Talk:2016 Group 6 Project

From CellBiology
Revision as of 18:59, 11 May 2016 by Z5015719 (talk | contribs) (peer review)

Contents

General Organisation

peer review

z3461911

General pointers:

  • When referring to articles, use the Havard in-text referencing style i.e Surname et al (year), then follow with the superscript
  • Not much more detail is needed. Focus should now shift to managing how information is presented

A few more specific pointers:

  • shift the subheadings around. Start with Intro into History, then Yype of B Cells then Commonalities between T cells subtypes. Provides a more logical flow as the reader is introduced to the cell types then the similarities between them are identified.
  • separate the development paragraph and form a differentiation/maturation/activation subheading to reduce clumps of text
  • for types of T cells, try include a diagram to show the pathway of activation/mechanism of action. Can provide a little more detail without expanding that subtopic.
  • expand on Cripr/Cas9. Include how it works and how it interacts with T cells.
  • Work on the glossary. There is a lot of detail in total and a lot of new terms presented. A glossary would be necessary.

Good use of hiding information in the T cell types. The main points are outlined while additional information can be access if wished. Easy way of finding info.

3463953

Very extensive, Very colourful, Very informative. The main theme of criticism is in the language used, but the content is great. Many sentences have good information but need to be reread and rewritten to make sense. A classic example is : A plethora of subtypes and difficulties to find adequate markers have provided difficulty to clearly establish what Treg distinguishes from T effector cells Technically it makes sense but it may be rewritten to have more flow to example: There are a plethora of difficulties in finding adequate markers to clearly distinguish Tregs from T effector cells. - It doesn’t read well to day: as reviewed in (footnote). I would recommend using the normal authors names then foot note that. I.e. as reviewed in Robertson et al. (2000)(footnote) - Also, you refer to the same review in two continuous sentences. Perhaps you can make the paragraph flow better by using linking language. i.e. this previously mentioned review by Robertson et al also discussed… - I like the video - There are some spelling errors which imply a reread is necessary. i.e. subsection function you say “makers” not “markers*” etc. Also the next sentence doesn’t read well “ To gives a mobility the physical structure of the T cell has to continuously remodeling. “ rewrite so it says “to give mobility*” Some sentences have poor grammar i.e. don’t start with a capital letter etc. - Great job explaining VDJ recombination, I would give the images titles though. This would make it easier for the reader to have a text title to refer to. You can do this by just making the the title of the images in bold - History isn’t very extensive compared to the standard of the rest of the report - The sub sub table “autoimmune diseases” needs to be addressed. It’s telling the reader to go look up information! And the following HIV section only has a photo that’s much to small to read from! There are several areas that require addressing - Interesting that Tregs are relatively non motile, did you know after appendicitis there’s a massive release of Tregs from the appendix that spread through the colon (with relatively high motility) maybe that would be an interesting add-on - Great job on the summarising of Tregs in cancer involvement - I love the Research at UNSW section, great original thinking. - No glossary’ - Also when discussing the TCR it says the TCR is "simple" then proceeds to explain the paragraph that is pretty complex. Even if it's simple to the writer, when you use language like that you risk insulting the reader.

Factsheet & Roadmap

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qJv5ZDtQs7WxfUx_tDs-hjhOIvonsCIzQqA3YJGhyms/edit#gid=1239190165

Cloud

Drive: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B73R6WMeqvwfRDk5VjBhbW5GLTg&usp=sharing (View Only link, edit link will be provided in private)

Basic questions needing answering

What is the shape of a T cell like? What do the T cells differentiate from? Where do they mature? Thymus Locations where they reside?

z3414546

  • Good use of subheadings, coverage of topics and very thorough information however I found it very hard to get through at times, too many blocks of text and not enough tables, images or flow charts to cut through it. Some sections need to be summarised further into dot points, need to be careful as less can be more.
  • It is also difficult to understand the style of writing at times
  • Some sections are overly complicated (development, recombination events), think carefully of the target audience
  • Great range of sources and use of videos to explain and simplify difficult concepts
  • The focus on current research and links to research groups was an excellent idea

Group 6 peer review

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

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

GROUP 6

Introduction

  • The introduction is a bit long. This section should provide an overview of the whole project and identify the major points about T cells, which this has done, however it begins to go into a bit too much detail, and covers information that should be/ is covered in the body.

History

  • This section is very well done - appropriate length for a history section, clearly set out in a table, and contains both historical and recent discoveries in relation to T cells - provides a good overview of their function.

Commonalities

  • This section could be worded in a way that would be more easily understood by people who are not experts in T cells. It contains a lot of good information, its just a bit hard to read.
  • The paragraph under the subheading “T cell receptor and Co- receptors” is very hard to read, and perhaps too complicated for this purpose. There are a lot of letters and not a lot of words, and I found it hard to understand what you were trying to say. This might be because each sentence originated from a different source, which shows you’ve done a lot of research, however these sentences need to flow with each other.

Types of T cells

  • The paragraph on T helper cell function needs to be reworded. There are unfinished sentence and some phrases could be worded better.
  • Same applies for the first paragraph on Tregs - basic language would be better than trying to use complicated language that is not making sense. Some of these sentences need to be reordered
  • Reconsider how you reference - including the name of authors or studies with the footnotes would give the readers an understanding of where the information has come from, rather than just having the numbers
  • The entire section on Memory T cells seems to say ‘As reviewed in’ at the beginning of every sentence. Although you are providing a lot of information, it is quite distracting to read, and means the sentences and information don’t flow on from each other.

