You are here


Submitted by damianszyk on Thu, 11/21/2019 - 21:51

(from the paper)

The transcription factor hairy/E(spl)-related 2 induces proliferation of neural progenitors and regulates neurogenesis and gliogenesis

Figure 2A shows that her2 is regulated by the delta-notch pathway. The authors came up with this conclusion by seeing what the figure was showing them. The figure shows her2 was significantly downregulated in mibta52bembryos compared with the wild-type embryos. They were also able to conduct another experiment to further analyze their results. In this experiment, they either treated embryos with DAPT at 6 hpf and harvested at 8 hpf, 8 hpf and harvested at 10 hpf, or at 10 hpf and harvested at 24 hpf. They analyzed the embryos and found the embryos treated with DAPT at 8 hpf and harvested at 10 hpf experienced a downregulation of her2 expression, which was what they found in the mibta52bmutant embryos. With this experiment and results from Figure 2A, the authors were able to determine that her2 is regulated by the delta-notch pathway.



I think that this is well written, but it's a bit confusing at points.for example, what is the relevance of the mutant embryos?

I understand that this is an excerpt from a paper. Due to that, acronyms need to be fully written out so that readers can understand what you're talking about, namely her2 (which I assume is the protein related to breast cancer), mib^ta52b, and hpf. Otherwise, it is hard to read the paragraph.

The second sentence seems a bit useless. I understand what you're trying to say but if you're going to describe what the figure says right afterwards, it seems pointless to say that the authors saw what the figure said by looking at it.