| 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. |
- An, Junghwa, et al.
(författare)
-
Permanent Genetic Resources added to Molecular Ecology Resources Database 1 October 2009-30 November 2009
- 2010
-
Ingår i: Molecular Ecology Resources. - : Wiley. - 1755-098X .- 1755-0998. ; 10:2, s. 404-408
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article documents the addition of 411 microsatellite marker loci and 15 pairs of Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) sequencing primers to the Molecular Ecology Resources Database. Loci were developed for the following species: Acanthopagrus schlegeli, Anopheles lesteri, Aspergillus clavatus, Aspergillus flavus, Aspergillus fumigatus, Aspergillus oryzae, Aspergillus terreus, Branchiostoma japonicum, Branchiostoma belcheri, Colias behrii, Coryphopterus personatus, Cynogolssus semilaevis, Cynoglossus semilaevis, Dendrobium officinale, Dendrobium officinale, Dysoxylum malabaricum, Metrioptera roeselii, Myrmeciza exsul, Ochotona thibetana, Neosartorya fischeri, Nothofagus pumilio, Onychodactylus fischeri, Phoenicopterus roseus, Salvia officinalis L., Scylla paramamosain, Silene latifo, Sula sula, and Vulpes vulpes. These loci were cross-tested on the following species: Aspergillus giganteus, Colias pelidne, Colias interior, Colias meadii, Colias eurytheme, Coryphopterus lipernes, Coryphopterus glaucofrenum, Coryphopterus eidolon, Gnatholepis thompsoni, Elacatinus evelynae, Dendrobium loddigesii Dendrobium devonianum, Dysoxylum binectariferum, Nothofagus antarctica, Nothofagus dombeyii, Nothofagus nervosa, Nothofagus obliqua, Sula nebouxii, and Sula variegata. This article also documents the addition of 39 sequencing primer pairs and 15 allele specific primers or probes for Paralithodes camtschaticus.
|
|
| 5. |
- Kennedy, Christina M., et al.
(författare)
-
A global quantitative synthesis of local and landscape effects on wild bee pollinators in agroecosystems
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Ecology Letters. - : Wiley. - 1461-023X .- 1461-0248. ; 16:5, s. 584-599
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Bees provide essential pollination services that are potentially affected both by local farm management and the surrounding landscape. To better understand these different factors, we modelled the relative effects of landscape composition (nesting and floral resources within foraging distances), landscape configuration (patch shape, interpatch connectivity and habitat aggregation) and farm management (organic vs. conventional and local-scale field diversity), and their interactions, on wild bee abundance and richness for 39 crop systems globally. Bee abundance and richness were higher in diversified and organic fields and in landscapes comprising more high-quality habitats; bee richness on conventional fields with low diversity benefited most from high-quality surrounding land cover. Landscape configuration effects were weak. Bee responses varied slightly by biome. Our synthesis reveals that pollinator persistence will depend on both the maintenance of high-quality habitats around farms and on local management practices that may offset impacts of intensive monoculture agriculture.
|
|
| 6. |
- Kleijn, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation.
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Nature Communications. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2041-1723. ; 6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- There is compelling evidence that more diverse ecosystems deliver greater benefits to people, and these ecosystem services have become a key argument for biodiversity conservation. However, it is unclear how much biodiversity is needed to deliver ecosystem services in a cost-effective way. Here we show that, while the contribution of wild bees to crop production is significant, service delivery is restricted to a limited subset of all known bee species. Across crops, years and biogeographical regions, crop-visiting wild bee communities are dominated by a small number of common species, and threatened species are rarely observed on crops. Dominant crop pollinators persist under agricultural expansion and many are easily enhanced by simple conservation measures, suggesting that cost-effective management strategies to promote crop pollination should target a different set of species than management strategies to promote threatened bees. Conserving the biological diversity of bees therefore requires more than just ecosystem-service-based arguments.
|
|
| 7. |
- Soininen, E.M., et al.
(författare)
-
Location of studies and evidence of effects of herbivory on Arctic vegetation: a systematic map
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Environmental Evidence. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 2047-2382. ; 10:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Herbivores modify the structure and function of tundra ecosystems. Understanding their impacts is necessary to assess the responses of these ecosystems to ongoing environmental changes. However, the effects of herbivores on plants and ecosystem structure and function vary across the Arctic. Strong spatial variation in herbivore effects implies that the results of individual studies on herbivory depend on local conditions, i.e., their ecological context. An important first step in assessing whether generalizable conclusions can be produced is to identify the existing studies and assess how well they cover the underlying environmental conditions across the Arctic. This systematic map aims to identify the ecological contexts in which herbivore impacts on vegetation have been studied in the Arctic. Specifically, the primary question of the systematic map was: “What evidence exists on the effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation?”.Methods: We used a published systematic map protocol to identify studies addressing the effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation. We conducted searches for relevant literature in online databases, search engines and specialist websites. Literature was screened to identify eligible studies, defined as reporting primary data on herbivore impacts on Arctic plants and plant communities. We extracted information on variables that describe the ecological context of the studies, from the studies themselves and from geospatial data. We synthesized the findings narratively and created a Shiny App where the coded data are searchable and variables can be visually explored.Review findings: We identified 309 relevant articles with 662 studies (representing different ecological contexts or datasets within the same article). These studies addressed vertebrate herbivory seven times more often than invertebrate herbivory. Geographically, the largest cluster of studies was in Northern Fennoscandia. Warmer and wetter parts of the Arctic had the largest representation, as did coastal areas and areas where the increase in temperature has been moderate. In contrast, studies spanned the full range of ecological context variables describing Arctic vertebrate herbivore diversity and human population density and impact.Conclusions: The current evidence base might not be sufficient to understand the effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation throughout the region, as we identified clear biases in the distribution of herbivore studies in the Arctic and a limited evidence base on invertebrate herbivory. In particular, the overrepresentation of studies in areas with moderate increases in temperature prevents robust generalizations about the effects of herbivores under different climatic scenarios.
|
|
