Difference between revisions of "Talk:2012 Group Project 2"

From Embryology
(Group evaluation)
(Assessment)
 
(21 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
==Assessment==
 +
 +
===Criteria===
 +
 +
# The key points relating to the topic that your group allocated are clearly described.
 +
# The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
 +
# Content is correctly cited and referenced.
 +
# 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.
 +
# 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.
 +
# 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.
 +
 +
* Colour of your tables makes difficult to read content.
 +
* Glossary too short for this large topic.
 +
* Some better information should have been included in the image summaries.
 +
* Adult function and neural pathways are covered well.
 +
* Weakest area is coverage of development/embryology. Given the number of members in this group the final project should have had much more information in this area.
 +
 +
===Student Edits===
 +
{|
 +
| Student Number
 +
| 3330539
 +
| 3331951
 +
| 3332863
 +
| 3375390
 +
| 3332885
 +
|-
 +
| Edits
 +
| 135
 +
| 27
 +
| 115
 +
| 39
 +
| 13
 +
|-
 +
|
 +
|
 +
| Hot Cold
 +
|
 +
| Pressure
 +
| History
 +
|}
 +
 +
===Images===
 +
 +
<gallery>
 +
 +
File:Touch 2.JPG|Touch
 +
 +
File:Somatosensory Map.JPG|Somatosensory pathway involving Dorsal Column and Lateral Spinothalamic tracts
 +
 +
File:Touch receptors in mammalian skin cartoon.jpg|Division of Mechanoreceptors in the Skin
 +
 +
File:Pacinian corpuscle histology 03.jpg|Histology of a Pacinian Corpuscle-Notice onion like structure
 +
 +
File:Meissner corpuscle 01.jpg|Histology of a Meissner Corpuscle in subcutaneous layers of the skin
 +
 +
File:Merkel Cell Neurite Complex.JPG|Histology of a Merkel Cell Complex
 +
 +
File:Ruffini Ending.JPG|Ruffini Ending
 +
 +
File:Touch Receptor- Hair Follicle.jpg|Hair Follicle
 +
 +
File:Pressure Receptors in Glabrous Skin.jpg|Pressure Receptor positions in glabrous skin
 +
 +
File:One Nociceptor Specification.JPG|Nociceptor Specification
 +
 +
File:Nociceptor survival.JPG|Nociceptor Survival
 +
 +
File:Axon growth.JPG|Axon Growth
 +
 +
File:Chemical physiological phenotype of nociceptors.JPG|Chemical physiological phenotype of nociceptors
 +
 +
File:Nociceptor Innervation Increases.JPG|Nociceptor Innervation Increases
 +
 +
File:Thermoreceptor development diagram.JPG|Diagram of thermosensation development
 +
 +
</gallery>
 +
 +
===External Linked Images===
 +
[http://www.siumed.edu/~dking2/intro/images/IN038b.jpg Additional Meissner Corpuscel Image 1]
 +
 +
[http://www.virtualworldlets.net/Worlds/Listings/BodySenses/Texture-MeissnerCorpuscle.jpg Additional Meissner Corpuscle Image 2]
 +
 +
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2705296/?tool=pmcentrez Comparative study between encapsulated and capsulated nerve/receptor cells]
 +
 +
 +
 
{{2012GroupDiscussion}}
 
{{2012GroupDiscussion}}
  
Line 265: Line 355:
  
 
==Search==
 
==Search==
 +
 +
Hi, the pressure section has some overlap with touch. Can we merge pressure with Touch? Let me know what you think.
 +
--[[User:Z3332863|Z3332863]] 11:49, 3 October 2012 (EST)
 +
 +
Hey, people writing the pressure and thermoceptor section, can you please add some images or tables in your section? You can use the code for the tables in the touch or pain section. If the copyright won't allow you to put images directly from journal articles, can you please draw some images to put up? I don't understand your sections as well as you do. I can put some pictures in your section if you are really stuck - let me know if that is the case. --[[User:Z3332863|Z3332863]] 22:38, 2 October 2012 (EST)
 +
 +
Finally worked all the kinks out for formatting, hence why the table is now on our page. Still uploading the final touches and sections. If there are any problems or questions with the section now, please feel free to contact me, either by this discussion forum, email or message. Thanks --[[User:Z3330539|Z3330539]] 22:18, 1 October 2012 (EST)--
 +
 +
Hey guys, don't mind me, I'm just going to be doing some table mock-ups n the discussion page, just before i upload it onto the main page. I know I could be doing this on the actual page, but I'd rther be safe than sorry, cause our page is coming along really well :)
 +
 +
Cheers --[[User:Z3330539|Z3330539]] 12:10, 1 October 2012 (EST)--
 +
  
 
Hi, whoever wrote the history section, can you include some dates as to when the discoveries were made. I was thinking of putting that info into a table but we need the dates to do that. Thank you. --[[User:Z3332863|Z3332863]] 14:50, 15 September 2012 (EST)
 
Hi, whoever wrote the history section, can you include some dates as to when the discoveries were made. I was thinking of putting that info into a table but we need the dates to do that. Thank you. --[[User:Z3332863|Z3332863]] 14:50, 15 September 2012 (EST)

Latest revision as of 16:44, 19 November 2012

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 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.
  • Colour of your tables makes difficult to read content.
  • Glossary too short for this large topic.
  • Some better information should have been included in the image summaries.
  • Adult function and neural pathways are covered well.
  • Weakest area is coverage of development/embryology. Given the number of members in this group the final project should have had much more information in this area.

Student Edits

Student Number 3330539 3331951 3332863 3375390 3332885
Edits 135 27 115 39 13
Hot Cold Pressure History

Images

External Linked Images

Additional Meissner Corpuscel Image 1

Additional Meissner Corpuscle Image 2

Comparative study between encapsulated and capsulated nerve/receptor cells


From the Course Coordinator

2012 Projects: Vision | Somatosensory | Taste | Olfaction | Abnormal Vision | Hearing


--Mark Hill 09:58, 18 September 2012 (EST) This is a recent review on vision. http://jcb.rupress.org/content/190/6/953.full JCB content allows reuse.

http://www.jove.com/video/3730/isolation-and-culture-of-human-fungiform-taste-papillae-cells

--Mark Hill 08:17, 16 August 2012 (EST) This small section at the top of your discussion page allows me to easily distribute information to all students looking at the group discussion page.

Please do not delete, edit or move the template {{Template:2012GroupDiscussion}} from the top of this page.

1. Search:

2. History

  • Embryology History Explore the rich history of sensory research. In particular look through the available images that may complement the text. Any of this material can be used, you should cite the original paper or textbook. Gray | 1921 Bailey and Miller


--Mark Hill 09:57, 18 September 2012 (EST) This is a recent review on touch. http://jcb.rupress.org/content/191/2/237.full JCB content allows reuse.

Group evaluation

The introduction is ok, there is an imbalance between text and pictures. Particularly there is a sentence which reads “The following picture shows the general organization of the somatosensory system” however there is no picture. Also in terms of sentence structure, there are four sentences in a row which begin with “the somatosensory system...” or “the system...” Try to alternate how different ideas are expressed as at the moment the paragraph reads as a disjunct of ideas.

As a whole the page’s visual appeal needs ameliorating. There is far too much text and only two pictures, one of which is very large and appears to be compensating for a lack of smaller relevant diagrams within the body of each section. Having said this, the neural development section was very well done. It was detailed without being verbose and showed it was well researched. The hand drawn diagram is excellent. The cell biology part was also very well written and well structured however again, it simply need some visuals to aid in some descriptions of molecular processes.

There appears not to be a continuous referencing style on the page. The introduction has in-text referencing whilst the rest of the page contains endnotes. A minor problem which could be fixed easily, though quite important nonetheless.


I really like your introduction, I think that is is really informative and gives the reader a much clearer understanding of what this topic is about. Your references here need to be included in the reference section below but it appears that you have a good amount of references for the points depicted. At the end of the first paragraph it discusses a picture of the general organisation however there is not one there?? Also the inclusion of a picture would be agreat idea not only to further our understanding but also to break up the text and make it more appealing.

In your history of discoveries section I would probably recommend putting this in a colourful table, again to rbeak up the text, and also to make it easier to read. I would probably suggest here that you include a greater progression of discoveries to show the change of thinking over time. Note to also inlduce the appropriate referencing as shown in previous lab classes.

The central somatosensory differentiation is very expansive and informative. I would assume that you have put a lot of research into this section. Note that you have used pretty well the same references over and over. I would suggest that you include additional references to back up those statements as well. If those couple of references were the only ones saying that information, then I would suggest further researching to ensure that other journal articles don’t contradict this. The image is good and appears to show a good somatosensory pathway, however I would make the font bigger, so that it would not be imperative to enlarge the photo to read what is there. The picture has a discription when it is enlarged which is good, but I think it would also be appropriate to put the correct student information for the referencing.

In the Touch part, I noted that almost none of the text is refenced, which essentially makes the information listen invalid, so I would look into finding appropriate references here. Also, this section seems a bit dull with no pictures. Perhaps histological photos could be included here? I know we studied them in histology and this would make the section more interesting and also compliment the information stated. I would also suggest that those subheadings you don’t want in bold, you list in italic with two ‘ ‘ in order to separate it from the text below..

The Pain section probably needs to be set out better by using dot points? It appears that you have provided some excellent information but it is also important to put the references included with the reference section below. A photo here might be nice, perhaps of the different fibres if this can be found?

The Hot/Cold section is better set out and I like the appropriate referencing here. However, it appears that you are re-using the same references, so I would suggest some more research be done here to compliment your other references. It is better set out, however I would suggest some photos to be included if at all appropriate and can be found.

Pressure is similar to the pain section in the sense that the references really need to be put in the referencing section. It would also be advisable that you split the first paragraph up as it is rather long and not very appealing for one to read.

Current research section is good and concise. I like the use of the picture there, and I like the description that you have when you enlarge the picture. Is there any other current research happening now?

Finally, I would suggest adding more information outlining the development of these areas as I believe this to have been limited across the majority of sections. Although you are providing good reaseach and information describing these sections, as this is am embryology course, I would see it as appropriate that some sort of developmental progression is included – or if this is not known as of yet, for that to be stated. I would also highly recommend that you include a detailed glossary of words, as this is rather incomplete.


Initial impression is it’s too textual for a wiki. The lack of consistent referencing styles is hard to follow. Relates the developing somatosensation to the nervous system, which was good and very interesting. Tables and mind maps/flow carts would be beneficial in sections 1.3.1-1.3.3. And a section on abnormalities of touch would be nice and/or methods of detecting touch and pain etc (ie: clinical methods) and maybe sensitivity to touch.

However, the way this project was divided was logical and easy to follow. But more defined and succinct paragraphs need to be made as it tends to go on for a bit, but that is a sign of good research into the project.

In the section of thermoreceptors it would be better if there was an image from the article for graphical representation.

Summary: MORE IMAGES!!! Be more succinct.

Good luck with the rest ☺



"The introduction is good in that there is a description of the role of somatosensory functions as well as an overview of its development. To improve further, perhaps avoid trailing off in the final sentence and perhaps put something that concludes your introduction.


In regards to the information presented and layout (outcomes 1, 2, 4 and 9), the history of discoveries is very brief and requires more research. Additionally, it would be useful to set up a timeline to add interest. The section on the central somatosensory differentiation appeared very well researched with a very interesting picture to accompany the text – good work. The section on Touch would better be placed in a table and have accompanying images to avoid getting too ‘wordy’. Also, this section does not have any consistent referencing in the bulk of the content – please cite where you find your information. The section on pain is well researched and has a strong content, however, to enhance this section I would suggest using dot points to describe the different fibres and add a relevant image. Similarly, the hot/cold and pressure sections were great in terms of content but could use with some dot points and visual explanation to make the page more interesting. Just a note on pressure – avoid getting repetitive; the page had already defined the Ruffini’s endings/corpuscles etc in the section of Touch. Additionally, the 2 urls at the bottom of this section are distracting, make sure to incorporate these in your reference list of add them to an ‘External Links’ section. Your Current Research section requires some proof reading and additional articles to make it more comprehensive. However, you have referenced the image well and referred to it in the accompanying text.


