| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Demetris, A J, et al.
(författare)
-
2016 Comprehensive Update of the Banff Working Group on Liver Allograft Pathology: Introduction of Antibody-Mediated Rejection.
- 2016
-
Ingår i: American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons. - : Elsevier BV. - 1600-6143. ; 16:10, s. 2816-2835
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Banff Working Group on Liver Allograft Pathology reviewed and discussed literature evidence regarding antibody-mediated liver allograft rejection at the 11th (Paris, France, June 5-10, 2011), 12th (Comandatuba, Brazil, August 19-23, 2013), and 13th (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, October 5-10, 2015) meetings of the Banff Conference on Allograft Pathology. Discussion continued online. The primary goal was to introduce guidelines and consensus criteria for the diagnosis of liver allograft antibody-mediated rejection and provide a comprehensive update of all Banff Schema recommendations. Included are new recommendations for complement component 4d tissue staining and interpretation, staging liver allograft fibrosis, and findings related to immunosuppression minimization. In an effort to create a single reference document, previous unchanged criteria are also included.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Jakubek, Ryan S., et al.
(författare)
-
Calibration of Raman Bandwidths on the Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman and Luminescence for Organics and Chemicals (SHERLOC) Deep Ultraviolet Raman and Fluorescence Instrument Aboard the Perseverance Rover
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Applied Spectroscopy. - : SAGE Publications Inc.. - 0003-7028 .- 1943-3530.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this work, we derive a simple method for calibrating Raman bandwidths for the Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman and Luminescence for Organics and Chemicals (SHERLOC) instrument onboard NASA’s Perseverance rover. Raman bandwidths and shapes reported by an instrument contain contributions from both the intrinsic Raman band (IRB) and instrumental artifacts. To directly correlate bandwidth to sample properties and to compare bandwidths across instruments, the IRB width needs to be separated from instrumental effects. Here, we use the ubiquitous bandwidth calibration method of modeling the observed Raman bands as a convolution of a Lorentzian IRB and a Gaussian instrument slit function. Using calibration target data, we calculate that SHERLOC has a slit function width of 34.1 cm–1. With a measure of the instrument slit function, we can deconvolve the IRB from the observed band, providing the width of the Raman band unobscured by instrumental artifact. We present the correlation between observed Raman bandwidth and intrinsic Raman bandwidth in table form for the quick estimation of SHERLOC Raman intrinsic bandwidths. We discuss the limitations of using this model to calibrate Raman bandwidth and derive a quantitative method for calculating the errors associated with the calibration. We demonstrate the utility of this method of bandwidth calibration by examining the intrinsic bandwidths of SHERLOC sulfate spectra and by modeling the SHERLOC spectrum of olivine.
|
|
| 8. |
- Sun, Vivian Z., et al.
(författare)
-
Overview and Results From the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover's First Science Campaign on the Jezero Crater Floor
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of Geophysical Research: Planets. - : John Wiley and Sons Inc. - 2169-9097 .- 2169-9100. ; 128:6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Mars 2020 Perseverance rover landed in Jezero crater on 18 February 2021. After a 100-sol period of commissioning and the Ingenuity Helicopter technology demonstration, Perseverance began its first science campaign to explore the enigmatic Jezero crater floor, whose igneous or sedimentary origins have been much debated in the scientific community. This paper describes the campaign plan developed to explore the crater floor's Máaz and Séítah formations and summarizes the results of the campaign between sols 100–379. By the end of the campaign, Perseverance had traversed more than 5 km, created seven abrasion patches, and sealed nine samples and a witness tube. Analysis of remote and proximity science observations show that the Máaz and Séítah formations are igneous in origin and composed of five and two geologic members, respectively. The Séítah formation represents the olivine-rich cumulate formed from differentiation of a slowly cooling melt or magma body, and the Máaz formation likely represents a separate series of lava flows emplaced after Séítah. The Máaz and Séítah rocks also preserve evidence of multiple episodes of aqueous alteration in secondary minerals like carbonate, Fe/Mg phyllosilicates, sulfates, and perchlorate, and surficial coatings. Post-emplacement processes tilted the rocks near the Máaz-Séítah contact and substantial erosion modified the crater floor rocks to their present-day expressions. Results from this crater floor campaign, including those obtained upon return of the collected samples, will help to build the geologic history of events that occurred in Jezero crater and provide time constraints on the formation of the Jezero delta.
|
|
