Talk:2010 Group Project 6

From Embryology
Revision as of 11:23, 17 July 2013 by Z3129413 (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Group Assessment Criteria

The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described

  • (Introduction) Good general introduction to the topic.
  • (Introduction) acronym Maternal Serum Alpha Fetoprotein (MSAFP) is listed but no entry for AFP when it is first used within the text.
  • (What is Alpha fetoprotein) Good information about levels in male and female blood.
  • Where is the information about the protein itself? "Mammalian AFP and serum albumin genes are thought to have arisen through duplication of an ancestral gene 300 to 500 million years ago."
  • Could have included more background on the history, for example about Dr Gary Abelev and other findings as a separate timeline section rather than in the introduction.
  • Project needed a better closing section, it currently just seems to finish.

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


Figure 1 - File:9_Week_Human_Embryo.jpg (Z3254433)

  • no image information/explanation shown when image is opened.
  • importantly this image shows a week 7 embryo, approx Stage 19 (PC post conception age, or from fertilisation) as I have taught you in the class and is a week 9 (GA or gestational age). You should have been able to identify that for yourself by this stage and if left on the site will be the source of confusion for others. I am disappointed that you did not check this fact.
  • This image will be deleted and re-uploaded with correct information.
  • no link to original image source to check copyright status.

Figure 2 - File:Properties_of_AFP.png (Z3186755)

  • incorrect link given the correct link is (you have left off the last "l" and not checked your link)
  • no legend on the project page, some information when the image is opened.
  • this would have been better added as your own table based upon the original and correctly cited.
  • this image is copyright © Atlas of Genetics and Cytogenetics in Oncology and Haematology with no information on the original site about reuse. "Any use of information from this web site should be accompanied by an acknowledgment of the Atlas as the source, citing the uniform resource locator (URL) of the article."
  • as the whole project is about this protein test I would have thought that more would be devoted to the protein properties, not just in this thumbnail table.

Figure 3 - File:Structure_of_Alpha_fetoprotein.jpg (Z3254433)

  • this figure is correctly cited from the same source (figure 2)
  • no legend on the project page, no further information when the image is opened.
  • this is poorly done as there should be a description of the image and what it is showing.

Figure 4 - File:Encephalocele.jpg (Z3254433)

  • no legend on the project page, no further information when the image is opened.
  • at least provide the explanation the original source used.

Figure 5 - File:MSAFP Test Results.png (Z3186755)

  • copyright information provided
  • this table is so small as to be virtually useless, the thumbnail image is unreadable and has no legend.
  • why was this not redrawn as your own table based upon this source?
  • disappointing in terms of project structure/format.

Figure 6 - File:Enzyme_immunoassay.jpg (z3254433)

  • meets the requirement of student drawn figure.
  • poor quality flow diagram of ELISA test, does not even show how the ELISA works which would have been a better drawing.
  • more common to use the term spectrophotometer.
  • "Procedures in the enzyme immunoassay of AFP conducted in Maternal serum AFP screening." is not a comprehensive explanation of this test.

Figure 7 - File:Karyotype_Down_syndrome.gif (z3254433)

  • This image has been sourced originally from Clinical Tools Inc., you do not link to the original source, I was unable to check the copyright status of your image from their site.
  • Where is the explanation of what is being shown in the figure.
  • there is also already this image on the current site that should have been used and not duplicated.

Figure 8 - File:Spina bifida occulta 01.jpg (z3254433)

  • meets the requirement of student drawn figure.
  • not a good drawing as details lacking.
  • image has an explanatory legend when opened.


  • (Ranges and Levels) why was the First Trimester (mg/dL) data given different quantification units to the Second Trimester (ng/mL). This can be confusing to the reader and does not allow direct comparison.

Content is correctly cited and referenced

  • The reference for " Furthermore, it was found that the 'normal' value of AFP was 15% higher in African Americans when compared to Caucasians." should have been "Canick JA, Kellner LH, & Bombard AT: Prenatal screening for open neural tube defects. Clin Lab Med 2003; 23:385-394." rather than a link to another website.
  • (MSAFP testing and the community) "Iles and Gath found that nearly one half of the women" this reference does not appear in your list.

