Talk:2014 Group Project 3

From Embryology
Revision as of 16:35, 9 November 2014 by Z8600021 (talk | contribs) (→‎Final Assessment)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the discussion page for your project.

  • Use this page to discuss online the project with your group members.
  • Paste useful resources here.
  • Remember to use your signature button to identify who you are when adding content here.
  • The following collapsed tables provide starting points for students during project work, you also have tutorials built into practical classes and practice exercises for individual assessmet items.
Group Assessment Criteria
Mark Hill.jpg
  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.
Uploading Images
Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Images

The following describes how to upload an image with all the information that must be associated with it.

The image must first be uploaded to the site.

  1. Open the left hand menu item “Toolbox” and click “Upload file” and a new window will open.
  2. Click the button ”Choose file” and navigate to where the image is located on your computer and double click the file.
  3. The window will now show the file name in the “Source filename” window.
  4. You can then rename the uploaded file in the “Destination filename” window.
    1. Make sure the new name accurately describes the image.
  5. Add a description of the image to the “Summary” window. Note the description must include:
    1. An image name as a section heading.
    2. Any further description of what the image shows.
    3. A subsection labeled “Reference” and under this the original image source, appropriate reference and all copyright information.
    4. Finally a template indicating that this is a student image. {{Template:Student Image}}

Images not including the above information will be deleted by the course coordinator and be considered in the student assessment process.

Students cannot delete uploaded images. Contact the course coordinator with the file address.

Referencing
Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Referencing

All references used in making your project page should be cited where they appear in the text or images.

In page edit mode where XXXX is the PubMed ID number use the following code.

<ref name=”PMIDXXXX”><pubmed>XXXX</pubmed></ref>

For references not listed on PubMed, and text can be inserted between <ref></ref> tags.

Where the reference list will appear make a new section and on a new line the following code. <references/>

Plagiarism
Mark Hill.jpg First Read the help page Copyright Tutorial

Currently all students originally assigned to each group are listed as equal authors/contributors to their project. If you have not contributed the content you had originally agreed to, nor participated in the group work process, then you should contact the course coordinator immediately and either discuss your contribution or request removal from the group author list. Remember that all student online contributions are recorded by date, time and the actual contributed content. A similar email reminder of this information was sent to all current students.

Please note the Universities Policy regarding Plagiarism

In particular this example:

"Claiming credit for a proportion of work contributed to a group assessment item that is greater than that actually contributed;"

Academic Misconduct carries penalties. If a student is found guilty of academic misconduct, the penalties include warnings, remedial educative action, being failed in an assignment or excluded from the University for two years.


Please also read Copyright Tutorial with regard to content that can be used in your project.

Project Analysis 24 Sep
Group 2014 project edits 24sep.png

--Mark Hill (talk) 09:57, 24 September 2014 (EST) Individual student data for each group has also been analysed.

Student 2014 project edits 24sep.png

--Mark Hill (talk) 09:57, 24 September 2014 (EST) I have masked student ID.

  • Individual students will know how much work you have been doing to date.
  • I will be contacting those student on 5 edits or below.

2014 Student Projects: Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | Group 7 | Group 8


--Mark Hill (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2014 (EST) These student projects have now been finalised and undergoing final assessment.

Group 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.

Final Assessment

  • Tables are useful summaries. Timeline table divided into major subdivisions was useful, could have been better organised as an actual timeline sequence.
  • Figures should have been referenced within the project page.
  • Selected topics in current research, need to link to fetal development.
  • Historic Findings table - Is about general GIT, need to link to fetal development.
  • The statement "For this section some references were from the Moore, KL, Persuad, TVN & Trochia MG. (2011) The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology (9th edition). Philadelphia: Saunders" is misplaced and should have appeared in the reference list rather than in the body of the project.
  • Midgut section nas the most to do with fetal development. Foregut and Hindgut needed better focus on the fetal period.
  • Week 10 and 11 student ( Z3414515) figures do relate to fetal development, but these could have been much clearer in representation and need more associated information with the uploaded file.
  • Indications that you have read and responded to the peer assessment comments.
  • Abnormalities section does relate to fetal period.
  • Good selection of sources used in the project. References (10 and 11) (53 and 54) are the same.
  • Project does not include glossary or list of acronyms used. Could have also included a list of the molecular factors identified.
  • Needs a better closing statement, goes straight from abnormalities into the reference list.


Figures

Peer Reviews

Reviews
A nice overview is presented for basic information to be presented onto the project page, with a descriptive introduction into the topic of GIT. Perhaps this section could include a brief mention of the aims of the page and perhaps a few images to make it more visually appealing. Timeline section is particularly extensive, however perhaps the layout can be altered- either adding further information to each developmental stage or even using a table format with images to aid the readers understanding of the processes. The subheadings of this section were also a particularly nice way to structure the information. Recent findings needs a bit more work- perhaps a particular focus could be established for this section of even links to a few articles organised by research into particular organs of the GIT. A few images would also increase the visual appeal to this section. The main body of information (foregut, midgut and hind-gut) are well covered and written- there is evidence of extensive research and work put into this section. The hand drawing idea was also particularly a good idea also with a proper description added to the image. Formatting to this section could be a little more unified however as some section use different styles of bullet points and ways to present the information. Deformities section is greatly informative; perhaps a few more should be presented with accompanying images. The overall references section was formatted correctly.
  • References are missing from the overview section. Although it serves as an introduction, you can still include references to support what you're saying. Also, maybe the language of this section should be edited to be a bit more formal, like the 2nd sentence in particular
  • GIT = Gastrointestinal tract, not track
  • The hyphens between "foregut" etc are not needed
  • The timeline is a good idea! Everything was simplified. Maybe look to see if you can add some images to this section
  • Week 6 of timeline: I don't think a liver can "obtain" a colour. Look to change the wording
  • Maybe to simplify the timeline section better, tabulate the findings according to time (weeks), rather than dividing it by the midgut, foregut and hind gut section. It makes it hard to follow
  • Need some more work on the recent findings section. Just some tips, when researching on pubmed, there's an option to look at recent articles by customising dates to say 2012-onwards
  • Many potentials for adding images to the "foregut" section. If you find that copyright is too difficult to get around, then you can sketch or trace images from textbooks and upload them
  • Great effort with the drawn images in the "midgut" section! Be wary of colour choice though, as the green highlighter and blue pen can be a bit difficult to see. Otherwise think of adjusting contrast on the images to make the diagram stand out more
  • Maybe think of adding a video from YouTube to show some features of GIT fetal development, like the rotations. If you do that, be sure to include the 11-digit cache code as your reference point

I think that the ‘Deformities’ section should be renamed to ‘Abnormalities’ and I am not sure if that is because it is the correct term but every lecture and similar page on the Embryology wiki uses the term ‘abnormality’ to describe abnormal developments. The page also needs to be more referenced more in some areas (e.g. the possible causes of Gastroschisis section) so as to allow your audience to read more into the text you have presented and give some citations to your information. Some sections are also suffering from a lack of information (e.g. ‘Recent Findings’ – more articles and ‘Abnormalities’ – more abnormalities) and I think some more research would definitely rectify these weak points.

I really liked the use of your own drawings in some of the sections and I think this demonstrates that you understand the concepts. My only criticism is that the images are a bit difficult to interpret because the colours are really hard to see against a white background. It would be good if you included some images from scientific literature as well to give more links to scientific papers.

Overall the page needs some more work and I think some more research and referencing will definitely go a long way in making this page better. You have the basic scaffold for you page and you only really need to develop some more detail in these areas.


Your introduction to the gastrointestinal system provided a clear overview of what your project is about. I think it would be a good idea to couple this introduction with an image that shows the pathway and divisions of the GIT. The timeline shown is fantastic, it is not only extensive, but it divides the GIT into regions of the foregut, midgut and hindgut as well as the weeks in which key development events take place. It is in simple, easy to read language, at an element of teaching at the peer level- great work! There is also a reference next to each of these events which reflects the amount of research that took place-well done guys!

Your page includes a table with statistics- the percentage of herniated foetuses which adds credibility to your work and gives the reader information on how frequent this abnormality occurs. Your section for current does not have a lot of information, there is only one reference available for your recent findings. This section of your project needs to be further researched before the submission date.

There is more than one hand drawn image is which fantastic! The colours used for it are a bit too bright, however, this shouldn't be too difficult to change, perhaps just adjust the brightness of the picture on paint, or whichever program the picture opens up with on your computer (this is just a very minor critique. The fact that your group project has more than one student hand drawn image shows adherence to the requirement for the project guidelines.

It was great to see only one reference list, as opposed to different reference lists for each section in the project. Your reference list appears to be long, with 24 references however, 16 of these references part of the timeline. More research papers need to be included to make what is already an amazing project, better!

A video of the GIT and the rotations that occur during development would be rotations would be great visual representation of this system due to the nature of its development course. Perhaps you could find one off YouTube or create one.

Overall, this is a good project page, well done group and best of wishes!



You have covered the key topics in relation to GIT. There is a good progression of topics, beginning with a GIT system overview and moving into more specific foregut, midgut and hindgut explanations. There are no subheadings under Hindgut however in the content box, the subheadings found in the hindgut section could be listed in the content box. In the explanation of the organs there is mentioning of the earlier embryonic weeks of GIT development. This may be important to set up the basis on which the fetal development begins. The page could add an introduction section to mention mention that your page focuses on fetal period of development, just for the knowledge of readers so that they know the page focuses on fetal development. The GIT system overview can be included under the introduction.

There was a good use of diagrams, in particular the hand drawn diagrams of midgut herniation and retraction of Midgut. This diagram shows a good understanding of gut formation and is really helpful in explaining it too peer level audiences. Also the diagram of large omphacele in the deformities also shows good understanding. However diagrams would really help wen explaining the Foregut organs like the oesophagus, stomach, liver etc. Reading the text is pretty heavy and pictures and videos would really help in supplementing the text. Images would also be really good for structures like Peyer’s Patches and Interstitial cells of Cajal. The timeline shows a good overview knowledge of gut formation and is useful for readers to refer to keep in context when reading the more detailed descriptions further on in the page. The other topics substantially cover all the other topics to a level around teaching level. Further deeper research can be done in particular to do with ‘recent findings’. However group you guys has not included a ‘historic findings’ section which I know you guys will do before the deadline. You guys have discussed recent findings but haven’t discussed current research models. Also there could be more information on the recent findings. The ‘anorectal deformities’ and ‘cloacal extrophy’ descriptions could be added to the main deformities section and it could be emphasized that it is a hindgut deformity.

References and citations are done correctly. The link in the recent findings subsection could also should be added to the main reference subsection and removed from the recent findings subsection. The citation number hyperlinks are meant to be put at the end of paragraphs or sentences instead of at the front of them as was done at the start of the ‘Oesophagus’ subsection and in ‘Stomach’. In foregut, midgut and hindgut subsections there were a lot of text but there wasn’t enough in text citations within the text. Instead of putting the citation number hyperlinks at the top under the headings they could be included in the text or at the end of the texts. There are little errors like in Hindgut section, under Cloaca partitioning, ‘esenchyme’ was written instead of ‘mesenchyme’. Otherwise your page is really good and comprehensive. Too go beyond the normal teach level of information you guys could add more information to historic findings and recent findings. A good recent findings section will give a good contemporary twist to your page, too keep the readers interested.



The overview is quite short and lacks citations and images, however this is understandable seeing as it is a draft copy, but please make sure the overview informations are cited and images are included. The information uploaded so far is structured based on the division of the gut into fore-gut, mid-gut and hind-gut, and very easy to follow.

An extensive timeline, however the presentation can be improved as this timeline takes a lot of space and consists of a single word or a sentence. Maybe adding more information in the timeline or condensing the timeline in a table format.

I don’t understand the recent findings section as only one research paper has been considered. If more will be added then that is fine however when writing about these findings it’s good to incorporate it with other findings rather than simply summarising the results of one article.

Foregut, midgut and hindgut are well covered including innervations and structures of those areas. A range of format is used such as table, dot point and full paragraphs, which neatly tie all the information together and allows for a break in between paragraphs. Student redrawn images are a great source and you have referenced from where you have obtained the original image. No images are used for the foregut even though you have mentioned a few organs in detail. Furthermore, it is best to keep your formatting consistent as the dot points in the foregut section differs to those in midgut.

Detailed examples of deformities are present in the gastrointestinal system, however more deformities should be looked at and included. Deformities are also mentioned under the subheading of hindgut (Anorectal deformities, cloacal extrophy, and developmental problems), which might be best moved to the deformities block of the project page. This redrawn image is clear and labelled, however there is no reference.

Overall the project page is interesting, easy to comprehend and follow, however certain layout issues should be addressed and more information added.


