User talk:AshleyJennings/I-motif DNA

Formation Peer Review
Ellie Felts (talk) 17:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC) This is a really great section! I would combine the second and third sentences in the first paragraph because they're repetitive. If you can, I would expand on the debate on four-stranded i-motifs and then put the info on formation at certain pHs in a new paragraph because those seem like two different ideas. You also need a citation for the "recent studies have shown..." sentence. The last two sentences are repetitive with "recent studies" and "numerous studies". When you publish this, you should hyperlink some of the terms to other wiki pages, like cytosines, centromeres, telomeres, etc.

Ligands and Binding Sites Peer Review
Ellie Felts (talk) 00:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)I would change the heading to just "ligand interactions" or something like that because you don't mention any specific binding sites that ligands bind to so the title is a little misleading. The first sentence in the TMPyP4 section could be better. Maybe say something like "The first ligand discovered to bind to i-motifs was TMPyP4. Hurley and colleagues found..." It would be awesome to include a picture of TMPyP4 binding if you can find it or make it in Pymol, but it's not necessary. When you publish this, hyperlink the terms that probably have other wiki pages, like EMSA, c-myc, telomerase, NMR.

If you can't expand on the other ligands binding like you did with TMPyP4, I would condense that list into a sentence because the list looks a little weird on the page.

For the biological function section, I think you should move the sentences about nitidine to the end of the paragraph, just because that's the only one that destabilizes the structure and the rest stabilize. The paragraph reads a little choppy, but I'm not sure how to fix this (and I had this problem on my own wiki page :/ ). The content is great, but maybe switch up the sentence structure a little bit?

The fluorescent probe section is cool and I'm glad you included it! If you can, maybe expand a little if there's any specific details about any of the probes.

Also, I can only see the first reference and none of the other ones but I can see the citations in the article. I don't know if they got deleted or something but definitely don't forget to include them!

Function-AJ[edit] The beginning of this section is good, I would just reread and go through it thoroughly because some sentences are repetitive like when you talk about gene regulation. The underlined portion of the first section is good and explains the function of i-motifs. I would reword the "Although G-quadruplex and i-motifs are not complementary structures, G-rich 3' terminal ends can lead to its complementary DNA strand to be C-rich, which can form an i-motif, which can lead to telomerase inhibition." it is a little repetitive. Laurennnnnnnl (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)LL In the second paragraph, first sentence I would specify what functions it affects. The sentence is kinda broad and doesn't add much to the paragraph. Make sure you also stay consistent with your vocab of "I-motif" or "i-motif". Also, the underlines portion doesn't really relate to this paragraph. Since you mentioned hTelo in the gene regulation paragraph itwould make more sense for the underlined portion to go there. Overall, this paragraph looks okay, I would just reread the paragraph, fix spelling and grammatical errors and I would also suggest maybe create a subheading for the ligands paragraph and one for gene regulation. Laurennnnnnnl (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)LL

Applications-AJ[edits] First paragraph looks good. Laurennnnnnnl (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)LL I would site gold nanoparticles conjunction because readers might not know what that is. Laurennnnnnnl (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)LL In the second paragraph, there is only one citation. You might be missing some, I would cite everything. Laurennnnnnnl (talk)LL The first sentence of the third paragraph does not make sense. The rest of the paragraph is good. Laurennnnnnnl (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)LL underlined portion looks good and appropriately put where it makes sense. Laurennnnnnnl (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)LL I might suggest you make sub-sections that label drug delivery systems, bio-sensing, and molecular switches. This might make it easier for the reader to follow. Laurennnnnnnl (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)LL