Difference between revisions of "Talk:CH391L/S14/SmallRNAs"

Revision as of 12:17, 11 April 2014

• --Dennis Mishler (talk) 08:13, 9 April 2014 (CDT) Jorge, there are a few grammar/typos located throughout the article. In particular, the introduction and the "sRNAs in metabolic engineering" were sections where the errors interfered with my understanding of the section.

• --Dennis Mishler (talk) 08:13, 9 April 2014 (CDT) Also, since you have written a review on this topic (ref #4), make sure you are not "self-plagiarizing" anywhere in the article. Make any quotes from that article very obvious, and keep them to a minimum. Remember, this includes verbatim copying as well as copying with minor changes.

• --Dennis Mishler (talk) 08:13, 9 April 2014 (CDT) I would like to see a future directions sections that expands on current work and possible future work. From your wiki article, I don't have a full appreciation of how commonly this methodology is being currently used... are there other current examples?

• You provide a nice table, but you don't really describe these works. At least a couple of them should be addressed in either the "current research" or "future directions" sections.

• --Ella Watkins (talk) 11:59, 10 April 2014 (CDT) "In addition, sRNA capacity to simultaneously multiple genes has enabled the vision of sRNAs as a powerful tool for metabolic engineering applications. Hereby I will focus on a specific type of sRNA and its presence in synthetic biology." The bolded part, I am not sure if it is supposed to say multiply? Also, I understand that sRNAs bind to mRNAs and can affect what happens to the mRNA (inhibiting, leading to degredation, etc.) but can one sRNA have multiple effects? For example one sRNA activates one mRNA and inhibits a different one? Or is that not how they work? Do they all have one specific action (i.e. activation, inhibition...) and act on different mRNA with the same action?

• --Gabriel Suarez (talk) 04:20, 11 April 2014 (CDT) I really liked the overall structure and comprehensive coverage of sRNAs in your wiki report. Writing is clear and very easy to follow. I also liked that figures are very well described. Maybe it shocked me a little bit that the article is written in first person "In this article I will...", but I guess that's ok. It might be good give a brief description of what is meant by "metabolic engineering", that way it should transition better into that subject in the section of "sRNAs in metabolic engineering". BTW, great presentation!

• --Liz (talk) 07:17, 11 April 2014 (CDT)Agreed with comments above about grammar in the Introduction, not really sure what part Ella has in bold means. (Orthogonally= orthogonality?) Also, I think something more like "This article will focus on..." could get the point across in a better way. I think you should reword later uses of first person in a similar (or not) way. Figures should be larger- especially given such descriptive captions. Small typos and word choice (berak, synthetize, diversity to variety or "diverse mechanism" kind of thing, so =to, ) issues to be fixed. Overall, you do a great job explaining the terms and important concepts associated with this field. As far as any missing information, what I would like to see a little more of is maybe how this technology developed, and like Dennis said kind of where it is going now. You do mention the work of Sharma et al but I guess my question would be - was this a huge breakthrough? How did their progress fit in the history of general progress on knowledge/ synthesis of sRNA? And of course you include the table and Hao, but maybe a highlight of one or two more especially interesting papers would emphasize how interesting this is. Great job overall- obviously you're really knowledgeable on the subject!