Talk:2017 Group 2 Project

From CellBiology

2017 Projects: Group 1 - Delta | Group 2 - Duct | Group 3 - Beta | Group 4 - Alpha

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.

Cells of the Pancreas  
The Endocrine Pancreas The Exocrine Pancreas
(pancreatic islets or islets of Langerhans)

NCBI Bookshelf Resources

Development Sources

Examples of Database searches  
Database Example search Wiki code (note - copy text when in Read mode)
Pubmed (all databases) pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
Pubmed pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
Pubmed 5 most recent references[1] <pubmed limit=5>pancreas</pubmed>
Pubmed Central pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
Pubmed Central (images) pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
PLoS (Public Library of Science) pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
BioMed Central pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
BMC Cell Biology pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
BMC Developmental Biology pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
Biology Open (BiO) pancreas [ ''pancreas'']
  1. Note the references appear where the code is pasted and will be updated each time the page is loaded, and may occasionally list articles that do not appear directly related to the search topic.
About Journal Searches  
The following general information is about the above online databases and journals.

External Links Notice - The dynamic nature of the internet may mean that some of these listed links may no longer function. If the link no longer works search the web with the link text or name.

  • PubMed - comprises more than 24 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books. Citations may include links to full-text content from PubMed Central and publisher web sites.
    • PubMed Central (PMC) - is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM).
  • Public Library of Science (PLOS) - is a nonprofit publisher and advocacy organization founded to accelerate progress in science and medicine by leading a transformation in research communication.
  • BioMed Central (BMC) - is an STM (Science, Technology and Medicine) publisher of 291 peer-reviewed open access journals.
    • BMC Developmental Biology - is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on the development, growth, differentiation and regeneration of multicellular organisms, including molecular, cellular, tissue, organ and whole organism research.
    • Reproductive Health - is an open access, peer-reviewed online journal focusing on all aspects of human reproduction.
    • Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology (RB&E) - aims to act as a forum for the dissemination of results from excellent research in the reproductive sciences. RB&E represents a global platform for reproductive and developmental biologists, reproductive endocrinologists, immunologists, theriogenologists, infertility specialists, obstetricians, gynecologists, andrologists, urogynecologists, specialists in menopause, reproductive tract oncologists, and reproductive epidemiologists.
  • Biology Open (BiO) - is an online-only Open Access journal that publishes peer-reviewed original research across all aspects of the biological sciences, including cell science, developmental biology and experimental biology.


Project Edits


  • Z5129708 - 8 images
  • Z5019526 - 3 images
  • Z5015752 - 0 images

General Comments

  • Historical events table a good inclusion showing timeline of discoveries.
    • Why does it stop at 1859?
  • Good figure and text balance.
    • Centre section from Development in Mouse to Dysregulation of signalling in diseases - no images.
    • Pancreatitis to The effect of high glucose on cell proliferation - no images.
  • Liked inclusion of a Quiz.
    • Exposed answers are informative.
  • Glossary is very short not covering all terms.
  • Project reference list - multiple entries for same reference.
    • references 5 ot 8, 24-25, 30 and 33, 74-75.
    • references 3, 9, 14 and 35.
  • Under Cystic Fibrosis sub-heading text formatting issue.

<pubmed>28291966</pubmed> Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common malignancy of the pancreas and develops from cells lining the ducts. It was reported that a patient suffering from PDAC without high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) in the surrounding areas had worse prognoses than a patient with PDAC with high-grade PanIN. This paper researches the molecular characteristics of PDACs with and without high-grade PanIN. They divided 100 patients with PDAC in 2 groups: one group with the PDACs with PanIN-2 or PanIN-3 in the background and the other group without PanIN-2 and PanIN-3. Immunohistological staining was used to evaluate SMAD4, p53 and p16 expressions in the invasive ductal carcinoma. The results showed that the group without PanIN-2 and -3 had sufficiently more continual high p53 and low SMAD4 expression, concluding that PDACs without high-grade PanIN may develop through an alternative pathway besides the PANIN-carcinoma sequence. Therefore, the molecular characteristics in the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas with high-grade PanIN were significantly different from those in the pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas without high-grade PanIN.

