Talk:2016 Group Project 4

From Embryology
Group Assessment Criteria  
Mark Hill.jpg Science Student Projects
  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 embryology.
  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.
More Information on Assessment Criteria | Science Student Projects
Signalling: 1 Wnt | 2 Notch | 3 FGF Receptor | 4 Hedgehog | 5 T-box | 6 TGF-Beta
Here are some starting places for the topic. Can be patterning, differentiation, etc. as long as a developmental signal process/pathway.


Contents

Assessment

Group Assessment Criteria  
Mark Hill.jpg Science Student Projects
  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 embryology.
  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.
More Information on Assessment Criteria | Science Student Projects

General Comments

  • Content - Project has a good balance of text, media and tables.
  • Language - is appropriate for university level students.
  • Peer assessment - Some (not all) of the peer assessment comments have been considered in the final submission.
  • Quiz - including some form of assessment of understanding is a good concept, your descriptions of the correct answer are provided in good depth. The exposed answer when submitted should be an opportunity to explain why some answers are incorrect as well as showing the correct answer.
  • Glossary - good to include, was reasonably comprehensive. Should have also included the acronyms used throughout the project page. This is where someone would look for these.
  • References - Comprehensive coverage and have identified reviews compared to research articles.
  • User contributions - Uneven contribution from individual users to the online page. "Ongoing contribution" means throughout the project timeline, not just in the final weeks.
  • Minor
    • "Mechanism" seems you needed a better description for this sub-heading.
    • Some of the text appears to have been only slightly modified from original research articles and reviews.

Edits

Media

  • Video - An overview of the hedgehog signalling pathway in Drosophila YouTube. (2016). The Hedgehog signalling pathway in Drosophila online Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1xXD9kss2w
  • Video - An overview of the Hedgehog Signalling Pathway in Tumour Development YouTube. (2016). The Hedgehog Signaling in the Tumor Microenvironment - Research Hedgehog online Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFWO3I-oqsE.
    • These videos are relevant to project and always good to include multimedia in online projects.


Some of the images contain additional information as well as the original figure legend(s).

Peer review

Group 4 assessment

Group 4 is off to a great start with their project with well carried out research and reference to a lot of research papers mentioned as well. The referencing style used is easy to navigate and is appropriate in text referencing has been used as well.

However, there are a few points which can be improved upon to make this a great wiki page. The image included doesn’t have a description. The description is always necessary for relation to the text and to understand the figure. To get a wholesome idea of the pathway and also to educate the layman on the pathway there should be an introduction which covers the general aspects involved like where the pathway is used, the molecules involved, etc.

I also think for the mechanism heading, a general introduction or overview should be given and then you could delve into the mechanisms in the species. A table to bring out the difference between the mechanisms in the two species could also be included as a concise and clear manner to display the above information.

There were some formatting errors as well like the subheadings under mechanisms were in bold when ideally the heading should be in bold and the subheadings in normal font.

Under the abnormality heading, the sub headings seem comprehensive enough but I also think treatment could be included as it goes hand in hand with diagnosis and it seems incomplete without it.

There were a few complicated terms like organogenesis used which were not explained. Maybe a glossary could be included or just a simple definition can be included under the heading.

Overall, this group is off to a promising start with their page. I’m sure after incorporating the reviews given here the page will be fantastic!

Group 4 Peer Review

Another well organised web page and a lot of references were used. Excellent job Group 4! The picture below the title looks clear and educative. However, that may need a citation. Some sections were left blank. They need to be filled as well. The mechanism of the signalling is well explained.

First of all, both mechanisms about the signalling in mammals and other vertebrates were discussed, therefore, it would be better if the title can be changed. Secondly, it would be better if you can build up more connections between the word-version descriptions and the flow chart graph you used. Thirdly, it might be better if you can put more pictures about the phenotype in normal development and abnormalities. Moreover, I think more citations are necessary to support your story. And it would be good to add a section about the terms used on your page.

overall, this web page is really good. There are some problems about formats, but i think you can do it after you have filled all your sections in first.

