Talk:2017 Group Project 6

From Embryology
Revision as of 13:17, 19 November 2017 by Z8600021 (talk | contribs) (→‎General)
Student Projects: 1 Cerebral Cortex | 2 Kidney | 3 Heart | 4 Eye | 5 Lung | 6 Cerebellum
Student Page - here is the sample page I demonstrated with in the first labs.I remind all students that you have your own Group Forum on Moodle for your discussions, it is only accessible by members of your group.
Editing Links: Editing Basics | Images | Tables | Referencing | Journal Searches | Copyright | Font Colours | Virtual Slide Permalink | My Preferences | One Page Wiki Card | Printing | Movies | Language Translation | Student Movies | Using OpenOffice | Internet Browsers | Moodle | Navigation/Contribution | Term Link | Short URLs | 2018 Test Student

I have now added a discussion Forum for your group to Moodle. You can add your discussion here (available to everyone) or in your Moodle Group Discussion (available to only your group members).

The collapsible table below shows the assessment criteria that will be used for this group project.

Group Assessment Criteria  
Mark Hill.jpg Science Student Projects
  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.
More Information on Assessment Criteria | Science Student Projects
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.

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/>

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

"Plagiarism at UNSW is defined as using the words or ideas of others and passing them off as your own." (extract from UNSW statement on Academic Honesty and Plagiarism)

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.

About the Discussion Page

This should be considered as the "other side" of the project page. It is an area where you can:

  1. Assemble resources.
  2. Add useful links.
  3. Discuss your project with team members. (Please do not use student names on any page on this Wiki)
  4. Paste your Peer Assessments. (Added anonymously, do not identify yourself)



  • 10 assessment criteria demonstrated with some exceptions.
  • Reasonable balance of text and media. I liked the use of tables and images on the project page.
    • YouTube video - useful and related inclusion.
    • Introduction - is a good summary of the project page.
    • Table - First Trimester table is poorly designed with large areas of "white" space. This is probably the weakest design aspect to the page.
    • Table - Key Historical Discoveries has a better design and content. Ramon y Cajal required text reference as well as the ref with the figure.
    • Table - Abnormalities good design and content (peer teaching).
  • Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology.
    • Future Questions - section gives some good directions, though some are not referenced, which would have increased their value (peer teaching).
  • Peer teaching - language and structure appropriate for audience level.
    • would have liked more in the "Cellular Migration" section as this has been an important aspect of cerebellar research.
    • Cell Signalling in Cerebellar Development - very good section content and figure usage. Could have done with a few more signalling pathway figures (peer teaching).
  • Terms - (glossary) is concise and well organised. Some of teh descriptions could have been better edited (grammar).
  • Referencing - reasonable coverage of literature and sources, multiple citations appear correctly in the list, some errors in list.
    • Ref 12 - Butts etal., was a good review article and has been extensively cited within the project page.
    • Ref 24 - is an incomplete citation.


Total - 604

  • Z5018156 - 209
  • Z5114433 - 149
  • Z5177699 - 125
  • Z5076158 - 84
  • Z5113034 - 37

Edit History Note

  • Both the Project and Discussion pages are now locked and cannot be edited. Please email me if you have additional comments or edits concerning the project and individual contributions.
  • This edit analysis is not a quantitation of individual student overall contribution, but is used to identify low contribution students and the ongoing contribution component.
  • Group Edit Comparison - Group 1 (855) Group 2 (452) Group 3 (583) Group 4 (399) Group 5 (381) Group 6 (604)


Total - 26

  • Z5076158 - 9
  • Z5114433 - 8 (1 copyright)
  • Z5018156 - 6
  • Z5177699 - 3
  • Z5113034 - 0

Images General Notes

  • Not able to determine UNSW image contributor to the project page.
  • File names should be descriptive not "screenshot...."
  • Fig 5 Diagram of a 2 Day Old Embryo Z5114433 (File:2 day old embryo diagram.jpeg) - check copyright, this textbook does not allow reuse.
  • teachmeanatomy - not a research source and also not the original figure origin.

Project Starting Places

Mark Hill (talk) 10:15, 14 August 2017 (AEST) OK Group 6 below are some starting places.

