User:Damian1997sowa/Messenger RNP/Jhayes0817 Peer Review

Peer review

1.   Is it obvious to you which sections of the article have been revised? Is the new content relevant to the topic?

It is obvious by they heading that the author added a new section. It is very relevant as it outlines some potential outcomes of damage or mutation of mRNP.

2. What does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any particular information that you found especially informative.

The article gives an overview of messenger Ribonucleic Proteins, their function, and diseases that result from mutation. I found the brief description of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis to be of particular interest but the most informative is the description of function of mRNPs and the potential mutations that cause disease.

3. What overall adjustments do you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement? What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?

As the article is not about specific diseases but about the overall subset of neurodegenerative diseases, a link to the specific diseases Wiki pages would be a helpful way to broaden the scope of the article without rewriting what is on other pages. A simple hyperlink to those wiki pages would accomplish this. I think this article is a very good start and the focus on one aspect of mRNP (neurodegenerative disease) allows the author to get into small detail. I think more detail on the mutations, such as causes, would help the reader understand. Defining the mutations themselves before describing how the different diseases are caused would make the section more complete. For example, is there a hereditary cause, environmental cause, age related cause, or are these mutations completely random?

4. Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know.

It is very possible that a neurodegenerative disease such as Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis has a heredity based genetic cause. Since the disease is caused by hyper-transcription then maybe an epigenetic therapy could be developed to shut this gene off or control it is some way. Genetic disorders are triggered by the transcription of the gene but the phenotype is how those genes are expressed. Inhibition of whatever causes the mutation or hyper-transcription could be the answer to truly horrifying diseases.

5. Is all new content backed up by a reliable source of information?

The ncbi article sited is very comprehensive. It gives many of it's own citations the author could have used that would have been first hand and very reliable. These sources would be primary sources which are usually more reliable than an article that is compiling the works or many other authors. There is no citation for the second section discussing Neuronal RNP granules assembly and regulation but it does discuss recent discoveries. Discoveries by whom? What study or experiment gave rise to the recent discoveries?

6. Are the sources fairly current (> 2015)? Check a few links. Do they work?

The source was published in 2018 on the ncbi website and in the journal Biological Chemistry, also in 2018. The provided hyperlink to the article works but investigating the primary sources used in that journal article require more investigation. A source each to discuss the two mentioned neurodegenerative diseases would have made the provided explanation more detailed without adding so much information that the focused pages for the diseases would be obsolete but it would allow the reader to have a more in depth understanding of the diseases.

7. Summarize any typographical/grammatical errors that you found.

Overall, this was very well written and easy to understand. The only grammatical issues would be missing comas in a few spots and misused comas in others.

8. Student authors are responsible for all images on their page (even if not part of their revised subsection). Double check the original page to make sure images are acceptable and clearly described. See associated tutorial to review Wiki image requirements. Summarize your findings.

There are no pictures on the original page, nor on the revision. I did see many pictures and graphics on the cited ncbi article. Those are copy-righted but the author may be able to find free and open pictures with an internet search that could graphically depict mRNP granules or the even the diseases described.

9. Identify at least one additional reference that you think may contribute to the article. Explain why you think this article would benefit from the new information. Be sure to provide the reference in your write-up.

Formicola, Nadia; Vijayakumar, Jeshlee; Besse, Florence (2019). "Neuronal ribonucleoprotein granules: Dynamic sensors of localized signals". Traffic. 20 (9): 639–649. doi:10.1111/tra.12672. ISSN 1600-0854

This could be a good article to site as it goes in depth in the function and disfuction of mRNP granules. Theses are discussed in the second section added but as nothing is cited this article could provide that.