Group 4 Peer Review

First off you guys have chosen great headings and subheadings! It’s really helpful in breaking down your information to be better understood and I like all the aspects you’ve chosen to explore. Your content so far is clear and concise and most of it is correctly referenced - well done particularly on the info for animal models. The examples of primary research you’ve included are also a great addition. The information you’ve presented is also written well and in a way that’s not too scientific so it’s easy to understand.

It would be great if you included an introduction paragraph to just give a brief overview of Hedgehog signalling. While your animal model content is good, I think you need a lot more info for human embryonic development (considering that it should be the focus of the project) - you’ve mentioned organogenesis very briefly, but I think if you explored each of the systems in greater detail then it would really improve your page. I would strongly recommend including a glossary as well. Make sure you have captions for your images so the reader understands why the image is relevant to your text. Also you should fully define all the abbreviations somewhere (either in your glossary on the image’s page) for the reader’s benefit. If you have some more images in the signalling/animal model sections I think that would break up the paragraphs a bit more and make it easier to read. And you might want to include a summary table, maybe of the molecular pathway factors, somewhere. But overall you’ve started off really well as a team - keep working hard to finish off/improve each section.

Group 4 Review

Nice effort group 4. Key points that relate to the Hedgehog signalling pathway are very succinctly described. Your choice of headings, albeit brief, provides a sense that you guys understand the topic generally but I feel as if you could improve on your subheadings, for example of the Clinical Significances section, I feel as if the diagnosis subheading could be altered. I also feel as if the information in the Organogenesis section could be reworked into an introduction which would allow you to then focus on Organogenesis on its own in more detail. Also, you guys only have one image so far which seems to be slightly lacklustre, you guys definitely need more images. The relevant content is mostly cited correctly, albeit the odd reference located below the marking criteria, I feel as if that is more of a small accident.

The information presented is relatively peer friendly. Perhaps more explanation, for example in the Processing of precursor section as I felt well and truly lost in that area. You guys could do with some hand drawn diagrams or analogies to help explain the information provided. A glossary section would be very helpful in understanding the wiki page, by defining the complex terms such as proteasome(which is misspelt on your page as proteosome). The research that has been done has indicated that you guys have went beyond the formal teaching activities, however, you guys could do more research in the sections that have no information for example 'History', you could even put a timeline in there! In the context of the course aims, he embryological relevance of the Hedgehog pathway is addressed to an extent but as you have missing sections under human disease, there is still work to be done in this section. Also, you should try to complete your current research section to address the second criterion of the course aims regarding new technologies and research.

Overall you guys have had a good start and really just need to start filling in the blanks so to speak. Your team researches information well, just ensure that you fill in your missing sections and think of innovative ways to present information. Nice job!

Group 4 Peer Review

Positive Factors

Group 4 have provided well-written information that I found was easy to follow despite not having an extensive understanding of the topic (covering criteria 1). Another positive aspect of this Group’s effort is the integration of the references, which makes it easy for students to access the resources they have used; already it seems that they have done extensive research on the topic (covering criteria 5). From looking at the subheadings it appears that the scope of the topic will be covered well (which will address criteria 2). Furthermore, the image at the top of the page provides a great visual to aid students’ understanding of and engagement in the topic (showing they have begun to address criteria 4). They have also directly related subsections to embryology, which covers criteria 6.

Points for Improvement

Some aspects of Group 4’s page that would improve their project include: the image at the top of the page could be better if a title and short explanatory caption accompanied it on the page; use of more diagrams throughout the page would also better address criteria 4; and under the ‘Animal Models’ heading, maybe shortening all the sub headings just to the animal name would make it a little more succinct and clear.

Overall

Overall this page has shown efforts at addressing a few of the assessment criteria, however still needs some improvements to make the page more suitable to engaging and informing students.

Group 4:

Positive aspects of the project and suggested improvements:

Group 4 has provided numerous headings related to the Hedgehog pathway, such as its involvement in organ development, neural development as well as its mechanism of signalling during embryonic development (criteria 1). The group has also used an image of the signalling pathway to help provide a visual description of the different components of Hedgehog signalling (criteria 2). The authors of this project have also provided in-text citations for all information utilised and have also included a list of references at the end of their page (criteria 3). It is also evident that the group has investigated the involvement of the Shh signalling pathway outside of the scope of human embryonic development by exploring its role in mice, chicks and fruit flies, which is excellent (criteria 5 and 6). The authors have also began to include new research and abnormalities related to the Shh pathway (criteria 1).

In order to further improve these positive aspects, the authors may provide a written description of the signalling pathway alongside the diagram utilised. This is because it is difficult to understand the signalling pathway just by looking at a diagram. Also, a suggestion would be to include a greater variety of diagrams and tables to support the descriptions already provided. Diagrams may relate to the animal models or the abnormalities described. A table may be utilised to summarise the history of the signalling pathway, such as different components of the pathway that were discovered and the year in which they were discovered. Additionally, whilst it appears that most of the information is correctly referenced, the authors have not correctly referenced the diagram that has been utilised to describe the signalling pathway, which is a breach of copyright laws. Therefore, a suggestion would be to ensure that all diagrams are referenced when added to the page.

Negative aspects of the project and suggested improvements:

Whilst there were positive aspects to this project, a key negative aspect of the project is that the authors have not provided an introduction describing what the Hedgehog signalling pathway is. The introduction may include an overview of the nature and role of the hedgehog signalling pathway in embryonic development, thereby introducing headings in your page. It is also evident that the authors have not met criteria 2 completely, in that a small number of subheadings were utilised. Take for example the heading, “organogenesis”, no subheadings have been created under this heading. A suggested improvement would be to include subheadings relating to specific organs formed by the actions of the Shh pathway, accompanied by an in-depth description and diagrams. It is also evident that the authors utilise complex terminology within their description that often make it difficult to grasp certain concepts. Terms include “knockout”, “autocrine”, “appendage” and “paracrine” for example. A suggestion for improvement would be to include a table of glossary terms at the end of the page, defining these terms.

It also appears that the authors have not provided a history regarding the Hedgehog signalling pathway and its discovery. A suggestion would be to include a timeline regarding the discovery of this signalling pathway, as it provides the audience with a background of how Shh came to be known.

Group 4

A good start has been made to the project with the appropriate selection of headings and subheadings which provide a brief overview of what is to be discussed in terms of the Hedgehog signalling pathway. By breaking down the mechanism of the pathway, it made the foreign concept much easier to understand. In saying this, this section is quite text-heavy and may benefit with the relocation of the included diagram or even inclusion of other diagrams and flowcharts to engage readers. With the introduction of a fairly new concept, the inclusion of visual or audio stimuli and maybe even a short quiz may encourage interaction with readers.

The discussion of this pathway in mammals exposed readers to the diversity of the Hh signalling pathway but in saying this, the inclusion of a table may be useful to compare and contrast the differences between the pathways in mammals and insects. Overall, this section was well written. On the other hand, when considering the section on animal models, it provided insight into the role of Hh signalling pathway on embryological development and offered a brief introduction to the abnormalities caused by disruptions of this pathway. Once again, the inclusion of diagrams would be useful in this section to provide visual insight into the research being performed.

Though there has been significant exploration of the mechanism and animal models utilised in this pathway, more work is needed to link this pathway to embryological development and this could provide a good leeway into understanding the abnormalities associated with disruption of this pathway. This project can be significantly improved simply by focusing on making it more interactive ad engaging with the inclusion of a variety of stimuli like tables, diagrams, quizzes and even videos. In addition, all information has been well cited and referenced and there has been substantial communication between group members, allowing team members to provide feedback and suggestions thus, ultimately increasing the quality of the work produced.


Group 4 – Hedgehog Pathway

Positive aspects of this project include that Group 4 appear to have well defined subheadings, which function well to help the reader navigate through the page. The information is appropriately referenced using in-text citations, appearing to be from both primary and review articles. There is a significant amount of research on the mechanisms of the pathway but less of a focus on the role of this pathway in embryonic development, which I think is really important in order to relate it back to what we are leaning in both the lectures and tutorials. I think the inclusion of current research is a very important aspect to include in this project, as it identifies the current direction in which this research is heading. This might be also interesting to link to its clinical significance and abnormalities in the signaling pathway.

However, some negative aspects of the page include the lack of an introduction as this essentially establishes your page. You need to include a brief outline of the signaling pathway, a summary of its role in development and the other aspects of it you are looking to discuss. Furthermore, the inclusion of an image outlining the signaling pathway without any information inducing or explaining it should be corrected. The project appears to be very informative but isn’t very interactive and lacks images. Perhaps sourcing images of results from some of the primary articles, which you have referenced or include videos outlining the signaling pathway, might be a useful addition. It might be a good idea to include a glossary at the bottom of the page to help readers to better understand some of these more difficult terms. Also under the subheading of history, like in some of the other projects, a table could be a useful addition, just summarizing all the scientific advances regarding this pathway since it was first discovered, this helps set up how far we have come and then may be helpful when talking about the direction in which we are heading under current research.

In conclusion, this looks like it’s on its way to being a successful project. In summary though, a greater emphasis on its role in embryonic development and conscious effort to make the page more interactive and engaging for the reader will go a long way.


Group 4 Peer Assessment

Positive aspects of the project and improvements:

At initial glance I can see a range of headings and subheadings which just made it easier to navigate from one aspect of the project to another. This satisfied the requirements for criteria 1 and 2. This also allowed me to recognise the main topic of the project is the Hedgehog signalling pathway. There is also an addition of an image of the pathway which was great to see as it outlines the main components of the pathway and in general educates the reader about the signalling pathway. This provided a visual stimulus/ description which in turn engaged the reader to find out more about the topic.

It was also good to see correct in text citations and a references list at the end which in turn satisfied criteria 3. To satisfy criteria 5 it was excellent to see information that was well beyond the required information. An example of this is when discussing the role of the pathway in not only humans but also in mice, chicks and fruit flies. The group also began to include new research and abnormalities related to the Shh pathway which aided in rounding off criteria 1.

In order to improve the already positives of this project it would be advised to add a description to the image just so the reader can have some sort of summary about the main points of the image/ pathway. Also, addition of diagrams or tables in some of the subheadings would be good as it will keep the reader interested and in general provide a visual aid. Also it is necessary to cite and provide a reference of the image as it breaches the copyright laws.

Negative aspects of the project and improvements:

Although there are positives to the project, there are a few negatives that can easily be fixed. It is crucial to put in an “Introduction” heading and providing relevant information. This in turn will create a coherent project as it flows from one aspect to another whilst simultaneously providing a brief overview of the Sonic Hedgehog Pathway. Although you have explored the mechanism in animal models it is imperative to link this to embryological development. Also, addition of diagrams, interactive quizzes and tables is necessary to satisfy criteria 3, since 1 image is not enough.

Adding a glossary of terms at the end of the project is needed to clarify any words or phrases that have not been previously encountered such as “organogenesis”, “paracrine”, “dephosphorylation” etc. Overall, the project is coming along nicely and with the recommended amendments, a high mark is definitely in order.

Group 4 Peer Assessment

Positive Assessment:

I am very impressed with the level and depth of information provided in this page so far. It is quite evident that you guys have gone to great effort and lengths to research and find relevant information regarding hedgehog signalling. The research conducted is also further solidified with the correct use of citations which link the information with their articles and allow the user to learn more if required. There is almost 34 references already provided which is a testament to the work that has been put in by the group. Well done!