This group has done exceptionally well at referencing their information and has a clear references section at the end of the page, (with the exception of the recent findings article which can be fixed up during the editing process). I particularly liked the structure and layout of the page and found it extremely organized and easy to navigate.

A point for improvement I’d like to suggest in the introduction is to focus on introducing the process of fetal GIT development rather than on the post-natal structure as that way you can set the scene of what the project is really about. It would be a good idea to summarise the purpose of the page and it’s contents. With the developmental timeline, it would be a great idea to put that into a table and expand a little more on each stage that has been listed, for example include the implications of development of Cajal cells in the small intestine.

Additionally, it would be a good idea to include images of the development process to help illustrate rotations and break up the text. I would also suggest to find and briefly elaborate another one or two articles for the recent findings section. There are some links to references under the foregut heading that don’t seem to be referring to any text and should be editing out or moved to the relevant position in the text. Another suggestion is to shift the developmental problems subheading from the hindgut section to under the deformities section as I feel that would be more relevant there.

The midgut and hindgut sections were written very well with relevant diagrams to support the information given. The use of original hand-drawn diagrams with colour helps to make the page more visually appealing and interesting to read. Overall the project was coherent and consistent over the different headings. I found it to be well structured and definitely informative. Good job!


‘GIT system overview’ section is good but requires more information to introduce the GIT and what the page is going to have information on. Timeline could form part of this section and could also preferable be in the form of a student drawn image or even a table. The overview section also contains no in-text citations. It’s a great idea to split the GIT into the three parts: foregut, midgut and hindgut to aid in understanding. There is not much information on recent findings without any mention of current models as well so perhaps it would be best to address this before final submission.

In the foregut section there is not much mention of blood supply or innervation as was done for midgut and hindgut. Student drawn images are very impressive and referenced correctly with the student template, description, title and copyright information. The features of the midgut section could include some histological drawings or images. The ‘abnormalities’ section does not contain many in-text citations in one of the paragraphs and could include more deformities listed and described with more images, as well as information on how to treat and manage such disorders later in life. There is also no information or images addressing historical findings or current models so this needs to be looked into.

The references are correctly done and ordered, and are present at the bottom of the page. Some of the in-text citations aren’t throughout the text like they should be, for example, in the stomach, liver and gallbladder, and oesophagus sections.

Overall, good effort so far but more extensive research needs to be conducted for models and findings and more information for Abnormalities, as well as a few minor edits to make the page present more nicely.


Good introduction, initial description of fore/mid/hindgut with listing of respective structures gives the reader an anatomical starting point. Fetal development is presented in appropriate depth. There is no acknowledgement of embryonic origin, research or abnormalities. These sections should feature in the introduction to present all parts of the report in the intro. The three separate timelines defeat the purpose of a timeline. These should either be merged into a single large timeline and remain at their present location or moved to introduce the foregut/midget/hindgut sections later on. Recent findings has a single study which is covered in good detail though 2-3 more studies would allow the reader to further understand current GIT Research.

In foregut section the dot-points used should match your subheadings. For example duodenum development is covered in the stomach section but is not mentioned in the subheading resulting in its development being hard to find without trawling through the text or “Ctrl-f”. Additionally you seemed to have missed out on pancreas development entirely. Foregut could also use some more images 2-3 would be suffice. Midgut development has great information, strong table, 8/8 drawings(captions required though). Inclusion of histological features gives viewer a microscopic perspective on development. Hindgut cloaca partitioning content is well worded though references are lacking.

Anorectal deformities sections should be moved under the Deformities section. The type of dot-point style used should be standardized. Too few abnormalities in the deformities section, though after the hindgut deformities are mover there should be sufficient. There are no references supporting the possible causes of Gastroschisis. The referencing it very good unlike other pages there are no random reference subheadings. In overview format wise quite attractive, information is adequately in-depth in all sections, introduction fails to address whole page, referencing is great for a draft (exceptions being “introduction” “Liver, Gallbladder and Bile Duct”), some captions aren't present, abnormalities in development section should be moved into deformities/abnormalities section.


The introduction is good as it accurately describes what the GIT system is about and the anatomical positions of the features in this system. It also briefly highlights the development stages at embryonic and fetal stages, however ‘embryonic development’ should be mentioned in a little more detail to understand how far in development the fetal stage begins. I also think the introduction should include a sentence or two describing how abnormalities in such organs can lead to these diseases. Basically a bit from each major subheading should be incorporated including current research as an introduction is a summary of the whole page. As for the ‘timeline’, it would’ve been more appropriate to place the timelines under each section, e.g foregut timeline under the ‘foregut’ subheading. This is because viewers would be confused on why there is so much difference in development in one section of the page. A glossary list should be incorporated in a separate subheading to define some of these words such as hematopoiesis so that viewers can fully grasp the information.

The information under recent findings is quite interesting and relatable to the content which is GIT fetal development. However, I believe more findings could be incorporated under this subheading. The information under each organ of the three ‘guts’ are quite detailed in fetal development which is good and shouldn’t be too difficult for the viewers to understand. However, I believe the group could include information on the function of these organs as well. The structure of the information under ‘guts’ does not flow in the sense that the midgut includes features and structure whereas the other ‘guts’ do not. The innvervation and bloody supply of the hindgut should be incorporated in a paragraph instead of being listed like that. All the deformities should be places under one subheading to make it easier for viewers to navigate. The abnormalities were also concise and related to the topic. Overall, the content is relating to the topic of the project and addresses key points. It also shows good amount of research, however there seems to be too much information in some parts which could be reduced a bit. The project needs a coherent flow of the structure.

As for images, there needs to be an image under introduction which includes all features of the GIT tract. There are a lot of potential images missing under each subheading except for the ‘midgut’ section. This shows that there has been one person working on this section or one section being focused on in comparison the others. The information used to reference the images is missing in some images such as the ‘Human- fetal week 10 sagittal plane D.jpg’ (although this is uploaded from a different user so this is understandable. However images such a ‘GIT 2.jpg’ need more information including ‘student template’ as well as the reference where the image idea may have come from. Also, if this is a hand-drawn image then please state this as one member did in ‘Week 11 midgut herniation.png’. Overall, I enjoy the use of self-drawn images as it makes it easier to show what the content is saying without going through the stress of looking for an image online that doesn’t relate to the content. However more images definitely need to be added. The use of footnotes is also good and indicates what the images are showing.