Research

  • This section is done well, providing a succinct summary of research in the field of T cells
  • Perhaps the CRISPR/ Cas 9 subheading could be expanded on
  • The UNSW current research table is nice, and makes the information in the project relevant to students

Overall

  • There are a number of spelling errors throughout, but i’m sure those will be picked up in the final editing process
  • The incredible depth that this project goes into shows that you’ve done a lot of research, however, in a few areas it is worded in a very complicated way that is perhaps beyond what is necessary. I found some areas quite tedious to read. In my opinion, it would be better to simplify it and condense the information as this would make a reader a lot more inclined to want to continue reading.
  • Although T cells are inextricably linked to immunology, i think there are areas where this project goes too far into the immunology side of things rather than the cell biology.
  • You have all of the information/research you need on the page already, it just needs to be sorted through and worded/ arranged in a more readable manner
  • Good research skills are evident. Well done so far.

group 6

1. key points throughout are clear

2. In the introduction there’s a sentence “T-cells earn their name from their main organ of maturation, the Thymus, which provides the means for their selection and differentiation, as shown in[2][3][4]…” I don’t think the as shown in is necessary I understand it’s to show research but simply putting the references after differentiation will suffice, otherwise it reads a bit more like an essay rather than a wiki page. Also the history section seems a bit out of place where it is, maybe it would make more sense to add it after the introduction.

3. I’m not sure if the SEM can be used under copyright, it says for personal use and not 100% if the use here would be personal. Also not sure about the image from the molecular biology text book, this may be rights reserved.

4. Very valuable teaching tool with a lot of information about the topic overall well presented

5. A lot of references which show a lot of research into the topic. However a lot of them aren’t directly referred to instead just stated as shown in… maybe instead these could be placed in an appendix or further reading section? It breaks the flow a bit when added throughout

6. Overall it is consistent with the course aims of cell biology.

Group 6

Amazing page!! Really thorough and provides an enormous amount of detail.

  • The structure and formatting is great; especially the use of collapsable tables for the different types of t cells- this really makes the page a lot less daunting than automatically displaying the huge amount of information. A great idea.
  • Maybe reorder the over all structure however, ie moving history to below introduction to allow the page to flow a little better.
  • Your use of images and videos is great. Each of them add to the information you have provided and also aid in explaining difficult concepts.
  • The reference list is extensive and very impressive, highlighting how much research you guys have done. However, I was under the impression it was preferred we did not use review articles for information and only used the for sources of images/diagrams so you might want to double check this with Mark.
  • I also really like the inclusion of research labs; especially those ones at UNSW. A really nice touch and provides students with a resource for finding more information that is current and relevant to the type of T-cells.

Over all there is not much that need fixing. I would suggest having another read through the do some last minute editing and ensuring all sections are written and flow really well (for example the structure section is really dense). Awesome job guys!

Group 6

This page is extremely detailed and it is evident that a lot of thought and work went into the way in which the information is presented. The introduction is well done and provides a good overview of T cells in an educational manner. The video placed in the introduction is also a good touch to make the page interesting from the very start. All of the individual sections are very well done and show a high level of detail, and the section of the different types of T cells is extremely thorough and provides good detail on the entire range of T cells. All of the drop down tables are also a nice touch to the page, with links to videos such as Khan Academy further helping to solidify knowledge on the subject. Additionally, the supplementing images are well picked out as they serve to solidify the information that is being provided. However, while looking through the images, the diagram of CD4 and CD8 co-receptors doesn’t seem to include a copyright statement (it only includes the fact that it is copyrighted from the British Pharmacological Society), so that is something that needs to be fixed. While the extensive number of references indicates the high level of research that has been put into the page, some of them seem to be links to websites and not articles, and I am not sure if those websites can be used as a source of information in this assignment. The research at UNSW section is a nice, unique touch to add to the page, as is the glossary, although it needs to be filled out.

Overall, this page is very well done and it is evident that a lot of effort went into creating it. All of the information is well structured and constructed, and all of the additional touches such as images and drop down sections are extremely informative. Some improvements could be made regarding the references and the images, but overall this page is very well done.

Resources

post resource link in the respective subsection (otherwise we'll get a real mess of resources) and include a short comment what it should be usesful for

Adaptions after peer review

  • Paragraphs need to be broken up - they are massive
    • Development of group 1 is good - how it is divided
  • Introduce disease in the intro

writing

writing style overwork

content

introduction: erase wrong point about presenting (see FB)

we really need to work on the intro and framework ( commonalities

that's NKT not CTL. (just so we dont forget to correct it when its unlocked again)

we need a proper histology H/E stained pic for structure

we also need something that shows the inner living of t cells, a fluorescently labeled actin picture or something, or something showing there are few endoplasmatic reticulum or something just a nice fluorescent picture of T cells

We completetly forgot about activation. that has to go into function i want some singaling pathways and I also want some common signaling pathways that are triggered by cytokines Jak/Stat certainly is one of the key ones

Layout

Reflist layout, three columnal


Template:Reflist


Introduction

Introduction links

PMID 26635800 - T Lymphocyte Migration: An Action Movie Starring the Actin and Associated Actors.

PMID 25523165 - Role of T lymphocytes in hypertension.

PMID 24556090 - Metabolism of activated T lymphocytes.

PMID 24672781 - A role for T-lymphocytes in human breast cancer and in canine mammary tumors.

PMID 24003925 - The targeting of β-cells by T lymphocytes in human type 1 diabetes: clinical perspectives.


