Talk:Developmental biology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Don't
Don't forget the mouse as a model system! Sjoerd de Vries
- Exactly my thoughts! I think that it would be good to have all developmental model systems listed here, but not in the text of the article. I'll put the most important ones in the text, and all of them will be listed at the end of the article. AdamRetchless 01:34, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- We could use zebra fish,drosophila, and nematodes too as model organisms.GetAgrippa 20:56, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
I made links for the model systems. It would be nice to have the scientific names listed and have information about the development of each of those model systems. I don't know if development should go in the species' main page or in a separate page, such as "Chicken (development)" AdamRetchless 03:07, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Maybe some thought should be given to the role of Wikibooks in the presentation of this material. Where do we draw the line between what should be here in wikipedia and what should be in a Developmental Biology textbook at Wikibooks? Anyhow, to answer you question, I would vote for pages like Chicken (development). Some day we might want to use such separate pages as starter material for the wiki Developmental Biology textbook.
-
- Good point. We obviously need to keep the encyclopedia article to a managable size. Maybe we should make a template page for reference. Anyway, I think the Wikipedia article should cover
- Why the organism is a good model organism
- The basic life cycle including major processes/stages in development. It would also be nice to point out homology to stages/processes in other organisms.
- Mention important tools/techniques with this organism? (such as Quail-Chick chimeras)
- Ignore molecular interactions except in the most general terms (morphogens, maternal mRNA, etc) AdamRetchless
- I vote for a complete move of the section "Molecular mechanisms of development" to Wikibooks instead. This article can't be a collection of everything that possibly belongs to Developmental biology. Everything can be found by clicking the links, and just links to the complete field of this study is going to be enough to make a very, very long article. A summary can be done in that Wikibook, if it is possible to make a summary of the subject at all. Mikael Häggström 19:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
- Good point. We obviously need to keep the encyclopedia article to a managable size. Maybe we should make a template page for reference. Anyway, I think the Wikipedia article should cover
I'll have to study five organisms (frog, fish, chick, mouse, fly) for an upcoming exam, so maybe I'll write articles for them as a way of studying. I'll try to be complete and direct future contributors to the textbook project. AdamRetchless 01:51, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I think developmental biology is one of the general subfields of biology as well, what do you think? If so, I would like to add it to the footer, but up to now I couldn't find the page.. Could somebody send me the link? Thanks, Nina 12:25, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Added to footer. When you go to edit the page, links to the templates that appear on the page show up; to edit one of the templates (such as the footer template), just follow the link. --Eric Forste 20:07, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Expansion request
Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2007) |
I came here to find a description of fertilized human eggs turn into babies, and I didn't find it, or a link to it. -- Beland 05:40, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
- I would also expect to find such info or links on other pages. Shouldn't there be a navigation bar that sequences human development? I'm looking at Gestation, Morphogenesis, Embryogenesis, Embryo, Embryology, Fertilisation, Childbirth, Fetus, and these articles and concepts are not very well connected. -- Beland 06:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] embryology
Does anyone happen to know any embryologists? I think Embryology really needs a lot of expert attention. would sympathtic editors consider a positive vote here? [1]Slrubenstein | Talk 16:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC) .
I think the embryology need infrastructure for a reference to developmental biology artilce. The embryology really needs a big picture page, because a number of embryology topics already have detailed articles. In the embryology article you can highlight cardiovasculature or nervous system embryology and then in developmental biology article talk about the cellular and molecular biology aspects of these developmental processes.GetAgrippa 02:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good! Will you start work on that? (I am simply not qualified) Slrubenstein | Talk 15:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
Well, I have been working on other interest as of late, and I was prepared to work on Evodevo next. I feel comfortable with vertebrate embryology, but not invertebrate. I'll try to write some, but may just vomit a bunch of information on the talk page and let others edit, choose, and write the article. I'll try to work on it soon. GetAgrippa 17:15, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
- Never let me get in the way of your working on evo-devo!! Slrubenstein | Talk 10:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] cleanup of concents of developmental biology
I think that this section should be cleaned up. As it is right now, the section is worthless. There are important concepts in there and these should be organized and defined. A lot of the concepts aren't important enough to be on this main page and should be linked from other pages. --Eubanks718 15:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)