Talk:2012 Group Project 4

From Embryology



  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.

Student Edits

Student Number 3374215 3333427 3331264 3333038
Edits 145 96 127 135


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. JCB content allows reuse.

--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 09:59, 18 September 2012 (EST) This is a recent review on smell. JCB content allows reuse.

Not for reuse but good reading - The Neurobiology of Olfaction


Hey Team... I was just wondering if we had come to a conclusion as to what image we wanted to place at the top of the page?? Please get back to me asap.

Z3333427 14:37, 27 September 2012 (EST)

Signal Transduction

Have anyone found an informative image we can use for this section

Z3333427 10:37, 2 October 2012 (EST)

--Z3333038 10:44, 2 October 2012 (EST)Yes - on this page. Mark says JCB allows content to be reused, just reference it.

Group evaluation

The project page was exceptional, there is a fine combination of text and images and the images are well integrated with the presented information. I particularly like the inclusion of a hand drawn histological section embedded within the table of historical findings. Perhaps this could also be done in the next table about the developmental timeline. As it stands, this table, while detailed in its wording may be difficult to understand as there are no diagrams to show the differentiation in visual terms, from week to week.

The clinical features, anatomy, and pathohophysiology were excellent. There is not much more to say. All of the diagrams were properly cited with correct copyright information. The CT scan was also interesting to look at.

One aspect that hasn’t been touched on is future research. The current research section was very detailed and explained the significance of each new finding however as is the nature of research, there are always gaps left in our understanding or further questions that need to be resolved as a result of new information. A brief section on this would give the project more depth as it would show a level of critique rather than simply the presentation of fact.

Your introduction is good and concise giving a simple understanding of the olfactory system. Here I would suggest that you include what you’re about to discuss on the page. I also think you should include some references and maybe a photo in this section. The references to show that this information has been researched and the photo to break up the text and give the reader a simple understanding of the olfactory system.

The history of discovery section is clearly well researched and is well set out. However, I would suggest that you include brief descriptions of what has been described such as the Vomeronasal organ or the Nobel Prize which will further enhance the readers understanding. You have a good use of references there as well. In the picture that was included in this section, I would provide a more indepth description of what is drawn i.e. what the ectoderm is etc.

The timeline of developmental process is really well set out and easy to read. I would just make sure that every new point you include, you put it with a references as some of your points are not referenced at all and you need to be careful of that! I would also suggest that you put it in appropriate bullet points using the star key on your keyboard, that way it can be set out a bit better. Also, at the end of week 8, does this mean the olfactory system is complete by then? If so, then I would suggest you state that in that final week, if not, then what other small changes occur throughout the duration of the pregnancy? Also note that week 6 – 8 the references are either limited or not there, so I would recommend putting them in.

The anatomy of the olfactory system and the normal function are limited in information but also have only one reference between them. The images attached should really have more of a description when the picture is enlarged to give the reader a better understanding of what you’re talking about. Such as: diagram of olfactory bulb- what does it do and where is it located?

The abnormality section is rather indepth for 2 conditions, are there any other factors that come into play in regards to olfactory defects? Such as environmental? The Kallmann’s syndrome is really indepth and describes the clinical features, diagnosis and treatment, could this also be implementd with the Choanal atresia? Or are the same techniques used there? Also, be careful when you use shortening of words such as OB, you provided the HH in brackets first, so I would suggest the same is done with the olfactory bulb just to prevent confusion. I like your use of both images and give s a simple but good explanation of what you have been discussing (and also breaks up the text!). I like how you have provided a good description in the enlarged picture and it makes it easier for the reader to understand.

The current research section really shows that you have put a lot of effort in for this section. However, at the beginning of each new research you state either a study or a paper with a link, perhaps use the name of the paper and who wrote it and use that as the link instead. It is really interesting and I rather enjoyed reading it, however, if possible I would add some more photos just to break up the text. Your glossary is good and well set out and the information displayed is quite easy to understand, however I would consider adding to this section as there were some other words throughout the page which were in need of a slight description. You have an excellent use of references which is great, but I would have another look at reference 11 as there is no text, only an arrow.

The work needs to be spell checked before you submit it, make sure you get all your grammar right as well. I think you should add more to your introduction, and make it a little simpler, easier to follow. Also throughout your project you tend to use a lot of long paragraphs, especially in the current research section.