In terms of referencing, I noticed some areas where the in-text references were not correctly formatted and were in the (Author, date) style. Perhaps have a look at the referencing tutorial on the Embryology ‘Students’ page to get an understanding of the codes required for citations. For peer teaching (outcome 4), make sure that you define all technical terms – your Glossary only has 2 definitions provided. Other than this, the content overall is interesting to read just make sure you are striking a balance between images and text. Hope it helps and all the best!"



- The introduction is small yet detailed --- I like how its an overview of the development. You do need to fix up the references though.

- You have in the intro section “the following picture….” But there is no picture there….if the picture is further ahead maybe write Fig 1 shows….and also label the picture.

- History section needs a bit work on – you should start with the earliest data and proceed in a chronological order so everyone can see the advancement in development of somatosensory organs.

- In the section of “Development of the primary somatosensory cortex” you have mentioned that there are intrinsic and extrinsic mechanisms --- you should mention what those signalling mechanisms are. Also if you are using the one ref for the whole paragraph do not put the ref after each line. Just put it in the end. Also it would be good to give the origin of the neurons like ecto, endo or meso.

- Its good how your description is divided into stages – it might help to give the weeks as well.

- For the touch section you have a lot of detail on what the receptors are which is fine but there is nothing about their development (which is what the project is about). The same thing is noted with “Pain” section – there is nothing on development. I’m sure you can put some genes or signalling molecules that are important for differentiation of cells into the different receptors.

At the moment your project is focused on what the different somatosensory receptors do but very little detail on how they develop, which is what you need to focus on.

More pictures are needed to break up the text.

Good luck!

--Z3333794 09:51, 23 September 2012 (EST)


Overall, the key points relating to the topic area are being addressed. The use of current research to develop ideas and provide detail to the separate sub-headings is helpful. However, I would suggest better collaboration amongst team members about what is going to be addressed under each sub-heading because some repetition has taken place, particularly between touch and pressure where overlaps are expected occur.

Additionally, there is clear imbalance between text and images and there are some areas where dot points, tables, images or videos will be better received by the audience than paragraphs of information.

More specifically, the history of discoveries can be tabulated and should include more historic events that may have taken place before Weber and possibly led to his research. In the section on pain, the bulk of the information can look more easy to read if the different fibres are bolded and put on separate lines with their accompanied descriptions or images or videos are used to replace the text.

A diagram or flow chart may be used in the hot/cold section accompanying or replacing the description on the sensation of temperature.

The section on pressure has all information cramped up in one paragraph which presents different ideas. I suggest each idea being put under a different heading or paragraph. For example, a paragraph on development, one on different structures and their functions (if needed since already addressed), one on research and applications. Images could be helpful!

So far current research looks promising and with the inclusions of more projects, would be interesting. I would suggest only including images in the research section when they can be simply understood and impact on the reader’s understanding or interpretation of the project.

The student diagram used in describing the somatosensory pathway is well done and makes a big difference to the page. The layout of this section is also organised and easy to follow and comprehend.

The references, although extremely extensive, is inconsistent between sections and a consensus should be met amongst team members, additionally, the glossary needs to be built upon. The inclusions of more definitions may help in limiting the text in each section.

Overall, there is no critique on the information presented on the page, it is all very interesting and current, however, a change in organisation of information will help bring this to the attention of the reader. Good luck!


Your introduction is quite expansive and the first paragraph gives an excellent overview of what the somatosensory system actually is. At the end of the first paragraph you do refer to a picture; however, there is no picture. Please add this to show the somatosensory organisation within the body. In the second paragraph you mention some key timepoints related to the somatosensory development, which is good. After this (“Development of the system entails…lemniscal system.”) the text is probably too specific for the introduction. This can be used as an introduction for your development subheading. Please make sure that you edit the in-text references to proper references which we can access via your reference list. Also make sure you start adding terms to the glossary, eg. dorsal column-medial lemniscal system (I do not know what this means!)