<pubmed>26100232</pubmed> Pancreatic duct glands (PDGs) are the main site of proliferation of pancreatic ductal epithelium, and one of its molecular features includes marking stem cell niches. The purpose of this research was to explore the role of PDGs as a progenitor niche using human and mouse models. This was done by grouping the cells by immunohistochemistry and microarray analysis. It was found that PDGs are the principal site of proliferative activity in the epithelium of the pancreas as a response to acute inflammatory injury. The proliferative cells would then relocate to the pancreatic duct and obtain a more mature pancreatic ductal phenotype, while losing their PDG-specific markers. This suggests that the pancreatic duct glands are an epithelial progenitor compartment that makes way for mature differentiated progeny and is important in pathways for embryonic and stem cell niches. This leads to the conclusion that pancreatic duct glands amount to an epithelial progenitor niche important in the repair of the pancreatic duct after inflammatory injury.

<pubmed>27523981</pubmed> There is an insignificant amount of information regarding the origin of pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN). Characteristics of side-branch IPMNs are found in pancreatic duct glands (PDG) that also convey gastric mucins. The aim of this research was to discover whether pancreatic duct glands were a precursor compartment for IPMNs, as well as to explore the role of TFF2 and the gastric mucosa - as both are involved in epithelial repair and tumour suppression (TFF2 stands for Trefoil factor family 2 and is a protein expressed by PDGs). In the study, they obtained pancreatectomy specimens taken from 20 patients with chronic pancreatitis. These samples were analyzed by immunohistochemistry to detect TFF2 and cell proliferation. In the histologic analyses of human IPMNs, the results showed that proliferation mainly took place in the basal segments containing pancreatic duct glands. This led to the conclusion that PDGs form the basal segment and can potentially work as a progenitor compartment. In addition, it was discovered that TFF2 has tumor-suppressor activity in the mouse pancreas and prevents formation of mucinous neoplasms.

<pubmed>28315433</pubmed> Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is classified by neural changes and abnormal expression of neural-specific factors. Semaphorins, a bearer of signals, is a main contributor in axon guidance, the immune response and tumor progression. The clinical importance of Semaphorin 3c and its role in the growth and metastasis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma remains unknown. This study found that overexpression of Semaphorin 3c inhibited cell apoptosis, thus promoted pancreatic cancer proliferation and regulated pancreatic cancer cell EMT by activating the ERK1/2 signalling pathway. Aberrant Semaphorin 3c expression was unmistakeably related with a specific tumor stage and correlated with poor survival of PDAC patients. Therefore, it was concluded that Semaphorin 3c is overexpressed and was linked with tumor stage in pancreatic cancer as it promoted tumor growth and metastasis by activating ERK1/2 signaling pathway.

<pubmed>20398666</pubmed> Dynamic regulation of CFTR bicarbonate permeability by [Cl-]i and its role in pancreatic bicarbonate secretion. The pancreatic ductal cells secrete HCO3-, which provides an environment in the duodenum which is optimum for the function of digestive enzymes. This paper explores how the cells secrete the HCO3- using concentration of Cl- ions. To do this they use human pancreatic cells and guinea pig pancreatic tissue and analyse using approaches such as imunnoblotting and electrophysiology. The results of the study suggested that the pathway, WNK-OSR1/SPAK pathway, is sensitive to the intracellular concentration of Cl- and this acts as a switch which causes the cells to secrete HCO3-.

<pubmed>26431833</pubmed> ATP release, generation and hydrolysis in exocrine pancreatic duct cells. This study explores whether pancreatic duct cells release ATP in order to regulate the ductal function, and the factors that are important in the control of this process. A human pancreatic cell line Capan-1 was used, as these cells are known epithelial cells and have ion channels and transporters in their membrane used for secretion. The conditions around the cells were changed, for example changes to the pH, and the fast ATP release from the cells was detected using an online luminescence measurement.