Though the developmental timeline that is set up is very detailed, it can be a bit hard to follow and a little confusing. There is too much text and no pictures at all to help demonstrate what is being said about the development. The ratio of images to text in the anatomy and abnormalities sections however is very good and makes it more interesting to read.

It’s good to see that you have some external links put up on the page and also that you’ve used quite a few references to do your research rather than just a few.

WOW! I really can’t come up with anything bad to say about this wiki. Text and image are nicely balanced. Developmental timeline was very easy to follow and succinct which is always nice. It was good to have research images alongside hand drawn images. Diagnosis and treatment sections may need some expantion. List of references current and varied – always good to see.

All in all this was a very good project and congrats of the good work. Keep it up.

Good luck with the rest ☺

- The introduction is very good and brief --- although it does not tell the reader that it is about development of olfactory sense.

- The history section is immaculately done --- You have used a couple different sources and gone into enough detail about each historic background which tells me that you have thoroughly research this part.

- The development section is also very nicely done --- I like the layout of this section. Also the sentences are very clear and structure is easy to follow. There is a large section in week 6 which does not have any reference so you might want to fix that up. Same goes for week 7 abd week 8.

- When you start talking about anosmia it just abruptly follows normal function so you might want to add the heading “abnormal development”. It might even be a good idea to put normal function before normal development to put things in prespective.

- In Kallmann’s syndrome although it was very interesting to read, it is very heavy on genes which you have not addressed in the normal section portion. I do realise for some of them you have put a description as to what they do in normal development but see if you can integrate it with normal development too.

- It is also good to see that you have a diagnosis section and a treatment section too. It was very informative.

- Current research is well put together

Overall your project is looking pretty good….Just some minor formatting issues. The text is a little on the heavy side so some images especially in the development section will be good.

The introduction was very interesting to read - 1000 genes related to olfactory system is amazing. The introduction isn't too long which is great. However, it would be good to include in text citations. Where did you get your information from?

The history section will look better if it was put into a table.

The 'Timeline of Development process' is excellent because it clearly presents so much information with respect to the time the differentiations took place. I can't wait to see the images though because some of the concepts were hard to understand without visual aids. For example, 'specialized areas in rostrolateral regions of head of olfactory placodes' - where is that on the embryo?

The normal function section was short. This is nice to see because this project is about development, not about the function. It would be good to include a diagram of the signaling pathway in this section, just to make it interesting.

The structure section needs a bit more information. Maybe put the olfactory bulb image in this section as it relates more to structure. You can also put some images of the cribiform plate in here too.

Abnormality section on Kallmann's syndrome was very well written. It had lots of detail, presented clearly in point form. Can you describe some of the other diseases in just as much detail as well? It just seems like Kallmann's syndrome is the main disease and there's not a lot of focus in other abnormalities.

In current research, 'the 'role of Odorant receptors' need to have some text and content in that section, not just the reference.

--Z3332863 16:58, 23 September 2012 (EST)

Page is well structured. Tables and images break up the information nicely. Some of the images lack an in depth explanation of what they depict/represent when you click on them. I know for some of the images it might be hard, but i think it would make for a more thorough way of presenting the information. Not to much a critique, but you spend a large amount of time and space on the abnormalities section. When combined with the current research section and the images, only about a third of your page is information on olfaction. An even less of it is on the actual embryology when considering the timeline of discoveries and introduction. Try and draw out the embryology section a little further, considering the context of the website and who would be visiting it.

Your introduction is good and gives a brief overview of what the olfactory system entails. There were a few spelling mistakes, which can easily be corrected. Make sure you do tell the reader what you will be discussing on your page – development of the olfactory system and the particular subheadings you will focus on. The image could do with a few more labels for orientation, but besides that it complements the text and contains the correct citation, student template, etc.

The history section is good and quite extensively researched. Most groups will provide the history in a table, with dates in chronological order (to clearly show history and developing knowledge over time). This might be something to think about. I would suggest a ‘date – description – significant person’ type of format for a table. Good image, but it is displayed next to Pearson instead of Kollman. It is also difficult to see what it is and read the labels without opening the larger version, so you might want to increase its size slightly. Because this is a student image I would like to see the original – if possible provide a link to the Atlas of the Development of Man 2. You should also explain what Kallmann’s Syndrome actually is, because this seems a little vague.

Your timeline of developmental process looks amazing and is enjoyable to read. Some of your words are printed in bold and link to the glossary. In one of your next sections the words link directly to the glossary, so you should probably do he same thing here. I really hope you can add pictures to this table to complement your text! Not quite sure what the line at the bottom (SINUSES:A:…) is doing there… either delete or expand upon this.