What to improve from peer reviews

z5076158 Tick off once this has been adjusted:

  • Future Research Questions heading
  • Split up adult and embryo anatomy under heading “basic anatomy”
  • Break down development – use dot points for types on grey matter etc, first paragraph is a big block of text – subsection it
  • Key historical discoveries – add images
  • Current research heading
  • Change the blue title
  • Basic anatomy – talks about development, move it to that heading
  • Cerebellum development table takes up a lot of space
  • Pictures in second trimester section of table
  • Neural development heading moved to cerebellum development
  • Caption photos placed together for abnormalities section – make photos look neater
  • Move timeline to before the info about development
  • Key historical discoveries – use a table with 2 columns – name of discoverer and brief description
  • Improve on cell signaling in cerebellar development (bit length), key discoveries and animal models, make them more engaging with photos, videos etc.
  • merge the introductions
  • add images to microanat
  • don’t centre text for cerebral nuclei table
  • place info about primary and secondary vesicles above their images
  • introduction repeated the word ‘hence’ too much
  • look over reference list – some were just links
  • references for weeks 3-6 on developmental timeline
  • repeated references
  • student drawn diagrams!
  • link other wiki page entries
  • utilize videos
  • Include symptoms for abnormalities
  • Include a glossary
  • References found in the reference list found inconsistent and not in style (2 – 5, 10 – 13, 17, 18, 30 – 32) , 47 and 48 are duplicated
  • In the early brain vesicle and abnormalities section, diagram’s description should be put in the file link under “alt text” so that they appears underneath their images instead doing it separately, this includes figure 6.
  • Microanatomy should be linked in with anatomy section
  • Isthmic organizer – section seemed out of place
  • Complications of abnormalities could be added

Neural Parts: neural | prosencephalon | telencephalon cerebrum | amygdala | hippocampus | basal ganglia | diencephalon | epithalamus | thalamus | hypothalamus‎ | pituitary | pineal | mesencephalon | tectum | rhombencephalon | metencephalon | pons | cerebellum | myelencephalon | medulla oblongata | spinal cord | neural vascular | ventricular | lateral ventricles | third ventricle | cerebral aqueduct | fourth ventricle | central canal | meninges | Category:Ventricular System | Category:Neural

PubMed Searches: Cerebellum Development

BMC Dev Biol Search: Cerebellum Development

Cerebellum: links between development, developmental disorders and motor learning; [1]

Cellular commitment in the developing cerebellum [2]

Recent papers

<pubmed limit=5>Cerebellum+Development</pubmed>

Neural Development

(z5114433) will fix referencing stuff later #ceebsrn

Neural development is one of the earliest systems to begin and the last to be completed after birth due to its highly complex structure. The first step in neural development occurs at the end of week 3 and involves the folding of the neural tubes to form the cranial and caudal region of the embryo ( . There is a high chance of neural dysfunction and defects during the fetal neural development particularly due to the long development time frame and the need of certain nutrients such as folic acid to successfully close the tubes. Neural tube defects (NTDs) such as spina bifida and anencephaly can arise if the tubes do not close effectively.


structure time course functional developing what cells appear when

glial cells development

4th ventricle

Genes in abnormalities

pathway of development of cere cells start of as neuroblast


Things to remember:

Coordinates muscular activities - walking, crawling, writing

Embryo doesnt need the musuclar activities

Prenatal - neurons develop to carry out those activities later on

Postnatal - wiring up

Neural tube

Comes from pontine flexure - 4th ventricle -- the cerebellum develops into this space

Lamination of the cerebellum

Development: z5018156 -



What I could add: Paramotal cells, molecular layer, what cerebellum connects to, how they are remodeled postnatally Kahals research - good reference LARSONS HUMAN EMBRYOLOGY TEXTBOOK The metencephalon gives rise to the pons and the cerebellum, the adjacent rhombic lips also contribute to the development of cerebellum. The pons functions to relay signals that link both the spinal cord and cerebral cortex with the cerebellum and the cerebellum is a centre for postural and balance control. Pontine nuclei relay information from cerebrum to the cerebellum. The cerebellum is first recognized as a pair of thickened cerebellar plates or cerebellar primordia. Adjacent rhombic lips gives rise to Cerebellar granule cells Major portion of the cerebellum consists of a narrow median swelling called the vermis and this grows faster than the flocculonodular which were the primitive part of the cerebellum and therefore becomes the dominant portion of the mature cerebellum. Folding: Primary fissure deepens by end of third month and divides vermis and hemispheres into a cranial anterior lobe and caudal middle lobe. Lobes divide further into lobules due to development of transverse fissures. This fissure formation and foliation continues throughout embryonic, fetal and postnatal life and this is done to increase the surface area of the cerebellar cortex. 2 types of grey matter present: - Internal deep cerebellar nucler - External cerebellar cortex 4 deep nuclei and all output of the cerebellar cortex is relayed through these nuclei. These nuclei and cortex are produced by a process called neurogenesis and neuronal migration 1. Dentate 2. Globose 3. Emboliform 4. Fastigular

