Talk:Developmental biology

message: I came here to find a description of fertilized human eggs turn into babies, and I didn't find it, or a link to it. -- Beland 05:40, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would also expect to find such info or links on other pages.  Shouldn't there be a navigation bar that sequences human development?  I'm looking at Gestation, Morphogenesis, Embryogenesis, Embryo, Embryology, Fertilisation, Childbirth, Fetus, and these articles and concepts are not very well connected.  -- Beland 06:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion request 

message: Does anyone happen to know any embryologists?  I think Embryology really needs a lot of expert attention. would sympathtic editors consider a positive vote here? Slrubenstein   |  Talk 16:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good!  Will you start work on that? (I am simply not qualified) Slrubenstein   |  Talk 15:50, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Never let me get in the way of your working on evo-devo!! Slrubenstein   |  Talk 10:42, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  embryology 

message: I think that this section should be cleaned up. As it is right now, the section is worthless. There are important concepts in there and these should be organized and defined. A lot of the concepts aren't important enough to be on this main page and should be linked from other pages. --Eubanks718 15:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleanup of concents of developmental biology 

message: This page has a large overlap with Ontogeny (which it failed to link to - I have added link now), and the pages should probably be merged. Ontogeny is after all defined as the development/developmental history of individual organisms (usually including origin/fertilization). Fileunderwater (talk) 15:42, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overlap with [[Ontogeny]] 

message: I propose to add a section on organogenesis before the section on metamorphosis. It is important to understand how the basic organism begins to function before it morphologically changes.
I also think that definitions of, or at least links to articles regarding mesoderm, ectoderm, and endoderm ought to be added to the section on cell differentiation.
-Estephe9 (talk) 17:21, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Since organogenesis is part of embryogenesis it should instead be a subsection of the embryonic development section which currently precedes the metamorphosis section.AioftheStorm (talk) 20:37, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested Additions 

message: This is an important field of study for both undergraduate (e.g., pre-med) and post-grad students / researchers. Developmental Biology = Comparative Embryology. This seminal area of biology requires a history section.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dosware (talk • contribs) 01:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I am proposing to update and make more logical the entry on Developmental Biology. I don't doubt that this is looked at by a lot of students but the current version is out of date and idiosyncratic. I'd like to make it more systematic and relevant for students. I shall also aim to improve the literature citations. Jonathan Slack JMWSlack (talk) 11:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major edit to Developmental Biology 

message: Yes, I agree with a recent edit comment, that there is too much detail in the section about plants. I put it here to have something about plants to balance the text about animals AND because it fits better here than in Plant morphology. Should we make yet another copy in Plant development and reduce the version that is here? We could then make a similar reduction in Plant morphology --Ettrig (talk) 07:21, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Really not in favour of multiple copying from material of unevaluated quality, followed by the difficult process of deciding what shape is actually needed and attempting to force square pegd into round holed. It is almost always better to think out what is required in each article and edit that afresh, with the best sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:57, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless of the quality, this text was already in Wikipedia and uncontested. Now it is (also) in an article where it fits better. The suggestion was to copy it to an article where it fits even better. With that copy in place we would be justified to cut down drastically on the first two copies. I hope we agree that both Plant morphology and Developmental biology shall have some introductory text on Plant development. In essence the suggestion is a low effort operation to cut the copies dow to the "right size". This can be done today. The two alternatives are so different in scope and effort that I don't really see a conflict. --Ettrig (talk) 11:43, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plants 

message: This article begins: Developmental biology is the study of the process by which animals and plants grow and develop, and is synonymous with ontogeny. I have difficulties sorting statements between subject area and phenomenon. This article is about a subject area. The article ontogeny is about a phenomenon. Is ontogeny both a subject area and a phenomenon? Nevertheless, (1) if it is both then it is still rather confusing than clarifying to state this synonymy without further explanation. (2) Is it true that developmental biology is limited to animals and plants? What about fungi? (3) Is ontogeny limited to multicellular organisms? Is development also? In one book I found a description of the development of a virus. In this article, the development of a cell is called differentiation. It is also called specialization. (4) Wouldn't it be more straight forward to call it development? We would then have development on at least two levels, cell and multicellular organism. Regardless of what is best, we must use the prevailing terminology. Do cells develop? --Ettrig (talk) 07:42, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  You're right, of course. I've said "their ontogeny", i.e. ontogeny is the process. On the broader question, the article is desperately out of date and seriously under-cited, in other words it needs a rewrite. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:39, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Development = Ontogeny 

message: — Assignment last updated by Samayfield (talk) 16:02, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Comparative Developmental Biology

message: This article is very informative. Throughout my reading, most sections and topics were easy to follow and thoroughly understand, except the Cell Differentiation and Regeneration. The information written under other topics were easily readable because of the space between the loads of information. When reading the Cell Diff. and Regeneration, I became easily lost and visually overwhelmed by the cramped information and how it was set up. I'd advise the author to separate some of the information into separate paragraphs if that is possible. Thank you. Vjj18 (talk) 20:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Format of Information 

message: — Assignment last updated by Wteh (talk) 15:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Comparative Developmental Biology