<pubmed>19266047</pubmed> Mechanisms of KGF Mediated Signaling in Pancreatic Duct Cell Proliferation and Differentiation. The aim of this paper is to explore how pancreatic ductal cells proliferate and differentiate as they can be used as an alternative source of insulin producing beta cells, this is important as it could be an opportunity for new therapies of cell replacement in Type 1 diabetic patients. The study investigates the effects of Keratinocyte Growth factor (KGF), which activates Fibroblast growth factor (FGFs) receptors which are expressed on the surface of the ductal cells. To do this they used a BrdU assay to measure the cell proliferation of diabetic rat cells, the results measured using immunolocalization. The results of these in vivo and in vitro experiments show that the KGF promotes duct cell proliferation by inducing PDX1 pathway and the regenesis of beta cells. When the pathways involved were investigated they found that the MEK-ERK1/2 pathway is responsible for duct cell proliferation and the PI3K/AKT pathway is unregulated by KGF and mediates cell differentiation to beta cells. The findings from this study is important as it could be used in regenerative medicine for diabetes.

<pubmed>26510396</pubmed> Inactivation of TGFβ receptor II signalling in pancreatic epithelial cells promotes acinar cell proliferation, acinar-to-ductal metaplasia and fibrosis during pancreatitis. Pancreatitis is a disease in the pancreatic cells where digestive enzymes attack the cells as they are prematurely activated. After pancreatitis the tissue needs to repair itself, Transforming growth factor-β (TGFβ)’s expression is unregulated during this repair. TGFβ is involved in activation of transcription genes and activating smads which activate growth. The aim of this study was to explore how the signalling of TGFβ in pancreatic duct cells is in involved in pancreatitis.The study used transgenic mice models, that had a knockout allele of the TGFβ-RII receptor, allowing them to analyse the signal involved in each key part of the disease. To study the cells, pancreatitis was induced in the mice using injections, then cultures of their acing cells were taken and incubated with the TGFβ inhibitor. The cells were analysed by using antibodies to label the proteins of interest and quantify and then RNA was then extracted from the cells and analysed. The results of the experiments suggested that TGFβ-RII signalling is not involved in the damage observed from pancreatitis, it also increases the expression of kinase inhibitors and the lack of TGFβ-RII in the cells causes a increased number of inflammatory cells present in pancreatitis. The results of this study are important as they show that TGFβ can act as a tumour supressor and is involved in pancreatic tissue regeneration.

Pancreas is a mixed exocrine and endocrine gland that plays an important role in good digestion and homeostasis. Ductal cell is part of the endocrine gland and it transports the digestive enzymes produced by acinar cells to the intestine where they ensure nutrient digestion and absorption. Three pancreatic buds (1 dorsal, 2 ventral) arise and develop in response to signals from the adjacent mesodermal tissues such as notochord, aorta and cardiac mesoderm. As the stomach and duodenum rotate, the ventral bud and the pancreatic biliary orifice move around, leading the ventral and dorsal buds to fuse. The ventral bud forms the posterior part of the head and the uncinated process, and the dorsal bud forms the remainder of the organ. The main pancreatic duct, Wirsung is the result of the fusion of the ventral duct with the distal part of the dorsal duct. The proximal part of the dorsal duct, Santorini is preserved with its own opening into the duodenum. <pubmed>17258745</pubmed>

In the mouse, at 8.5 dpc, the homeobox transcription factors Pdx1 and Hlxb9 mark regions of the forming duodenum where the pancreas buds form (one dorsal and two ventralateral). One dorsal and one ventral bud expand and fuse to form one organ. All the endocrine cells including duct cells derive from common progenitors expressing Pdx1 but each start a unique differentiation program. During 9.5 and 11.5 dpc, selective labelling of cells that express Pdx1 at particular developmental stages show that duct progenitors express Pdx1. Permanent expression of activated Notch allows the expression of several ductal markers. The mechanism where branches form is still not clear and certain. However several gene deletions affect the number of branches and the factors produced by the mesenchyme of the pancreas control branching. <pubmed>15618005</pubmed>

This paper has been reviewed by Giancarlo Flati in 2002. History of the discovery of pancreas and the pancreatic duct begins back in time, during 16th and 17th centuries. There have been a number of controversies on who discovered the parts first and comes first in priority. Main duct of the pancreas - 1642: first described by Johann Georg Wirsung (1589-1643), during an autopsy of a 30 year old man executed for a cime - After this discovery it was understood that the pancreas was a secretory gland - The first cannulation of pancreatic ducts was conducted in dogs by Reignier de Graaf - 1796: German G.Sommering first used the word ‘Bauchspeicheldruse (abdominal salivary gland) to indicate the pancreas’ excretory function - Many scientists in 19th century who dedicated most of their efforts to investigate the physiology of pancreatic secretion

