1,458
11
Review, 3 pages (600 words)

Article review

Article Review: Mouse Resource Browser – a database of mouse databases Sharon Thompson of Phoenix HCI/520 – Data Management and Design Instructor’s Name
Date
Article Review: Mouse Resource Browser – a database of mouse databases
The article entitled Mouse Resource Browser – a database of mouse databases was a collaborative work of 12 authors from diverse fields of sciences ranging from biomedical sciences, bioinformatics, genetics, physiology, genetics, and veterinary medicine, published in the Oxford Journals on May 3, 2010. The authors aimed to present a unified database where the laboratory mouse has been tapped “ for discovering gene function and unravelling pathogenetic mechanisms of human diseases through the application of various functional genomic approaches” (Zouberakis, et. al., 2010, par. 1). A Mouse Resource Browser (MSR) was presented, “ a database of mouse databases that indexes 217 publicly available mouse resources under 22 categories and uses a standardised database description framework (the CASIMIR DDF) to provide information on their controlled vocabularies (ontologies and minimum information standards), and technical information on programmatic access and data availability” (Zouberakis, et. al., 2010, par. 1).
The discourse briefly introduced the need to achieve the authors’ identified objective and progressed by proffering the design, implementation and accessibility of the proposed database. The MRB which was the focus of the article was described as “ the front-end of a relational, fully normalized PostgreSQL database, and is a typical Java EE application that follows the MVC architectural pattern, generating three transparent layers: the Enterprise JavaBeans (EJB) layer, the intermediate Session layer and the interface/web layer” (Zouberakis, et. al., 2010, par. 5). The general content of the article was explained in greater detail in terms of management, delivery and structure. Likewise, an online questionnaire was designed for curatorial purposes. Several illustrations and graphical representations were provided to diagram the MRB architecture and to depict the online responses, curatorial information, ontologies, and accessibility, among others.
Finally, a discussion of the proposed MRB’s beneficial contributions to scientists and professionals in the fields of genetics and biomedical sciences was clearly expounded; and the source of funding was appropriately acknowledged.
The authors were effective in attaining their objective to “ provide useful information to both bench scientists, who can easily navigate and find all mouse related resources in one place, and bioinformaticians, who will be provided with interoperable resources containing data which can be mined and integrated” (Zouberakis, et. al., 2010, par. 1). Further, the discourse was effectively and creatively structured to present a concise and accurate presentation of facts which are easily understood and can be appreciated by a wide range of clientele. The use of graphical illustrations enhanced the presentation of data and proper citations were accorded for referenced sources of additional authoritative information.
Overall, the article proffered relevant information about integrating data from diverse sources made possible through standardization, interoperability and integration. The benefits that database management accords to diverse fields of discipline, especially in the medical sciences endeavor – a continually developing and progressive career – are manifested and exemplified in the article. Through genuine interest and commitment to enhance discoveries in bioinformatics applications, the authors’ innovative and creative talents enabled the integration of critical and relevant information which would ensure that users could easily access data which have been previously encoded but differently programmed. The article is a relevant piece of information where readers are definitely accorded the opportunity to advance theoretical concepts on databases and clearly apply these theories to contemporary biomedical sciences applications.
References
Zouberakis, M., Chandras, C., Swerz, M., Smedley, D., Gruenberger, M., Bard, J., Schughart, K.,
Rosenthal, N., Hancock, J. M., Schofield, P. N., Kollias, G. & Aidinis, V. (2010). “ Mouse Resource Browser – a database of mouse databases.” Oxford Journals: Database (The Journal of Database and Curation), Vol. 2010: baq010; doi: 10. 1093/database/baq010. Retrieved 04 June 2010.
< http://database. oxfordjournals. org/cgi/content/full/2010/0/baq010>

Thank's for Your Vote!
Article review. Page 1
Article review. Page 2
Article review. Page 3
Article review. Page 4

This work, titled "Article review" was written and willingly shared by a fellow student. This sample can be utilized as a research and reference resource to aid in the writing of your own work. Any use of the work that does not include an appropriate citation is banned.

If you are the owner of this work and don’t want it to be published on AssignBuster, request its removal.

Request Removal
Cite this Review

References

AssignBuster. (2021) 'Article review'. 19 December.

Reference

AssignBuster. (2021, December 19). Article review. Retrieved from https://assignbuster.com/article-review-article-review-samples-3/

References

AssignBuster. 2021. "Article review." December 19, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/article-review-article-review-samples-3/.

1. AssignBuster. "Article review." December 19, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/article-review-article-review-samples-3/.


Bibliography


AssignBuster. "Article review." December 19, 2021. https://assignbuster.com/article-review-article-review-samples-3/.

Work Cited

"Article review." AssignBuster, 19 Dec. 2021, assignbuster.com/article-review-article-review-samples-3/.

Get in Touch

Please, let us know if you have any ideas on improving Article review, or our service. We will be happy to hear what you think: [email protected]