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

  • (Glossary) Some good entries but not comprehensive enough for this project topic. You needed to read through the final project and select any terms within the body of the text and ask whether there is a full enough explanation of their usage.
    • Where are the terms: false-positive results, fetal bradycardia, maternal diabetes mellitus, maternal serum, Meckel syndrome, amniotic fluid, Triple Test, Quadruple Test, thrombosis, radio-immuno assay, bioluminescence, chemiluminescence, hereditary cogenital nephrosis
    • The following definition is incorrect as there is an additional chromosome 21 (trisomy 21). "Downs syndrome: A chromosomal disorder where there is a 21st chromosome in the fetus. This leads to problems in growth and cognitive ability."
  • (Abnormalities) - Where was information about the following: Citrin Deficiency, Ataxia with Oculomotor Apraxia Type 2, Ataxia with Oculomotor Apraxia Type 1, Ataxia-Telangiectasia, Hereditary Ataxia Overview, Beckwith-Wiedemann Syndrome, Beta-Thalassemia, APC-Associated Polyposis Conditions, Juvenile Hereditary Hemochromatosis, Tyrosinemia Type 1, Smith-Lemli-Opitz Syndrome, TFR2-Related Hereditary Hemochromatosis, SYNE1-Related Autosomal Recessive Cerebellar Ataxia, Spinocerebellar Ataxia with Axonal Neuropathy, Autosomal Recessive, Joubert Syndrome, Friedreich Ataxia, Junctional Epidermolysis Bullosa, Epidermolysis Bullosa with Pyloric Atresia, Ataxia with Vitamin E Deficiency, Hydroxymethylbilane Synthase (HMBS) Deficiency, Simpson-Golabi-Behmel Syndrome, DGUOK-Related Mitochondrial DNA Depletion Syndrome, Hepatocerebral Form

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

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

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

  • Peer feedback suggested adding descriptions of the pictures in the caption-areas. This was not done for the final submission. A tutorial had been given early in the course on how to add and label images as well as a permanent images information page.

Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement

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

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

LoL I give table a go with the advanages and disadvantages, but I don't think it's suitable, coz the texts are too long, it's easier to read it in point form as it is so I changed back.

--3216889 09:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

hey i'm not too sure, i think it was mentioned in our peer review that we should make a table to compare the different types of prenatal testing, if not pick whatever you think is best!

--z3254433 01:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey I see there are more pictures in the page which is great, I have found out how to make the tables, however I was just reading through the text again and... I am not too sure which contents to put it in a table, I thought about the advantages and dis-advantages but it is already in point form, what do you guys think should be put in a table?

--3216889 11:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

hey guys, after reading all the reviews the main thing that needs to be changed is the page lay out, i'll fix this by adding some more pictures and adding the steps of the procedure, and i think someone is going to add a table.

--z3254433 09:19, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Guys! I was just wondering if i could please get your permission to use your student drawn diagram, if you see our page im making a table with all our diagrams in it, and, of course, i need your permission to use it :) Thanks! Jill - group 2 --z3265772 02:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Peer review

Group 6: Your page is very well put together. The information is in depth and structured nicely so that it seems to flow well as you read it and seems to cover all concepts. I feel like i get a very good overview of the topic after reading it and i found the "testing and the community" section particularly engaging. You could try to improve the page with the use of more pictures and maybe a discussion about this technique in relation to others that also use maternal blood. You could also discuss the future of this technique and the benefits of direct analysis of fetal material through maternal blood in comparison to invasive techniques? but overall a really good job --z3293029 22:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 6 - very informative, well done. The page could do with more images and tables to engage the reader's attention a little more and also allow for some information to be compared and contrasted. Nice effort with the hand drawn pictures. You could also include current research on the uses of the procedure in relation to pregnancy and fetal development as well as the future of the procedure. Although it is not your subject matter it would be helpful for you to briefly define what percutaneous umbilical blood sampling is and emphasise the risks that the method of sample collection are strongly associated with the decision to use this procedure. Aside from that good effort --z3241780 14:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

GROUP 6: Maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein

I liked the overall scientific feel of the information you provided. I liked how you went into a bit of the molecular biology involved, as well as pictures to explain what exactly is alpha-beta protein. you guys showed a good understanding of the topic, although I noticed an error in the contents section where you put all the other headings under the 'introduction'. I liked the drawn pictures, it was a nice effort and was very informatively labelled. Ways to improve is probably add some tables to there isn't as much text and to simplify things, and also it can make it more interesting than it is already. More pictures in the abnormalities would have been good, images of spina bifida are definately eye catching and interesting to know about. The tables as pictures were a little hard to see without clicking on them but yes, good organisation, great job! --z3224500 13:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

To tell you the truth I didn’t find anything wrong with this assignment page. There is a lot of information but that can be expected from an informative web page. Yet the best way to make it look less is just throw some pictures into the mix. I think that your page was the only page that didn’t have any spelling mistakes so good work in that department and keep it up. I sometimes thought in some areas that the language was a bit easy to read and this can be both an advantage or a disadvantage depending on how Mark Hill but as a precaution just add a bit more scientific data. I don’t think it will hurt. I felt that in some place maybe a table would better suit the information presented but that just me. I also found the introduction had things that could be covered in sections below but I’m not sure if that was intentionally done. The best way to reduce the amount of words used to describe is to dot point or tabulate coming back to my old point but apart from that I found the assignment very informative and interesting which really isn’t easy when you have all those word, most people would have rambled on. So hats off to you there. The flow of the page is disrupted but you can fix that up by just moving bits and pieces around the page seeing where it fits best. A really good assignment. Well Done Guys!!!!