You have started on your history section, but it would be more interesting and easier to read if you put this in a table. For instance: date – description – significant person. Also try to add a few more important discoveries. Again, please provide proper references. See the ‘editing basics’ section on this embryology website.

The central somatosensory differentiation is good and I can see that a lot of effort has been put into this section. The picture is very helpful and complements the text. To some extend it does seem like the sensory neurons only come from the dorsal aspect (going into the dorsal root ganglion), so maybe put a note in there that the dorsal and ventral rami are mixed nerves and both of them will contain sensory neurons that go to the dorsal root ganglion. With this image, you also have to include the student template. Text and references are good in this section and I particularly found the ‘making connections’ section very clear, organised and enjoyable to read. Do make sure that you add to the glossary – in particular terms from the ‘development of the primary cortex section’, and if possible add more images.

The touch section has a fair amount of text, but no images to complement it. This made it a bit boring to read. Make sure the subheadings stand out by making them bold. Most of the text has not been references at all, which is concerning and could potentially indicate plagiarism. I also did not read anything about the development of the various receptors (or hypotheses it no distinct evidence has been provided yet). Keep in mind we are looking at the development of the system, not the physiology. You did put in some interesting facts, such as that cell abnormalities can lead to Merkel-cell carcinoma.

Pain and hot/cold are similar to touch: good description of the physiology, but no development included. References are only provided as in-text citations or listed below, which will need to be edited to include them into the reference list. Include images to complement your text and engage the reader – this also concerns the touch section.

The pressure section has limited information regarding the development. Please include how this develops – what factors are included etc. In my opinion there is too much focus on the adult physiology. We are studying embryology… As mentioned above, please edit references and include appropriate images.

Current research looks good with an interesting image and the appropriate references, copyright and student template. The description helps to understand the image. Maybe add another research project to this section.

Add to the glossary, references and actually name the external links listed as 1) 2) and 3).

Hope this helps!


The introduction is very detailed and precise, and it really prepares the readers for what is going to be covered within the project. I thought it was a good introduction but the referencing needs to be fixed up because it looks really different too all the other parts of the project. I do not think that style of in-text citation is needed for the purpose of this project. The histories of discoveries will look better if it is in dot-points, it would be so much easier to read.

In the central somatosensory differentiation section, you mentioned that there are three components, but to me, only the primary somatosensory cortex has been extensively researched, i think more research should be done on the other two components. There is an imbalance of information between the three components. Also, I can see that only 2 references have been used in this entire section, maybe this is why there is an imbalance of information. Using a large variety of resources will definitely expand your knowledge and enable you to put in more information in this section. I thought the hand-drawn image was impressive but the colour is a bit vague and hard to see. A larger version of the image should be uploaded so that it is easier to see.

The "making connection" section has very good description on the physiology and the signalling process of CNS but I do not really understand the stages? Are they the stage events that are involved in embryonic development? Some more detailed explanation is needed here, and maybe some images will help?

The touch section has some good information but again only 2 references have been used which shows the need for further research. Images should be put in here because right now it is very crowded with text. Also, the same problem keeps occurring throughout the project, I feel like there are lots of information about the function of different components of the somatosensory system but not how they are developed. Make sure you do not go off track. There are some weird referencing in the hot/cold section which needs fixing up. There are nothing in the glossary, scientific terms and definition should be put here because not everyone will understand the terms used within the project page. The structure of the project was good though, very clear and simple which makes the page very easy to follow.

Overall, the page is looking good but maybe more research should be done and more images should be put in to balance with the large amount of text. Also, keeping the information related to the research topic will be a huge aspect to focus on. Hope this helps :)


Group Assessment Criteria:

