Talk:Bungarotoxin

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 December 2021 and 12 January 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Studentdoc2022. Peer reviewers: Fauci2.0.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

December 2011

added brief overview of bungarotoxins — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.59.204.17 (talk) 00:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

action of gamma-bungarotoxins

Apart from the source given in the article (which by the way uses almost the same words as the article), I found no evidence of gamma-bungarotoxins acting presynaptically. Instead I found two sources that suggest a postsynaptic blocking action mainly on muscarinic acetylcholine receptors:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13209221_Primary_structure_of_g-bungarotoxin_a_new_postsynaptic_neurotoxin_from_venom_of_Bungarus_multicinctus

https://www.uniprot.org/uniprot/Q9YGJ0

A postsynaptic mode of action also appears more plausible from the "three-finger" structure of these toxins... --87.157.202.194 (talk) 20:24, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review

Overall, I thought this was a very well written and informative article!

Readability: for the most part, the article appears to read between a 12-13th grade level, which is strong. Maybe consider shortening/breaking up some sentences to help bring the readability down to a 10-11th grade. For example, the sentence "Within the family of three-finger α-neurotoxins, the protein structure is further subcategorized as short chain, long chain, atypical long chain and non conventional α-neurotoxins" could be broken down into two sentences to improve the readability.

Adherence to topic: This article did a great job of staying on track. You consistently connected topics back to the main topic of "Bungarotoxin", even when you were explaining subtopics.

Organization & Flow: Organization and flow of this article is strong. One suggestion I have would be to move up the "Structure" section of the article before the "Mechanism" section, since I think this section would be a strong lead-in to the mechanism of the toxin.

Use of images and figures: Including an image of the structure of the toxin may be helpful when reading that section of the article. Also, including a picture of a snake or krait that has this toxin may be helpful for real-world application.

Proper use of citations: citations look good. I think there are some areas where you could include a citation at the end of the sentence. For example, these sentences may benefit from including a citation:

1. "Majority of these cases occur in Africa, Asia and Latin America and outcomes can be debilitating if not treated immediately."
2. "α-Bungarotoxin irreversibly blocks the binding of acetylcholine (ACh) to postsynaptic nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAchR) on both muscle and neurons."
3. "Similarly, κ-bungarotoxin acts to block postsynaptic nAchRs, but its effect is primarily on neuronal receptors rather than muscular nicotinic receptors."
4. "Within the family of three-finger α-neurotoxins, the protein structure is further subcategorized as short chain, long chain, atypical long chain and non conventional α-neurotoxins. This subclassification describes additional structural aspects of the toxin as well as the receptors they act on. For example, α-BTX is a long chain toxin meaning it is composed of 66-70 amino acids and possesses a three-finger structure."

Paraphrasing: this article appears to be appropriately written without evidence of plagiarism or close paraphrasing.

Sources: you appear to have a wide variety of reputable sources. I did notice that many of your sources are from 10+ years ago. Maybe look to include more recent sources that are within the past 5 years.

Bias: this article has no evidence of bias. It is very well written from a neutral perspective.

Great job on this article! I thought it was very well-written, easy to follow, and highly informative with a great variety of sources. Ssturpin (talk) 20:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC)