User:Z5020466 - Revision history

Z8600021 at 06:12, 17 November 2016

2016-11-17T06:12:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:12, 17 November 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{ANAT2341Student2016}}		{{ANAT2341Student2016}}


			Please note there are many assessments that have not been added to your student page and this will affect the final individual mark.

	==Lab Attendance==		==Lab Attendance==

Z8600021: /* Lab 9: Peer Assessment */

2016-11-17T06:11:06Z

Lab 9: Peer Assessment

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:11, 17 November 2016
Line 57:		Line 57:

	==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==		==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==
			These are good brief reviews of the project pages, with some specific examples. They include some critical assessment, given the existing status of some of these pages. 7/10

	GROUP 1		GROUP 1

Z5020466: /* Lab 9: Peer Assessment */

2016-11-10T05:53:55Z

Lab 9: Peer Assessment

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:53, 10 November 2016
Line 76:		Line 76:

	From reading through Group 5’s project I can see that they having clearly and effectively talked about topics relating to Tbx genes. Their subheadings include animal models, history, function in embryonic development, as well as abnormalities. This provides evidence to me that they have obviously considered and addressed both criteria’s 6 and 1. Group 5 has done a fantastic job with criteria 2, in that they provide many visual representations of information with different forms. For examples they provide a table of the main T-box genes, but then also have many visual diagrams relating to the Tbx development. Even though criteria 2 is very well done, it could be improved by having a timeline of the history of the T-box family. Also, I have seen in some other groups that they have included multiple choice questions to test the audience on their knowledge, I think this is a good idea since it makes the learning experience more interactive.		From reading through Group 5’s project I can see that they having clearly and effectively talked about topics relating to Tbx genes. Their subheadings include animal models, history, function in embryonic development, as well as abnormalities. This provides evidence to me that they have obviously considered and addressed both criteria’s 6 and 1. Group 5 has done a fantastic job with criteria 2, in that they provide many visual representations of information with different forms. For examples they provide a table of the main T-box genes, but then also have many visual diagrams relating to the Tbx development. Even though criteria 2 is very well done, it could be improved by having a timeline of the history of the T-box family. Also, I have seen in some other groups that they have included multiple choice questions to test the audience on their knowledge, I think this is a good idea since it makes the learning experience more interactive.


			{{Stem Cell Presentations 2016}}

Z5020466: /* Assessment 1 */

2016-11-10T05:53:42Z

Assessment 1

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:53, 10 November 2016
Line 55:		Line 55:
	\| width=100px\| Assessment 5/5		\| width=100px\| Assessment 5/5
	\|}		\|}


	~~{{Stem Cell Presentations 2016}}~~

	==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==		==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==

Z5020466: /* Assessment 1 */

2016-11-10T05:53:07Z

Assessment 1

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:53, 10 November 2016
Line 47:		Line 47:

	Results showed that a decreased functioning of Tet1 caused an increase in the unpaired synaptonemal complex at zygotene-stage oocyte, suggesting a synapsis-formation defect. The meiotic defects seen from Tet1 loss of function included: formation of univalent chromosome, but also homologous recombination and DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) repair defects. These in turn caused defective meiotic prophase which caused decreased amount of oocytes and in turn reduced litter size and lowering in fertility. The study done was pivotal as it built upon past studies which have already established that DNA methylation levels of certain meiotic genes are lowered with genomic reprogramming.		Results showed that a decreased functioning of Tet1 caused an increase in the unpaired synaptonemal complex at zygotene-stage oocyte, suggesting a synapsis-formation defect. The meiotic defects seen from Tet1 loss of function included: formation of univalent chromosome, but also homologous recombination and DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) repair defects. These in turn caused defective meiotic prophase which caused decreased amount of oocytes and in turn reduced litter size and lowering in fertility. The study done was pivotal as it built upon past studies which have already established that DNA methylation levels of certain meiotic genes are lowered with genomic reprogramming.

			{\| width=95%
			\|-bgcolor="FAF5FF"
			\| [mailto:m.hill@unsw.edu.au Mark Hill] 18 August 2016 - You have added the citation correctly and written a good brief summary of the article findings.
			TET1 is part of the family of methylcytosine dioxygenases that involved in cytosine demethylation and gene activation, interesting that it has a meiotic-specific role.

			\| width=100px\| Assessment 5/5
			\|}


			{{Stem Cell Presentations 2016}}

	==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==		==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==

Z5020466: /* Lab 9: Peer Assessment */

2016-11-10T05:52:50Z

Lab 9: Peer Assessment

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:52, 10 November 2016
Line 68:		Line 68:

	From reading through Group 5’s project I can see that they having clearly and effectively talked about topics relating to Tbx genes. Their subheadings include animal models, history, function in embryonic development, as well as abnormalities. This provides evidence to me that they have obviously considered and addressed both criteria’s 6 and 1. Group 5 has done a fantastic job with criteria 2, in that they provide many visual representations of information with different forms. For examples they provide a table of the main T-box genes, but then also have many visual diagrams relating to the Tbx development. Even though criteria 2 is very well done, it could be improved by having a timeline of the history of the T-box family. Also, I have seen in some other groups that they have included multiple choice questions to test the audience on their knowledge, I think this is a good idea since it makes the learning experience more interactive.		From reading through Group 5’s project I can see that they having clearly and effectively talked about topics relating to Tbx genes. Their subheadings include animal models, history, function in embryonic development, as well as abnormalities. This provides evidence to me that they have obviously considered and addressed both criteria’s 6 and 1. Group 5 has done a fantastic job with criteria 2, in that they provide many visual representations of information with different forms. For examples they provide a table of the main T-box genes, but then also have many visual diagrams relating to the Tbx development. Even though criteria 2 is very well done, it could be improved by having a timeline of the history of the T-box family. Also, I have seen in some other groups that they have included multiple choice questions to test the audience on their knowledge, I think this is a good idea since it makes the learning experience more interactive.

	~~{\| width=95%~~
	~~\|-bgcolor="FAF5FF"~~
	~~\| [mailto:m.hill@unsw.edu.au Mark Hill] 18 August 2016 - You have added the citation correctly and written a good brief summary of the article findings.~~
	~~TET1 is part of the family of methylcytosine dioxygenases that involved in cytosine demethylation and gene activation, interesting that it has a meiotic-specific role.~~

	~~\| width=100px\| Assessment 5/5~~
	\|}


	~~{{Stem Cell Presentations 2016}}~~

Z5020466: /* Lab Assessment */

2016-11-10T05:49:20Z

Lab Assessment

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:49, 10 November 2016
Line 39:		Line 39:
	==Lab Assessment==		==Lab Assessment==

	[[Media:Example.ogg]]~~===Assessment 1===~~		===Assessment 1===
			[[Media:Example.ogg]]
	<pubmed>PMC3528851</pubmed>		<pubmed>PMC3528851</pubmed>

Z5020466: /* Assessment 1 */

2016-11-10T05:48:00Z

Assessment 1

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:48, 10 November 2016
Line 39:		Line 39:
	==Lab Assessment==		==Lab Assessment==

	==Assessment 1==		[[Media:Example.ogg]]===Assessment 1===
	<pubmed>PMC3528851</pubmed>		<pubmed>PMC3528851</pubmed>

Line 46:		Line 46:

	Results showed that a decreased functioning of Tet1 caused an increase in the unpaired synaptonemal complex at zygotene-stage oocyte, suggesting a synapsis-formation defect. The meiotic defects seen from Tet1 loss of function included: formation of univalent chromosome, but also homologous recombination and DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) repair defects. These in turn caused defective meiotic prophase which caused decreased amount of oocytes and in turn reduced litter size and lowering in fertility. The study done was pivotal as it built upon past studies which have already established that DNA methylation levels of certain meiotic genes are lowered with genomic reprogramming.		Results showed that a decreased functioning of Tet1 caused an increase in the unpaired synaptonemal complex at zygotene-stage oocyte, suggesting a synapsis-formation defect. The meiotic defects seen from Tet1 loss of function included: formation of univalent chromosome, but also homologous recombination and DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) repair defects. These in turn caused defective meiotic prophase which caused decreased amount of oocytes and in turn reduced litter size and lowering in fertility. The study done was pivotal as it built upon past studies which have already established that DNA methylation levels of certain meiotic genes are lowered with genomic reprogramming.


	==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==		==Lab 9: Peer Assessment==

Z5020466: /* Lab Assessment */

2016-11-10T05:47:31Z

Lab Assessment

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:47, 10 November 2016
Line 37:		Line 37:
	PMID 27486480		PMID 27486480

	===Lab Assessment===		==Lab Assessment==

	==Assessment 1==		==Assessment 1==
	<pubmed>PMC3528851</pubmed>		<pubmed>PMC3528851</pubmed>

Z5020466: /* Lab Attendance */

2016-11-10T05:46:35Z

Lab Attendance

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:46, 10 November 2016
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Lab Attendance==		==Lab Attendance==
			[[USER:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:34, 5 August 2016 (AEST)

	[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:42, 12 August 2016 (AEST)		[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:42, 12 August 2016 (AEST)

	[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:46, 26 August 2016 (AEST)		[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:46, 26 August 2016 (AEST)

			[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:18, 2 September 2016 (AEST)

			[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:23, 16 September 2016 (AEST)

	[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:53, 7 October 2016 (AEDT)		[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:53, 7 October 2016 (AEDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:46, 10 November 2016
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Lab Attendance==		==Lab Attendance==
			[[USER:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:34, 5 August 2016 (AEST)

	[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:42, 12 August 2016 (AEST)		[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:42, 12 August 2016 (AEST)

	[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:46, 26 August 2016 (AEST)		[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:46, 26 August 2016 (AEST)

			[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 14:18, 2 September 2016 (AEST)

			[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:23, 16 September 2016 (AEST)

	[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:53, 7 October 2016 (AEDT)		[[User:Z5020466\|Z5020466]] ([[User talk:Z5020466\|talk]]) 13:53, 7 October 2016 (AEDT)