User:Sammccauley3/sandbox

Research Contributions section

Aravinda Chakravarti, a professor at the McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine at the John Hopkins University of Medicine, contributed to an editorial titled Genomic Is Not Enough. Throughout this editorial, Chakravarti conveys his goal of making his genetic knowledge be used in medical practice for the use of public and for researchers. However, Chakravarti expresses there is lack of knowledge in how genes affect different diseases. Throughout evolving technology, he has discovered that genomes serve as a marking for our ancestors. Lastly, he discovered that genomic science has provided information about medical treatment for diseases depending on the individuals genes and from their family genes.

Chakravarti, A. (2011). EDITORIAL: Genomics Is Not Enough. Science, 334(6052), 15-15. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23059274

Awards Section

In 2013, Aravinda Chakravarti received the award called the William Allen Award. This award is given out each year by the American Society of Genetics to a genetics who has contributed to new scientific findings in human genetics. “William Allan Award.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 14 Dec. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Allan_Award.

Bibliography of Aravinda Chakravarti

Aravinda Chakravarti was born into a family of three sons. Their childhood revolved around the importance of education. He received his Bachelor of Statistics in 1974 from the Indian Statistical Institute in Calcutta. Then moved to the United States in 1979 where he received his Ph.D form the University of Texas. He then became a member of the Department of Human Genetics at the University of Pittsburgh. In 1994 he began working at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. He is now currently the director of the Center for Complex Disease Genomics of the McKusick-Nathans Institute Medicine.

Eichler, E. (2014). 2013 William Allan Award Introduction: Aravinda Chakravarti 1. American Journal of Human Genetics, 94(3), 324–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.11.013

Peer Review
This article review is written well and easy to read/understand. It is also neutrally written with a clear structure. One thing I would include is linking the sources after every sentence so that there are no copyright or plagiarism questions. The source is also very credible but might be a primary source, written by the geneticist, so I would look into that to see if you need to change that.