4th month – germinal layers undergo cell division and this produces populations of cerebellar neurons. • Ventricular layer – purkinje cells, golgi cells, basket cells, stellate cells • Granule cells remaining from the cerebellar cortex (these arise from external germinal layer) • External germinal layer – primitive nuclear neurons these migrate to form deep cerebellar nuclei

PAPER 1995 Cerebellum – about: It consists of 3 layers with 2 principal classes of neurons Granule cells studies of naturally occurring mutations and targeted gene disruption that block discrete steps in development of this region Development of anterior portion of neural tube involves the formation of 3 brain vesicles: 1. Prosencephalon 2. Mesencephalon 3. Rhombencephalon Division of rhombencephalon into metencephalic vesicles and myelincephalic vesicles (this forms in day 9) Failure of neural tube closure creates gap along the dorsal aspect of the neural tube, which bows into a mouth-like structure as the tube bends to establish the pontine flexure. Further deepening this newly formed pontine flexure, bringing the mesencephalon (midbrain) closer to the primordium of the cerebellum (metencephalon); anterior aspects of the myelincephalon (brainstem) fold underneath developing the cerebellum plate.

Cells fated for cerebellum are derived from both the mesencephalon and metencephalic vesicles (rhombencephalon). Neuroepithelium of the mesencephalon generated majority of the cells in the cerebellar cortex: V-like area of mediodorsal aspect of the anlarge arose from a caudal movement of cells from the mesencephalon.

PAPER 2014 Cerebellum has a very basic structure: • Monolayer of inhibitory purkinje cells sandwiched between a dense layer of excitatory granule cells • Subpiled molecular layer of granular cell axons and purkinje cell dendritic fibres Granule cells receives inputs from outside the cerebellum and project to the purkinje cells, the majority of which then project to a variety of cerebellar nuclei in the white matter. The area designated for the cerebellum to reside (anlage) during development was located between hindbrain and midbrain. Regulation of patterning in this early stage (E9) of development shows to be particularly important for development of the uniquely mammalian midline expanded region of the cerebellum, “vermis”.

Specific cell types are allocated along the dorsoventral axis. For glutamatergic cells of cerebellum, remarkably prolonged establishment and an important dynamic process that takes place at most dorsal interface between neural and non-neural roof plate tissue, the rhombic lip. This phase generates the basic dichotomy between GABAergic and glutamatergic cell types that underlies the conserved Purkinje-Granule cell circuit. Cell type allocation proceeds a third, distinct temporal phase of development that extends into early prenatal (up to 2 years). In this phase, the principal derivative of the rhombic lip, the granule cell precursor, accumulates over the surface of the cerebellum and undergoes further rounds of symmetric division in a process of transit amplification that exponentially expands its numbers. The anlage of the cerebellum is a product of mechanisms of segmentation that establish iterated rhombomeric subdivision within the hindbrain just after neural tube closure. All cells of the cerebellum arise from dorsal rhomomere, a region definitively classified by absence of the expression of Otx and Hox genes. Majority of cerebellum arises from metencephalic (rostral) hindbrain.

- Development - Cerebellar nuclei table - Some images - fixed image referencing - future questions - current research


Vasculature of cerebellum originates from vertebral arteries and the arteries that arise from it.

Metencephalon; temporary structure that differentiates into pons and cerebellum ventrally and dorsally respectively.

Current Research

Key discoveries during research of cerebellar development

Topic Selection

Hi group! I am personally interested in the development of the heart! Also, are you guys happy to exchange details after the lab tomorrow? - z5018156

Hi! Im happy to share details! And yeah heart would be interesting, but I was also thinking maybe the ear? that could be cool

Hey, yeah I was thinking the heart- I did a course on it last semester, but i also feel its quite generic and the other groups would do something similar. Shall we wait until the end of prac and find each other? Call out number 6 LMAO (z5114433)

Hey all! I'm pretty open about topics but I was leaning towards the eye? Unless that's too close to optom, (and it might be a popular subject too?) I'm fine with anything. Let's find each other after prac! -z5113034

The ear sounds good as well as the eye, theres also the lungs as well! We can just make a list and then decide as a group! - z5018156

Peer Review

This page is very informative, well set-out, and easy to follow and read. The information is well-referenced and the images have a description, the correct Copyright, however some lack the appropriate Student Image template. The "Key Historical Discoveries" and "Cell Signaling in Cerebellar Development" sections could be broken up with relevant images. Other images I find are too large and could be made smaller. The smaller amount of information above the "Introduction" would flow better if it was all included as one introductory paragraph. The images in the "Abnormalities" section could include a small description directly under them to describe the image and make it more uniform with the other images on the pages. Reference list is extensive and done very well. The page could be improved by including a "Future Research Questions" section. Overall very hard to fault!