Accessory Pancreatic Duct: - Discovered by Diovanni Domenico Santorini (1681-1737) - Santorini wrote his ‘Observationum Anatomicarum’ in 1724, where he clearly described a second pancreatic duct. However it was not published until 1775. - Santorini was forgotten for a period of time and was re-evaluated by Claude Bernard with his physiologic studies 1859. However, the discovery of the second duct was already been observed by other scientists then. One explanation of the overlooked previous discoveries might be due to the fact that the language of the texts was Latin and perhaps contemporary anatomists did not make special efforts on reading it <pubmed>12120005</pubmed>

To form the main duct that transverse the pancreas to the duodenum, delivering fluid laden with digestive enzymes, first, the intercalated ducts merge to form intralobular ducts and these in turn merge to form interlobular ducts, which then finally merge to become the main duct There are a number of transcription factors that are critical and important in its development. Ductal Cells express markers include cytokeratin19, cystic fibrosis and DBA lectin. Its transcriptional factors include HNFiB, HNF6 and SOX9.

Pdx1: - for the specification for all pancreatic linages

- non-islet Pdx1-positive cells display physical traits of ductal branching

- involved temporally in a program of gene expression sufficient to facilitate the biochemical and morphological changes necessary for branching ductal morphogenesis

HNG6: - develops cysts in interlobular and intralobular pancreatic ducts but not in intercalated ducts

- maybe restricted to distinct ductal segments


Allocating sub headings Anna - Function, Signalling Maria - History and development Joie- Abnormalities and structure

Hey guys! I am doing research at the minute and keep finding helpful papers, I will link them here <pubmed>27368278</pubmed>

Hey guys - this is on the google drive that I sent you but here is a brief outline and questions that maybe should be answered in each sub heading Introduction Questions to answer: Location of ductal cells Brief description of function + importance What happens if dysfunction Brief mention of current research Function Questions to answer: What are the function of the cell? What activates the cell? How does it carry out the function? Brief mention of dysfunction and link to pathology and abnormalities Figure ideas - the signalling cascade, the location and duodenum Structure Question to answer: What is the main structure of the cells? What cytoskeletal features are involved? If they are? Figure ideas - Histological images of the cell History Questions to answer: How and when were the cells discovered? Development Questions to answer: What do they develop from? When do they develop? What are the different types of ducts? Images: - early development in embryo (what the duct in the pancreas looks like) Signalling and Interactions How to the cells signal with each other? How do the cells signal with other cells What signals to they respond to? Image ideas: signalling cascades it is involved in Pathology and Abnormalities What happens when regulators in the cell are dysregulated or mutated? Pancreatitis? Pancreatic cancer? - different features What are the other disease related to the function of the pancreatic ductal cells Images - how cancers form - histology of pancreatic cancer? Current Research What is the current research happening with the cell currently? (Maybe everyone choose something they are interested in?) What could be explored in the future? Conclusion

Peer Assessment

Group 2 (Ductal Cells)

Positive - (1) Good headings, but as a suggestion, maybe the history can precede structure. (2) great use of image to show the clinical significance. (3) Correct citation format in the “function” heading. Negative - (1) History can be organized into a table, instead of writing the notes down. Overall, great headings to guide the reader around your information, however the order of the certain headings could help. Not much information has been put down yet, but the structure section as it is right now demonstrates good research. Images could also be a great way to demonstrate the information.

Group 2 (Ductal Cells)

This is really easy to understand and read through so far. For the structure sub-heading, the background information on the pancreas’ functions could perhaps go under “Introduction”. An explanation would be very helpful for the diagram. The explanations under your "functions" sub-heading are great. They flow very well and it’s easy to follow. For the history sub-heading, as mentioned above, a table format for years/major events would be useful, or even a timeline image. For the development sub-heading, the brief description of pancreatic development as background was an excellent addition. Overall, the content is clear and concise. Of course, referencing, spell-check, adding images etc. will be done at the end. There are a lot of interesting facts that make this wiki engaging.

