A new Miocene deep-sea chiton and early evidence for Teredinidae-sustained wood-fall communities

Deep-sea wood-falls are important biodiversity hot spots for insights on chemosynthesis-based communities. The study of deep-sea wood-fall-related palaeocommunities from the Neogene of north Italy shed light on interesting associations from the Miocene of Torrente Cinghio (Tortonian) and of Moncasale di Casina (Langhian). The most common components of this association are typical chemosynthetic/wood-fall molluscs, such as the gastropods Homalopoma sp. and Pseudonina bellardii, the bivalves Idas sp. and shipworms, and the chiton Leptochiton lignatilis n. sp., which belongs to a genus typical of recent sunken woods in tropical waters. The new species described is compared with other fossil and recent congeners, especially with those sharing the same kind of tegmental sculpture, fully covered with randomly or quincuncially arranged granules. An overview of the sunken wood-related chitons is provided. Surprisingly no taxa of the boring bivalves of the family Xylophagidae, whose species have been known to be fundamental for sustaining this kind of deep sea chemosynthetic ecosystem, were found in the studied site; however, other boring Teredinidae bivalves have been abundantly recovered. This suggests that, conversely to what has previously been observed on sunken wood communities, Teredinidae may be viewed as a counterpart for the maintenance of deep-sea wood-fall ecosystems

Hierarchy Theory of Evolution and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: Some Epistemic Bridges, Some Conceptual Rifts

Contemporary evolutionary biology comprises a plural landscape of multiple co-existent conceptual frameworks and strenuous voices that disagree on the nature and scope of evolutionary theory. Since the mid-eighties, some of these conceptual frameworks have denounced the ontologies of the Modern Synthesis and of the updated Standard Theory of Evolution as unfinished or even flawed. In this paper, we analyze and compare two of those conceptual frameworks, namely Niles Eldredge’s Hierarchy Theory of Evolution (with its extended ontology of evolutionary entities) and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (with its proposal of an extended ontology of evolutionary processes), in an attempt to map some epistemic bridges (e.g. compatible views of causation; niche construction) and some conceptual rifts (e.g. extra-genetic inheritance; different perspectives on macroevolution; contrasting standpoints held in the “externalism–internalism” debate) that exist between them. This paper seeks to encourage theoretical, philosophical and historiographical discussions about pluralism or the possible unification of contemporary evolutionary biology

Real and Virtual Clinical Trials: A Formal Analysis

Systems biology is an interdisciplinary approach to complex biological problems through modelling, simulation, and systems-level analysis, which is increasingly establishing itself as an alternative and complementary source of knowledge to standards laboratory, clinical and epidemiologic studies in medicine. It has been proposed that such computer simulation and computer-aided modelling techniques could be employed in the setting of clinical testing, in order to support the planning of clinical trials, refine their conduct and reduce the possibility of their failure. According to this view, patient-specific computer models should be used to generate simulated populations, on which new biomedical products can be safely tested. The Avicenna Alliance refers to this methodology as In Silico Clinical Trial (ISCT). In their recently published Roadmap (Viceconti et al., 2016), the Avicenna alliance produced an in-depth examination of the scientific, technological, and societal obstacles that have to be overcome in order to establish a role for the ISCT in medical research. With the present paper we provide an analysis of ISCTs epistemological status, in particular with respect to the gold standard instrument of clinical investigation: Randomized Controlled Trials. We draw on Cartwright's analysis (2011) of RCTs as a basis for a formal analysis of their epistemic value and as a benchmark for investigating ISCTs. Britton et al.'s study (Britton et al., 2013) on the impact of ion current variability on cardiac electrophysiology is used for illustrative purposes

Real and Virtual Clinical Trials: A Formal Analysis

Systems biology is an interdisciplinary approach to complex biological problems through modelling, simulation, and systems-level analysis, which is increasingly establishing itself as an alternative and complementary source of knowledge to standards laboratory, clinical and epidemiologic studies in medicine. It has been proposed that such computer simulation and computer-aided modelling techniques could be employed in the setting of clinical testing, in order to support the planning of clinical trials, refine their conduct and reduce the possibility of their failure. According to this view, patient-specific computer models should be used to generate simulated populations, on which new biomedical products can be safely tested. The Avicenna Alliance refers to this methodology as In Silico Clinical Trial (ISCT). In their recently published Roadmap (Viceconti et al., 2016), the Avicenna alliance produced an in-depth examination of the scientific, technological, and societal obstacles that have to be overcome in order to establish a role for the ISCT in medical research. With the present paper we provide an analysis of ISCTs epistemological status, in particular with respect to the gold standard instrument of clinical investigation: Randomized Controlled Trials. We draw on Cartwright's analysis (2011) of RCTs as a basis for a formal analysis of their epistemic value and as a benchmark for investigating ISCTs. Britton et al.'s study (Britton et al., 2013) on the impact of ion current variability on cardiac electrophysiology is used for illustrative purposes

Appunti ... per un lungo viaggio

Analisi dei dati sulla violenza domestic

Defining quality of life: A wild-goose chase?

In the last decades there has been a growing interest towards the concept of “Quality of Life” (QoL), not only in the bio-medical field, but also in other areas, such as sociology, psychology, economics, philosophy, architecture, journalism, politics, environment, sports, recreation, advertisements. Nevertheless QoL does turn out to be an ambiguous and elusive concept – a precise, clear and shared definition appears to be a long way off. In this article an analysis of how QoL is interpreted and defined in various scientific articles published in the last two decades, is offered. In addition, an illustration of how widespread the use of this concept is in different fields of knowledge, the difficulties in reaching a shared understanding of QoL, the problems involved in stating clearly the construct, and a presentation of some of its conceptualizations, are provided. The importance of subjectivity in the definition of what QoL is, emerges as a key aspect. This personal and subjective dimension could be the starting point for a more thorough and holistic understanding of this concept, in which standardized sets of valid, reliable and evidence-based measures of, e.g., psychological and spiritual dimensions, are encompassed in the person’s quality of life evaluation