Talk:Morphogen

Untitled
More on the molecular biology of Morphogens are required. SteveD 31st May 2008.

Recent morphogen research challenges the textbook view
There has been a lot of recent work on morphogens that substantially challenges or revises the traditional view of factors such as Bicoid. The April, 2012 Cell commentary by Roth and Lynch provides an overview of these advances. SpectraValor (talk) 14:10, 27 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Indeed the article urgently needs updating by an expert on the subject. Science has clearly moved on, as have our referencing standards. This article is an embarrassment. Which sections? Most of it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

There is an entire field of work in embryogenesis based on other models such as those based on mechanics that disputes the whole morphogen idea. The article should not just be made neutral (which I have tried to do) but should have some references to other alternative models. Bjorklund21 (talk) 15:22, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay on review I like the review so I am removing my initial comment.

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Morphogen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161013223611/https://www.ibiology.org/ibiomagazine/eric-wieschaus-and-christiane-nusselin-volhard.html to https://www.ibiology.org/ibiomagazine/eric-wieschaus-and-christiane-nusselin-volhard.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:43, 5 February 2018 (UTC)