History

History/ other T cell links

PMID 25746046 - Orchestration of invariant natural killer T cell development by E and Id proteins.

PMID 25396352 - Molecular regulation of effector and memory T cell differentiation.

PMID 25727290 - Innate memory T cells.

PMID 17972353 - A brief history of CD8 T cells

PMID 17972355 - Regulatory T cells – a brief history and perspective

PMID 15140026 - Events that led to the discovery of T-cell development and function--a personal recollection.

PMCID: PMC1857272 - Th1 and Th2 subsets

Common Structure and Function

Questions to pose regarding to this subheading
  • Ressources

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK10762/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T_cell Look up T cells in molecular biology of the cell, by alberts, it's the main textbook of this course, you should be able to access it through the internet. https://www.khanacademy.org/science/health-and-medicine/human-anatomy-and-physiology/introduction-to-immunology/v/review-of-b-cells-cd4-t-cells-and-cd8-t-cells https://askabiologist.asu.edu/t-cell http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1991486 http://accessmedicine.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?bookid=358&sectionid=39835895 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/188/4189/732 http://www.pnas.org/content/95/11/6302.full https://medtextfree.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/chapter-80-morphology-of-lymphocytes-and-plasma-cells/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3342336/

  • Dont just google t-cell structure, google different terms like t cell shape, t cell morphology, t cell form, t cell surface, how to differentiate t cells from other cells, t cell organelles, t cell plasma, t cell markers, t cell weight, t cell size etc. Google not only t cell but also t lymphocytes, and use search operators to get rid of information you don't want to (https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en) So you will get more informational pages, rather than just 2y high school overviews of t cell function. Also always good is: "images of blablabla" "visualisation of blablabla" there you'll get images and a good description what happens. Basically, just ask yourself what you wanted to know, and then google specifically for that, e.g. I want to know what the t cell membrane differs from other, hence I google "T Cell membrane" and "T Lymphocyte membrane" or just "lymphocyte membrane" to see if b and t cell have common membranes etc.


Questions to pose regarding to this subheading
  • How would you differentiate between T-Cell and other bodily and immune cells based on their function? (Bspw. B-Cells main job is to produce antigens, what is main job of T-Cells?) Attention: Wikipedia is flawed, it says T Cells are involved in cell-mediated immunity, but Th2 cells are just as heavily involved in humoral immunity)
  • What is their job in immunity, and how is this based on their function (always try to reason based on structure, e.g.: they are small, thus they can carry out their function and invade in tissues)
  • T Cell proliferation (clonal amplification, memory cell formation, stemm cells, proliferative potential compared to other cells)
  • T Cell migration: how to they move, how to they invade the tissue and why, and what molecules are involved
  • T Effector cells vs. T regulatory cells subdevision
Questions to pose regarding to this subheading
  • How do they look like, can you distinguish them from other cells of the body and the immune system based on pictures, markers, composition? Things to consider (thats not a complete list, just giving you examples what might be interesting): Size, histological stainings, morphological features (form, protrusions, how does the nucleus look like), include pictures when you find a suitable one, e.g. those on the wikipedia page are really cool as they compare different immune cells in the same picture, but you cant use a wikipedia picture!, it was specifically critisized in one of the older project that they used one.
  • Do they have the same organelles with the same size, distribution and function as all other cells?
  • Do they have specific molecules on the surface that makes them distinguishable from other cells?
  • Do they have variations in the cytoskeleton compared to other cells?
  • Is their membrane composed of the same lipis as other cells?
  • Is their cytosol and cell environment different from other cells?
  • Do they have the same genomic code as other bodily cells? (Hint: No, VDJ recombination of V region of TCR) Do all T-Cells have the same genomic code (Hint: No, same as before)
  • Where do they normally reside, in what organs in particular? (hint: secondary lymphoid organs
  • Give a overview of all T Cell subtypes that are covered, include a good diagram
  • How long do they live?

Type of T-Cells

Cytotoxic T Cells

PMID 26161391 - Functional Alteration of Natural Killer Cells and Cytotoxic T Lymphocytes upon Asbestos Exposure and in Malignant Mesothelioma Patients

PMID 25973438 - Epigenetic control of interferon-gamma expression in CD8 T cells.

PMID 25834833 - The story of CD4+ CD28- T cells revisited: solved or still ongoing?

PMID 22294696 - Interleukin-22 is produced by invariant natural killer T lymphocytes during influenza A virus infection: potential role in protection against lung epithelial damages, Paget, C., et al.

PMID 22442383 - Microbial exposure during early life has persistent effects on natural killer T cell function, Olszak, T., et al.

PMID 12021841 - Regulation of autoimmune disease by natural killer T cells.

PMID 16412042 - The natural killer T lymphocyte: a player in the complex regulation of autoimmune diabetes in non-obese diabetic mice.

Current Research, Future Directions and Conclusion

T helper cell subsets

Types of subsets  
Include subsets. Subsets I know about: T follicular helper cells, TH1, TH2, TH3, TH17, TH17 regulatory cells


z3329177

z5018866

Note: I haven't checked the copyright on any of these yet. Most are reviews and will need to be referenced accordingly


All T cell links

PMID 7006707 - Human T-lymphocyte growth factor: regulation of growth and function of T lymphocytes.

PMID 26913033 - Biophysical Aspects of T Lymphocyte Activation at the Immune Synapse.

PMID 24099302 - MicroRNA regulation of T-lymphocyte immunity: modulation of molecular networks responsible for T-cell activation, differentiation, and development.

