Talk:Blastulation

Early discussion

is the blastula the same as the blastocyst? if so, should be merged.

The blastocyst is not mammalian blastula. Blastocyst is specific stage appeared in placentals mammalia in order to form the sphere imitating the yolk. Placentals lost the yolk in their eggs but the scheme of morphogenesis is the same as in reptiles and prototeria (and homologious to well-known bird's development). The blastula of all Amniota (reptiles, birds and mammals) is discoblastula and is formed on (or under) a sphere (yolk or trophoblast). 95.25.161.153 (talk) 16:03, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

found somewhere that the blastula follows the morula stage (16cell) during which for about 3 days mitotic divisions continue, but differentiation between the embryoblast and trophoblast has not yet occurred. This should be confirmed though. However, several embryology texts note that once the cavity has formed it is considered a blastocyst. Might be an unnecessary delineation.

Whitefish

Why study whitefish in particular, as opposed to, say, haddock? Wanderer57 (talk) 12:44, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe it's due to cell size, easier to view chromosomes 205.250.72.250 (talk) 09:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

If you're an expert on this subject, please elaborate and make this article substantive.

I can't believe that whoever worked on this article previously left it hanging with so many question marks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.248.6 (talk) 13:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Educational Project

Our group has expanded this article greatly through addition of sections on development and structure as well as clinical implications. The introduction has been expanded to give a broader sense of the blastula's place in embryonic development. Mannintg (talk) 16:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC) Dickhitch (talk) 17:05, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Potential new introduction The blastula is a hollow sphere of cells, referred to as blastomeres, surrounding an inner fluid-filled cavity called the blastocoel. Embryo development begins with a sperm fertilizing an egg to become a zygote which undergoes many cleavages to develop into a ball of cells called a morula. Only when the blastocoel is formed does the early embryo become a blastula. The blastula precedes the formation of the gastrula in which the germ layers of the embryo form.

During the blastula stage, a significant amount of activity occurs within the early embryo to establish cell polarity, axis formation, and regulate gene expression.(reference) In amphibians, the mid blastula transition (MBT) is a crucial step in development during which the maternal mRNA is degraded and control over development is passed to the embryo. Many of the interactions between blastomeres are dependent on cadherin expression, in particular E-cadherin.

The study of the blastula and of cell specification has many implications on the field of stem cell research as well as the continued improvement of fertility treatments. Embryonic stem cells are a field which, though controversial, have tremendous potential for treating disease. In Xenopus, blastula behave as pluripotent stem cells which can migrate down several pathways, depending on signaling. By manipulating the signaling factors, various tissues can be formed. This potential can be instrumental in [regenerative medicine] in disease and injury cases. In vitro fertilization involves implantation of a blastula into a mother’s uterus. Blastula cell implantation could potentially serve to eliminate infertility. Mannintg (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

For the current project in Education Program:Boston College/Developmental Biology (Spring 2013) we will be using some of the following sources

Blastula

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ...that you started out as a blastula?

• ALT1:...that in vitro fertilisation involves implantation of a blastula into the mother’s uterus?
• Reviewed: Will review tmrw.

5x expanded by Mannintg (talk), Dickhitch (talk), Tadahhla (talk). Nominated by Smallman12q (talk) at 02:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC).

I added and edited the Clinical Implications section. Tadala.jumbe (talk) 04:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review

As you can check in the history, I made a few minor edits. The implementation of some citations into the article was inconsistent, which I fixed (e.g. - unnecessary spacing before citations). What I haven’t changed are the Wikipedia links. ‘mRNA’ is linked the second time its mentioned in the article rather than when it’s first mentioned. ‘Xenopus’, ‘trophoblast’, and ‘cell cycle’ are linked to more than once. ‘Tight junctions’ isn’t linked until the second time it appears. I noticed ‘reductive divisions’ was linked to, although no page currently exists for that.

I also recommend creating a Wikipedia link for ‘gastrulation’ when it’s first mentioned in the article, even though it’s also linked in the See Also section. E-cadherin can be linked by referring to the CDH1 WikiPage. Other potential Wikipedia links are ‘cell polarity’, ‘gene expression’, ‘infertility’, ‘transcription’, ‘alpha-catenin’, ‘beta-catenin’ (which my group is working on), and ‘retina’. The introduction was very well written and clear. It had a depth of relevant information on what the article covers. Some of the more specific points can be taken out of the intro and included in the main body of the article.