Structure: you only have a link here. Please provide text and image to explain the structure briefly. The YouTube link should be there to help the reader understand this section, instead of being the only thing this section is made up of. The video is not your own work, so please add your own work to this!

The normal function section was alright. It has some useful information in there, however, only a single reference listed at the end. It seemed like more references should be included within the paragraph. I would also include the fact that depolarization is an all-or-nothing response. The threshold needs to be reached for depolarization to occur, but there is no build-up over time to reach this threshold. It has to happen at that one instance. The links should be listed under the heading ‘external links’ or, if used as references, incorporated as proper references within the text. The olfactory bulb image is a little small and the description is quite brief. Though, good citation of the source and a student template is present. I think the olfactory bulb image and the epithelium image should be included in the ‘structure’ section.

The abnormality section includes Kallmann’s syndrome and a quick definition has finally been provided! Please include this in the history section too. This section was a joy to read! Very interesting! A lot of effort has been put into the research and references have been done very well. I assume OB stands for olfactory bulb – please indicate this in the text. The dotpoints listed in the ‘clinical features’ section could do with a brief explanations instead of me having to scroll up and down between the text and the glossary. The image is excellent and shows a good simplified concept of what happens. Good descriptions, source citations, etc are added too. It was good to see diagnosis and treatment included.

Current research starts with a link, which seems quite random – include this in the external links section. You found some interesting and current research. References are only listed at the end of each paragraph, but should probably be included within as well. The image relates to one of the projects and descriptions are appropriate. Nothing has been added to the ‘role of odorant receptors’ though (apart from a reference). Please add a brief paragraph to this section.

Terms should be added to the glossary. The reference list also needs checking, because some are the same (eg. 11 & 12) and others do not have a reference (eg. 7 & 17).

Hope this helps!

The introduction is quite small but very precise, indicating the function and the components of the olfactory system but maybe include one or two sentences in the introduction telling readers that it is actually about the development of the olfactory system, not just the function and components of it. After all, introduction is meant to show others what your project is about. The hand-drawn image there is very nice but maybe more information need to be provided other than just labelling parts of it. Along with the image, there are the important informations such as the copyright notice which is good to see.

The history of discoveries section is very well-researched but it will be easier to read if it was in a table. The timeline, i thought was very good because there are a lot of useful information about the development of olfaction which relates to the research topic. The developmental process is explained in quite simple terms but i notice some of the scientific terms in the timeline are not explained in the glossary, this makes it a little bit hard to understand the whole process. It is very interesting that a youtube link has been included in the structure section, this is really a good peer teaching but make sure you referenced the video correctly to avoid plagiarism. The section on Kallman's syndrome is quite interesting but the structure of that section is a bit messy, maybe try clarifying and tidy it up a lit. But i can see that a lot of research effort has been put into it which is good and the variety of resources used in the section is very broad. More images should be put here because right now, there is just a huge block of text in the section. Images will balance out the heavy text load and attract readers more.

The current research section contains a lot of useful information and it relates to the research topic well. Again, images should be put here because right now, there are just small blocks of text in the section without any images, this maybe a little bit boring for readers.

Overall, the project looks well-researched and relates pretty well to the research topic. The balance of the images and text still needs to be fixed but in terms of the text and information on the page, i think it is pretty sufficient and in-depth especially the timeline of development and current research section. There are some terms in the glossary which is good but maybe more terms should be added. The structure of the page is good, very easy to follow. There are a few external links which is always good to put there for anyone that are interested by the topic and want some further information about it. Referencing is good, there is only one minor citing error (no.7), but it should be easy to fix. Hope this helps :)

The introduction provides a good overview to the topic and the associated images have all the appropriate referencing information.

The history section is interesting and well researched with good use of subheadings.

The timeline of development is very useful and informative however is quite text-heavy, some diagrams may be able to help here.

The anatomy and normal function sections don't add very much to the page, especially in terms of embryological development. Adding more to these sections may help.

The abnormalities section is good, with a lot of information on Kallmann's syndrome, however other abnormalities (if there are any?) could be included to expand this section.

The current research section contains a lot of information in a small amount of space. It is quite jargon-heavy although this might not be able to be avoided. The subheadings are good as they act to split this section into discrete units.

The glossary and external links are very good, and the references are extensive which is good.

