h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A519851

This is the only article on mitochondria. I've tried to fill a gap, and I think I've written it pretty well. It is well researched and factual.

Excellent work! You covered all the major points without getting too bogged down in technical detail. You even mentioned the bit about motochondria possibly being a captured organism (which I was sure you were going to leave out )!

You managed to keep it light and yet still convey the proper information.

Stellar job!

- Jimi X

It certainly is!

This is a difficult subject for the layman and you do a good job of explaining the terminology. Having a section for Three Letter Acronyms certainly helps (though it might be easier for the reader if you write out 'Three Letter Acronym' in the body of the text rather than leaving it as a footnote).

One term you didn't explain was 'eukaryotic'. I doubt it's particularly important, but since you mentioned the word it would be as well to define it.

When talking about the production of ATP, you say: 'Step 1 made 2, step 2 made 2 and this final step creates about 32.' From the article, I gather ATP is energised ADP. I am unclear what exactly is being produced by these three stages. Step one produces 2 energised ADPs from two existing unenergized ADPs, step two produces 2 more, and step three produces 32 on top of the existing 4 - is that right ? And all the other ADPs are simply inactive, waiting to be energized ?

Finally, as a minor style point, it is generally better for an article to start with standard text (the introductory paragraph) before introducing subheadings. It lets the reader in more gently and helps to establish the shape of the article.

That's what my old English teacher told me, anyway...

Overall, a very promising piece. It will make a valuable addition to the Guide.

MDS

I have incorporated the changes you suggested. I have removed the first subheader, which wasn't really necessary anyway, and I've added a footnote on what eukaryot cells are, and have tried to make the bit about ATP and ADP clearer.

Please see how you like the changes!
Thanks
=)

Fantastic! I love it!

<-- bookmark. I accidently unsubscribed

Very good, I never thougth I would find an article about Mitochondria entertaining but I did! Well done
Minor quibbles:
There is a third type of cell called an archae (formerly known as archaebacteria - they are not the same as bacteria)

There is a third type of RNA -rRNA or ribosomal RNA

dunno if this really matters but for pedantry's sake I thoguht I should say it.

The ADP section is a lot clearer.

It was probably just me being a bit dense.

MDS

Hmm. I haven't heard anything about them. I'm doing Biol 111 - biology of cells, and I got most of my facts out of our textbook, so mabey we'll learn about those next year. I have heard about cyanobacteria, but they are still prokaryots.

Oh well.

Oh, Archae are prokaryotes, they're just slightly different to bacteria, probably doesn't matter

One thing that you have not mentioned is that mitochondria are proving to be useful for historical genetics. Because it is passed from mother to child, it provides exactly the same information that the male germ line gives you for figuring out familial inter-relationships in situations where you do not have the information available in any other way.

Oh, yeah, I forgot about that. I've added a paragraph on the end.

BTW, thank you all for the constructive ideas and comments you've all given.

Wow, I didn't know THAT!!! (About the whole mitochondrial DNA thing) How interesting!!!!

(Want another round of Myxosporidia, scaryfish?)
My father was a cellular biologist (amongst other things) and during much of my childhood (we're talking ancient prehistory here) he compared mitochondrial functions in normal tissue cells and in cancerous cells. Unfortunately this never led to any big breakthroughs either in cellular biology or oncology, so he changed tracks and did marine paracitology instead.

My point is that i grew up with a lot of interesting explanations. The "Cellular Biology and Biochemistry for Three-year-olds." kind of thing, you know...

I find your article about 90% perfect. It compresses a lot of incredibly complex biology and biochemistry into a few understadable bits of information and puts them into an interesting context.

The 10% you lack is "why in the world do cellular biologists study these little things all their lives in total fascination."

You mention the primary two areas of fascination, the origin of Mitochondria (the "are we simply advanced symbiotic hosts for vast colonies of germs?" issue); and the geneological (the "Can we ever find Eve?" issue.) The ten procent the article lacks is making this fascination as palpable for the reader as the complex biochemistry that you make both fascinating and accessable

loved it

~^M^~erdo

Congratulations! This excellent entry has been accepted by the Editors and is now going foward to become a part of the edited guide.

Well done!

It may take a little time before it appears on the front page, what with sub-editing and all that. But not too long, hopefully

In the meantime: keep up the good work! I look forward to reading your next article.

MDS

Editorial Note: This thread has been moved out of the Peer Review forum because this entry has now been recommended for the Edited Guide.

If they have not been along already, the Scout who recommended your entry will post here soon, to let you know what happens next. Meanwhile you can find out what will happen to your entry here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/SubEditors-Process

Congratulations!

Editorial Note: This thread has been moved out of the Peer Review forum because this entry has now been recommended for the Edited Guide.

If they have not been along already, the Scout who recommended your entry will post here soon, to let you know what happens next. Meanwhile you can find out what will happen to your entry here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/SubEditors-Process

Congratulations!