There are sections where incite referencing are used, however some sections are void of them such as the ‘introduction’ and ‘Liver, Gallbladder and Bile Duct’ (the [6],[7] should be placed next to the text not above the text. The use of a ‘references’ subheading is good the same references have been combined into one number showing that the group knows how to make the references set out. The use of a table in formatting the ‘Percentage of Foetuses Herniated’ is great and shows more that the group has done research. Overall, this is a good project and if the group makes edits based on the peer-reviews received, this could enhance their project.


A good introduction to the page but only outlines the developmental part of the project. Don’t forget to include other sections as well like current findings, abnormalities, etc. Also, no need for the hyphen for foregut, midgut, and hindgut. The development timeline is really good. Its very concise and well-referenced. It could be improved by tabulating the whole thing and maybe try to fuse the three sections together. Also, add an image or drawing of the development of the system. It will definitely help in terms of understanding what is happening at each stage. On recent findings, it’s not as good as the other groups but it’s definitely a start. Most groups write about 2-4 research articles for their current findings sections. As for the development section, each section is very detailed and informative. Maybe add a few images for the foregut section because images are really helpful. As for midgut, great to see images and student drawings. Good job on that. The same can be said for the hindgut section. It’s written well but maybe put the deformities in this section with the “Deformities” section. Deformities (abnormalities) section is good. It is detailed and the image used clearly shows what the disease is like. Maybe writing about 1-2 more abnormalities would make this section better.

It terms of citation and referencing, midgut section did the best job. I recommend the other sections to look for a lot more related material. I understand that this topic was divided depending on the region of the GIT, particularly the development section, but make sure to reorganise each section to make the page coherent. As for the images, most of them are well referenced. It wouldn’t hurt to add a few more. It’s great to see a lot of student drawings. Overall, a good project page very detailed in most areas but very little in referencing. In summary, focus on adding more references, making the whole page coherent, and a few more on the abnormalities.


The introduction provides a good basic outline of the overview of the GIT. Although, there are no in-text citations in the introduction and all sub-headings are not included into the overview. Be wary of spelling errors such as “GIT (Gastrointestinal Track) consist of the Fore-gut, Mid-gut and Hind-gut” that should read Gastrointestinal Tract consists of the foregut, midgut and hindgut. This section would be better it was expanded upon and images were added. The timeline provides good detail, though would benefit by better formatting and organisation of the information, maybe putting it all into a table, by week will tidy it up.

Adding images for the sections will definitely be beneficial. The images hand-drawn are great, although the colours used make it hard to read. If you plan to add anymore drawings, try and use dark colours that allow for easy readability. The images already uploaded are missing copyright, referencing and “student template” information for images such as “fetal week 10 sagittal plane”. I would suggest you look up the tutorial for uploading images on the pages as Mark has extensive information for the proper steps required for uploading images.

The deformities section should be re-titled abnormalities as per the assessment criteria and would ensure the group is following similar structure from the other projects. Again, adding an image per disease would be great. Try and do about 1-2 more abnormalities. Great job on putting all the references at the bottom of the page, it makes it very neat and accessible. Overall, a good project just needs a few edits.


A good overview of the GIT, very descriptive. This section would need some referencing as most of this info isn’t exactly common knowledge. Some of the sentences seem too short for me e.g. I would reconfigure the third sentence and combine the fourth and fifth sentences into one: ‘The GIT (gastrointestinal tract) consists of three regions: the foregut, midgut and the hindgut. The majority of the organs are located in the foregut, including…..’. You also need to make sure not to use capital letters in the middle of sentences.

The timeline is sort of well organized; it’s good that you have it separated for each region so they’re not all muddled up together, but is the info in dot points under the week, or is it just written next to the week? It needs to be kept consistent. I feel like this section is a bit too spread out as well, a large portion of the left hand side has text, while the entire right side of the screen is empty. You could possible put in a picture showing these 3 regions of the gut to fill in the space? Or maybe format the info into a table, it would make it look more formal and structured. The proper referencing technique should also be used here, not added hyperlinks.

The recent findings area is a little sparse, so you should try to find a few more. The title does say findings (plural), so maybe add at least one more. The foregut section is very extensive on the information provided which is good, a lot of research has been made. Visually however, it looks a little bad as all that can be seen is a mass of text. This can be alleviated if the same thing is done as has been with the midgut and hindgut region: the use of bullet points, a small table and the use of images to offset the slabs of text. It makes it more visually appealing. Unlike the midgut portion of the page, if the images are hand drawn, make sure they are clear, legible, and with colours used that will not strain the eye. For the images drawn in that section are messy and the labels hard to read both due to the colour of the pen used and the handwriting. In both the foregut and hindgut, referencing needs to be done. There are slabs of text in both sections where no references are made.

The deformities section is good, kept simple with no extensive explanations. Are there only 2 possible deformaties? If so, might be good to write a sentence mentioning that. If not, would be good to have at least 2 more deformities listed. The image drawn in this section is very neat, I like it a lot. The only problem with it is that it’s too small, making it hard to read some of the labels.

Overall, I think this page is very well done in terms of content. You have a lot of text, but I think it could do with some more pictures especially to offset some of the large slabs of texts in some areas. Make sure the pictures you have a clear and neat, and make sure you are referencing and doing it correctly.


Overall this is a good project; I enjoyed the tailored diagrams and presentation of information in a succinct manner. Information is presented in a logical and coherent manner. The presentation of information into specific components such as foregut, mid gut, hind- gut is great.

The quality of research is exceptional and well presented. Specifically, the subsection of mid gut and the use of visual aids assist immensely in the translation of complex concepts into simple ones. The use of dot-points succeeds in summarizing the information into easily digestible sections. This also improves the clarity of the page. The use of subheadings also assists with the logical analysis of the project.

However, the referencing could potentially be more extensive. A further expansion on current research model and findings will prove to be instrumental in generation of a solid understanding of the project hand. I would recommend splitting recent findings into current research models and historic findings.

It would have been beneficial to see more information on the foregut section, as this would have provided a pronounced understanding of the topic at hand. It would assist in the comprehension of the data if the timeline were tabulated. Further expansion of the abnormalities would be needed. It would be great if the abnormalities in the hindgut were moved into the abnormal section. The grammar and punctuation is sound and the readability is good. The presentation of information is lucid and shows a sound understanding of the concepts involved.


