Difference between revisions of "User:Z5016365"

From CellBiology
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 89: Line 89:
==Lab 2 - Microscopy==
==Lab 2 - Microscopy==
* [[User:Z8600021|Z8600021]] I had to delete the uploaded image as you require copyright permission for reuse. Papers appearing in PMC are not necessarily allowed to be reused elsewhere, as I described during the class. (3/5)

Latest revision as of 17:03, 19 June 2016

My Student Page


Jo :)


This is my friend Jo :) who is the greatest Also i'm a professional nail painter

♥║ ║


Group Project

Assessment Tasks

Group Projects
This year's main topic is Blood Cell Biology. Each group should discuss with group members the specific sub-topic that will be covered by their project.

Here is a list of some of the cell types (Structure and Function)

Cell Type (PuMed citations)

Below are the groups to which students have been randomly assigned. You should now on the project discussion page add your own suggestion for a specific topic. Once your group has agreed on the topic, add this as a heading to the project page before Lab 3.

2016 Projects: Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7

Group 1: User:Z5017493 | User:Z3330991 | User:Z5020043 | User:Z5020175 | User:Z3489355

Group 2: User:Z5018320 | User:Z5015980 | User:Z3376375 | User:Z3461106

Group 3: User:Z5019595 | User:Z5019962 | User:Z5018925 | User:Z3461911

Group 4: User:Z5020356 | User:Z3463895 | User:Z3376502 | User:Z3423497 | User:Z5021149

Group 5: User:Z5015719 | User:Z3462124 | User:Z3463953 | User:Z5017292

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

Group 7: User:Z5021060 | User:Z5016365 | User:Z5016784 | User:Z3414546 | User:Z3417773

Group Assessment Criteria

Group Assessment Criteria

  1. The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.
  2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
  3. Content is correctly cited and referenced.
  4. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student's own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.
  5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.
  6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of cell biology.
  7. Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer's wiki.
  8. Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.
  9. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.
  10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines.
Individual Lab Assessments
Lab 8 Assessment
2016 Lab 8 - Lab 8 Assessment (to be completed before Lab 9)
  1. Add your peer assessment to your own student page to the site.
  2. Add your peer assessment to each project discussion page to the site.
Lab 6 Assessment
2016 Lab 6 -
  1. Identify an antibody against your group blood cell protein that is commercially available.
  2. Add a link to the original data sheet page and identify the type of group blood cell protein.
  3. Include the following information: type of antibody (polyclonal, monoclonal), species raised in, species reacts against, types of application uses, and if available any reference using that antibody.
Lab 2 Assessment
2016 Lab 2 - Super resolution microscopy
  1. Find a recent research article (not review) that uses super resolution microscopy technique.
  2. Write a brief summary of the paper (referenced) and what the super resolution microscopy technique showed.
    1. This should not simply be the abstract of the paper.
    2. This can be 2-3 paragraphs no longer.
  3. Include a super resolution microscopy image from the paper.
    1. Therefore the paper must be from a source that you can reuse.
    2. Image uploaded as in Lab 1 (summary box - description/reference/copyright/student image)
    3. Image should appear as a "thumbnail" (thumb) next to your paper summary (with citation legend) See Test page
Lab 1 Assessment
2016 Lab 1 - Lab 1 Assessment (to be completed before Lab 2) The test page I set up in the Lab
  1. Add your own student page to the site.
  2. Add your signature for Lab attendance.
  3. Add a sub-heading.
  4. Add an external Link.
  5. Add an internal Link.
  6. Add an image from PubMed, PloS or BioMed Central journal related to prokaryote cellular component. Make sure it includes both the reference and copyright information, with the file and where it appears on your page.


Z5016365 (talk) 11:54, 10 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5016365 (talk) 11:11, 17 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5016365 (talk) 11:05, 24 March 2016 (AEDT)

Z5016365 (talk) 11:12, 14 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5016365 (talk) 11:05, 28 April 2016 (AEST)

Z5016365 (talk) 11:06, 5 May 2016 (AEST)

Z5016365 (talk) 11:37, 19 May 2016 (AEST)

Lab 1 Assessment

2016 Lab 1

Shortcut Page

Search Pubmed

Prokaryote Cytoskeleton

Eukaryote Cytoskeleton

BioMed Central

How to make an in text citation

Collaborative Protein filaments [1]

PubMed ID

PMID 26271102

PubMed Reference



Cell Biology Introduction - In Site Link to first Lecture

Test page

External Link

What I've Learnt So Far

Throughout my first laboratory for Cell Biology I've learn the basics for coding my page on the Cell Biology Wiki, the most useful thing I believe that I've found is the automatic reference for PubMed journal articles. I enjoy the coding aspect and believe it to be a useful skill that can be applied later throughout my career. I've also learnt the importance of formatting references and copyright statements and been taught how to produce them efficiently on the Cell Biology Wiki.

Student Image

Here is my uploaded image.

Model of pcDNA-trp-2 Plasmid.jpg

Model of pcDNA:trp-2 1-472 -cA Plasmid[2]

Upload File

Here is my image in 200px wide.

