87
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 6:
Line 6: + +
Talk:Adult stem cells (view source)
Revision as of 02:18, November 28, 2011
, 02:18, November 28, 2011no edit summary
I have edited the article to bring it in line with current research. I will add references later tonight, I need to eat some dinner first :) I did not realize that there was already a page on induced pluripotent cells. I am currently involved in research in that field--specifically, attempting to induce skin cells to become intestinal epithelial stem cells--I may lengthen that article as well.--[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 17:41, 27 November 2011 (EST)
I have edited the article to bring it in line with current research. I will add references later tonight, I need to eat some dinner first :) I did not realize that there was already a page on induced pluripotent cells. I am currently involved in research in that field--specifically, attempting to induce skin cells to become intestinal epithelial stem cells--I may lengthen that article as well.--[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 17:41, 27 November 2011 (EST)
My developmental biology textbook (Gilbert's "Developmental Biology"--the latest edition is the best textbook in the field, in my opinion) pretty nicely summarizes all of the points that I made in this article. I have referenced a link to the online material for that textbook. I am thinking that it might be more appropriate to cite reviews and papers from the peer-reviewed literature. However, I think that a textbook written from the literature is a more concise source of information. I would appreciate some guidance on this point. Should I thoroughly cite the primary literature, or is a textbook enough? --[[User:RudrickBoucher|RudrickBoucher]] 21:18, 27 November 2011 (EST)