Group 2 (Ductal Cells)

Most of the information thus far seems really good, I think more images would be beneficial, and the use of different forms e.g. microscopy/research-based images in combination with drawn diagrams would also be a great way to convey some of your content. Structure seems good, but experimenting with formats e.g. tables, collapsable folders, etc. could provide some visual interest. Be sure to check your referencing before the final submission, because the raw reference is used under your 'Structure' subheading (instead of a footnote). Otherwise, the bones of your project look good and I'm excited to see when it's fully fleshed out!

Group 2

Your page seems to be on its way to being very informative; it’s nice to see each sub-section aside from one; “Current Research”, has begun with some introductory and preliminary information and research which shows a gradual progression. It’s also great to see the addition of images to support the written content. It would have been nice to see maybe a table for the history at this point, seeing as some research has already been done. However, otherwise the layout and subsections in the preliminary stages seems to be doing well.

Although it seems that the content is not in its final or draft stages, a suggestion would be to keep all the information on the project page referenced throughout. I noticed the introduction, history and development didn’t have any references despite having paragraphs of information. Also another suggestion might be to use thumbnails for your images in order to have captions on the project page, as was attempted for your image under “Signalling and Interaction” (coding: [[File:filename|thumbnail|caption]]; where it is italicised is where you would insert the image’s caption on to the page; for example [[File:filename|thumbnail|Signalling involved in the formation of the Pancreatic Ducts]] ).

Overall I can tell your page is still in its preliminary stages and compared to other projects there’s still much work ahead, however the subsections are a great start and perhaps looking at the project pages of the past few years might help in gaining a perspective of where your project page might aim to be and what other things you might like to add, such a comparative tables, a banner image and amount of references to be aiming toward. It does look like the beginning of a well covered project.

Group 2 (Ductal Cells)

The content of the ‘Function’ and ‘Structure’ of ductal cells are good. However, I think it could be elaborated further by explaining the Inositol pathway. It can be seen that good research has been done on the ‘History’ part. It could be better by organizing the information in a table to make it easier to follow, as it can be a bit confusing. I believe that the referencing will be done on the ‘History’ and ‘Development’ sections during final touch of the project. Good content for the ‘Development’ sub-heading, although it could be improved by explaining further in details of certain terms or factors that are not familiar such as HNFiB, HNF6 and SOX9 for better understanding of the viewers. Unfortunately, at this point there is no current research found by the team. Overall, the project has really good contents in which it can definitely be enhanced by adding videos or images that are related to the content for viewers to develop deeper understanding.

Group 2:

My initial observation of this group’s project is that it does not contain as much information as some of the other groups. Unfortunately, this is an indication of inconsistent contributions by team members, which can be confirmed by browsing through the history page of the project, which reveals a period of inactivity from April 11 – May 1 2017. Nevertheless, I am a supporter of the ‘quality over quantity’ mindset and do understand that it can be difficult to contribute to the project when other assessments are due. The quality of the information presented on the page thus far is good, however a bit too generalised in my personal opinion. While there is mention of ductal cells in the ‘structure’ section of the project, I believe that the pancreas is fixated upon more so than it should be. I would definitely recommend adding a lot more information about the structure of the ductal cells themselves with a strong focus on answering specific questions such as – what is the diameter of the ductal cells, which membrane-enclosed organelles do they have, are they only present in the pancreas, etc. I also believe it would be beneficial for the audience if a comparison was made between the ductal cells within humans and those within animals – do they have the same structure, function and location? Additionally, an anatomical image of ductal cells would be ideal alongside the anatomical image of the pancreas in the ‘structure’ section. I also believe that the following sentence in the introduction: “[The pancreas] makes a number of different enzymes, each of which is responsible for breaking down the different types of food into small particles suitable for absorption” is also too generalised. I would personally list which specific ‘enzymes’ are synthesised so that audiences from a non-science background are informed better and not disadvantaged when reading the project. I also recommend more research and information in the ‘functions’ section of the project, as it seems slightly brief at the moment. The inclusion of pictures or flow diagrams would be useful in this section as well as it would allow readers to follow a diagram alongside written text.