PMID 8727107 - T-lymphocyte interactions with endothelium and extracellular matrix.

PMID 6389597 - Human T lymphocyte subsets. Functional heterogeneity and surface recognition structures.




Natural Killer T cell links

z5105710

Discussion

Z5018866 (talk) 22:48, 25 April 2016 (AEST)

  • Added in a table for history, I think it might be easier to read and understand just with a table, as the history is more of a minor section and will be good to break up text as much as possible?
  • Let me know if you have any key findings or points to add and I can find a reference for it and add it too.
  • I think nomenclature of t cell would be covered in intro or common section as they all develop in thymus.
  • I'll add in a graph of articles too

z5105710: As stated in the facebook group i propose a change of structure of the Tc subheadings, from 1.dev 2. struc. 3. funct, as the first thing I want to now about a cell is its function, then how it looks like and then how it is generated, and not the other way arround

z5105710: Guys, just adapted the structure to what we discussed. Feedback welcome. Cheers!

Z5018866 (talk) 15:11, 13 April 2016 (AEST) Hi, just for the structure of the history section do you guys think this is a good outline to follow:

  • When they were discovered and through what experiment
  • Nomenclature?
  • Key studies following the discovery
  • Potential Breakthrough findings since - if I can get enough key dates put it into a table

Also a lot of other groups have included the trends in research of that area, like how many articles on their topic over the year, not sure how they did this (wouldn't be hard to figure out) but do you think this would be good to have too?

z5105710: Sure thing, looks good for me. Make a short timeline and include fun facts. Dont do too much future, we dont want redundancy, we have a seperate heading for future directions

Z3465531 (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2016 (AEDT) Hi everyone, I expected to have work on Good Friday, but it turns out that I do not and that I am available. If we need to meet at any time, I am available.

Z3465531 (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2016 (AEDT) Hi Everyone, I apologize again that I will not be able to meet tomorrow to discuss the outline. I am definitely available by phone or skype after 5 pm or perhaps for I could step away for 15 minutes during work if you shoot me a message. I have looked at the feedback for the other projects that were done in 2015, and I think we should be have an outline that looks something like the following:

z3329177 I'm in the main library till 6 i guess, if anyone can meet i would love to join.

Proposals for Structure

z5018866

1. Banner

2. Introduction

3. History

4. Add common structure and function

5. Types

5.a. Structure

5.b. Mechanisms and development

5.c. Functions and roles in the body

5.d. Clinical implications and diseases

6. Current research, future directions and do as conclusion

7. Glossary

8. References

In terms of dividing work I think we should do a type of t-cell each, making a glossary and doing references as we go along for our sub type. For the common structure and function and current research we can collaborate at the end Someone can do the intro and someone can do history whilst others can do the smaller subtypes of t cells

z3465531

1) Banner Heading (as in Group 1 2015)

2) Introduction (as in Group 1 2015, or with timeline graphic as in group 4 with internal referencing, or video as in group 5, careful with citing though) Be sure to cite textbook if used

3) History (Emphasizing research techniques)

4) Types of T Lymphocytes

5) Structure (as in Group 1 2015)

6) Function

7) Malfunction of T-lymphcyes – investigation of T-Lymphocyte malfunction as a causative agent of disease

8) Current Research – (Possibly switched in order with clinical significance, we’ll see how it feels, good example Group 5 2015 with collapsible tables) -

9) Clinical Significance (as in Group 3 2015)

10) Future Directions (Possibly unify this with the conclusion? Plenty of examples)

11) Conclusion (closing section)

12) Glossary (as in Group 1 2015)

13) References

What does everyone think?

z5105710

1)Titel Picture

2) Introduction

4) History (short! keep it on the history of discovery of structure and function, as this is a cell biology class)

3) Common Characteristics (Structure and function of T-Cells compared to other BC's, not too much as specific structure and function of each T-Cell type will be covered in Subsection and they are very different from each other)

Surface Proteins TCR ...

4) Development (Short, not too much immunology)


5) Types (focus on structure and function, Activation, mechanism of action, involved pathways etc.)


6) Clinical Significance (focus on cell biology pathways in the development of the disease)


7) Current research (Involved research centers, current theories related to cell biology of T-Cells etc.) Elaborate this section, he put emphasis on it on a) the lecture b) criticism to former projects

z3329177

I was looking at the structure, i will add a bit more,but the format could be roughly like this

1. General information (about t-cells, types etc.)

2. History (early and current researches, future expectations)

3. Cell structure

4. Function and mechanisms

5. Related diseases

6. Glossary

7. References


Division of Topics:

Helper - z3329177

Cytotoxic - z5018866

Memory - z3465531

Suppressor - z5105710

Natural killer

Mucosal associated invariant

Gamma delta T cells -

Suggestions for subtopic

z5105710: T Regulatory Cells: I

z3465531: T Regulatory Cells would be good. Red Blood Cell, Neutrophil, Eosinophil, Basophil, or Monocyte/Macrophage would be great because they always seem to be relevant to our studies. I'l be happy to go with whatever the group decides.

z5018866: I am more than happy to do T regulatory cells, as it would be great to do a topic that someone has a particular interest in. If there isn't enough on t reg cells alone we could maybe do T cells as a whole and z5105710 you could potentially focus on your interest of t reg cells.

z3329177: I'm happy with the topic, because there are many of articles about t-cells that we can access. For the T-Regulatory cells, i think that it is interesting topic, but i will need to learn more about it to be honest.