I love the very detailed explanation of animal models used to investigate hedgehog signalling and there is an abundance of information provided for this where as I’ve noticed other groups tend to very lightly touch this topic.

Critical Assessment:

The page is looking very good so far but in my opinion there are a few ways in which it can be improved.

Although the information is in-depth and thorough it can be a little intense at times. I would recommend using more dot points or look into using tables to categorise information into a more user friendly structure. This can also be achieved by using more subheadings to further dissect the information and make it less imposing when reading as this content can be difficult to understand at first. I would also have a nice and clear introduction at the beginning of your page as it essential for the students entering your page to be able to familiarise themselves with Hedgehog signalling before diving into the more complicated information.

I would also make better use of the subheadings, so that they reflect more of the marking criteria in particular hedgehog signalling role in embryology. I didn’t see too much content outlining and explaining this and this is a major part of the project. It would also be a good idea to draw a picture rather than using one to explain the mechanism as simplified visual aids always help. Lastly, try including a glossary as there were many terms that I was very unfamiliar with, such as organogenesis.

Peer Assessment: Project 4: Hedgehog signalling pathway

1. The key points relating to the topic are clearly described.

The key points related to the topic are clearly described however the introduction is a little limited , as there is no information just a figure without any text related to the figure.

2.The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.

This wiki does seem to have a very extensive list of contents, which demonstrate that the topic is divided into clear interesting sections. However it is not finished and there are empty headings with no text underneath. There is only one figure but there is no text related to these figures so it makes it hard for the reader to know what this means. There are no tables and no other illustrative diagrams. This wiki would benefit a great deal with more figures, table and perhaps a you tube video.

3. Content correctly cited.

Yes it seems the content is cited correctly. There is an extensive list of references. However there is some information that is not cited at all e.g. under Organogenesis. This needs to be cited.

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.

There are no graphs, or tables and one figure that is floating in the introduction and start of the topic. Clearly this can be improved. The wiki does use examples with Drosophilia and Mammals which is great and interesting.

5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.

This is evident that the students have done a lot of research in this topic and are innovative with their examples using Drosophilia and Mammalia however there is still headings without content that needs to be filled.

6. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology.

There is a heading on neural development but no text and some information on organogenesis which does correspond to learning aims in Embryology. However more information is clearly needed.

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.

There seems to be editing in this Wiki however the students need to come together to talk about what is missing: i.e. introduction is missing.

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.

This is hard to tell. There seems to be an overall group effort but some sections have missing content and it either seems one student is not pulling weight or that section will be a group effort and the group has not worked on it yet.

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.

Yes so far there is adequate research, a lot of references cited but some key sections are empty. It seems that the group has used the Discussion section to communicate between each other.

10. Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with the above guidelines.

Yes this group has edited the wiki using the guidelines.


Z5019880 (talk) 14:58, 26 August 2016 (AEST) Hey guys, I have added some sub-headings for the hedgehog signalling pathway, feel free to add any headings that might be useful for the topic, or suggest a different topic.

Hey guys, I've started doing some research on the animal models for the Hedgehog signalling pathway. I'm currently finding it a little difficult understanding some of the terms when researching the experiments done on Drosophila melanogaster so I was wondering if you had any suggestions as to how much detail to include. Also I have included some links that maybe useful for those researching mechanism and history: [1] [2]

Also, I thought I would just put in writing here that we want everyone to have completed their parts by the end of mid semester break so that we can meet up the following week to fix any issues with formatting and work on the introduction, conclusion etc. Thanks guys!! P.S. Did Mark mention that we shouldn't use research articles?