  • Introduction: The information is very interesting and provides a good overview of the olfactory system. The only improvement that could be made is clearly stating what content is going to be covered on this project page. Also, “The olfactory system are often ‘’’divide’’’ into a peripheral mechanism”
  • History of Discovery: This sections presents a good summary of each research paper, detailing a background of the researchers and the importance of each discovery. Well done!
  • Time line of developmental process: This section shows a good depth of research and provides detailed descriptions of each stage of development. However, the information provided is quite complicated and would not be easily understood by peers. This could be overcome by the use of labeled diagrams or hand drawn images, which I can see is yet to come. Overall this is a well done section, the colors draw the readers attention and I like the use of bolded text to highlight important information.
  • Anatomy of the Olfactory System & Normal Function: This provides a good amount of information seeing as the focus of the page is about olfactory development, not the function & final structure. The only improvement could be providing an explanation in the figure provided.
  • Congenital Abnormalities: This section is well organized and includes all relevant content. Very interesting to read.
  • Current Research: A well researched section and coverage of content. Each paper is summarized and the importance of each discovery is made clear. It would be nice to include a direct link to each article.

For me this is one of the best projects of the 6 groups. It is extremely well researched, as seen through the extensive reference list. It is evident that the group has gone above and beyond, researching even more than required for the topic, or standards set by other groups, such as clinical approaches, and much information on current research.

I found that the formatting in the upper part of the page, specifically the section under the title ‘normal function’ was a bit awkward in relation to text and image positioning. It felt that it was not consistent with the flow of the rest of the page. Also the first table may require an in-filled colour or even lines (can be a light or pale colour), just so each column and the single uploaded image is more defined and linked to the correct year/individual.

The ‘Choanal Atresia’ tomography image requires acknowledgement that the image was uploaded as part of a university assessment. However, really appreciated the breakdown of where the arrows were pointing and the relevance in relation to your specific topic. Images for the tables need to be finalized and uploaded; ensuring that there is appropriate referencing, whether they are student drawn, or sourced from the literature. Found that the student drawn diagrams were really detailed and easy to understand and appreciate. Each was also relevant to the topics, which they were linked/associated to.

The introduction while small gives a great overview on what olfactory is. You could add a small overview on what the page is about to make this part a little longer.

I like your table on development however there is some information in the table which is missing references, you should see to that soon and add a reference. Some images in this section would be nice and if there are not going in the table then you might want to delete the image column.

The anatomy of the olfactory system is quite small; this part could possibly be added to your introduction. Kallmann’s syndrome is done very well and is quite thorough and as a result the choanal atresia section looks lacking. I would suggest adding this to the bottom of your abnormalities section and if no more information is going to be added to the page maybe state that other abnormalities include - choranal atresia and then maybe an external link.

Current research section is quite detailed and I would not add anything else to this section. I did notice that Role of Odorant Receptors is just stated with a reference and no information. If nothing is to be added here I would just delete this heading. --Z3220343 21:33, 25 September 2012 (EST)

Group 4- olfaction

-numerous typos and syntax errors throughout. My favourite is "naval cavity"

-generally well explained and I like how you've used different formats for each section to keep it interesting

-this seems a bit random-


-I think the anatomy section should come before the developmental timeline just to put the developmental stages in context

-abnormal function is very comprehensive :)

-current research is great, it appears some quality research went into this

-excellent use of resources throughout, including your external links. I think you've covered everything well

Introduction is sufficient for now, but it may be better if you add more details, and perhaps an image to support it. Maybe an image of the nose and its structural components labelled.

History of discoveries section is great so far. You gave succint information with references. You only have 1 useful image in this section, so it would be better if you add more images.

Developmental timeline is very well detailed and has appropriate refrencing, however more refernces need to be added for some of thee information. You also need to add images as that column is left blank so far.

Anatomy of the olfactory system needs more details and explain the structural components. The diagrams are good, but needs more description in the captions.

“Congenital Abnormalities” is very detailed, with appropriate referencing and good images. It would be good to add a few more images. Also, add more description in the “Computed Tomography of Choanal Atresia” image.

Current research section is very good so far. Perhaps adding a few more images to support the other articles would make it better to read.

Glossary section is good so far, but needs more words to be added.

The references section is excellent.

