Deep Neighbor Layer Aggregation for Lightweight Self-Supervised Monocular Depth Estimation

With the frequent use of self-supervised monocular depth estimation in robotics and autonomous driving, the model's efficiency is becoming increasingly important. Most current approaches apply much larger and more complex networks to improve the precision of depth estimation. Some researchers incorporated Transformer into self-supervised monocular depth estimation to achieve better performance. However, this method leads to high parameters and high computation. We present a fully convolutional depth estimation network using contextual feature fusion. Compared to UNet++ and HRNet, we use high-resolution and low-resolution features to reserve information on small targets and fast-moving objects instead of long-range fusion. We further promote depth estimation results employing lightweight channel attention based on convolution in the decoder stage. Our method reduces the parameters without sacrificing accuracy. Experiments on the KITTI benchmark show that our method can get better results than many large models, such as Monodepth2, with only 30 parameters. The source code is available at https://github.com/boyagesmile/DNA-Depth

Effect of Spice Essential Oil Combinations on the Quality and Safety of Air-Dried Catfish Sausage

In order to explore the effects of different combinations of spice essential oils on the quality and safety of air-dried catfish sausages, sausages were prepared from marinated catfish surimi added with a 1:1 (m/m) blend of clove and star anise (CA), clove and perilla (CP), star anise and perilla (AP) or clove, star anise and perilla essential oil (CAP) at 0.03% or none as a control. Moisture content, water activity (aw), pH, color difference, thiobarbituric acid reactive substance (TBARS) value, biological amine content, N-nitrosamine content, and microbial load were measured. Microbial community structure was analyzed by 16S rDNA high-throughput sequencing. The results showed that the moisture content of the AP group was 27.13%, and the aw value was 0.765. The L* and a* values of the CA group were high, indicating typical characteristics of air-dried sausages. The pH of the four treatment groups was higher than that of the control group, and followed the descending order of CAP > AP > CA > CP. There was no significant difference in the inhibition of fat oxidation among different essential oil combinations (P > 0.05), but the TBARS value of air-dried sausages was significantly reduced by all combinations (P < 0.05). The contents of biogenic amine and N-nitrosamine in the AP group were low. The total number of bacteria, and the number of Enterobacteriaceae and Aeromonas were significantly lower in the AP group than in the control group (P < 0.05). High-throughput sequencing results showed low species richness in the AP and CAP groups and low relative abundance of pathogenic bacteria in the AP group. Overall analysis showed that AP was superior to the other groups in improving the quality and safety of air-dried catfish sausages

Carbon reduction measures-based LCA of prefabricated temporary housing with renewable energy systems

Temporary housing plays an important role in providing secure, hygienic, private, and comfortable shelter in the aftermath of disaster (such as flood, fire, earthquake, etc.). Additionally, temporary housing can also be used as a sustainable form of on-site residences for construction workers. While most of the building components used in temporary housing can be manufactured in a plant, prefabrication technology improves the production efficiency of temporary housing; furthermore, integrated renewable energy systems, for example, solar photovoltaic (PV) system, offer benefits for temporary housing operations. In order to assess the environmental impacts of prefabricated temporary housing equipped with renewable energy systems, this study first divides the life cycle of temporary housing into six stages, and then establishes a life cycle assessment (LCA) model for each stage. Furthermore, with the aim of reducing the environmental impacts, life cycle carbon reduction measures are proposed for each stage of temporary housing. The proposed methodology is demonstrated using a case study in China. Based on the proposed carbon reduction measures, the LCA of a prefabricated temporary housing case study building equipped with renewable energy systems indicates a carbon emissions intensity of 35.7 kg/m2&middot;per year, as well as a reduction in material embodied emissions of 18%, assembly emissions of 17.5%, and operational emissions of 91.5%. This research proposes a carbon reduction-driven LCA of temporary housing and contributes to promoting sustainable development of prefabricated temporary housing equipped with renewable energy systems

α-Tocopheryl succinate promotes selective cell death induced by vitamin K3 in combination with ascorbate

BACKGROUND: A strategy to reduce the secondary effects of anti-cancer agents is to potentiate the therapeutic effect by their combination. A combination of vitamin K3 (VK3) and ascorbic acid (AA) exhibited an anti-cancer synergistic effect, associated with extracellular production of H2O2 that promoted cell death. METHODS: The redox-silent vitamin E analogue a-tocopheryl succinate (a-TOS) was used in combination with VK3 and AA to evaluate their effect on prostate cancer cells. RESULTS: Prostate cancer cells were sensitive to a-TOS and VK3 treatment, but resistant to AA upto 3.2mM. When combined, a synergistic effect was found for VK3\u2013AA, whereas a-TOS\u2013VK3 and a-TOS\u2013AA combination showed an antagonist and additive effect, respectively. However, sub-lethal doses of AA\u2013VK3 combination combined with a sub-toxic dose of a-TOS showed to induce efficient cell death that resembles autoschizis. Associated with this cell demise, lipid peroxidation, DNA damage, cytoskeleton alteration, lysosomal\u2013mitochondrial perturbation, and release of cytochrome c without caspase activation were observed. Inhibition of lysosomal proteases did not attenuate cell death induced by the combined agents. Furthermore, cell deaths by apoptosis and autoschizis were detected. CONCLUSION: These finding support the emerging idea that synergistic combinations of some agents can overcome toxicity and other side-effects associated with high doses of single drugs creating the opportunity for therapeutically relevant selectivity