--z3252635 13:24, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi guys!

Good job with the referencing and copyright information on your pictures, including the student-drawn ones. It would be nice to see descriptions of the pictures in that caption-area, just to make it more clear what part of your writing they were relating to. I love that you included a link to a video in your intro; it made me want to watch and find out more. I would suggest moving your other links for further reading to before your glossary though, just so they don’t get lost in the page – once people hit the glossary I find they tend to think that’s the end and stop reading (at least I tend to). Other than that, it says “ babys’ ” instead of “baby’s” in the Maternal Serum Alpha Protein as a Screening Test section first paragraph; but other than that I didn’t spot much else in the way of typos, and I found your language quite easy to read. Other suggestions would just be maybe to break up the text a bit, perhaps with some more pictures, just to make the page more eye-catching. Perhaps something with colour, if you can find it. Overall, though, well done!--z3252833 12:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 6

Group 6, I think the structure of your page is great, there's enough subheadings to break it into clear sections, but maybe more point form could be used to break it up a little. The information is very detailed so it shows lots of research but its written in a clear enough way to be understandable, and it has a good scientific feel. The student drawn diagrams, especially the one of the analysis process, is great and helps to explain the information really well. What would improve this project: Maybe some more references, and you could also put in a section of the historic background of the procedure with some of the information that's in the introduction.

--z3292208 08:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein

This is a great project filled with lots of information. It is clearly well researched and the organisation of the page itself is sensible in the logical order of sub headingsand the flow of ideas.

I don't mind seeing a picture aligned to the left :P. Maybe you could use figures the break up the text a bit more? Other than that great work guys, this is excellent and gives a very 'scienfitic feeling'presentation of this topic

--z3254753 17:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Group 6 = Maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein

The project is very organised and the pictures included were very related to the text. I really liked the link too because that not only showed you did alot of research for this project but also made it outstanding. Definetly provide me with better understanding About MSAFP.

How you can improve = There are alot of words may be try to break them down into point form but other than that everything looks good --Navneet Ahuja 12:16, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Group 6, I like how you have organised the page, its easy to follow and the layout was great. The pictures helped me with understanding the sections, although maybe they could be a bit bigger. I did learn alot about Maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein from your page, Thanks!

Improvements: Under the heading MSAFP testing and the community, there is a spelling mistake. liklihood should be likelihood, and servey should be survey. The page also looks a bit like an essay, maybe for some parts you could do a few tables to make it easier to follow

--z3265772 03:45, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading this project, the layout was overall great and i liked how you put in a link to a video. It was very understandable and i was able to follow what was said throughout reading it all. It was scientific enough but easy for anyone to read.

Improvements - the pictures were a little small, so maybe enlarge them a bit. Also, maybe break the procedure section into the different steps that are taken.

--z3291079 10:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

There is A LOT of information. Although it is very well researched (to that I commend you), I personally think you need to break it up a bit. Maybe align the pictures differently; they are great pictures they just seem to hang there as a side thought. Maybe also include a table or flow chart for the procedure because it is quite hard to follow. Your glossary is adequate although your referencing may fall short in the screening test section. Great video to start off with!! Good work guys!! --z3252083 12:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Co-ordinator Comments
--This is an area for members of the group to communicate online and to place links and information relevant to the project. Do not forget to sign your additions and always add the newer material to the top of this page.

Projects: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Students Page | Help:Editing Basics

--Mark Hill 00:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC) OK guys, its now time to get going with this. You need to have significant content added to all sections on your project page before this weeks lab. Still no related images or student drawn figure here.

You need to have this updated before this weeks lab when I will be reviewing all projects.

--Mark Hill 04:52, 23 August 2010 (UTC)OK so there is some discussion here. I need the major subheadings to be added before this weeks lab and there should be some thought to the content within each section. Still no related images here.

--Mark Hill 22:56, 11 August 2010 (UTC) Well group 6 where is your work that should have been done before this week's Lab?

Hey guys, ive only really done some light background research about alpha-fetaprotein testing via wiki/google/journal articles hehe :P

Anyway, i forgot to save the links i got for the journal articles ive already printed off, but i’ll stick up their titles which can be found easily, and i’ll basically summarise the info we can use from them anyway and stick it up so we can sift through it all.