On a positive note, it’s great to see that a ‘history’ section has been included. I personally believe that this is quite important for audiences to acquire an understanding of the background and origins of ductal cells. My only two recommendations regrading the ‘history’ section would be to relocate its position in the project, as I don’t think it fits well beneath ‘functions’. I would also encourage another method of formatting the key dates, perhaps a table, as the present dot points make the section appear rather informal and disorganised. Referencing has been done well in this project so great job there however I would definitely encourage using a wider range of resources from hereon as it is hard to find all necessary information within the 5 resources that have been used up until now. I did notice that there is a full reference, rather than hyperlink, following the first sentence in the ‘structure’ section. I assume that this is to remind the team members of the article that has been used for this section. If not, then I would advise removing it from there as a hyperlinked reference is all that is required. The overall coherency and readability of this project is good. Clearly, the project is still in its early stages however it is encouraging to see information or dot points in most sections. The work so far is commendable and no major errors have been made, so well done on that. From the three projects, which I have peer-reviewed, I would say that this project ranks second- highest in terms of both quality and content. Nevertheless, I would definitely encourage more frequent contributions to the project to ensure that it becomes more informative. Congratulations to the team members on their good work so far.

Group 2 (Duct):

Positive: (1) The introduction is a little shorter compared to those of Group 1 and Group 3, however, it is still good one. It gets straight to the point. It gives a brief, clear explanation of what the pancreas is, what ductal cells are, and the main focus of the project. (2) The images used are very helpful and go well with the information you have for Structure and Signaling. A suggestion I have would be to add a caption for each image and perhaps copyright information (how we did for the first assessment). Negative/ suggestions: (1) I’m a little confused why the “Research” heading is before “Introduction” and the other headings, when there is also a “Current Research” subheading. Are they the same thing? If not, then perhaps rename the “Research” heading and move it somewhere after “Introduction”. (2) I suggest placing your “History” information in a table or a time line format, rather than dashes or bullets. This way the section will be more organized and easier for the viewers to read. Overall: Compared to some of the other groups, there are still a lot information that need to be added to your project. The project is well organized, with some small details to fix or reconsider. The information you have right now, especially under “Function”, is very well written. You guys are off to a great start so far!

Group 2 peer review

Overall, the project appears very neat and well layed out. It is not very extensive so far but it is a good start. The introduction is very succinct; it gives a great summary of the whole project. The structure section includes a great description of the ductal cells. However, the paragraph veered off track and there is a lot of information that doesn’t come under the structure heading such as development and cancers. I recommend including the developmental information under the development heading. The image was useful, however a description and reference to it in the text would be beneficial. The function section was informative and well referenced, but could be more in depth. The history section had core information; I recommend a table with dates and text so it is neater and easier to read. The developmental heading was very extensive and had great information. I recommend a diagram or flow chart to back up the text. The signaling and interactions section is informative; I do think it could be a subheading under development. The image was good but needs to be explained. I can see you have found articles for the pathology/ abnormalities section, which is a good start. Overall it is a good draft, I only had minor recommendations.

Group 2 pancreatic ductal cells peer review:

The project looks very tidy and the order of the sub-heading is nicely organized and It is easy to follow the topic. References used all research article and suitable. Development part contains very much details.

However, more figures or video would help understanding the topic and the image doesn’t have the [Student Image] paragraph, figure number or title might need for easy understanding. The format of the reference needs to change, there is no hyperlink direct to the pubmed. I would suggest that the history part is easy to read when it is in the table. it might help when put more sub-heading of sub-heading.

So far group 2 did well in organizing sub-heading, but title of the figure and right references format is necessary. if put more contents and edit the project, the final work would be better.

Group 2

The page is well set out with appropriate headings and subheadings. Each section is well researched. The introduction is well thought out, however consider expanding on the relation between the pancreas and duct cells, for example, talk about Islets of Langerhans. Whilst the content is comprehensive, there are only two diagrams on the page, it would be useful in understanding the text with more diagrams, videos, or tables, particularly for the function section, perhaps it would be easier to understand with a flow chart of some sort. The pathology/abnormalities section is incomplete, but with the references for articles it looks like it will be covered well. There is yet to be anything included in the glossary. It would be a good idea to use the tool as it would make it easier when using the page. Overall there seems to be a comprehensive understanding of duct cells with the various sections researched well, however the layout could be improved to allow for a more engaging learning experience.