| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- 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.
|
|
| 3. |
-
- 2019
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Sumaila, U. Rashid, et al.
(författare)
-
WTO must ban harmful fisheries subsidies
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 374:6567, s. 544-544
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 7. |
- Menkveld, Albert J., et al.
(författare)
-
Nonstandard Errors
- 2024
-
Ingår i: JOURNAL OF FINANCE. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 0022-1082 .- 1540-6261. ; 79:3, s. 2339-2390
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence-generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty-nonstandard errors (NSEs). We study NSEs by letting 164 teams test the same hypotheses on the same data. NSEs turn out to be sizable, but smaller for more reproducible or higher rated research. Adding peer-review stages reduces NSEs. We further find that this type of uncertainty is underestimated by participants.
|
|
| 8. |
- Ariyawansa, Hiran A., et al.
(författare)
-
Fungal diversity notes 111–252—taxonomic and phylogenetic contributions to fungal taxa
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Fungal diversity. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1560-2745 .- 1878-9129. ; 75, s. 27-274
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper is a compilation of notes on 142 fungal taxa, including five new families, 20 new genera, and 100 new species, representing a wide taxonomic and geographic range. The new families, Ascocylindricaceae, Caryosporaceae and Wicklowiaceae (Ascomycota) are introduced based on their distinct lineages and unique morphology. The new Dothideomycete genera Pseudomassariosphaeria (Amniculicolaceae), Heracleicola, Neodidymella and P s e u d o m i c ros p h a e r i o p s i s ( D id y m e l l a c e a e ) , P s e u d o p i t h o m y c e s ( D i d y m o s p h a e r i a c e a e ) , Brunneoclavispora, Neolophiostoma and Sulcosporium (Halotthiaceae), Lophiohelichrysum (Lophiostomataceae), G a l l i i c o l a , Popul o c re s c e n t i a a nd Va g i c o l a (Phaeosphaeriaceae), Ascocylindrica (Ascocylindricaceae), E l o n g a t o p e d i c e l l a t a ( R o u s s o e l l a c e a e ) , Pseudoasteromassaria (Latoruaceae) and Pseudomonodictys (Macrodiplodiopsidaceae) are introduced. The newly described species of Dothideomycetes (Ascomycota) are Pseudomassariosphaeria bromicola (Amniculicolaceae), Flammeascoma lignicola (Anteagloniaceae), Ascocylindrica marina (Ascocylindricaceae) , Lembosia xyliae (Asterinaceae), Diplodia crataegicola and Diplodia galiicola ( B o t r yosphae r i a cea e ) , Caryospor a aquat i c a (Caryosporaceae), Heracleicola premilcurensis and Neodi dymell a thai landi cum (Didymellaceae) , Pseudopithomyces palmicola (Didymosphaeriaceae), Floricola viticola (Floricolaceae), Brunneoclavispora bambusae, Neolophiostoma pigmentatum and Sulcosporium thailandica (Halotthiaceae), Pseudoasteromassaria fagi (Latoruaceae), Keissleriella dactylidicola (Lentitheciaceae), Lophiohelichrysum helichrysi (Lophiostomataceae), Aquasubmersa japonica (Lophiotremataceae) , Pseudomonodictys tectonae (Macrodiplodiopsidaceae), Microthyrium buxicola and Tumidispora shoreae (Microthyriaceae), Alloleptosphaeria clematidis, Allophaeosphaer i a c y t i s i , Allophaeosphae r i a subcylindrospora, Dematiopleospora luzulae, Entodesmium artemisiae, Galiicola pseudophaeosphaeria, Loratospora(Basidiomycota) are introduced together with a new genus Neoantrodiella (Neoantrodiellaceae), here based on both morphology coupled with molecular data. In the class Agaricomycetes, Agaricus pseudolangei, Agaricus haematinus, Agaricus atrodiscus and Agaricus exilissimus (Agaricaceae) , Amanita m e l l e i a l b a , Amanita pseudosychnopyramis and Amanita subparvipantherina (Amanitaceae), Entoloma calabrum, Cora barbulata, Dictyonema gomezianum and Inocybe granulosa (Inocybaceae), Xerocomellus sarnarii (Boletaceae), Cantharellus eucalyptorum, Cantharellus nigrescens, Cantharellus tricolor and Cantharellus variabilicolor (Cantharellaceae), Cortinarius alboamarescens, Cortinarius brunneoalbus, Cortinarius ochroamarus, Cortinarius putorius and Cortinarius seidlii (Cortinariaceae), Hymenochaete micropora and Hymenochaete subporioides (Hymenochaetaceae), Xylodon ramicida (Schizoporaceae), Colospora andalasii (Polyporaceae), Russula guangxiensis and Russula hakkae (Russulaceae), Tremella dirinariae, Tremella graphidis and Tremella pyrenulae (Tremellaceae) are introduced. Four new combinations Neoantrodiella gypsea, Neoantrodiella thujae (Neoantrodiellaceae), Punctulariopsis cremeoalbida, Punctulariopsis efibulata (Punctulariaceae) are also introduced here for the division Basidiomycota. Furthermore Absidia caatinguensis, Absidia koreana and Gongronella koreana (Cunninghamellaceae), Mortierella pisiformis and Mortierella formosana (Mortierellaceae) are newly introduced in the Zygomycota, while Neocallimastix cameroonii and Piromyces irregularis (Neocallimastigaceae) ar e i n t roduced i n the Neocallimastigomycota. Reference specimens or changes in classification and notes are provided for Alternaria ethzedia, Cucurbitaria ephedricola, Austropleospora, Austropleospora archidendri, Byssosphaeria rhodomphala, Lophiostoma caulium, Pseudopithomyces maydicus, Massariosphaeria, Neomassariosphaeria and Pestalotiopsis montellica.
|
|
| 9. |
- Rothman, Nathaniel, et al.
(författare)
-
A multi-stage genome-wide association study of bladder cancer identifies multiple susceptibility loci
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Nature Genetics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1061-4036 .- 1546-1718. ; 42:11, s. 978-984
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- We conducted a multi-stage, genome-wide association study of bladder cancer with a primary scan of 591,637 SNPs in 3,532 affected individuals (cases) and 5,120 controls of European descent from five studies followed by a replication strategy, which included 8,382 cases and 48,275 controls from 16 studies. In a combined analysis, we identified three new regions associated with bladder cancer on chromosomes 22q13.1, 19q12 and 2q37.1: rs1014971, (P = 8 × 10⁻¹²) maps to a non-genic region of chromosome 22q13.1, rs8102137 (P = 2 × 10⁻¹¹) on 19q12 maps to CCNE1 and rs11892031 (P = 1 × 10⁻⁷) maps to the UGT1A cluster on 2q37.1. We confirmed four previously identified genome-wide associations on chromosomes 3q28, 4p16.3, 8q24.21 and 8q24.3, validated previous candidate associations for the GSTM1 deletion (P = 4 × 10⁻¹¹) and a tag SNP for NAT2 acetylation status (P = 4 × 10⁻¹¹), and found interactions with smoking in both regions. Our findings on common variants associated with bladder cancer risk should provide new insights into the mechanisms of carcinogenesis.
|
|
| 10. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Landes Bioscience. - 1554-8627 .- 1554-8635. ; 4:2, s. 151-175
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,1 and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.2,3 There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.
|
|
