Think of this as a mini-senior seminar. (Many students have in fact used their topic as the starting point for a senior seminar.) Each student will present once, and act as a "reviewer" 2-3 times during the semester. In most cases, you will be excused from reviewing the week of your presentation.
Format: Formal 8 - 10 minute oral presentation with about 2-4 minutes for questions and discussion. The talk must be very well prepared and rehearsed in advance so as to fit in the allotted time (including timed rehearsals). (A 12 minute maximum per person will be strictly enforced.) Also, there will be no time at the beginning of class for last minute preparations; the first talk must begin promptly at 8:55. Presenters are encouraged to use appropriate overheads and/or provide handouts to augment their presentations. Please remember that your presentation represents 10% of your final grade.
Students will present a summary with appropriate background of a recent paper or few closely-related papers from the scientific literature (no older than 1999). The paper(s) must be primary literature, not a review article. Beside introductory material and conclusions, the talk should present some specific key experiments found in the paper(s). This part of the presentation usually is centered around showing and explaining one or more key figures and/or tables from the paper. Although some basics of the topics may be covered in lectures leading up to the presentations, the student is encouraged to read all necessary and appropriate background in preparation for the presentation. It is likely that you may need to obtain some materials by visiting the UCSD Biomedical library. Directions can be found on the Biology 176 home page.
Students should select the paper and submit a copy no later than 3 weeks prior to the date of presentation for approval by the instructor. Students are strongly encouraged to discuss paper selection with the instructor as soon as possible. It may be useful to show me several possible paper selections. The final paper selection must be completed by 2 weeks prior to the presentation. Once a topic is selected, the student should schedule at least one session with me to discuss the paper and the background/context for the paper. [As most students have limited experience reading the primary literature, you will likely need help to prepare an excellent presentation. Students without such preparation may not be able to achieve a top grade on the presentation.] It may be helpful for you to provide me a full copy of the paper several days in advance of our meeting (if you have not already given it to me).
One week prior to presentation, materials to be added to the class home page must be given to me for posting (see "Read More About It" below). Also one week prior, copies of the paper must be provided to assigned student reviewers and the instructor. Reviewers are required to read the paper and expected to ask questions following the presentation that reflect their knowledge of the paper, and examine the web materials provided by the presenter in the week prior to the presentation. Reviewers will also fill out a brief evaluation of the presentation in question. Following presentations, all students (not just assigned reviewers) are encouraged to ask questions or make comments; one's participation here constitutes a portion of the "Discussion participation" grade.
Presenters for a given week may coordinate their talks to cover closely related topics if they wish. This can lend a coherence to the session that benefits everyone participating. Topics are listed by week below. By prior approval, a student may deviate from the suggested topics.
There is considerable virtue in selecting an article that you believe will be accessible to the greatest number of your peers; for example, by choosing one directly related to course topics.
Presenter responsibilities:
Reviewer responsibilities:
Additional Guidelines for selecting a paper:
The article must be a basic research article, not a clinical or epidemiological report (i.e., an article from a journal with the word "Clinical" in the title is highly unlikely to be acceptable). Note that some free online journals are obscure and not particularly good (that's why they're free). Please do not restrict yourself to articles that are available online (unless you are at the UCSD Biomedical Library, where many good journals are available online).
Check the "Read More about it" pages to see examples of papers presented by students last year (accessible from the class home page).
Preferred Journals
| Developmental Biology | Development | Evolution & Development |
| Genes & Development | Science | Nature |
| Neuron | Cell | Development, Genes & Evolution |
| Developmental Cell | Proceeedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS) |
The evolution of the Hox cluster: insights from outgroups. Finnerty & Martindale (1998) Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 8: 681-687.
Getting your Pax straight: Pax proteins in development and disease. Chi & Epstein (2000) Trends in Genetics 18: 41-47.
Neural cell adhesion molecule L1: relating disease to function. Kenwrick& Doherty (1998) Bioessays 8:668-675.