“The addition of the two growth phases into the cell cycle allow for the cells to increase in size,” I believe the word ‘allow’ in this sentence should be changed to ‘allows’, since it relates to the singular noun ‘addition’. Overall the article was well cited with many necessary Wikipedia links. The two images are very simple, which is good, but perhaps include a more informative image referring to something more specific such as cellular adhesion in blastulas or something related to the clinical implications section. Though it may be difficult due to the nature of the topic, see if anything can be worded differently to appeal more to the layman audience. Bgumbardo (talk) 01:08, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Overall the page looks pretty good so far. You have presented a good overview of the material. First I recommend adding more detail to the topics discussed. It would make the article a little more accessible to a layperson if you could elaborate on certain developmental terms and topics when they come up in the article, such as in the "fertilization technologies" section, while we understand how a blastula relates, it might not be clear to a layperson. You might want to add a few topics to the "clinical implications" section. Although I understand how hard it is to find images for wikipedia, it would be nice if you could include a few more images it would really add to the article. chingla 03:17, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry I'm late to the party! I've read through your article and it seems to have a lot of great information. I think the organization of the topics is logical and easy to follow, great job! However, in the introduction I think it may help is some of the sentences are parsed down so it would be easier for a non-scientific person to understand. Some of the associations between blastomere/blastocoel/blastocyst/blastula could be slightly confusing so perhaps by breaking up the sentences describing these associations, it will make the information more accessible to the reader. The sections on "Structure" and "Cellular Adhesion" are really well developed and provide a lot of good information. Under the section "Fertilization Technologies" it doesn't say how what exactly implantation and such has to do with the blastula. Maybe you could make it a little more clear how the blastula plays a role in that process. I realize it is very clear to us, as we've taken a developmental course, but to someone new to the subject it might help them to make a more direct connection. The "Stem Cell" section is really good. I appreciated the use of an example as a way of showing what exactly stem cells do, however, I suggest clarifying some phrases such as "inducing several mid-expressions of transcription factors" so readers can better grasp what is happening. Lastly, I know its kind of difficult to find more images for blastula but maybe you could add a picture of a tight junction, for example. Overall a really great article! You did a good job of finding a lot of pertinent information on a relatively small subject and making it clear to the reader. Nice work! Claritycr (talk) 17:21, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both so much. I went through and made the changes you pointed out. We appreciate the time you spent finding edits for us to make. Tadala.jumbe (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

I have made a few changes to the page which simplify phrasing, eliminate vague statements and make the wikilinks more comprehensive and properly formatted. I looked into adding a picture as was suggested, but was unable to find an appropriate diagram for this article. I have added wikilinks and more lamens phrasing where details could have caused confusion. Also, I have linked other pages to the blastula page for instance from the blastomere, blastocoele, gastrula, germ layers and blastocyst page. Mannintg (talk) 16:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I have corrected the grammatical error in my section pointed out in the first review, so thanks for the heads up. Although I found I couldn't really convert to layman's terms whilst dealing with such a technical subject matter, I've added a few explanatory comments where I could which I hope should clarify things for the good folks at home. Dickhitch (talk) 01:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Did you know?

Did you know that you did not start out as a blastula? First you were a zygote, then a morula, then, when the blastocoel formed, you became a blastula. See the lead of blastula. --108.45.72.196 (talk) 03:29, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

The beginning of human personhood remains subjective. In hindsight, it would have been better to say you "... that you were once a blastula" or something to that effect. Smallman12q (talk) 18:39, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you think you could tweak it a bit? We don't want to mislead anyone. It brought 6k 3k views to the page and that's a good thing—you know—knowledge is power and all that. (On the personhood question: it's a shame it remains subjective for so many people when the answer is so blindingly obvious.) --108.45.72.196 (talk) 15:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Clarification required

An early discussion on this page began and was answered as follows:

is the blastula the same as the blastocyst? if so, should be merged.

The blastocyst is not mammalian blastula. Blastocyst is specific stage appeared in placentals mammalia in order to form the sphere imitating the yolk. Placentals lost the yolk in their eggs but the scheme of morphogenesis is the same as in reptiles and prototeria (and homologious to well-known bird's development). The blastula of all Amniota (reptiles, birds and mammals) is discoblastula and is formed on (or under) a sphere (yolk or trophoblast). 95.25.161.153 (talk) 16:03, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I find it hard to grasp this reply, but clarity remains required as the introduction given in this article defines the blastula as being the same as the morula, as does the diagram which appears next to it (which also appears on the morula article).

The articles here that deal with human embryogenesis refer to the solid mass of cells (less than 16 in mumber) that the zygote develops within the zona pellucida by mitosis as the morula, and with cells above this number, when the blastocoele forms, as being the blastocyst.

Could someone please clarify?

LookingGlass (talk) 18:04, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

I can clarify. There is confusion in concepts. Morula is a group of cells that may precede blastula (in lancelet, in molluscs). Or it may precede the blastocyst (mammals). Appearance does not determine an evolutionary role. The fin of a dolphin is similar to the fin of a fish, the same words are used, but they are different organs. Human morula and lancelet morula are similar in appearance, the same words are used, but these are different evolutionary formations. Я так думаю (talk) 00:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)