  1. The key points relating to the topic that your group was allocated are clearly described. The introduction outlines the importance of the somatosensory system and provides a good summary of the developmental stages. More emphasis could be made on the key points of the project page.
  2. The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area. The content shows an understanding of the topic area, however the layout makes the text difficult to follow. There is not a clear connection between the ‘Central Somatosensory Differentiation’ and the somatosensory system. There is a lack of diagrams, tables and graphs to explain the written content.
  3. Content is correctly cited and referenced. Some sections are correctly referenced whilst others are completely lacking. This area needs working on.
  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. The information is broken down well by headings and subheadings, however there is a lack of relating images to compliment the information. The one student drawn image is very useful.
  5. Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities. The information provided is well researched and satisfies the aims of the project in terms of developmental stages, however in order to go ‘beyond the formal teaching activities’ it needs to include sections such as abnormal development and more on the history, current and future research.
  6. Relates the topics and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology. The topics and content relate to the learning aims of embryology by describing the developmental stages if the somatosensory cortex.
  7. 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. There has been a fair amount of research into the topic, however a bulk of the information is focused on descriptions of each of the senses. More emphasis should be placed on the development of each of these sense as that is the key topic area.

Additional points:

  • The Introduction and Central Somatosensory Differentiation sections were well written and the accompanying diagram was very useful.
  • The layout of the page could be improved with the use of tables and diagrams to reduce/replace the amount of text
  • The project seems largely incomplete; more research needs to go into the History and research sections and there is a lack of images




Somatosensory review:

The key points are clearly presented at the top of the page efficiently formatted allowing viewer a perfect insight to the entire pages content. There is a severe lack of visual stimuli; this makes the page present as boring and text heavy. Image citation is commendable although throughout the text there is unacceptable links to external sites that are not explained with a messy reference section. The information presented is quite detailed and promotes a significant amount of research and understanding, it is put forward in an excellent matter, sections that could easily be expanded are glossary, and perhaps a section specifically on development.

Attempt to relate to the learning aims of embryology are apparent. There is a large amount of information presented in a fantastic way although the lack of visual stimuli takes away from the final product, perhaps a more summarised presentation matter would be appropriate to break up large amount of text; this along with the tidy up of referencing needs to be addressed.

--Z3330795 10:36, 24 September 2012 (EST)



The introduction provides a good overview however using the wiki in-text citation system will make it neater.

The history section has made a good start but this can be elaborated on further. Once again, referencing can be improved here.

The central somatosensory section has been well researched and the referencing is good. It would be preferable to label figures as "figure 1" etc as this makes it easy to refer to. The drawing is good and has a good explanation however the "student template" should be added.

The touch/pain/hot and cold/pressure sections have a lot of information on their function but not so much information relating to embryological development. Some sections are well referenced, other bits are referenced without the wiki format, and other sections aren't really referenced at all. This can be improved. Adding pictures to these sections to illustrate points will also be helpful.

The current research section, although small, is very good, well referenced, good inclusion of the figure however this could be given a name such as "figure 2". Adding more current research with variation in the topics covered will make this section even more interesting.

The glossary and external links are good - keep adding to these throughout the project.


This page has made good use of subheadings ensuring that the main topics are easily accessible from the contents box. The project appears a little text heavy, it may help to include some other images. Also don't forget to add the student template note on the student drawn image. The reference list at the end is not particularly extensive. Perhaps this can be worked on by collecting the loose references in the text and adding them to the final reference section. Overall some sections of the page seem to have little to with embryology and more focused on adult function.

The introduction, while good, seems to lack any original voice, rather seeming to consist almost entirely of research done by others. The referencing in this section is also confusing with (Lagercrantz, Hanson, Evrard & Rodeck, 2001) being listed before any text. Referencing in this format also makes the page seem like a report or essay rather than a web page. There is also mention of a picture that does not exist. The historic section is brief and rather hard to digest as it is just a chunk of text. Perhaps putting this information into a table and developing it a little would help here.

The section on Central Somatosensory Differentiation was particularly well done. The inclusion of the student drawn image making all the difference. The general structure of this section is also commendable.

The subtitles "Touch", "Pain", "Heat/Cold" and "Pressure" are somewhat abrupt and don't particularly indicate what the section is discussing. This section in particular could do with the addition of some images. The information under Touch could perhaps be a little more heavily researched but is generally well written. Breaking the Pain section into some smaller paragraphs could be useful. The Hot/Cold and Pressure sections are well done excepting the random references to some articles.

