| 1. |
- Tabiri, S, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Bravo, L, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 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. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Ortigoza-Escobar, J. D., et al.
(författare)
-
Thiamine deficiency in childhood with attention to genetic causes: Survival and outcome predictors
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Annals of Neurology. - : Wiley. - 0364-5134. ; 82:3, s. 317-330
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Primary and secondary conditions leading to thiamine deficiency have overlapping features in children, presenting with acute episodes of encephalopathy, bilateral symmetric brain lesions, and high excretion of organic acids that are specific of thiamine-dependent mitochondrial enzymes, mainly lactate, alpha-ketoglutarate, and branched chain keto-acids. Undiagnosed and untreated thiamine deficiencies are often fatal or lead to severe sequelae. Herein, we describe the clinical and genetic characterization of 79 patients with inherited thiamine defects causing encephalopathy in childhood, identifying outcome predictors in patients with pathogenic SLC19A3 variants, the most common genetic etiology. We propose diagnostic criteria that will aid clinicians to establish a faster and accurate diagnosis so that early vitamin supplementation is considered. Ann Neurol 2017;82:317–330. © 2017 American Neurological Association
|
|
| 8. |
- Dengler, Juergen, et al.
(författare)
-
GrassPlot - a database of multi-scale plant diversity in Palaearctic grasslands
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Phytocoenologia. - : Schweizerbart. - 0340-269X. ; 48:3, s. 331-347
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- GrassPlot is a collaborative vegetation-plot database organised by the Eurasian Dry Grassland Group (EDGG) and listed in the Global Index of Vegetation-Plot Databases (GIVD ID EU-00-003). GrassPlot collects plot records (releves) from grasslands and other open habitats of the Palaearctic biogeographic realm. It focuses on precisely delimited plots of eight standard grain sizes (0.0001; 0.001;... 1,000 m(2)) and on nested-plot series with at least four different grain sizes. The usage of GrassPlot is regulated through Bylaws that intend to balance the interests of data contributors and data users. The current version (v. 1.00) contains data for approximately 170,000 plots of different sizes and 2,800 nested-plot series. The key components are richness data and metadata. However, most included datasets also encompass compositional data. About 14,000 plots have near-complete records of terricolous bryophytes and lichens in addition to vascular plants. At present, GrassPlot contains data from 36 countries throughout the Palaearctic, spread across elevational gradients and major grassland types. GrassPlot with its multi-scale and multi-taxon focus complements the larger international vegetationplot databases, such as the European Vegetation Archive (EVA) and the global database " sPlot". Its main aim is to facilitate studies on the scale-and taxon-dependency of biodiversity patterns and drivers along macroecological gradients. GrassPlot is a dynamic database and will expand through new data collection coordinated by the elected Governing Board. We invite researchers with suitable data to join GrassPlot. Researchers with project ideas addressable with GrassPlot data are welcome to submit proposals to the Governing Board.
|
|
| 9. |
- Biurrun, Idoia, et al.
(författare)
-
Benchmarking plant diversity of Palaearctic grasslands and other open habitats
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Vegetation Science. - Oxford : John Wiley & Sons. - 1100-9233 .- 1654-1103. ; 32:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Journal of Vegetation Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Association for Vegetation Science.Aims: Understanding fine-grain diversity patterns across large spatial extents is fundamental for macroecological research and biodiversity conservation. Using the GrassPlot database, we provide benchmarks of fine-grain richness values of Palaearctic open habitats for vascular plants, bryophytes, lichens and complete vegetation (i.e., the sum of the former three groups). Location: Palaearctic biogeographic realm. Methods: We used 126,524 plots of eight standard grain sizes from the GrassPlot database: 0.0001, 0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10, 100 and 1,000 m2 and calculated the mean richness and standard deviations, as well as maximum, minimum, median, and first and third quartiles for each combination of grain size, taxonomic group, biome, region, vegetation type and phytosociological class. Results: Patterns of plant diversity in vegetation types and biomes differ across grain sizes and taxonomic groups. Overall, secondary (mostly semi-natural) grasslands and natural grasslands are the richest vegetation type. The open-access file ”GrassPlot Diversity Benchmarks” and the web tool “GrassPlot Diversity Explorer” are now available online (https://edgg.org/databases/GrasslandDiversityExplorer) and provide more insights into species richness patterns in the Palaearctic open habitats. Conclusions: The GrassPlot Diversity Benchmarks provide high-quality data on species richness in open habitat types across the Palaearctic. These benchmark data can be used in vegetation ecology, macroecology, biodiversity conservation and data quality checking. While the amount of data in the underlying GrassPlot database and their spatial coverage are smaller than in other extensive vegetation-plot databases, species recordings in GrassPlot are on average more complete, making it a valuable complementary data source in macroecology. © 2021 The Authors.
|
|
| 10. |
- Gracia-Marco, Luis A., et al.
(författare)
-
Seasonal variation in physical activity and sedentary time in different European regions. The HELENA study
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Journal of Sports Sciences. - : Routledge. - 0264-0414 .- 1466-447X. ; 31:16, s. 1831-1840
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This report aims (1) to examine the association between seasonality and physical activity (PA) and sedentary time in European adolescents and (2) to investigate whether this association was influenced by geographical location (Central-North versus South of Europe), which implies more or less extreme weather and daylight hours. Valid data on PA, sedentary time and seasonality were obtained in 2173 adolescents (1175 females; 12.5-17.5 years) included in this study. Physical activity and sedentary time were measured by accelerometers. ANCOVA was conducted to analyse the differences in PA and sedentary time across seasons. Results showed that girls had lower levels of moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) and average PA, and spent more time in sedentary activities in winter compared with spring (all P < 0.05). Stratified analyses showed differences in PA and sedentary time between winter and spring in European girls from Central-North of Europe (P < 0.05 for sedentary time). There were no differences between PA and sedentary time across seasonality in boys. In conclusion, winter is related with less time spent in MVPA, lower average PA and higher time spent in sedentary activities in European adolescent girls, compared with spring. These differences seem to mainly occur in Central-North Europe.
|
|