Z5019880 (talk) 23:30, 12 September 2016 (AEST) Hey, what you have added is really good! To be honest I'm not completely sure about how technical we have to be, because I have also found my self that there is a lot of chemistry when it comes to the signalling pathways etc. which makes it incredibly difficult for me to understand. At this point I reckon what you have now is enough, but we can always revisit it when we have added more to the page, to keep the content at a consistent depth. Also with regards to the research articles, I'm not entirely sure what Mark said, but I'm sure it would be alright to see what is written, and click into the citations to get further information, and just cite that. Anyway I've added a small piece on the processing of the Hh protein, but am unsure if It would be necessary to go more into the chemistry behind how the auto-cleavage occurs.

So I've read what you have written and I think it sounds coherent and it's also very easy to understand so good job! I think I'll do a little more research, I think it might be a little tedious to add information of Shh knockout mice considering the experiments on the chick embryo were quite similar but I'm open to suggestions. I was also thinking it would be useful to include a link to a short youtube video of some sort that would be able to visually explain the Hh signalling pathway (something like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1xXD9kss2w but unfortunately this video has no audio but has some good visual and written cues). In regards to an image, I actually found a pretty decent image of this pathway but I'm not too sure if we can use it due to copyright. It says we can if it's not for commercial use so I think we should be ok.

Please let me know what you think of the diagram. I've just added something that looks like it could be helpful but feel free to edit/remove it if you don't think it is appropriate :)

Z5019880 (talk) 22:28, 26 September 2016 (AEST) The diagram looks great! I reckon as long as we include all the copyright it should be fine. We can probably eventually move the image next to the mechanism of signalling section when it is finished. I have started it, and will continue finishing it tomorrow, so if there are any issues with how I'm going about it, please don't hesitate to tell me.

Good idea! I've added some information on Shh Knockout mice so any feedback on what I have written will be greatly appreciated! I'm also thinking of looking into videos that we could link as part of our assignment to make the concept easier to understand. Also if you guys see this here, please add your glossary terms, we don't have much time left.

Z5019880 (talk) 21:30, 28 September 2016 (AEST) Hey, I've read your section on Shh and it seems good. In terms of what you could add, do you reckon it is appropriate to talk about the advantage of using each of the models over one another, and possible problems you might encounter with each model. I get that it's probably hard to find material on that, so don't worry if that's the case. Also a video would be a great idea, although we should first check with Mark with regards to what sources would be appropriate. Anyway I have finished the first part of the mechanism part regarding the general pathway for Hh proteins that have specifically been studied in the fruit fly, and will continue onto vertebrates later. I was wondering from what you guys have studied on this pathway if I have covered most of the areas sufficiently and in a coherent matter. Any other feedback is also appreciated.

I've read what you've written and you've successfully made it really easy to understand. From the knowledge I've gained through reading articles on this pathway, I don't think you have missed anything thus far. The only improvement I could suggest is maybe referencing an image in your explanation so that readers have a visual stimulus to refer to to ease understanding of the pathway. In regards to looking at the differences between the models, I genuinely tried to find a comparison between the animal models but was met with no such information unfortunately. I'll try and have a look sometime soon. Also, I was thinking maybe we could include a quiz of some sort to make our project more interactive. We could do this by adding a quiz after each section or just one quiz at the very end. Our project is also quite text heavy so I think we should find more images and other stimuli to make it more interesting. We should create a timeline of events for the history of the pathway in the form of a table. Also, should we create a glossary?

Also, quick question, who's handling history, function and current research?

Z5019880 (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2016 (AEDT) I know this is a late response, but I have already handled aspects of the function, and the history, and will try and add to current history if no one else is up to it. With regards to your feedback I have addressed this issue by adding an image that is quite in line with the written text.

Group 4

This web page is developing well, but has many areas that need completion. Starting the web page with the flowchart of the hedgehog signalling pathway is not recommended, as the reader has not been introduced to the topic at all and does not know what any of the terms and abbreviations mean. This image would serve better further down in the web page where the reader has knowledge of this signalling process and what is involved to then apply and consolidate in the image. More images can also be included in this web page, such as an image of a hedgehog at the top of the page, which would be an interesting and humorous way to grab the reader’s attention, which is required to fulfil the criteria for this assessment. Images in the animal model section would also enhance the reader’s understanding.