Reminders

- Do not cite a review article has having findings. "As reviewed by" is more appropriate terminology. (As in This reference (Biochemistry of tropoelastin. Vrhovski B, Weiss AS. Eur J Biochem. 1998 Nov 15;258(1):1-18. Review. No abstract available. PMID 9851686 ) is a good review article to introduce your topic. One key point is that it is a "review" not original research and should have been cited as such. For example "as reviewed in" or "see review". It is important to discriminate between original research articles and reviews in your writing., group 3 of 2015)

- At all times, remember: How is this sentence related to our topic/subtopic and what are the consequences thereof. Bspw Group 3 2015 made subsection of Vit. A deficiency but didn't explain what this had to do with their exact topic

- At least 1 image on the page should be a student drawn image (e.g flow diagram, power point slide of the cell structure).

- Remember to give all uploaded content an appropriate name.

- Any time that you see nomenclature in an article that is not the current nomenclature (eg. MSDS instead of SDS), that means the article is old and should not be used.

- Avoid add unnecessary detail explaining biological processes that not directly related to the topic (e.g. the description of translation in Group 1 2015)

- It might be a good idea to add "additional information" collapsible boxes (as in Group 3 2015)

Lab 3 Assessment

z3465531

1. Summary: Cathepsin B controls the persistence of memory CD8+ T lymphocytes, Byrne, S. M., et al. [1]

This study investigates the mechanisms by which memory T lymphocytes persist, even in the absence of antigen.

The findings indicate that one of the major limiting factors to memory CD8(+) T cell populations is the stability of the cell lysosomes. The genes IL-15 and IL-7 contribute to the production of serine protease inhibitor (Spi) 2A, which inhibits cytosolic cathepsin and thus inhibits apoptosis. In animal models, Spi2A inhibition results in less CD8+ T lymphocyte maturation and less homeostatic proliferation as well. The experimental results indicated that Spi2A is required in order for the memory CD8(+) T lymphocytes to maintain population numbers after viral infection and that one specific mechanism of action is protection from lysosomal breakdown via cathepsin B inhibition. Furthermore, it was found that T cells deficient in Spi2A could have their homeostatis restored by concurrently blocking cathepsin B, which strongly suggested that the physiological target of Spi2A was indeed cathepsin B.

The relevance of this topic to T lymphocytes, specifically memory T lymphocytes, is manifold. The primary function of memory T lymphocytes is to persist within the organism until such time as they are necessary to promote a fast, powerful targeted response to a second infection. If the population of the memory T lymphocytes is allowed to deplete, then immunological memory will not remain. If, on the other hand, memory T lymphocytes proliferated over abundantly, then this would be a likely mechanism for the development of possible leukemia.

2. Summary: The majority of HIV type 1 DNA in circulating CD4+ T lymphocytes is present in non-gut-homing resting memory CD4+ T cells, McBride, K., et al. [2]

This study investigates the locational distributions of integrated HIV-1 DNA copies within memory CD4+ T lymphocytes for the purposes of better understanding the efficacy of disease treatments.

A proposed site of prominent HIV-1 replication with Memory CD4+ T lymphocytes is the gut-associated lymphoid tissue, where such cells tend to recirculate. The researchers of this study hypothesized that regulatory T cells and activated CD4+ T lymphocytes tend to recirculate and disproportionately make up a source of the HIV-1 reservoir, serving as a difficulty needing to be solved in any possible eradication of the disease.

Real time polymerase chain reaction was used to localise HIV-1 DNA within the human immune cells. More than 80% of total HIV-1 DNA was found in non-gut-homing CD45RO+ memory T lymphocytes, while less than 10% was found in regulatory T cells and CD38+ activated memory cells. The researchers found that most of the HIV-1 DNA was present in non-gut homing resting CD(+) T cells. The findings of the experiment are significant because they work toward better understanding the locational pathogenesis of HIV-1 in memory CD4+ T lymphocytes, which is necessary for developing a cure.

3. Summary: Interleukin-22 is produced by invariant natural killer T lymphocytes during influenza A virus infection: potential role in protection against lung epithelial damages, Paget, C., et al. [3]

During viral infections, invariant natural killer T (iNKT) cells are a type of non-conventional T lymphocyte that plays a key role through quickly producing cytokines. While the mechanism of their action is not entirely well known, it has been proposed that they play a useful role during influenza A virus (IAV) infection.

The findings of the article support that iNKT cells produce IFN-γ and IL-22, cytokines critical to muscosal immunity. The specific mechanisms of the production and mediation of these cytokines are investigated, especially with respect to the morality of those infected by the virus. It was demonstrated in vitro and vivo, at least during early IAV infection, that IL-22 helps to prevent epithelial cell death in a IAV-infection of the airway. In total, iNKT cells were revealed to provide a quick source of IL-22 that possibly is critical to protecting the lung epithelium. These findings are significant to better understanding how T-lymphocytes, and specifically natural killer T lymphocytes, play a role in proactively protecting from early infections in critical exposed areas, such as the lungs.

4. Summary: Microbial exposure during early life has persistent effects on natural killer T cell function, Olszak, T., et al. [4]

This study investigated the importance of microbial exposure at a young age to the function of natural killer T cells, which are supposed to play a critical role in diseases relating to the immune system such inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and asthma.

The findings of the article are that germ-free (GF) mice tended to accumulate invariant natural killer T (iNKT) cells in the lungs and in the lamina propria of colon, increasing morbidity as compared with specific pathogen-free mice. Also, the GF mice had increased intestinal and pulmonary expression of CXCL16, a chemokine ligand associated with increased iNKT cells of the mucosa.