Current research section could do with some more information. There are several words throughout the content that could do with being linked to an explanation in the glossary such as the "dorsal column-medial lemniscal system". The external links section is a good addition but it might be helpful to explain more clearly what each links to, especially the last three.


The introduction for somatosensory is very informative and the overview of its development is great. The information is also great, however i do notice a bit of overlap throughout the page. It is important to go through the information and remove information that is repeated.

At times it feels like there is far too much information and not enough images, tables and diagrams. Dot points would be an alternative way to present your information as organisation is necessary. Including some tables and breaking up the texts into more subheadings would make the information easier to absorb.

The history section requires some attention, and it is important to put it in a chronological order. A number of references were not cited correctly and this needs to be corrected. It is important that you refer back to the tutorial on referencing as the citations are very important. Your glossary needs to be worked on and extended, it simply does not cover enough words within your project.

Where is the development section? This is one of the most important topics in the project in addition to function which need to cover signalling molecules and genes. The section on pressure however, is great, but the information needs to be put into tables or under more subheadings to make the information easier to read. At the moment information seems to be all over the place.

The current research section is great and should be expanded upon. The self drawn diagram about the somatosensory pathway is very informative and easy to understand. The references are great but some are included more than once and these need to be organised at the end of the page. Beside the limited diagrams, images, tables and organisation this page looks very promising. Good luck


Somatosensory

Sectioning off the touch, pain, hot/cold and pressure was a very well thought out idea, but wouldn't hot/cold come under a temperature? Just an idea to change the heading to something a bit more formal. Overall the content was very well written. And most sections were referenced properly. Other sections were not, such as the introduction and pressure. The content in these paragraphs is so well written, I fell it is left down by the referencing problem. I found that there were only a few references used in some sections, and sometimes being only one. That may be because there is not enough information out there, I'm just not entirely satisfied with the amount of references. I feel there's more out there. The hand drawn picture was very well done and I like it. The Touch section was well done but had no developmental development, current research is lacking and as is the glossary. There needs to more pictures also.


The introduction is thorough and explains what your topic is about. The history of discoveries part if that is all the info you can find, why not put it in a table it would format the section so the reader can get an overview on how our understanding on somatosensory began.

Your page could do with adding some more pictures in relation to the different sections of somatosensory. for e.g. you mention Meissner's corpuscles in the touch section, you could add a picture with labels so that people could have a visual to understand, as you state where they are located but lay people would not understand what dermal papillae are.

I see you have an embryology and development part with no information, hopefully this will be added to in the near future otherwise don't forget to delete it.

You should also add more to the glossary and have a part called external links and place your links there. --Z3220343 21:30, 25 September 2012 (EST)





Your introductory paragraph is very detailed and has appropriate references. It would be nice to add an image to complement it somehow. Because it’s not very easy to read a big block of text without any image supporting the text. It would look more balanced that way. Also, providing clickable links to the references would be better and make it easier for users to find the original references by clicking on the citation rather than scrolling down and manually looking for the citation in the references.

History of discoveries section is somewhat lacking in content, you need to add more information. It would be nice to do a timeline format to make it easier to see the transition of new discoveries over the past years. Again, adding some images to support this section would make it more interesting to read. Again, providing clickable links to the references would be better and make it easier for users to find the original references by clicking on the citation rather than scrolling down and manually looking for the citation in the references. “Central Somatosensory Differentiation” is the best section so far. It is very well detailed with appropriate references and has an image to support the text. It even has clickable reference links which is good, as it makes it easier to find the references. It would be good to add a little bit more information to describe the image. And perhaps add a few more images to support this section. Overall, you only have one image on your entire page. It would be good if you add some more images to support your text.

Current Research section needs more articles about current research. One article doesn’t seem sufficient. It is good that your image from the article has the appropriate reference. Glossary section needs more words and definitions, there is not enough so far. Some of the external links needs to be fixed. You need to change the format of the links and explain where the links would take you or what those web pages are about.