The information is really well written and informative. The use of images is really good, especially with the description and when they have been included in the table. The section on the Historical Discoveries is a really interesting part and adds a good amount of background information to the cerebellum. Maybe add a table for the glossary section part that just relates to the terms relating to the cerebellum. Make sure that all references are referenced properly, not just the addition of the links. Overall, a really good wiki and the information is understandable and very well done.


  • This page was easy to follow and had relatively good flow, with relevant headings and subheadings relating to the development of the cerebellum. There were some sections under Anatomy of the cerebellum relating to the development (see Neural Development) which seemed out of place, so I suggest to put it under the Development section to improve flow.
  • Basic anatomy of the cerebellum contained a good amount of information, which provided relevant background knowledge before jumping into the development.
  • Images were nicely chosen and was very relevant to the content, and they were also cited properly. Perhaps you could add in some images in the table of Cerebellar Nuclei to make it easier to visualise.
  • The section Cerebellum is informative but too wordy, making it difficult to read through. Adding in a couple of images in between points would making it easier to read and understand.
  • The table of "Cerebellum Developmental Weeks” First Trimester was nicely done as it was simple and easy to understand, and had relevant images to visually aid the reader. Perhaps you could add in images in the Second Trimester table to balance it out.
  • There is a vast amount of references used, and they were done properly.
  • A "Further questions" section is needed to address any research gaps as well as explore more information on the Cerebellum. So far, well done!


There is a good introduction into the cerebellum which is also connected to the page and what the page will explore. The “basic anatomy” subheading is nice and succinct with minimal text and clear diagrams that clearly represent the anatomy of the cerebellum. The “Vasculature” subheading also provides a good overview with a simple diagram to complement. The only thing I find a bit odd about all the subheadings under “basic anatomy” is that I feel as though we go from the adult human anatomy of the cerebellum into embryological anatomy of the cerebellum. I think it might serve you better to split these up or just rearrange/rename your subheadings a bit. The reason for this is because the cerebellum is quite complex so I think it would help to absorb the information. The “cerebellum development” is a good and descriptive subheading with a good use of diagrams. Since there is quite a big chunk of text, it would probably be better if you broke it down where you could. So, for example, where you say: “there are two types of grey matter in the cerebellum…” you could easily use dot points. It just helps with readability. The “cellular migration” subheading is very good and the diagram you found is a great representation of it. I like that you added images to complement each week of development in your first trimester timeline. If you can do the same for your second trimester timeline that would be great. Your “key historical discoveries” subheading could use some images (even if it is of the people who made the discoveries). You chose a good number of abnormalities to explore in that last section. You might want to add another section for “future questions” just to hint at what more we need to learn about cerebellum development. You have a solid, long list of references.


Really good project page. The page goes through almost everything required for the project. You need a section about Further Questions and Current Research. The project is really well written and easy to understand. There is a good introduction giving the reader an idea of what to expect from the project page and good use of pictures giving a basic understanding of the anatomy of the cerebellum. There is a lot of use of figures and tables, which makes it easier for the reader to understand the subject. Most of the figures have a figure number and text, this also makes it easier to get a quick view of what the text refers to. The layout of the page is also comfortable to go through, but I do think the title Cerebellum in blue is a bit disturbing. There is good use of references.

  • It seems like you have mixed the context in Basic Anatomy of the Cerebellum section and the Cerebellum Development. During the 'Anatomy section, you start describing the developmental origin, which I think would fit better in the Developmental section.
  • The first section in the Cerebellum Development has a lot of text. Maybe you can make some subsections to split of the text and makes it more comfortable to read.
  • The Cerebellum Developmental weeks table is really good and has good use of pictures. But the format makes it really big. Maybe you can do this part in a different way, so it does not take that much space. For the table about the second trimester, it would be a good support for the reader to add pictures to this table too – like the first-trimester table.
  • The Key Historical Discoveries has a lot of text. Maybe you can add some pictures or change the layout a bit.


