An Individual-Oriented Model on the Emergence of Support in Fights, Its Reciprocation and Exchange

Complex social behaviour of primates has usually been attributed to the operation of complex cognition. Recently, models have shown that constraints imposed by the socio-spatial structuring of individuals in a group may result in an unexpectedly high number of patterns of complex social behaviour, resembling the dominance styles of egalitarian and despotic species of macaques and the differences between them. This includes affiliative patterns, such as reciprocation of grooming, grooming up the hierarchy, and reconciliation. In the present study, we show that the distribution of support in fights, which is the social behaviour that is potentially most sophisticated in terms of cognitive processes, may emerge in the same way. The model represents the spatial grouping of individuals and their social behaviour, such as their avoidance of risks during attacks, the self-reinforcing effects of winning and losing their fights, their tendency to join in fights of others that are close by (social facilitation), their tendency to groom when they are anxious, the reduction of their anxiety by grooming, and the increase of anxiety when involved in aggression. Further, we represent the difference in intensity of aggression apparent in egalitarian and despotic macaques. The model reproduces many aspects of support in fights, such as its different types, namely, conservative, bridging and revolutionary, patterns of choice of coalition partners attributed to triadic awareness, those of reciprocation of support and ‘spiteful acts’ and of exchange between support and grooming. This work is important because it suggests that behaviour that seems to result from sophisticated cognition may be a side-effect of spatial structure and dominance interactions and it shows that partial correlations fail to completely omit these effects of spatial structure. Further, the model is falsifiable, since it results in many patterns that can easily be tested in real primates by means of existing data

Higher incidence of perineal community acquired MRSA infections among toddlers

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A six-fold increase in pediatric MRSA infections, prompted us to examine the clinical profile of children with MRSA infections seen at Mercy Children's Hospital, Toledo, Ohio and to characterize the responsible strains.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Records were reviewed of pediatric patients who cultured positive for MRSA from June 1 to December 31, 2007. Strain typing by pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFT) and DiversiLab, SCC<it>mec </it>typing, and PCR-based <it>lukSF-PV </it>gene (encodes Panton-Valentine leukocidin), arginine catabolic mobile element (ACME) and <it>cap</it>5 gene detection was performed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Chart review of 63 patients with MRSA infections revealed that 58(92%) were community acquired MRSA (CAMRSA). All CAMRSA were skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI). Twenty five (43%) patients were aged < 3 yrs, 19(33%) aged 4-12 and 14(24%) aged 13-18. Nineteen (76%) of those aged < 3 yrs had higher incidence of perineal infections compared to only 2(11%) of the 4-12 yrs and none of the 13-18 yrs of age. Infections in the extremities were more common in the older youth compared to the youngest children. Overall, there was a significant association between site of the infection and age group (Fisher's Exact p-value < 0.001). All CAMRSA were USA300 PFT, clindamycin susceptible, SCC<it>mec </it>type IVa and <it>lukSF-PV gene </it>positive. Nearly all contained ACME and about 80% were <it>cap</it>5 positive. Of the 58 USA300 strains by PFT, 55(95%) were also identified as USA300 via the automated repetitive sequence-based PCR method from DiversiLab.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>CAMRSA SSTI of the perineum was significantly more common among toddlers and that of the extremities in older children. The infecting strains were all USA300 PFT. Further studies are needed to identify the unique virulence and colonization characteristics of USA300 strains in these infections.</p

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