Model of pcDNA-trp-2 Plasmid.jpg

Model of pcDNA:trp-2 1-472 -cA Plasmid[2]

Model of pcDNA:trp-2 1-472 -cA Plasmid[2]

Lab 2 - Microscopy

  • Z8600021 I had to delete the uploaded image as you require copyright permission for reuse. Papers appearing in PMC are not necessarily allowed to be reused elsewhere, as I described during the class. (3/5)


PMID 24576891 - Shedding new light on lipid functions with CARS and SRS microscopy


File:Linear quantification ability of SRS microscopy.jpg
Linear quantification ability of SRS microscopy[3]

Recent advances in microscopy has removed the previous limitations for scientists in the biomedical field with a greater access to the functions of a cell internally and thus increased the understanding of the pathology of disease and also the cell in a "normal' state to allow comparison. In this article the underlying principles of SRS and CARS microscopy are examined and compared with thought to which technique would be better applied to different situations. CARS and SRS microscopy were also applied to study other macromolecules such as lipids and reviewed, the instructions on how to build a system for the microscopy's was also included in this research paper.



Cell Membranes and Compartments 1st Lecture

Cell Nucleus 2nd Lecture

2016 Lab 2

Lab 3 - Preparation/Fixation

Eosinophil adoptive transfer system to directly evaluate pulmonary eosinophil trafficking in vivo

PMID 3625276

PMID 15218055

Lab 5 - Cytoskeleton Exercise

Morphological Analysis of B35 Neuro-Epithelial cells.JPG

Figure: Morphological Analysis of B35 Neuro-Epithelial cells

This Graph was created during the week 6 lab (14/04/2016), on the manipulation of B35 epithelial cells by Tm4 and there observed effects graphed against a control set of results indicating the function Tm4 expression has on the morphology of the cells. Phenotype A - "Fan", Phenotype B - "Broken Fan", Phenotype C - "Stumped" , Phenotype D - "Pronged", Phenotype E - "Stringed", Phenotype F - "Pygnotic", see 2016 Lab 5 for reference of pictures and experimental results.

These above results were taken from group 3 of the 2016 Lab 5 page.

Lab 8 - Peer Reviews

Group 1 - Megakaryocytes Structure section could have used some diagrams to help the reader better visualize the cell zones that were discussed well. Only 1 reference was cited in this section. History section is totally unreferenced. History for 2012 – “” makes no sense. Sentence structure can do with more proofreading – some have repeated words. Some spelling errors evident – “Signallling” heading. “References for ET” section is unstructured, not formatted well, not in alphabetical order and should be consistent with the remainder of the page. There are two “figure 4” diagrams and not all diagrams are attributed. The YouTube video does not have a caption nor is it referenced. Figure 5 comes between figures 2 and 3.

Group 2 – Red Blood Cells

Sentence at the end of the introduction is incomplete. Structure section could have used a diagram too. Referencing is inconsistent – some footnotes and some in-text APA style. These in-text APA style references have not been included in the reference listing. ABO and Haemoglobin sections are a bit too brief. Erythrocyte production diagram has no caption or reference. Eryptosis section – erypoptosis is used incorrectly a number of times. Sentence structure is inconsistent and needs some improvement – “It is approximated that they are produces”. IDA symptoms section is incomplete.

Group 3 – B Lymphocytes

Introduction has no references. History has only 1 reference and could do with a bit more detail. Referencing is inconsistent – some footnotes and some in-text APA style. These in-text APA style references have not been included in the reference listing. Quite a few spelling errors. Surface structure and other sections would benefit a lot from more diagrams to help the reader’s understanding. The entire page is very sparsely referenced and there are entire sections that are devoid of referencing.

Group 4 – Natural Killer Cells

History section is a bit short and would benefit from a bit more detail. Adding more diagrams would enhance the page. None of the diagrams are referenced. Receptors section is incomplete. Referencing is quite sparse in some sections – it would be good to have more than 1 reference per section to ensure that your view is substantiated. There are some editing comments in brackets that need to be actioned or removed. Capitalization, grammar and sentence structure could do with improvement.

Group 5 – Mast Cells

History section is good but would look better and be easier to read if organized as a table. A diagram would add value in the morphology section. Three of the diagrams are not referenced (lineage, precursors and activation). Some sentences need to be reworded to make better sense and flow well – “Similarly to all allergic diseases,”.

Group 6 – T Lymphocytes

English needs work – example being “Especially dendrite cell takes huge part of T-cell activation” and “this naïve T-cell never with antigen thus never activated” in Functions section. Uses terms such as tregs, MHCI and VDJ but they are not defined. Quite a few spelling errors too. This makes the page quite hard to follow as you need to go back and re-read sections to clarify the meaning. There are places where facts are stated but little further discussion about their relevance. Some of the statements do not make much sense – “T-cell is about 70% and B-cell is about 20% of the lymphocyte in the blood”. What are the remaining 10%? (natural killer cells) Diagrams are very effective but their legends could be improved.


  1. <pubmed>26271102</pubmed>
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 <pubmed>4696278</pubmed>
  3. <pubmed>24576891</pubmed>