Very efficient page in its structure and attention to detail throughout the text. Subheadings are easy to follow and did not cause any confusion. The use of diagrams and images are relevant and accompany the text well and are referred to as figures which elevated the efficiency, however, inconsistencies in labelling the images are evident with many images lacking the figure number such as “diagram of a 2 day old…”. This would ease the process of referring to images throughout the writing and improve the reading experience. There is no section on current research or further questioning which is a shame as it is an interesting aspect of reading these pages and I feel it would add an up to date relevance to the overall page. Expansion on the abnormalities mentioned under the subheading is required as only a few are mentioned and not discussed. Some of the technical terms were difficult to follow so definitely a glossary would fix this. Referencing seems to be quite consistent throughout for the most part, however some areas are lacking acknowledgement to resources. Overall, an informative page which demonstrates a thorough understanding of the cerebellum.


Overall, this team's wikipage was really informative. They were detailed yet not too much information was given. There was a good balance with text and pictures. The pictures chosen were all of good quality as well with appropriate description, referencing and copyright information provided. The introduction was a very good brief of the entire page and explained what was to be expected. In the basic anatomy of the cerebellum, the subheadings were really well-defined. However, maybe neural development should be shifted to the developmental section instead. This section was well referenced. I like the use of the table to describe the cerebellum developmental weeks. The images used were really helpful in visualizing what was happening in those weeks. In the abnormalities section, it was short and concise with good picture. Maybe the caption of the photos could be placed together with the photo such as those in the table. This could make the photos look neater. Overall I find that this wikipage was well done, it had a good amount of text and photos and the references were all properly included.


Overall, I think this project page is really good and well done to the team. I think the headings and subheadings flow easily and there is a good arrangement of information. There is a good amount of referencing and the images have copyright statements and brief descriptions. For the “Neural Development” subsection, instead of placing it under the anatomy of the cerebellum, I think you should move it down to the development section as it has more relevance to that. I think the Cerebellum Developmental weeks should be shifted to before the description on cerebellum development. This way, the readers can have a general idea on the development and its stages before going through he description because the description is quite content heavy and if we were to read that first, its quite confusing and hard to understand. For the key historical discoveries, maybe you could use a table with two columns where one column can be the name of the discoverer and the other column could be a brief description. The abnormalities section was done well.


Overall this project is very extensive and appears to almost be complete. The structure and lay out is clear and easy to follow. The numerous tables and diagrams are very engaging. The material seems to be relevant, informative and well-referenced. I think the you could combine the first section into the introduction as it is confusing to have two introductory sections. Also the blue title could be larger and at the top of the page to highlight the overall topic of the project. The sections of ‘cell signaling in cerebellar development’ and ‘key historical discoveries’ and ‘animal models’ are not very engaging to read as they are just large chunks of text and perhaps images, videos or collapsible windows could be used to break them up and make them more attractive. Despite these minor suggestion, your project is extremely well done!


The introduction and the information above the introduction is really good, however, I think it would be better if you merged these into one as it sort of seems like two introductions and doesn't flow very nicely, even though what you're saying is really good. The basic anatomy was really good, especially with the images and the reference to them. The microanatomy information is good however would be better if you added images like you did in the anatomy. The cerebral nuclei table is good, however, I think its distracting the description in the centre, just have it normal and don't centre your text. Place the information about the primary and secondary brain vesicles above their images and then refer to the images. Some of your sections, for example, cell signalling or key historical developments, are really wordy and hard to keep a focus so maybe split them up with images, videos, or tables. The rest of the page looks really good, maybe just add some more information to the abnormalities as some are only a sentence or so. The page could also benefit from using a video or two. Referencing is good.


It was really good that the structure and function of the cerebellum was explained in a succinct way in the beginning. The introduction repeated the word 'hence' a few times, maybe it's better to modify it into bullet points, in a similar way when lecturers provide a slide on the lecture overview. Appropriate images were added as well as figure labeling. Copyright approval was also provided for the images and were referenced appropriately. The use of tables was also appropriate in some of the topic sections. Images were also in appropriate sizes that avoided covering the while page. The page was very detailed as well. Some sections like "Cell Signaling" was a bit lengthy, images would be nice. It was good that reputable journal articles were used for the project, proper in text citations superscripts were also done properly. However, revise the reference list because some were left as links and the list did not have a consistent reference format. But overall, the page looks almost complete.


