Danio rerio; Gga, Gallus gallus; Tgu, Taeniopygia guttata; Gac, Gasterosteus aculeatus; Orl, Oryzias latipes; Tru, Takifugu rubripes; Tni, Tetraodon nigroviridis; Aca, Anolis carolinensis; Xtr, Xenopus tropicalis; Ttr, Tursiops truncatus; Cin, Ciona intestinalis; Csa, Ciona savignyi; Spu, Strongylocentrotus purpuratus.


[24] <pubmed>22046431</pubmed>


Copyright Li 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.

Note - This image was originally uploaded as part of a student project and may contain inaccuracies in either description or acknowledgements. Please contact the site coordinator if the uploaded content does not meet the original copyright permission or requirements, for immediate removal.

[25] <pubmed>11734586</pubmed> Cyclins are from the family of proteins that are involved in regulation of cell division. They control the progression of cells through the cell cycle by activating cyclin dependent kinases enzymes. It is evident in one of the articles written by Ken Garber that cyclins were discovered by Timothy Hunt in 1983. Timothy Hunt was studying the fertilization of sea urchin eggs and while he was measuring the level of proteins in newly fertilized eggs, he found one protein that shortly disappeared at the end of cell division and then gradually appeared again as eggs began the next round of division. He named this protein as “cyclin” and concluded that this protein was driving the cell cycle. Also it was proven further by Hunt and other scientists that making and destroying cyclin were essential for cell division. Thus, this article outlines the historical research of the cell cycle and its regulators such as cyclin, therefore it is relevant to the topic “regulation of cell division” because it explains how they were discovered and why they are still an important factor in the subject of cell cycle.

[26] <pubmed>3306916</pubmed> At the beginning of 1950s, the discovery of growth factors were established. Nerve growth factors were one of the first growth-regulating signal substances that was discovered by Rita Levi-Montalcini. The article named “The Nerve Growth Factor 35 Years Later” shows evidence about the work of Rita Levi-Montalcini. In 1952 Rita showed when tumors from mice were transplanted into chick embryos, they induced strong growth of the chick embryo nervous system. This outgrowth did not require direct contact between the tumor and the chick embryo. Therefore she concluded that the tumor released a nerve growth- promoting factor which had a specific action on certain types of nerves. This article supports and proves that growth factors are naturally occurring substances that can effect cell division by binding to the receptors of the target cell. It also give information about the first founder of growth factors and the time of the discovery.

[27] <pubmed>16551699</pubmed>

In 2001 Leland Hartwell, Timothy Hunt and Paul Nurse won the Nobel Prize in Physiology and medicine for their discovery of 2 classes of regulatory molecules cyclins and cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs). CDKs are constitutively expressed in cells, whereas cyclins are synthesized at specific stages of cell cycle. CDK inhibitory proteins prevent the development of cell cycle because they include genes such as P21 that stops cell cycle. One of the studies that has been carried in this field is the research on “Spatiotemporal dynamics of p21CDKN1A protein recruitment to DNA-damage sites and interaction with proliferating cell nuclear antigen”. This article explains specifically the role of P21 protein inhibitor as well as the other historical aspects of the protein inhibitor P21 with other scientists and how they performed experiments to investigate its role in cellular pathways.

  1. <pubmed>268776</pubmed>
  2. <pubmed>4358429</pubmed>
  3. <pubmed>23565292</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>
  5. <pubmed>22912800</pubmed>
  6. <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>
  7. <pubmed>2259205</pubmed>
  8. <pubmed>11134534</pubmed>
  9. <pubmed>3598205</pubmed>
  10. <pubmed>22586473</pubmed>
  11. <pubmed>11134534</pubmed>
  12. <pubmed>21439394</pubmed>
  13. <pubmed>11389834</pubmed>
  14. <pubmed>10793135</pubmed>
  15. <pubmed>22357967</pubmed>
  16. <pubmed>11389834</pubmed>
  17. <pubmed>17443180</pubmed>
  18. <pubmed>4358429</pubmed>
  19. <pubmed>23565292</pubmed>
  20. <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>
  21. <pubmed>22912800</pubmed>
  22. <pubmed>22532834</pubmed>
  23. <pubmed>22046431</pubmed>
  24. <pubmed>22046431</pubmed>
  25. <pubmed>11734586</pubmed>
  26. <pubmed>3306916</pubmed>
  27. <pubmed>16551699</pubmed>