On the other hand, when neonatal GF mice were colonized with conventional microbiota, the mice tended to be protected from iNKT accumulation within the mucosa and associated pathogenicity. The results of the experiments as a whole suggested that contact with commensal microbes by a critical early age are crucial to developing a healthy levels of mucosal iNKT. These findings are significant to better understanding iNKT cells because they address both the natural function of iNKT cells in providing resistance to environmental exposures, but the experimenters also investigate the double edged nature to this immunity. If a the host fails to interact with any conventional microbiota during the early stages of life, then the natural killer T-cells themselves seem to be a source of pathogenicity. The results of the experiment provide crucial insight for better understanding T lymphocytes as a whole.

Migratory challenges faced by T cells [5]

References

  1. <pubmed>22745374</pubmed>
  2. <pubmed>23971972</pubmed>
  3. <pubmed>22294696</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>22442383</pubmed>
  5. <pubmed>26635800</pubmed>

z5018866

1. Summary: Folate-mediated chitosan nanoparticles containing the IP-10 gene enhance melanoma-specific cytotoxic CD8+CD28+T Lymphocyte responses, He, J., “et. al.” [1]

In the study promising combination treatments for malignant melanomas are explored using adoptive immunotherapy with Cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL).

The study aimed to increase the CTL anti-tumor response by inducing melanoma TRP2-specific CD8+CD28+T cell in combination with folate-modified chitosan nanoparticles containing Interferon-y-inducible protein-10 (IP-10). IP-10 plays a role in chemotaxis particularly for CD8+ T cells towards the tumor [2][3]. The chitosan molecules where prepared with a IP-10 gene from a mouse and the TRP2-specific CD8+CD28+ T cells co-cultured with artificial antigen presenting cells, due to cost and efficiency. Affected mice were treated with one therapy, both or a saline control, with tumor size and survival times measured. Other immune cells were measured and TUNEL techniques used to determine proliferation and angiogenesis.

Overall the combination of the two therapies increased the anti-tumor response and hindered the advancement of the melanoma in vivo. Inhibiting growth and proliferation whilst promoting apoptosis of tumor cells leading to an extended survival time for the mice than either therapy alone. With the chitosan nanoparticles creating a chemotaxic by inducing IP-10 secretion, resulting in recruitment of CD8+ t cells in the tumor area angiogenesis and proliferation were reduced.

2. Summary: Delivery system of CpG oligodeoxynucleotides through eliciting and effective T cell immune response against melanoma in mice, Sun, W., “et. al.” [4]

Through the addition of a C-class CpG ODN-685 (oligodeoxynucleotides) the study aims to explore the effects on anti-tumor activity in melanoma inoculated mice as well as prophylactically in healthy mice to ultimately improve the immunogenicity of the whole tumor cell lysate developed as a vaccine for tumors, whilst. The CpG ODNs are involved in stimulating the early immune responses with T cell activation occurring during their transport to the immune system. There were two groups of study, prophylactic – which were given tumor cell lysate, CpG ODN, tumor cell lysate plus CpG ODN or PBS as control. At a later stage were given tumor cells. The other therapeutic group was inoculated with melanoma tumor cells and then received a treatment. Tumors were either inoculated in hind leg or peritoneum of mice. Subcutaneous and intraperitoneal melanoma affected mice did not respond to tumor lysate or CpG ODN but when combined an immune response was triggered. This led to longer survival time and prevented tumor spread to through the abdominal cavity. Upon analysis of splenocytes the lysate only group displayed anti-tumor effects whilst the CpG ODN alone did not however, when used in conjunction an enhanced response was displayed. Suggesting assistance from CpG ODN in stimulating a cytotoxic immune response. CD4+ / CD8+ T cells increased significantly after tumor inoculation signifying their involvement in immune response and when CpG ODNs where combine with tumor lysate a strong specific Cytotoxic T lymphocyte response was generated. It was concluded that CpG ODN-685 could be effective in increasing immunogenicity of tumor vaccines against melanoma.

3. Summary: Spinal cord T-cell infiltration in the rate spread nerve injury model: a time course study, Gattlen, C., “et. al.” [5]

Infiltration of the spinal cord by T-cells after SCI [5]

In this study Gattlen et. al. explored the immune response following a spared nerve injury (SNI) [6] in mice, in particular microglia, T-lymphocytes and cytotoxic T-lymphocytes responses. The study looks at the relation between different immune cell types and their role in pain and chronic pain. Levels of microglia (Iba1), T-lymphocyte (CD2) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CD8) were measured through various techniques such as measuring gene expression and immunofluorescence.

Microglial reactivity gene expression was unregulated for a prolong period, whilst microglial proliferation measured through immunofluorescence was only increased sharply on day 2. Inflammatory genes were regulated following the SNI with pro-inflammatory factors such as interleukins being increased soon after injury and typical anti-inflammatory factors began to increase at a later stage. Following the SNI CD2 and CD8 cells were counted in the dorsal horn to detect T-cell infiltration into the spinal cord however, a significant difference was not found. This is comparable to a spinal cord injury where T-cell infiltration is displayed.

The increase of anti-inflammatory factors could be a factor in the resolution of the inflammation [7]. Increased excitability in the lamina neurons of the spinal cord has been linked to the increased presence of Pro-inflammatory factors [8]. From this the study concluded that further study should focus on the transition from pro- to anti- inflammatory phases of the microglial cells.