On the shoulders of giants: p63, p73 and the rise of p53. Yang et al. (2002) Trends in Genetics 18: 90-95.
All from: Current Opinion in Genetics & Development (Genetics of Disease), June 2002
Genetics of disease Web alert, Makalowska et al.
Genetics of disease - Surprises still in store, Gitschier & Zoghbi.
Dominantly inherited, non-coding microsatellite expansion disorders, Raum & Day.
The molecular bases of spinal muscular atrophy, Frugier et al.
Heart Development: learning from mistakes, McFadden & Olson.
Genetics of Parkinson's disease and biochemical studies of implicated gene products, Lansbury & Brice.
Muscular dystrophies involving the dystrophin-glycoprotein complex: an overview of current mouse models, Durbeej & Campbell.
From: Current Opinion in Genetics & Development (Oncogenes & cell proliferation), June 2002
Oncogenes and cell proliferation Web alert, Makalowska et al.
Oncogenes and cell proliferation - Update on the big C: complexity and cross-talk between pathways, Downward & Goff.
Regulation of G1 cell-cycle progression by oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes, Ho & Dowdy.
The role of p53 and pRB in apoptosis and cancer, Hickman et al.
The BRCA1/BARD1 heterodimer, a tumor suppressor complex with ubiquitin E3 ligase activity, Baer & Ludwig.
A 'lottery' will be held to determine priority for presentation date selection (date to be announced). Be sure not to miss class or arrive late on the appointed day. (Otherwise you go to the bottom of the list.) Note: Nov. 24 is the Wednesday immediately prior to Thanksgiving holiday. Attendance is nevertheless required.
Presentation Topics and Dates
A) 1 word/phrase and 1-2 sentence definition to go into the Bio 176 Glossary from the reading or lecture, or otherwise related to Developmental Biology. Definitions will be edited and included in the glossary. You may include other words you would like to see defined (this is optional). Your word must not already be defined in the Home Page glossary, unless it requires a different or additional definition for a different context. That means you must check the glossary prior to selecting a word and submitting it. The definition should be in your own words, not simply copied verbatim from another source (that would be plagiarism).
B) A URL (web address) for a Developmental Biology link that has some close relationship to the principal features of development or topic currently being covered in class - these will be added to Developmental Biology Links section of the Bio 176 Home Page. Please be sure to check there to make sure you are not submitting a link we already have (for example, not to something in the textbook website). You may find my web searching utility page useful in finding an interesting link.
An alternative is to provide a weblink that would supplement your submitted glossary word, or another word currently in glossary. (This must not be a link to a definition.) These will be added to the glossary adjacent to the word and definition.
WWW assignment due dates (due by 5 PM of the date indicated)
| Oct. 11 | Oct. 25 | Nov. 8 | Nov. 22 |
Format: a few paragraphs, up to the equivalent of about a page of text that succinctly explains the background, significance, and main points of your paper - in your own words. This should be understandable to anyone in the class and should NOT be a copy of the paper abstract (see below).
The text will be followed by a list of at least 5 related links. The first of these links must be to the PubMed abstract of the paper being presented. Additional links may include links to review articles (especially good if you can link to an accessible full-text article) that you used to help understand the materials, laboratory websites of the paper authors, lay information about subject (there may be many of these if a human disease is involved). Not all the additional links should be to related literature. Note: in collecting web addresses ("URLs"), beware of websites that use "Frames" - it may be difficult or impossible to create a link directly to the page of interest. Be sure to test your web addresses prior to submission to make sure they work.
Use one of three different methods for submitting your mini-webpage:
Note that grading will based on content - not by appearance. If you want to, and enjoy doing fancier web 'stuff,' then by all means do so. Otherwise take the simple route and use the provided web submission page. This assignment is NOT about teaching you HTML or web publishing, but rather to write about your article in your own words, and to provide links to related information.
As noted above, examples of last year's pages are accessible from the class home page.