The introduction part of this project provided a good overview of the gastrointestinal tract and its components, also mentioning briefly the changes that occur in the fetal period. However, care must be taken to not capitalise words that are not needed e.g. Foregut, Midgut, Appendix etc. Although the information in the ‘timeline’ section is relevant, its formatting needs a bit of review as there are inconsistencies between the foregut, midgut and hindgut parts. It also seems that the in-text citations have just been arbitrarily placed in chronological order, with each line having a new reference. Also, this information may be better presented in table format to improve readability. Some simple editing may be needed to fix this.

The section on ‘Recent findings’ has some good information, however the reference needs to be properly cited and maybe a couple more articles would help give this part some substance. I thought it was effective to have the GIT split into the foregut, midgut and hindgut and then detail the fetal development under those titles. This gave the page a good structure. However, adding some images, both from online and student-drawn to the foregut and hindgut sections would help improve the aesthetics of the page. The hand-drawn images on the midgut section are effective learning tools to a student, but maybe could be drawn a little neater with darker colours as the blue labelling is difficult to read. They should also be captioned. The use of a table to show midgut herniation of fetuses was a good tool as it makes the information easier to read also.

Lastly, the section on abnormalities was well-detailed and I liked that the deformities were split into a definition and cause. An image of gastrochisis may be helpful for a reader to visualise the condition though. The in-text citations in this part were properly done and a long list of references being at the end of the page made the project look neat overall. Areas of improvement may be some simple formatting changes and evening out the information across sections, however a solid project so far.


Gastrointestinal

In the overview section, the words “GIT” suddenly are used without any explanation as to what abbreviation it is for. Change to “The gastrointestinal (GIT) system is a ….”. There are also some punctuation errors with capital letters being used mid sentence, and words like “till” being used instead of “until”. Adding a picture to the introductory section would make it visually appealing to the readers. In the fore-gut section, there are not any pictures and make it really long and dreadful to read by first look. The explanation of the oesophagus being occluded and recanalized is a bit hard to understand and could use some further explanation / rewording / diagrams to aid. I noticed in the GIT lecture that the rotations that occur in the mid-gut was a hard concept for me to understand, you should definitely add a gif / picture to portray this nicely to the readers.

Overall, I think the tone of the page is very dry, and doesn’t include as much information as it should. You should include more detail, and especially some background information as to how and what the structures arise from, as well as explaining the overall function it will hold in the adult.

The reference list seems really small, or most the text doesn’t seem relevantly referenced in general. You should check over the reference listings before submission. For the timeline I think it’d be better if you put the fore-gut, mid-gut, and hind-gut were put together, so that we can see the overall development, rather than the individual development of the GIT system.


This project overall is very good with a lot relevant information. There is some use of images and hand-drawn images that are excellent. It would be good to see more images, perhaps to complement the timeline section. It is clear the group have worked well together to create a wiki page that flows well and covers all the organs of the gastrointestinal system. All the citations formatted correctly and it is good that all the references appear in one long list at the end of the page. There is still room to add tables, maybe to summarise the timeline. Other groups who presented their timelines in a table achieved an element of wiki-sophistication. There are a few spelling errors in some of the sections (specified below) which need to be corrected so as to not interrupt the flow of information when the reader is reading it. Again, there are only minimal errors or problems with this page, overall it is excellent!

The section on the midgut is well presented and thoroughly researched, well done! It is easy to follow and the way it is described makes it easy to imagine visually. However just double check for typos, for example “to that of” is spelt “tot hat of”. Simple error that is easily fixed. These hand drawn images are excellent. The colour coding and minimal use of words is very effective in supporting the written material.

The hindgut section is also well written and there is a lot of extensive information. Also double check for spelling, mesenchyme is spelt “esenchyme” in one of the sentences. This area of the project is lacking images detracting from its readability and level of interest.


This project page has thus far been completed with really great effort. The introduction is a good detailed description of the gastrointestinal system consisting of all the corresponding organs. Good to see a timeline of all the events, might be useful to format this into a table since it is so extensive. The ‘recent finding’ section is done well, will however need more info maybe including other studies. Try to look through the GIT development lecture content, there may be some more studies mentioned and these could also refer to others. The ‘foregut’ section is really well detailed and easy to understand, although it would be nice to see some images, drawings or even tables as done in the ‘midgut’ section. The ‘midgut’ section is great, in its formatting, info, visuals and citations, and the drawings in particular are a really good effort. It would be great if you could try to re-upload the drawings, as it is hard to see some of the labeled structures clearly. In the section describing the ‘hindgut’ there is a good use of in text citations, just be careful as some parts don’t have them so they may need to be added. Also there are some minor formatting adjustments that may need to be made with some of the dot points. Lastly the ‘deformities’ section is done well, easily understandable and a good structural layout. Might want to add a few more, maybe the ‘Anorectal deformities’ sub heading could be moved into the big ‘deformities’ heading.

Finally this page is done well considering there are a number of sections that have to be covered. Some suggestions that could be helpful include; adding an additional heading for historic findings which is listed in our assessment criteria. To help find info for this try to search under the “Explore” tab on the left had side of the embryo page, clicking on the sub heading ‘historic embryo’. Also a useful source is the unsw library as it spans a longer period of time and following the unsw search then research the article in the pubmed site. For the in text citations try to add them after the content rather than before as it’s not clear which parts are from certain references that have been found. Adding some more images especially in the ‘deformities’ section would be good to see. There are only a few minor changes that may need to be addressed. Otherwise you just need to do a little more research to complete the page. So far good work everyone, keep it up. Good luck :).


I believe more of what the page hopes to achieve could be added to the introduction. These outcomes could add to the overall understanding and experience of the page. Also, remember to at least acknowledge the historical findings, recent findings and abnormalities section in the introduction (just state how this page will attempt to cover those areas- just a suggestion though!)

The development section has an excellent choice of headings and subheadings. There is correct referencing and strong evident of significant scientific research. I do believe however that this section could be summarised with more information presented in a table. There is also an excellent addition of images and hand-drawn diagrams, which adds to the overall understanding of the section. The hand-drawn images clearly display an element of teaching at the peer level and a strong overall understanding.

More recent studies could be added to the ‘recent findings’ section. Only one is currently presented at the moment. It is well explained, correctly referenced and informative though.

I can not find a ‘historical findings’ section?

I believe more abnormalities and deformities could be also added. This section is very informative and correctly referenced. I particularly enjoyed the addition of the hand-drawn diagrams- it was clearly labelled and aided in the overall understanding. Excellent work nevertheless.