This page seems to have the one of the best organizations. All the sub headings needed for the project are included and completed (minus further questions). The introduction is a nice addition as it gives a roadmap to your page. The entire Basic Anatomy is informative and sectioned nicely into the most important topics--some of the images may be a bit too large however. I like that the information for the first and second trimester is separated, instead of clumping it all together. Cerebellum development, cell signaling, and key historical discoveries have a lot of text and might need some diagrams or tables to break up the text. Also it would help to put the key historical discoveries at the beginning so that the reader knows how it led to the information we know today. The neural development section should be moved below microanatomy and before early brain vesicles since it leads into that section. The

This peer review is based on the relevant dot points of the ‘Group Assessment Criteria’, as well as subheadings suggested by Mark. This information can be found on the student page.

Criteria Strengths Weaknesses
1. The choice of content shows a good understanding of the topic area The ‘basic anatomy of the cerebellum’ section is written well and in detail. It provides a solid introduction to the wiki page, as well as background information that assists in understanding other sections. The chosen visual aids enhance the written information, and allow the reader to visualize some of the more complex ideas.

The ‘signaling processes’ and ‘key discoveries’ sections were both well addressed, with the information being expressed clearly.

The developmental timeline provides a nice summary of cerebellum development, especially throughout the first trimester. The accompanying images are both relevant and useful in understanding the text.

Overall, the wiki page is structured well, with the chosen sub headings making the page easy to navigate.

The wiki page lacks some important areas of information, including:
  • ‘Future questions’ regarding development of the cerebellum
  • ‘Current research’ in relevant fields
  • A glossary of terms

Some sections could also be improved. The ‘animal models’ section has been addressed minimally, with only one example being provided. Try to include several more examples of animal models. In addition, the ‘abnormalities’ section lacks detail for some of the examples (see ‘rhombencephalosynapsis’).

Some areas of the wiki page would benefit from visual aids, such as the ‘animal models’ and ‘signaling processes’ sections.

2. Content is correctly cited and referenced Most areas of the wiki page contain some degree of referencing. ‘Cell signaling in Cerebellar development’ was the most well-referenced section.

The reference list is extensive and is mostly correct. The majority of the sources in the reference list are peer-reviewed primary research articles.

Most of the images on the page have been referenced correctly (see all images in the ‘abnormalities’ section).

Referencing throughout the wiki page is inconsistent. Some areas contain minimal in-text citations (see ‘cerebellum development’) and other sections lack referencing entirely (see weeks 3-6 of the developmental timeline). Remember to cite any and all text that is unoriginal in regard to idea or structure.

Some of the images on the wiki page have not been referenced correctly (see ‘lateral view of embryo central nervous system at 5 weeks’). In addition, the copyright section of figure 4 states that ‘copyright has been requested’; avoid uploading images until after the copyright request has been approved.

Some references have been repeated in the reference list (see references 47 and 48).

3. The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level The information presented on the page is written at a level suitable for peers.

Many of the chosen images and tables help clarify some of the more difficult concepts discussed on the page.

Many of the acronyms and terms used in this assignment are either poorly explained, or not explained at all. Remember to include relevant definitions in the ‘glossary’ section of the page.

The page currently lacks student-drawn diagrams; try to include some for the final submission (and remember to cite the source of inspiration).

4. Relates the topic and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of embryology The wiki page addresses most of the relevant learning aims of embryology, including embryonic development, a developmental timeline, signaling processes, key discoveries, animal models and congenital abnormalities. There are some sections relevant to the learning aims that have not been included, such as ‘current research’ and ‘future questions’.
5. The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic Most of the content on the wiki page has been researched well, particularly the ‘basic anatomy of the cerebellum’ and ‘cerebellum development’ sections.

The reference list contains a large variety of reliable sources of information (i.e. primary research articles). This demonstrates that this topic has been well researched.

Links to other wiki pages on the UNSW embryology wiki have not been included. Try linking some sections of the page to other wiki entries, such as ‘lecture 4 – week 3’ or ‘lecture 5 – ectoderm’.