Many subheadings have been included, but could be improved on their clarity. For example, the heading “Mechanism” is not very specific and thus could be improved to identify which mechanisms are being spoken about. A “History” subheading has also been included with no information. A timeline of the history of research associated with the hedgehog signalling pathway would be very comprehensive, including where future research is headed. This research should include why there are question marks (“?”) in yellow in the diagram at the top of the web page, as these could be areas where future research is heading. Ensure this table/timeline is well referenced, including names of researchers for depth of information. A glossary section should also be included to enable to reader to keep track of the different terms and abbreviations used in this web page. Terms in this list could include information on the abbreviations in the diagram included: Cos2, PKA, Slimb and a range of other terms.

A “Human disease” heading has also been included. No information has been added to this section as more research by the group members must be carried out. This heading could be more specific, such as titling it as “abnormalities” as “Human disease” can be in reference to a wide range of issues, whereas “abnormalities” or something similar is more topic specific. Images of the effects of these abnormalities would also be an interesting addition, including treatments for the diseases and their symptoms as well as future research areas. The “Animal Models” section contains substantial textual information. Images would enhance this section, such as images of the animals being studied and short videos of their embryological development. A greater focus on human embryology is needed throughout the entire web page as there is a substantial amount of information on the hedgehog signalling pathway in animals.

In text referencing has been carried out throughout the web page which is commended, and an extensive reference list is developing well. Be sure to reference information twice (using the same reference number) when they are being mentioned, so that the reader has a direct link to where this is being sourced from. For example, another reference for when “Chiang et al., 2001” is mentioned would be appropriate, as the preceding paragraph referenced this work without specifically mentioning Chiang. More in-text referencing in the “Blockage of Shh Signalling in Forebrain Neuroectoderm of Chick Embryos” section would also be appropriate, even if the same references are being re-used. This would make it easier for the readers of the web page to easily access further information at any point in the web page.

GROUP 4 From reading through Group 4’s project I can see they are clearly and succinctly describing the topic at hand, which is related to the hedgehog pathway. They explore things such as the mechanism of signalling during embryonic development as well as neural and organ development. From reading their research I can see they have carefully written it according it to criteria 1. Unfortunately, their use of headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs is not as good as it could be. They have used an imagine of the Hedgehog signaling pathway, which is a good start, but to improve and further fulfil this criterion I would suggest having more media. The referencing has been done quite well as it has its own section and is easy to find, but also there are quite regular in text citations, fulfilling criteria 3.

Group 4 Peer Review

Group 4 has collated a large amount of information and presented it in a well referenced and written manner however the page could do with other learning mediums such as more images and/or videos. Currently the page is not very engaging and the addition of these will help with this aspect of the project.

The referencing for this page has been done well on most accounts however there is no reference provided for the image they have placed under the hedgehog signaling pathway heading, also there is a stray reference at the beginning of the page which should be moved to the reference list. As well as this towards the start of the article an introductory paragraph should also be provided in order to help readers gain basic background knowledge on the hedgehog signaling pathway before delving into more complex concepts.

Some of the terminology used throughout this article may prove to be difficult to understand for readers who are new to the topic or come from a non-science background therefore terms such as N and C terminus should be defined in an additional glossary section which can be added at the bottom of the page. Overall this group has made significant progress towards a good draft copy of their article and after filling out empty subheadings and adding vital components such as a good introductory paragraph they will have a well set out final product.

Peer Review

Firstly, the page is missing an introduction to the signalling pathway. There is also text missing under the first few subheadings. Since the hedgehog pathway research began as early as the 1970s, a table including the key events in the Hedgehog research would be interesting to add.