In this review I intend to highlight the positive features of your project while pointing out some areas that need improvement, in light of the marking criteria provided.

I really like the overview on of the topic, it is clear and succinct. However you could elaborate on some of the areas if time permits. I think a developmental time line you have presented is a great way to summaries all the information. I would also like to mention that this summary is very well referenced and gives an over view of the significant event is GIT development. However I think that this information would be best presented in a tabulated form. Perhaps you could use the following layout: Column1: Week, Column 2: Foregut, Column 3: Mid-gut, Column 4: Hind-gut. It would also be a good idea to include images or diagrams. I particularly like the hand drawn diagrams, they really compliment the text and help visualise the different stages of development.

However are two issues with this project, there is little information on current research. I suggest looking up emerging technologies, drugs, treatments for congenital abnormalities in relation to GIT development. You also need to address the topic of Historic Findings, I suggest using textbooks from the library, the UNSW library database and UNSW embryology page to discover how our understanding of GIT development began and how it has changed.

A great start to the project. Make sure you organise and structure the page under the appropriate headings before you submit the project. Good luck!!


Introduction is good as it describes and gives an overview about what is happening in the fetal period for foregut, midgut and hindgut. However, it would be better if it mentions that the project is focusing on fetal development, abnormalities, current researches, etc.

It is clear to separate the timeline of GIT development for hindgut, midgut and foregut. It is well-researched with much information in this section. However, it would be easier to follow if a table is used and images are included.

The hand-drawn images can explain the development well, however the blue colour for labelling is a bit difficult for reading. It would be better if a darker colour is used.

It is a good idea to explain the abnormalities in definition and the causes. Some more abnormalities can be included as well as images for better understanding.

There is only one reference in recent findings. More researches could be done in this section. Also, a section about historic findings could be included as well.

There are a few spelling errors, such as “esenchyme” in the hindgut section and “tot hat of” under midgut section. Some proof-readings are needed.

The referencing is overall good, but some more researches have to be done under some sections (abnormalities and recent findings). It is easy to follow as there is a reference list at the bottom of page.

It is overall a good project as the development during fetal period is well described. However, more information about recent findings and abnormalities could be included, with the use of images to illustrate the contents.


The introduction to the gastrointestinal system development is ok but needs work on as to indicate what will be covered below and any other noteworthy information. However, the introduction does briefly describe the parts of the GIT system as they reader may not be aware of all the structures. Overall, sentence structures need to be improved on as they may lead to confusion. In addition to this certain areas of development have been missed out and need to be included. The strengths and weaknesses are covered below;

Strengths

• The timeline of GIT development in the embryonic period has been well written and is very concise in conveying what happen in each week.

• Originality is quite important as some images have been drawn up and uploaded. These have been done well and indicate that group project contributors are showing dedication.

• Most Images have an image name and an image description.

• Referencing with in-text citations and no random references in between paragraphs.

Weaknesses

• Abnormalities section of the GIT system is quite lacking and so more information on defects as well as image should be provided.

• Certain organ development areas are also lacking ad need to be included with those already mentioned.

• More in-text citing should be used and not only centered in some areas.

• A tabulated form of the timeline would be useful as to allow it to be clearer.

• Some footnotes are placed in the wrong areas and should be within paragraphs and not be separated.

• Headings need to be consistent such as using the same font and size.


Introduction is good with brief background information on the anatomy of the GIT which is an appropriate starting point for the readers. Fetal development is also described in the introduction, however I suggest including more information on embryonic period and how that leads to fetal development so that the rest of the page can focus more on the fetal stages. I also suggest including parts of each of the major subheadings in the introduction such as the common abnormalities and the recent finding. An image illustrating different organs of GIT can also help with better understanding of the anatomy. There is no referencing in the introduction to support the information provided. Regarding the timeline section, the information needs to be tabulated in order to make it easier to compare between organs. Another alternative is to include a small timeline for each of the organs at the beginning of each section. It is very good that each stage of the timeline has been separately referenced; this shows the extensive research that has been conducted.

The recent finding section focuses on only one study in 2006 on hedge-hog signalling pathway. There are a lot of interesting and more recent studies that can be included in this section. As a starting point, you can search for recent models that help in better understanding of GIT development. The information under each of the foregut, midgut and hindgut is very detailed and comprehensive; however the structure does not flow through the whole page with mid-gut including different subheadings and diagrams. In my opinion you should break up the foregut and hindgut sections into smaller subheadings and use diagrams like the ones used for midgut. Potential images can also be used in these sections. Additionally, the anorectal deformities under the ‘hindgut’ section can be placed under the deformities section. The “Midgut” section includes very good information and the drawings are helpful in understanding the concept however they need to be captioned.

This project does not include historic findings. I understand that this section is a bit more difficult as it is hard to find information on it. A suggestion I can make is to search for old articles in PubMed (by adjusting the year) which can include key historical events. Review articles that summarise historic findings related to GIT development may also be helpful. The abnormalities are precisely discussed and are relevant to the topic but as mentioned before, I suggest putting all the abnormalities under one subheading to make it easier for the viewers to navigate.

Overall, the main key points are addressed in this project and the content demonstrates extensive research and a good understanding of the concept. In order to facilitate learning and to make it more interesting and understandable for viewers, some of the text can be summarised in diagrams. Dot -points can also be used in some parts instead of paragraphs. The use of hand written drawings was creative and aided in understanding however I would suggest stating that the drawing is handwritten in your page. If the drawing is copied from another image, then the source of that image needs to be included as well. Also a more complete description of the image will make it easier to understand.


I think that the ‘Deformities’ section should be renamed to ‘Abnormalities’ and I am not sure if that is because it is the correct term but every lecture and similar page on the Embryology wiki uses the term ‘abnormality’ to describe abnormal developments. The page also needs to be more referenced more in some areas (e.g. the possible causes of Gastroschisis section) so as to allow your audience to read more into the text you have presented and give some citations to your information. Some sections are also suffering from a lack of information (e.g. ‘Recent Findings’ – more articles and ‘Abnormalities’ – more abnormalities) and I think some more research would definitely rectify these weak points.

I really liked the use of your own drawings in some of the sections and I think this demonstrates that you understand the concepts. My only criticism is that the images are a bit difficult to interpret because the colours are really hard to see against a white background. It would be good if you included some images from scientific literature as well to give more links to scientific papers.

Overall the page needs some more work and I think some more research and referencing will definitely go a long way in making this page better. You have the basic scaffold for you page and you only really need to develop some more detail in these areas.