Group 2- Somatosensory

-Great introduction. Really puts the project in context and justifies the importance of your research. Citations need to be formatted like the rest of the page

-History of discoveries-very poor syntax, word repetition and no paragraphs. What is Weber's full name? This is entitled "history of discoveries" when it is actually just a very brief, nonspecific summary of "Weber". What about the other interesting discoveries from various scientists over decades?

-Adult Central Somatosensory systems- ascending in what? Position? Importance? Activity? Sensitivity? This needs a more informative opening sentence.

-Trigeminal system and Development of the Primary Somatosensory Cortex- are well explained and ideas are presented in a logical, flowing manner. Great picture with a good description and referencing (impressed you drew it).

-"making connections between...." what do the stages mean? Why does it start at stage 23 instead of stage 1?

-touch/touch receptors is good but where are the references?

-pain and pressure sections also good but needs paragraphs and the formatting of citations is incorrect

-bullet points in pressure section need a brief sentence introducing their purpose. Papers listed at bottom of section should be correctly cited instead of having hyperlinks

-interesting info in temperature

-current research- maybe you could put the name of the paper and authors and explain how they conducted their study? That would help with understanding the nice picture

-Glossary is incomplete

-Needs more pictures

-minor grammatical and spelling errors throughout but overall very good and well sequenced.

Search

Hi, the pressure section has some overlap with touch. Can we merge pressure with Touch? Let me know what you think. --Z3332863 11:49, 3 October 2012 (EST)

Hey, people writing the pressure and thermoceptor section, can you please add some images or tables in your section? You can use the code for the tables in the touch or pain section. If the copyright won't allow you to put images directly from journal articles, can you please draw some images to put up? I don't understand your sections as well as you do. I can put some pictures in your section if you are really stuck - let me know if that is the case. --Z3332863 22:38, 2 October 2012 (EST)

Finally worked all the kinks out for formatting, hence why the table is now on our page. Still uploading the final touches and sections. If there are any problems or questions with the section now, please feel free to contact me, either by this discussion forum, email or message. Thanks --Z3330539 22:18, 1 October 2012 (EST)--

Hey guys, don't mind me, I'm just going to be doing some table mock-ups n the discussion page, just before i upload it onto the main page. I know I could be doing this on the actual page, but I'd rther be safe than sorry, cause our page is coming along really well :)

Cheers --Z3330539 12:10, 1 October 2012 (EST)--


Hi, whoever wrote the history section, can you include some dates as to when the discoveries were made. I was thinking of putting that info into a table but we need the dates to do that. Thank you. --Z3332863 14:50, 15 September 2012 (EST)

search pubmed GTO development

Development of Nociceptors, Thermoceptors,and Pruriceptors

Lopes C, Liu Z, Xu Y, Ma Q. Tlx3 and runx1 act in combination to coordinate the development of a cohort of nociceptors, thermoceptors, and pruriceptors. J Neurosci. 2012 Jul 11;32(28):9706-15. <pubmed>22787056</pubmed>


Review for general Somatosensory development - just for background knowledge:

<pubmed>7812142</pubmed> --Z3332863 14:53, 23 August 2012 (EST)

Central sensory Neuron development:

<pubmed>2918087</pubmed> --Z3332863 14:53, 23 August 2012 (EST)


Article on Pain Development:

<pubmed>16446141</pubmed>

--Z3332863 10:05, 22 August 2012 (EST)


I think it would be cool to do an organ, but i'll be just as happy to do one of the senses. Does anyone have a specific organ they were thinking of?

My preference was Sensory, but if we get organ that's fine also. If we did do organ I still want to look into some of the topics before I give my opinion, depending on the research and information behind it. If we got sensory, sight could be cool? - ==Z3330539 08:26, 10 August 2012 (EST)==


I'd prefer Sensory.

I agree; if we got Sensory, I would be happy to do Sight. But if we got Organ, I want to do the Heart but I'd be just as as happy to do another organ if anyone's keen. --Z3332863 09:14, 10 August 2012 (EST)

Hi all,

I started with; and have mainly been looking into development relating to "Touch" and the receptors involved and time at which this occurs. I am happy to keep going or do research on the other categories as well? I will share what I found when we meet next. --Z3330539 22:02, 20 August 2012 (EST)--