The page includes a nice overview of the Hedgehog pathway captured in the image however, it needs a reference to acknowledge the original source of the image. Consider relocating the image to the mechanism of signalling section. This may help the reader understand the processes better if they have that image there.

Mammals have 3 Hedgehog homologues (DHH, IHH and SHH). I think that is an important point to mention.

Good discussion of animal models since it is one of the key regulators of animal development. Despite having headings without text. Group 3 has made good progress so far. Keep it up!

Group 4 Peer Review

Group 4 is off to a good start for this project. Before anything else, I strongly encourage that you guys add an ‘Introduction’ to your page, briefly explaining the importance of the pathway and in what processes it is involved in. Alternatively, an ‘Overview’ of the topic would also be helpful to give us readers an outline on what your page will be about.

The picture of the Hedgehog signalling pathway process at the top of the page is good and correctly referenced. However, on its own, I do not fully understand the pathway – I think it would be more effective if the picture were placed beside information that described the steps of the pathway. Moreover, it would make the page visually appealing if more pictures (that of course, support the content) were added. In regards to the 'History' of the pathway, it is clear that information is yet to be added. I suggest something other than text, such as a timeline or a table, to be used – it gives a break from the long paragraphs of information and is much more easier to read. The information on the page is correctly citied, with the complete reference list at the bottom of the page and the use of in-text references. However, I noticed that the ‘Organogenesis’ section had no in-text references and suggest that there be consistency with citation in this project.

A critical aspect of the page is that they do not explain how the pathway is involved in the process of embryology, not even a heading to show that they will write about it. Showing how the Hedgehog signalling pathway is involved in early development is one of the main aspects of this project, so it is important that this group starts working on that section.

Overall, Group 4 has showed great progress and have a lot of potential to make the page even better. They have demonstrated that they are capable of producing an excellent and nformative page, but just need to add more parts of the pathway that are essential for this project.

Group 4 Peer Review

Group 4 The layout of the page is quite nice with lots of sub-headings present that can be used to navigate the page easily. The explanation of the mechanism in animal models in humans is very good and extremely detailed. You have covered a lot of information in this section and have covered a variety of animal models. You have also differentiated between the models to make them all unique. Try and put the same amount of effort in some of the other sections of your page as they are lacking in detail. There are a lot of references used on the page proving that a lot of research and effort has been put in.

There was no introduction at the top of the page to give the reader an overall understanding of what the page is about. You have also included an image at the top of you page regarding the Hedgehog signalling pathway, however, you have not included any information to explain the diagram. So, the reader cannot understand what is going on. There are several blank sections on the page that will hopefully be built upon as the sub-headings look quite interesting. Maybe you should include a glossary section at the end of the page due to some of the complex terminology you have used.

You have created a very detailed page with quite a bit of information, however, you have not mentioned some of the basics of the signalling pathway to provide the reader with the basic knowledge and understanding on the topic.


GP4 peer review

This group had found some good animal of their project. Very detailed content in each section but it seems a bit meticulous and even messy, sub-titles should be added to be systematically and clear. Good references formatting. This group have left some area that to be posted such as history, function and glossary, they should be as much as the existed part to be more balanced. We could find the abnormality part under some titles, I think this group group member could add an abnormality part the list out the disease related to this signalling. More picture should be added to help audience to understand the topic, there is the only one in the beginning.


Group 4 Peer Assessment=

Great start on the project with well-written information. Appropriate subheadings have been used so the information was quite easy to follow. The referencing has been performed correctly with a list of references at the end. Additional further information regarding the Hedgehog pathway has been provided as it went beyond embryonic development and explored it in mice and chicks. I would suggest using more diagrams and providing a brief concise description for all of them (one of the images didn’t have any description at all, and its specific relevance was hard to discern). The use of a glossary at the end will help clarify any jargon that is not understood by the reader such as organogenesis. Overall, the project is going great and with a little more refining, will lead to great results!

  1. <pubmed>17925578</pubmed>
  2. <pubmed>26839340</pubmed>