• The authors of this wiki page have included a variety of topics relevant to the development of the cerebellum. Topics range from the normal anatomy of the cerebellum, abnormalities, and the normal developmental process to animal models. Thus it is evident that criteria 1 has been satisfied which is excellent!
• A broad variety of tables and images have been utilized within this wiki page which is another excellent feature that has been included. Not only has this enhanced the presentation of the page, but the images serve as a visual aid in assisting in the explanation of certain concepts to peers (particularly those who are visual learners) (criteria 2 and 4 satisfied). For example the use of images was utilized to help simplify the explanation regarding the vesicles that development.
• It also appears that authors have included a broad variety of references in-text to cite all information utilized. Most source utilized appear to be recent and all have been correctly cited (criteria 3).
• The authors of this page have also explored evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that extends beyond the formal teaching activities (criteria 5) by exploring avenues including animal models and how the use of animal models have contributed to our understanding of the cerebellum. Authors of the page have also explored abnormalities of cerebellar development which was excellent
Areas of improvement:
• In order to improve, authors may wish to expand on different animal models utilized. • The authors of this wiki page may also wish to utilize videos as another visual tool to aid in the presentation of content included.
• Another area of improvement would be to cite sources that are of a more recent date, rather than citing sources from the 1970s. The reason being is that such sources may include information that is currently outdated, thus the page may be providing inaccurate information about cerebellar development.
• Authors of the page may have also covered certain topics in greater depth. For example the heading titled “Cell signaling in cerebellar development” may have been subdivided into different types of genes and signaling factors involved in cerebellar development. Authors may then elaborate on each gene/signaling factor. This will help enhance presentation whilst also improving the readability of the information presented.


General Comments: Most sections of this wiki page have been presented at a high standard. There are only a few areas that could do with some improvement.

--- 'Basic Anatomy of the Cerebellum' has really useful and clear diagrams that support the content. However, the content was a bit brief in this section. All easy to read and follow. 'Early Brain Vesicles' has useful diagrams but needs more text to back them up. 'Cerebellum Development' is well written and referenced with appropriate diagrams and captions. 'Cerebellum Developmental Weeks' has very brief descriptions; needs to be more detailed and the pictures better explained or better captioned. 'Key Historical Discoveries' are interesting and well referenced. 'Ramon y Cajal' might need to be corrected to 'Ramon and Cajal' if reference is in Spanish.. Maybe add some pictures to this section too. 'Animal models' could use more subheadings and more examples of animals models as there is only currently one described. 'Abnormalities' has interesting pictures and examples but is a bit brief in its descriptions. Overall, interesting topic and well used pictures. Some sections still need work; Glossary and maybe add a 'Future Research' topic to the page. Also a requirement of the project is to include one hand-drawn diagram which has not yet been added. ---

Peer review project 6:

  • Overall the project was good and had both a abnormalities, animal model, timeline, signalling and development origin section. It does not have a current research and question for the future section.
  • I like the timeline. It was nice and easy to read and gave a good overview over the developmental process. I like the use of embryonic pictures. Maybe instead of having a key historical discoveries section it could be integrated in the timeline?
  • Good selection of pictures and the picture have caption. But the caption does not following the protocol.
  • The abnormalities could have more context to it.
  • I think it would improve the project if the timeline where before the developing process because then you read the table, get an idea about what is going to happen and then you can read the steps in detail. The developing process section could use some more breaks and pictures to make it look a little less dense.
  • In general, good referencing but some sections like purkinje/pyramidal cells miss their reference.
  • The anatomy section was good and informative


The appearance of the project page is really good and the content is well written and very extensive on the Cerebellum. The balance of text to pictures is generally good, however I do think the section on the on ‘cerebellum development’ is maybe a little too wordy and could be broken up with more pictures/ animations, or could be cut down. The pictures that have been chosen are of high quality from appropriate sources and well referenced. I found the ‘cerebellum developmental weeks’ particularly clever as a way of putting this information across, greatly helped by the accompanying pictures as a visual aid. I do not think that the title at the top needs to be in blue, as it doesn’t seem to fit with the general theme. I think a ‘future research’ section would be particularly helpful to address any exciting new developments or the focus of recent studies. I do however think you have done a really good job so far, well done

--- Cerebellum GROUP Project 6 - I like how it first introduces cerebellum as an organ and progresses to describing what will be discussed in the page in a nice summary for the introduction. It also described what type of things to expect on this page which is a nice way to introduce the project

- I like how the pictures have a small description underneath to describe what the picture is talking about and it was also referred to in the text

- Anatomy was very detailed and also included small details such as including vasculature as well which I liked

- Microanatomy was divided into clear subheadings to describe different type of cells in cerebellum, but possibly lacking some references in a few places for this section.

- Table of the type of cerebellar nuclei was useful and a picture of the location of nuclei would’ve made it even better

- Nice division of early brain vesicles into primary and secondary and also describing metencephalon. Including description about the other brain vesicles is needed as well

- Cerebellum development paragraphs could be divided more so that it easier to read instead having it as a large chunk of text. Other than that great explanation of the development and very detailed.