4. Summary: Eliciting cytotoxic T lymphocytes against human laryngeal cancer-derived antigens” evaluation of dendritic cells pulsed with a heat-treated tumour lysate and other antigen loading strategies for dendritic cell based vaccination, Wei, F., “et. al.” [9]

With the goal of improving the antitumor immunity though optimizing antigen loading of current dendritic cell (DC) vaccinations, Wei et. al. explore the value of various dendritic cell vaccinations comprised of whole tumor cells or their derivatives. Through antigen loading DCs tumor-associated antigen (TAA) specific t-cells and cytokine production can be induced. DCs pulsed with tumor cell supernatant (DC-TCS), whole-cell tumor stressed lysate (DC-TSL) and irradiated tumor cells (DC-ITC) where the three different types. It was found that DC-TSL induced strongest responses for TAA-specific T-cells, Th1 cytokine production, and cytotoxic T lymphocyte activity. Making it the most efficient of the three tested for laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma. DC-TCS and ITC inhibited T cell activation however, had limited capacity for CTL activity.

DCs have a potent antigen presenting capacity, which are taken advantage of in the vaccines that have shown promising clinical results [10]. However, a percentage of patients remain insensitive to the therapy, where further research can develop the immunogenicity of these current vaccinations.

References

  1. <pubmed>27022421</pubmed>
  2. <pubmed>18723067</pubmed>
  3. <pubmed>21802343</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>26918036</pubmed>
  5. 5.0 5.1 <pubmed>27005622 </pubmed> Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name "PMID27005622" defined multiple times with different content
  6. <pubmed>19923276</pubmed>
  7. <pubmed>10767254</pubmed>
  8. <pubmed>18480275 </pubmed>
  9. <pubmed>26795730</pubmed>
  10. <pubmed>12633662</pubmed>

z3329177

1. Summary: Defining characteristics of classical Hodgkin lymphoma microenvironment T-helper cells, Greaves P, et. al. [1]

This article shows that how the t helper cells acts in the diseases such as hodgkin lymohoma. The hypothesis that TH-infliltrate is expressing TH1 marker-rich rather than TH2-enriched in hodgkin lymohoma miroenvironment. The method that they used was gathering the samples from the CHL and RLN patients. The sample cultured based on technique developed for proliferation tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. The way of examine is looking at amount of the TH1 and TH2 associated with CCRs. The result of the experiment was that TH1 associated CCRs more than TH2 association with CCRs. This result proves that hypothesis that CHL express more to TH1 active and suppressed TH2 action. This study could give potential diagnostic, prognostic and therapy on CHL.

2. Summary: Brain Glycolipids Suppress T Helper Cells and Inhibit Autoimmune Demyelination, Mycko MP, et. al.[2]

Sulfatide treatment suppresses EAE. A, B, CD1d-deficient mice sensitized for EAE with MOG35–55 were treated with five intravenous injections of sulfatides or vehicle[2]

The summary of this article is that autoimmune demyelination disease such as multiple sclerosis. Myelin in the CNS contains proteins and lipids. These component could recognise as foreign by immune system. Autoimmune demyelination is the term that our immune system attacks our myelin. This research found inhibition of sulfatides dependent navie T helper cells. The sulfatides are consisting major component of myelin glycolipids. The effect of sulfatides was not related to necrosis or apoptosis but they are upregulating two transcription factors in early growth of T cell. This research found that Sulfatides inhibit navie T cell. Moreover, glycolipid 3-sulfate group was essential for the T cell suppression, and the T cell inhibition was galectin-4-dependent. The Th17 that is known as major effect for autoimmune demyelination is inhibited by sulfatides. Therefore, following result shows that sulfatides can prevent autoimmune demyelination. It could be relevant for future treatment of the MS.

3. Summary: Follicular T helper cells and humoral reactivity in kidney transplant patients, de Graav GN, et. al. [3]

This article demonstrate that Tfh cells may mediate humoral alloreactivity, and it also presents in immunosuppressed environment. This research wants to find the humoral alloreactivity of Tfh cells regulation in kidney transplant patients, unlikely current research found that B cell is main role in alloreactivity in kidney transplantation. Tfh cells gives differentiation of B cells by IL-21. They observe the numbers and function of peripheral Tfh cells in patients before and after transplantation. The research using the relationship with the presence of DSA and Tfh cells. The result shows that the remaining number of Tfh is stable after transplantation. However, their IL-21 producing capacity is decreasing under the immunosuppressive drugs, and also during the biopsies the Tfh cells co-localized with B cells and immunoglobulins in follicular-like structures.

4. Summary: Microbe driven T-helper cell differentiation: lessons from Candida albicans and Staphylococcus aureus, Zielinski CE. [4]

The Th1 and Th2 cells are discovered about 3 decades ago, but now we know that more of Th cells present, such as Th17 which is very important role in IL-17 induced recruitment of neutrophils, and also it is involving in destroying bacteria and fungi. However, this Th17 cells are also involving in pathogenesis of autoimmune disease. The differentiation of human Th17 cells are depending on the microbial antigen such as C. albicans and S. aureus. The C. albicans specific Th17 cells are dependent to IL-1β, but not in S. aureus specific th17 cells. The C. albicans induces pro-inflammatory Th17 cells, and this is incapable of self-regulatoryIL-10 production, unlikely S.aureus induces anti-inflammatory Th17 cells, and also produce IL-10. Having knowledge that how the microbes induces t-cell will be very important to therapeutic method for immunomodulation strategies.