The journal articles that i remembered to save links to are as follows:

First-trimester maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein as a marker for fetal chromosomal disorders -

--Mark Hill 04:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC) Here is the Pubmed link for the above paper This is how to cite it using the current website (look at the page in edit mode):


And this is how to reference it in the body of your project page.[1]

to appear in a reference list

  1. <pubmed>7534926</pubmed>

Amniotic fluid alpha-fetoprotein is not a useful biological marker of pregnancy outcome -;2-7/abstract

The value of early third-trimester maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein determination -

Reduced fetal hepatic alpha-fetoprotein levels in Down' s syndrome -

Very low versus undetectable maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein values and fetal death -

I don’t know what you guys had in mind for splitting the work etc, but as it is, im quite happy to just get info, and slowly just add info the main page as it goes and let it slowly evolve from constant editing of stuff etc. And if anyone had clashes of ideas etc, then just fix/change a section and stick it up as well and we can all just edit passages as we see fit after some discussion hehe

so you guys know what other articles im looking at, so we don’t really double up on info, are as follows: The effectiveness of prenatal serum biomarker screening for neural tube defects in 2nd trimester pregnant women

Msaf values in type ½ diabetic patients

2nd trim. Msaf elevation and its association with adverse maternal/fetal outcome

Afp in the early neonatal period

Structure and function of afp

ps - i most likely will just play around with headings etc on the main page...and if i put info up there in point form its not really the main text, just a quick point of ref. for what info i may or may not stick up etc as well as just general format testing haha ^_^

--3186755 15:56, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi everyone, yeh I think its a good idea to compile information and research before the next lab and go through it together before we designate certain areas to one another. I'll try to get through some of the articles that are up to get an idea of how we are going to divide the work up. Possible categories:

1) Introduction to how it is carried out, history, developements. 2) How the test works, what is used or tested. 3) What the test is looking for, diseases, syndromes, dissorders. 4) Any problems or flaws the test has, effectiveness, contempory issues.

We should discuss more in depth during the lab, put up any more ideas for subheadings that we should use.


--3290040 12:31, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys,

I’m still in the research stage with this assignment, I think we really need to come up with a specific outline or structure for the assignment so the work can be divided up soon.

This structure is similar to the previous one mentioned above:introduction and background information on prenatal testing, what is alpha-fetoprotein how it is made by the foetus etc, the diseases that could be tested, history of maternal alpha- fetoprotein testing, accuracy etc.I don’t think there is much information on the procedure or ethical issues on this topic as they are not so relevant.

Here are two links The first one is some general research done on rats. I’m not sure if you guys want to use it?!!

reducing invasive testing by using maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein testing. We could use it to compare some benefits of a non-invasive test.

--z3254433 11:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey guys,

I think right now we have come up with the basic lay out of the site, I suggest that we split up the parts in our next lab class and if we come across anything that are specific for our assignment and think it's worthwhile to put in the site as well we can do that as we go along. These are some of the articles that I have been looking at:




Alpha-fetoprotein Information, chemical composition, quantition, Standardization of AFP assay etc. -

Overview -

--3216889 10:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

hey guys,

i just put up a very rough and incomplete outline of the subheading that we can have for our assignment, so if you have any subheading you would like to add or edit those that i have put up please do so.

also if anyone has any relevant picture that we can use please post them up.


--z3254433 23:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

hey, i just stuck up some basic background stuff on afp that is prety much just a dump of info so we can use it how we see fit :) hopefully will be able to add some other stuffs under the diff headings etc ^_^

--3186755 14:16, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

hey guys, just sending you a pictures via email that i drew but i think it might breach copyright so if you can edit it so that its not that would be great, also I'm uploading other pictures that i have drawn on our site. if you find any pictures that aren't copyright please post them up because i can't seem to find any!!!

--z3254433 05:43, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

ok I have chuck in the spina bifida and anencephaly detection in there, I would have the Down Syndrome detection up soon as well. I will help find pictures of thoses disorders as well and have them up as soon as possible. (Note to self: remember to edit the AFP in pregnancy so it doesn't overlap with the disorder section)

--3216889 13:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)----

just upload the picture you emailed to us :) it should be fine hehe anyway, just added extra parts :) --3186755 16:00, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

hey guys, did 3290040 respond to any of the emails you sent? --3186755 11:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

hey, i got no response, Q) why won't these pics upload on our page???

--z3254433 11:18, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

ummm not sure? maybe try and just upload onto the main page and see if its like that i guess :S the other pictures seem to work fine on the main page --3186755 15:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

so i redid all the references since no one knew how to edit them properly. However, i couldnt really find the proper references for the following:

Green 1995. See n. 6, p. 232

Iles and Gath 1993. See n. 30, p. 411

so i'll leave it here in discussion to be cleared up and take it off the main page hehe

--3186755 13:51, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Guys! I was just wondering if i could please get your permission to use your student drawn diagram, if you see our page im making a table with all our diagrams in it, and, of course, i need your permission to use it :) Thanks! Jill - group 2 --z3265772 02:56, 23 September 2010 (UTC)