- Cellular migration picture was very nicely used in this section and helped explain granule and purkinje cell migration

- Cell signalling was covered well but maybe dividing up the text and adding some photos will help distribute text in a way so that its easier to read

- Cerebellum developmental week table was nicely done with images for each stage of neurulation which correlated well with the description of the weekly development. Maybe could’ve rearranged the images and text so that it isn’t too spaced out

- I liked how you have also included key historical discoveries which was rarely seen in most of projects.

- Abnormalities was well done but could do with some more detail into each abnormality and possibly include symptoms as well for some of the abnormalities

- Including the glossary would’ve made it better, referencing was well done and detailed and good use of reliable source

- Overall, a solid page with a detailed amount of information for each subheadings that is well written. Fixing up the details I have pointed out will make it a great project.


This page starts off nicely with a brief introduction. The page looks almost completed with well written texts and diagrams, are referenced thoroughly but inconsistent in some part in the cerebellum development week 3 – 6 . They have covered most of the requirements, just the current research and findings are missing, would be beneficial if you include them. The abnormality section has good amount of texts and pictures for each one, mention a few more of abnormalities if available. The animal model lacks images. References found in the reference list found inconsistent and not in style (2 – 5, 10 – 13, 17, 18, 30 – 32) , 47 and 48 duplicated. Include glossary terms in the glossary section. In the early brain vesicle and abnormalities section, diagram’s description should be put in the file link under “alt text” so that they appears underneath their images instead doing it separately, this includes figure 6.

  • Microanatomy
    • Should be moved upwards and linked together with anatomy
  • Cerebellum development
    • Section felt long and overly-packed. Could benefit from better formatting or use of appropriate subheadings to divide information into more easily digestible parts
  • Isthmic organiser
    • Section seemed somewhat out of place, should consider moving this section somewhere
  • Abnormalities
    • Complications of abnormalities is an area that can be discussed to enhance content
  • Overall, good effort and well written page. However:
    • Some diagrams lacked descriptions and figure legends/abbreviation definitions – diagrams should be self-explanatory and be understandable in combination with their descriptions, when taken out of their contexts within the page
    • Minor grammatical errors present throughout the page
    • Remember to remove zIDs before final submission

I think overall, this project is the most wholesome and well formatted. You have provided a great deal of information, which you have supported with many relevant references. It is clear that a lot of effort has been put in - well done. At times there is a lot of content, e.g. cerebellum development section, but it is fine because your language is plain and under stable and you have provided suitable diagrams. Perhaps adding a video could be a good addition. Your first trimester table has good detail and is easy to understand, however I would suggest changing the colour scheme of the table because it was a bit hard to differentiate the rows and looked like there was just a huge white space with words in the middle. Nothing that can't be easily fixed though. Same for the table under it. I think you have good flow to your page, however I would suggest changing the size of the subheadings in the abnormalities section because they're all the same, so got a bit confused at first.

Overall very well done.

  • I personally think that this page is the best out of all six groups. Content is generally good with clear elaborations and labeled figures that are essential in explaining the anatomy and development of cerebellum. Figures are well labeled and clearly referenced.
  • Although the content has been properly referenced in the text, the group may want to decide on one style of referencing i.e. APA or BJP for reference list.


Group 6

Introduction: I think this is a good idea but I would try and make it a bit more concise/general Basic Anatomy/Microanatomy: I like the way you have described the anatomy through description of pictures - it is very clear to understand and i think it is well categorised with an apt amount of information on each section Vesicles/Cerebellum Development: there is a great amount of detail in this section but I would work to make it more readable especially with the large chunks of text in the cerebellum section Cell Signaling: this section is well categorised and well referenced Timeline: good use of images here

Overall: a well researched a referenced page. Only comments would to try to make some sections concise and consider how each section flow into each other

Grouo 6- Cerebellum

Regarding content:
The page has been arranged in an easy to follow way with appropriate headings and subheadings. The introduction is well-written, though it has been split into various smaller paragraphs that affect the flow. The headings and subheadings were all relevant to the topic. A glossary could have also been added in order to get the understanding of the key terms, as some terms were difficult. More information is however needed under “Abnormalities”, “Future questions” and “Current research”.

Referencing and Research:
The referencing and research are well done. There have been extensive sources used from a wide variety of journals. A proper reference list has been provided at the end. The sources are reliable, mostly being peer-reviewed. Throughout the page also, referencing has mostly been done. The images have also been cited properly in most cases. Referencing is however missing in some places throughout the project, such as that in the Development Timeline. Some images have also not been cited correctly.

Other Comments:
There have been many images used throughout the page which help the reader understand through visual aids. The development timeline is also commendable. However, some images do not have the correct description. Further video aids such as videos could have been used for further betterment.