Beth Levine in memoriam

Beth Levine was born on 7 April 1960 in Newark, New Jersey. She went to college at Brown University where she received an A.B. Magna Cum Laude, and she attended medical school at Cornell University Medical College, receiving her MD in 1986. She completed her internship and residency in Internal Medicine at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York, and her fellowship in Infectious Diseases at The Johns Hopkins Hospital. Most recently, Beth was a Professor of Internal Medicine and Microbiology, Director of the Center for Autophagy Research, and holder of the Charles Sprague Distinguished Chair in Biomedical Science at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. Beth died on 15 June 2020 from cancer. Beth is survived by her husband, Milton Packer, and their two children, Rachel (26 years old) and Ben (25 years old). Dr. Levine was as an international leader in the field of autophagy research. Her laboratory identified the mammalian autophagy gene BECN1/beclin 1; identified conserved mechanisms underlying the regulation of autophagy (e.g. BCL2-BECN1 complex formation, insulin-like signaling, EGFR, ERBB2/HER2 and AKT1-mediated BECN1 phosphosphorylation); and provided the first evidence that autophagy genes are important in antiviral host defense, tumor suppression, lifespan extension, apoptotic corpse clearance, metazoan development, Na,K-ATPase-regulated cell death, and the beneficial metabolic effects of exercise. She developed a potent autophagy-inducing cell permeable peptide, Tat-beclin 1, which has potential therapeutic applications in a range of diseases. She was a founding Associate Editor of the journal Autophagy and an editorial board member of Cell and Cell Host & Microbe. She has received numerous awards/honors in recognition of her scientific achievement, including: The American Cancer Society Junior Faculty Research Award (1994); election into the American Society of Clinical Investigation (2000); the Ellison Medical Foundation Senior Scholars Award in Global Infectious Diseases (2004); elected member, American Association of Physicians (2005); appointment as a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator (2008); Edith and Peter O’Donnell Award in Medicine (2008); elected fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science (2012); election into the National Academy of Sciences (2013); election into the Academy of Medicine, Engineering and Science of Texas (2013); the ASCI Stanley J. Korsmeyer Award (2014); Phyllis T. Bodel Women in Medicine Award, Yale University School of Medicine (2018); recipient, Barcroft Medal, Queen’s University Belfast (2018).Fil: An, Zhenyi. No especifíca;Fil: Ballabi, Andrea. No especifíca;Fil: Bennett, Lynda. No especifíca;Fil: Boya, Patricia. No especifíca;Fil: Cecconi, Francesco. No especifíca;Fil: Chiang, Wei Chung. No especifíca;Fil: Codogno, Patrice. No especifíca;Fil: Colombo, Maria Isabel. No especifíca;Fil: Cuervo, Ana Maria. No especifíca;Fil: Debnath, Jayanta. No especifíca;Fil: Deretic, Vojo. No especifíca;Fil: Dikic, Ivan. No especifíca;Fil: Dionne, Keith. No especifíca;Fil: Dong, Xiaonan. No especifíca;Fil: Elazar, Zvulun. No especifíca;Fil: Galluzzi, Lorenzo. No especifíca;Fil: Gentile, Frank. No especifíca;Fil: Griffin, Diane E.. No especifíca;Fil: Hansen, Malene. No especifíca;Fil: Hardwick, J. Marie. No especifíca;Fil: He, Congcong. No especifíca;Fil: Huang, Shu Yi. No especifíca;Fil: Hurley, James. No especifíca;Fil: Jackson, William T.. No especifíca;Fil: Jozefiak, Cindy. No especifíca;Fil: Kitsis, Richard N.. No especifíca;Fil: Klionsky, Daniel J.. No especifíca;Fil: Kroemer, Guido. No especifíca;Fil: Meijer, Alfred J.. No especifíca;Fil: Meléndez, Alicia. No especifíca;Fil: Melino, Gerry. No especifíca;Fil: Mizushima, Noboru. No especifíca;Fil: Murphy, Leon O.. No especifíca;Fil: Nixon, Ralph. No especifíca;Fil: Orvedahl, Anthony. No especifíca;Fil: Pattingre, Sophie. No especifíca;Fil: Piacentini, Mauro. No especifíca;Fil: Reggiori, Fulvio. No especifíca;Fil: Ross, Theodora. No especifíca;Fil: Rubinsztein, David C.. No especifíca;Fil: Ryan, Kevin. No especifíca;Fil: Sadoshima, Junichi. No especifíca;Fil: Schreiber, Stuart L.. No especifíca;Fil: Scott, Frederick. No especifíca;Fil: Sebti, Salwa. No especifíca;Fil: Shiloh, Michael. No especifíca;Fil: Shoji, Sanae. No especifíca;Fil: Simonsen, Anne. No especifíca;Fil: Smith, Haley. No especifíca;Fil: Sumpter, Kathryn M.. No especifíca;Fil: Thompson, Craig B.. No especifíca;Fil: Thorburn, Andrew. No especifíca;Fil: Thumm, Michael. No especifíca;Fil: Tooze, Sharon. No especifíca;Fil: Vaccaro, Maria Ines. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Bioquímica y Medicina Molecular. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad Medicina. Instituto de Bioquímica y Medicina Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Virgin, Herbert W.. No especifíca;Fil: Wang, Fei. No especifíca;Fil: White, Eileen. No especifíca;Fil: Xavier, Ramnik J.. No especifíca;Fil: Yoshimori, Tamotsu. No especifíca;Fil: Yuan, Junying. No especifíca;Fil: Yue, Zhenyu. No especifíca;Fil: Zhong, Qing. No especifíca

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

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. For example, 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 versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost 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 fi eld 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. 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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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