A good introduction to the Gastrointestinal system giving a broad overview of the system. The timeline is effective in giving a general perception of the gastrointestinal system development. However maybe this could be put into a table format or add pictures to refer to specific or significant development.

There is a great deal of information that is presented in a strong manner however there is a scarce amount of images. Images can help summaries what some of the paragraphs communicate, tables would also be beneficial to make the page more inviting. Otherwise the page appears to overwhelming with just written content and no visual content to reinforce concepts and information. I’d like to acknowledge the hand drawn diagram and the efforts taken to do that. Great job. There is an inconsistency in the amount of information throughout the page. Some sections lack information more than others, however this can be a room for improvement to insure further research is done in sections like “recent findings”. In regards to referencing, I found that it was not as bad, however more referencing in some areas would benefit. My biggest criticism is that the page wasn’t coherent and could flow a lot better with communication with each other and figure out a systematic pattern in each section of the GIT that it is broken down into.

Overall, you should look for a balance between information and pictures that complement the information you are trying to get across. Aim for a photo each section. Also focus on the coherence of your page as this will make it seem professional and makes understanding everything easier a the page flows.


Timeline is very clear and easily shows the order of developmental events that occur. Good detailed information about the development of the foregut, midgut and hindgut however more diagrams could be used in the foregut section. Good description of the deformities that can occur and the possible causes however there is no reference for the possible causes of gastroschisis. The recent findings could do with a little more detail or possibly reference another recent finding.


Discussion

--Z3414515 (talk) 20:38, 13 August 2014 (EST)

Alright so lets choose a topic quickly before it gets taken. I would like all of you to post 3 topics that you would like to do (here) in order of importance and the topic that gets chosen the most will win. This is the only way I could think of in order to decide, so sorry. By the way Cardiovascular is taken so we cannot do that any more. My three choices are: Gastrointestinal System, Immune System and Placenta. What are yours?

i choose renal, head and neck, GIT --Z3415242 (talk) 22:22, 14 August 2014 (EST)

Im thinking GIT. Everyone so far has said GIT so I reckon that might be the best option as i think it will be relatively easy to understand and follow with the whole mid gut, hind gut formation ect. --Z3415141 (talk) 12:58, 15 August 2014 (EST)


--Mark Hill (talk) 10:16, 16 August 2014 (EST) I have just reformatted your project page heading as the major heading (single =) and capitalised the words). All page sub-heading (two ==).

z3415141: I am going to be looking up research of the midgut.--Z3415141 (talk) 13:08, 20 August 2014 (EST)

I choose to research on abnormalities of the GIT system--Z3415242 (talk) 13:14, 20 August 2014 (EST)

z3375627: I'm going to be doing Hind gut development research --Z3375627 (talk) 13:10, 20 August 2014 (EST)

z3414515: I will be researching foregut. --Z3414515 (talk) 13:12, 20 August 2014 (EST)

Alright people lets get some work done on this project. I hope everyone could at least write up few paragraphs on their chosen section by Tuesday. Thanks :) --Z3414515 (talk) 22:18, 30 August 2014 (EST)


--Mark Hill (talk) 22:47, 30 August 2014 (EST) I agree, times a wasting. While you have met the required addition of references, tarts all that is currently on your project page.

--Z3414515 (talk) 12:23, 2 September 2014 (EST)The reference below might help you guys. <pubmed>12943221</pubmed> --Z3414515 (talk) 12:23, 2 September 2014 (EST)

Is it only me or is everyone finding it hard to differentiate between embryo and fetal development?--Z3414515 (talk) 12:23, 2 September 2014 (EST)

Yeh I agree there are so many times where they talk about it as one in the same thing. Just have to read really carefully as we don't want to cross over. --Z3415141 (talk) 14:46, 2 September 2014 (EST)

Also with what you have written so far about the oesophagus, it looks good but what are you doing about referencing. Are you just keeping a list that you will put down later or are you getting the information from the resources that you found last week?? --Z3415141 (talk) 14:53, 2 September 2014 (EST)

I have my references saved on my laptop so when the time comes I can relate the information to specific reference. How are you coming along with your research so far?--Z3414515 (talk) 00:08, 3 September 2014 (EST)

Just been reading heaps to make sure I get the information right. I'm trying to get a really good understanding of the midgut rotation as I believe it is a critical part in the development of the ftus. --Z3415141 (talk) 09:31, 3 September 2014 (EST)

I am still waiting for some information from z3375627 and z3415242. Common people get moving!!! Also I meant that in the nicest way possible :) --Z3414515 (talk) 10:52, 3 September 2014 (EST)

I have found a picture to go with the adnormality that i am doing however i will not upload it until everyone is ok with it. I will work to add on the first abnormality i have started and done and continue to research on a second one. If i come across any useful articles for you guys i will post it on this. --Z3415242 (talk) 19:02, 9 September 2014 (EST)

Show the group in class your image so we can discuss on it. Also I know everyone must be busy with mid semester exams or assessments so I appreciate the effort you guys are putting in so far. BUT do remember as soon as the mid semester exams are over we need to pick up the pace or pull up our socks for this embryology project. --Z3414515 (talk) 09:27, 10 September 2014 (EST)

Common people lets get a move on. I have put up some information on my section though it is on the embryo period, the fetal period is in progress and in detail. The embryo period is only there as a guideline to understand how the stomach actually attains its shape. --Z3414515 (talk) 12:47, 16 September 2014 (EST)

i have come across some research articles on omphalocele (abnormality occurs in week 10-12 YAY ) just reading through them as they are pretty long and abit difficult understanding so i'm trying to put some stuff into a paragraph or two will try and upload the stuff for it by this week sometime. cheers --Z3415242 (talk) 21:50, 16 September 2014 (EST)

Alright this is the week to really get a good chunk of it done now that most of our mid sems are over. Not sure if anyone else has any good youtube videos, but because we only get one I'm gonna put this one out there relating to midgut rotation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AscKR_cQExY --Z3415141 (talk) 08:09, 17 September 2014 (EST)

Also we need to start our list of references so I reckon we just put them down under this heading. Leave the references at the bottom of the page ie. write above the heading references.--Z3415141 (talk) 08:18, 17 September 2014 (EST)

i found a simple sketch drawing of omphalocele just so we have some picture on our page but i don't want to put it on the page yet incase you guys don't like i and since we cant delete it once its up so after your approval i will put it up also i am trying to find good video on organ development since im sure alot are formed by week 10 as i have read in articlese. --Z3415242 (talk) 00:42, 24 September 2014 (EST)