Olfaction review:

Upon first glance of the page you immediately get the impression excellent presentation and a surplus of information. Most topics are well described although the history of discoveries layout is questionable and a table would present at a higher quality. It is clear that the group has a high level of understanding through large amount of research; this is then transformed into chunks of knowledge in which are easily digestible for the reader. The page lacks visual encourage, I believe more detail into this would only benefit the page. The glossary could quite easily be expanded many terms throughout the text are absent from this list. This page is almost parallel with embryological teaching aims. Citation & referencing is excellent. The way to improve this page would be reducing the weight of the text using innovative ideas to the present information in a more exciting way along side inclusion of more visual stimulus. --Z3330795 09:53, 26 September 2012 (EST)


The introduction, though brief, captured my attention and made me want to read more. It did exactly what is was supposed to do; provide an introduction to the topic, while keeping it interesting. Both the history and the development timeline sections are well researched and referenced. For the timeline part, there are large chunks of text describing processes but with no images to support them. This makes it confusing and hard to follow (especially when describing the development process). The division of the abnormalities and the inclusion of the pathophysiology is very thorough and is done very well. This part was very interesting to read. Current research is also well structured, and more importantly, relates to the abnormalities describe above. Overall this group has done an exceptional job.

External Links

Hey team... make sure you check the links i added to the external link section. They are great resources to use in your sections.

Z3333427 10:19, 21 August 2012 (EST)

Group Topic Selection

So we have a choice between:

stem cells

Neuronal development

Sensory development

I personally don't have a particular preference but I think neural or sensory would be something different to touch on since there's still so much progressing research in the field.

Hey all :-). Thanks for getting the ball rolling. I like the latter two options, in particular neuronal development - from there we can pick a certain aspect and explore not only normal development but perhaps research complications and genes/factors implicated when things go wrong. p.s. It would be great if we could figure out a regular time to meet during the week outside the lab so we can properly discuss and share our research

Just a heads up- Mark preferred that we don't put our names up anywhere on the wikipage for privacy purposes!

sensory system hello everyone, it seems like the options we had chosen for sensory were picked before we had a chance and therefore I have asked Dr Hill for us to do the "hearing" system. I don't mind changing if the group chooses to do so, however, I thought it would be a good idea to have a topic locked in. Please let me know if you want to do a different topic

--Z3333427 11:32, 14 August 2012 (EST)

Designation of parts

There must be an addition of current research and technologies in each area

Make sure this is not presented as an essay (balance text and writing with images, tables etc)

Possibly a history of the development of understanding

Z3331264 11:54, 15 August 2012 (EST) Timeline and processes of development

--Z3374215 11:59, 15 August 2012 (EST)I would like to do a history section and the introduction

Please identify which part you want to be responsible for, keep in mind that you can work at any topic you would like.

Introduction: Andrew

History: Libby

Abnormalities: Stephanie

Future research: Libby (future research on normal function) Stephanie (future research on abnormalities/treatments)

Timeline: Z3331264 20:18, 22 August 2012 (EST)

Progress of individual tasks and project queries

Z3331264 20:18, 22 August 2012 (EST): I will be creating a table to indicate the timeline of development of olfaction during embryonic development. I will make changes to the initial table as I go along so as to avoid not contributing any online material until the end.

--Z3333427 00:58, 25 August 2012 (EST)The table is a really good idea, we should probably have at least another one as information becomes much more organised. Just to let you know that I changed it to Carnegie stages as most sources organise their information based on those stages, and keep in mind that the placodes dont form until week 11 or 12, so there is no need to have stages 1-10.

--Z3374215 17:52, 27 August 2012 (EST) I've got some information on historical developments but information is really difficult to find. I've made some progress but not sure how much more there is that I can do. In light of that I might also take a look at the subheading "Structure". It's referring to the physical structure of the developing olfactory system?

--Z3331264 19:33, 27 August 2012 (EST) Carnegie stages are a good idea! I also think its important to include a brief description of the development of the anatomy of the nose (turbinates etc) as well as a bit about the brain development in the locations of the olfactory nerve. Don't freak out when you read my additions, I do my research gradually, which means I will first add what I found in the textbook and then later on fill in the gaps plus add a research dimension with current lit.

--Z3333038 10:09, 29 August 2012 (EST) Hi all, you heard it from Mark today but just restating, even when doing draft work you must reference properly as you go along or you will be penalised.

--Z3331264 11:22, 29 August 2012 (EST) Decided to just stick to weeks rather than carnegie stages because sometimes between carnegies stages, little events occur which will make the table larger and more confusing!