References

  1. <pubmed>24004665</pubmed>
  2. 2.0 2.1 <pubmed>24948818</pubmed>
  3. <pubmed>25557528</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>25040443</pubmed>

z5105710

1. T lymphocytes need less than 3 min to discriminate between peptide MHCs with similar TCR-binding parameters, Brodovitch, A., et al. [1]

Summary

Brodovitch et al. investigated the kinetics of the interaction between MHCs and TCRs. MHC and TCR interaction plays a crucial role in the foundation of "immunological synapses" and discrimination of self and non-self. 1G4 TCR carrying human T-Lymphocytes are dropped on a surface functionalized with various different types, formes (diamonds, squares, crosses) and amounts of pMHCs. To determine the time necessary to differentiate between the distinguished pMHC types, interference reflection microscopy (IRM) was used to quantify the spreading area in real time. The results indicate, that the differentiation process is completed already after 2 minutes, a reflection of how fast our immune system is able to process attacks on our system.

2. The direction of migration of T-lymphocytes under flow depends upon which adhesion receptors are engaged, Dominiquez, GA., et al. [2]

Summary

The movement of leukocytes within vascular environments has given invaluable insight in the progression of auto-immune diseases such as multiple sklerose. The effort of basic research has been promptly rewarded by the discovery of one of the most effective treatments against MS, a monoclonal antibody called Natalizumab, which opts against the delocalisation of lymphocytes from the blood stream into nervous tissue[3]. In the light of such discoveries, further emphasis has been placed on the research of Lymphocyte movement. This paper tried to observe the interaction between lymphocyte function-associated antigen-1 (LFA-1; αLβ2), very late antigen-4 (VLA-4; α4β1) and their ligands, intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1), cell adhesion molecules expressed on the vascular endothelial lining. VCAM and ICAM was printed on a silicone polymer (PDSM) to inquire, whether ligand type and engagement strenght would influence the migration direction. It was found that direction and cell polarity are well influenced by ligand type and engagement strenght.

3. Broad T-cell receptor repertoire in T-lymphocytes derived from human induced pluripotent stem cells, Chang, CW., et al.[4]

Summary

Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC) are one of the biggest promises nowadays. The standard approach, also used in this paper, is viral transfection with Oct3/4, Sox2, c-Myc, and Klf4 [5]. These are the four transcription factors with the power to push cells back to the initial steps of their development. The therapeutic options for iPS are mind-boggling, from Leukemia to Multiple Sclerosis, an uncountable number of diseases is a direct consequence of a malfunctioning immune system. Chang et al. achieved for the first time to induce pluripotent human T-Lymphocytes with expression of various different T Cell Receptors (TCRs). The number of TCRs decreases with the advancing T-Cell development, an increase of incorporation of different TCRs thus signals dedifferentiation. The observed iPSC showed normal patterns of differentiation, as shown in subsequent expression of CD7 and CD3. Furthermore, cytokine signaling strongly resembled natural patterns. The importance of the findings in this paper are emphasized if one takes into account one of the major difficulties with iPSC: directed differentiation. Current approaches focus on mimicking the natural cell environment and copy it from in-vivo to in-vitro, an approach which has been successfully applied by the authors of this paper.

4. Restrictions to HIV-1 replication in resting CD4+ T lymphocytes, Pan, X., et al.[6], a review

Summary

Schematic model of HIV-1 replication and restrictions thereof in activated and resting CD4+ T lymphocytes[6]

Inarguably one of the most important Type of T-Cells are Cells expressing a CD4 surface glycoprotein (not in the Paper, but on a side note: In the range of T-Lymphocytes, CD4 is mainly expressed by T-Helper cells, but also found on other Leukocytes, such as NK-Cells[7]). As reviewed in the paper, besides physiological functions, T-Helper Cells also serve as the main host for HIV1, but only as long as they are in a active state. Active T-Helper Cells primarily reside in lympnodes and replicate not only its own, but also the viral genome. As CD4+ T-Lymphocytes become inactive, a actin structure forms around the cell nucleus and the cell becomes insusceptible for HIV invasion. The review states the cell restriction factor SAMHD1, a deoxynucleoside triphosphate triphosphohydrolase, a key player in inactive CD4+ Cell defense against reverse transcriptase and insertion of viral genom into nuclear DNA.

References

  1. <pubmed>25782169</pubmed>
  2. <pubmed>25674729</pubmed>
  3. <pubmed>16510744</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>PMC4020825</pubmed>
  5. <pubmed>16904174</pubmed>
  6. 6.0 6.1 <pubmed>PMC3698640</pubmed>
  7. <pubmed>16951326</pubmed>

Reminders

Introduction - image and maybe Khan academy video http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fimmu.2014.00057/full

A large proportion of the individual assessment is the peer assessment

Don't write an essay. Be concise and thorough. Identify the parts of the project that were very useful/not useful. Speak in professional language

Peer Assessment

2016 Projects: Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7
Group Projects - Blood Cell Biology - Updated 21 April  
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)

PuMed citations PuMed Central citations PuMed Central note
Note - that while full publications are available online at PuMed Central, not all these publications allow reuse. You should still always identify the copyright statement within the actual article that allows reuse. Many research labs that receive government grants are required to make their published research available on PMC, this does not mean that the publicly available copy content can be used in your projects.

Remember - No easily identifiable statement usually means that you cannot reuse.


Examples from Megakaryocyte references on PubMed Central

Embryology - content cannot be reused but a useful resource about cell development.

Histology - images these can be reused in your projects.

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.

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