Apologies with my lack of input on this. I’ve added a bit of the Cloacal partitioning and deformities that I’ll expand upon. I’ve also found some great pictures on some of the other GIT deformities. If I’m unable to source permission for them, I’m happy to recreate them --Z3375627 (talk) 07:55, 24 September 2014 (EST)

Definitely put that picture up about Omphalocele. That will work well because I'm talking about midgut herniation so if I talk about it in my stuff then I can just link it so that when you click on it goes down to the bottom of the page to where you talk about it in abnormalities. Not exactly sure how we do that but I'm sure we will work it out.--Z3415141 (talk) 13:02, 6 October 2014 (EST)

Hey all just wanted to note that when your referencing from now look at the editing page to see what mark does so that the references are footnotes down the bottom of the page. Obviously you will need to change the reference in the brackets but you get the point. This means that when you do this all the references will come up down the bottom of the page. --Z3415141 (talk) 23:34, 6 October 2014 (EST)

Not sure if we are supposed to get rid of the references that we used for our group assignment but I just did because they were taking up uneccesary space on our page. Just thought i would say this here just in case we were not meant to.--Z3415141 (talk) 09:17, 8 October 2014 (EST)

Everyone please take off your student signature from the group page as it looks unprofessional. Thanks guys and girls :) --Z3414515 (talk) 10:07, 8 October 2014 (EST)

We need to find recent research articles on stem cell on this weekend people. By this friday night please try to finish your section of this project so on the weekends we can focus on current models/findings and historical findings. Thanks group :) --Z3414515 (talk) 13:00, 15 October 2014 (EST)

I didn't like having to get through all the peer reviews to get to discussion. I collapsed it for ease of use --Z3375627 (talk) 11:51, 19 October 2014 (EST)

well done z3375627 for collapsing the discussion section. It makes a whole lot easier for us now :) and ALSO thank you z3415242 for doing the timeline table. It looks good but obviously we need to try to add a bit more information on it. Lets get our sections finished first people THEN we can worry about the editing. ALSO do not forgot to contribute a stem cell research paper on the facebook group so we can discuss it. Thanks :) --Z3414515 (talk) 16:44, 19 October 2014 (EST)

ok so looking through the peer reviews the main things that people were talking about were: make sure that we tabulate our information, add more models and research findings and then there were things more related to the individual assessments. So its good that someone has started to tabulate our timetable but its a bit all over the place at the moment so we probably need to fix it up a bit. and then we really need to get onto the research findings ect.--Z3415141 (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2014 (EST)

People do not forget to add reference for the image within the image if that makes sense. And we need to finish our part of the project as well as current findings, models and historic finding by tomorrow night or by wednesday lab PLEASEEEEE. This is because we need to spend a day on editing the page overall as a whole with consideration to the peer reviews. ALSO we MUST have a gathering so we can do this editing together either on wednesday after lab OR thursday. THANK YOUUU :) --Z3414515 (talk) 09:18, 20 October 2014 (EST)

Wednesday would be suitable for me if that is fine with the group also i have added a link of a recent finding under that heading can someone please check its ok to use so then i can start to summarise it, and for the stem cell presentation i have found this http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/125/7/883.long i hope you guys are fine with it. Also does anyone know any good link where i can get xray image or real life image of infant with one of the disease,it's hard finding image which allows permission for use if any of you guys have suggestion would much appreciate it thanks --Z3415242 (talk) 10:17, 20 October 2014 (EST)

I cant find a place for x ray images sorry. Just had a look at that article you have under the current research on our page. I think it would be fine to use. I assume you were going to put this under the models section right???--Z3415141 (talk) 12:00, 20 October 2014 (EST)

yes i was thinking that but I'm not sure if it relates with fetal development, i also found this http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0009111 i think can be used for findings so i might sumamrise this first i think its more relevant then my previous link --Z3415242 (talk) 10:45, 21 October 2014 (EST)

so i changed the table a bit to simplify it. I will explain tomorrow in class why when you click on some of the links it doesn't work. I worry a bit about the foregut section in the timetable because i feel as though its a bit embryonic heavy. But i think mark will be fine with it anyway. I think you might have said something ealrier about you talking to mark about it so we should be alright. so we just need to finish off the findings part and then make the last few changes and then we should be right.--Z3415141 (talk) 12:54, 22 October 2014 (EST)

I noticed that Midgut doesn't have appearance of villi. After gut return, week 9 has differentiation of epithelium in intestines. Week 11 villi appear in SI, with lining complete by week 16. If you don't have the time to add anything, i'll revisit again tomorrow night/Friday morning and add it in --Z3375627 (talk) 23:41, 22 October 2014 (EST)

Ok just did it then. Tell me what you think. I also updated it to the timeline. I think our project is coming along well overall. Hopefully mark realises that we are trying to keep things as simple and as interesting as possible and we are not trying to kill the page with too much information. --Z3415141 (talk) 18:49, 23 October 2014 (EST)

I guys i was just trying to fix some stuff and i was wondering where my abnormality table information went from the coding as without it i can't add information into the table, if anyone edited it could you let me know where the content is so i can fix up the blank boxes thankyou --Z3415242 (talk) 20:59, 23 October 2014 (EST)

Yeah, looks good Z3415141. Everything is coming along nicely. I may fiddle with the picture layout in the Midgut section when I edit tomorrow just to make the whole page a little more uniform and condense. If anyone wants anything specificly changed done let me know below, I'll be working on the page until roughly 3-4pm tomorrow --Z3375627 (talk) 23:01, 23 October 2014 (EST)

Getting so frustrated with the images. I hand drawn 3 images which took me awhile and then I couldn't use them due to lack of referencing :( . However I did put up some images which I found recently. --Z3414515 (talk) 09:44, 24 October 2014 (EST)

The page looks great people. Good job everyone. I am soo sorry that I could not do anythin today as i was out for an interview and my car got broken down so it had to be towed.--Z3414515 (talk) 20:30, 24 October 2014 (EST)

References

Won Kyu Kim, Hyun Kim, Dae Ho Ahn, Myoung Hee Kim, Hyoung Woo Park Timetable for intestinal rotation in staged human embryos and fetuses. Birth Defects Res. Part A Clin. Mol. Teratol.: 2003, 67(11);941-5 PMID:14745932. I used this in describing midgut rotation.