--Z3333038 18:01, 29 August 2012 (EST) Hey Libby, I found a review article which contains a brief history on olfaction abnormalities in development in the introduction:

--Z3333038 19:26, 29 August 2012 (EST) Hi all, just letting you know im working through pathophysiology for Kallmann's syndrome on a word document at the moment and will post some as I go online to document progress. Currently working on a diagram demonstrating the abnormalities in the olfactory bulb neuronal connections.

--Z3333038 21:18, 30 August 2012 (EST) Completed my diagram and have uploaded it with referencing. I based my diagram on an image from a review article which I have referenced - have emailed Dr. Hill to check that all is alright in terms of copyright.

--Z3331264 22:25, 4 September 2012 (EST) : Hey everyone, this is the html code to add to your parts whenever you wish to place a link of a word to the glossary:

put the word you want linked to glossary here

--Z3374215 17:18, 5 September 2012 (EST) Hi Stephanie, I found an interesting article about abnormal development of the olfaction bulb of mice when exposed to alcohol. Don't know if you'd seen it.

I also read that article! Pretty interesting stuff

Z3333427 17:48, 7 September 2012 (EST) That is a good idea, please email Dr. Hill if you are unsure about anything as huge penalties apply for ignoring copyright. By the way our group project is looking good, more diagrams and tables similar to the one we have now would be great.

--Z3333038 08:21, 11 September 2012 (EST) Thanks for the article :-). I will add it to a section on congenital anosmia. I emailed him and he said it was absolutely fine, as long as I referenced my source information.

--Z3374215 12:00, 12 September 2012 (EST) Just a note to myself more than anything. I need to reference Julius Kollmann's textbook in the history section and add a diagram.

--Z3333038 20:12, 14 September 2012 (EST) Loving the page team! The drawings are great! Nearly finished my bit, just have to add a brief paragraph for the other congenital abnormalities and one more research article.

--Z3333038 22:35, 14 September 2012 (EST)Hey Libby I found this website for timeline/history: talks about discoveries of congenital olfactory defects. --Z3333038 09:15, 15 September 2012 (EST)Completed abnormalities and submitted 3 current research articles. Happy to take on extra parts.

--Z3374215 12:06, 15 September 2012 (EST) Thanks Stephanie that site looks great! I'll check it out soon.

--Z3333038 11:06, 19 September 2012 (EST) Important! Hey guys, we really need to work on the development of each structure and the genes involved. Who can help me out?

--Z3333038 11:47, 19 September 2012 (EST)Note to self: Make section on external links.

--Z3331264 17:49, 20 September 2012 (EST) The table that I included walks through the timeline of development. I have slowly been adding more and more research including genes involved in patterning. But at the same time, I don't want to dive into too much information in order to maintain the balance between text and images. I have figured out a way to do this without making it all seem too simple, so just bear with me for the next week and you'll see it tie in well. Cheers

--Z3333038 09:52, 25 September 2012 (EST) I have stumbled across an extra abnormality - although it is more a structural defect rather than a sensory defect, it still relates to olfaction so I have added it in. Will keep it brief though as whilst it is a common nasal abnormality, it is not so much a sensory one. Also, Z3374215 and I are concerned - are you two alright with your parts? We know, like the rest of us you have other assessments but it's been a long while since we've seen any major contribution - if you're stuck we are happy to give you a hand.

--Z3374215 19:07, 25 September 2012 (EST) Hi guys, don't want to impinge on anyone elses work but I think I have to change a couple of generic features on the page. If you don't mind I'll just stick the external links in the section down the bottom with the others. I also may have to move or make smaller the initial image of the olfactory system as I think it is stopping a table from formatting properly. If you are unhappy with any of those small changes I make please feel free to put them back or let me know and I will. Cheers.

--Z3333038 10:37, 26 September 2012 (EST) Thinking to move adult structure and function between history of discoveries and time line of development for flow.

--Z3333038 08:52, 29 September 2012 (EST) Adoring the site everyone! The picture is so adorable :) I am planning to complete my part by monday maximum.

--Z3333038 15:41, 1 October 2012 (EST) After looking at the feedback, I thought it would be better to reorganise the genes section in abnormalities into a table.

--Z3333038 09:54, 2 October 2012 (EST) The tables I put in for abnormalities are doing this weird thing where the colours are not showing up. Libby, I remember you had the same problem - how did you fix it? --Z3333038 10:40, 2 October 2012 (EST) All my content has been completed and refined. Now going back to proofread. If anyone needs a hand with anything please let me know.

--Z3374215 09:02, 5 October 2012 (EST) Hi guys, the page looks great, thanks for all your hard work.