Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016

Precision oncology: as much expectations as limitations.

It is encouraging to witness the recent price reduction and expanded access to next generation sequencing platforms, the increasing number of investments and publications on new targets and respective targeted drugs, as well as the worldwide excitement with anti-cancer personalised therapies. This editorial aims to highlight the limitations regarding the small proportion of solid cancers potentially eligible for the use of molecular-based targeted drugs until now. It also covers the expected clinical benefits in refractory patients treated by matched therapies, and detailed cost-effectiveness analysis of the use of DNA sequencing analysis oncology practice in an academic and large-scale community.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Components of the Canonical and Non-Canonical Wnt Pathways Are Not Mis-Expressed in Pituitary Tumors

<div><p>Introduction</p><p>Canonical and non-canonical Wnt pathways are involved in the genesis of multiple tumors; however, their role in pituitary tumorigenesis is mostly unknown.</p> <p>Objective</p><p>This study evaluated gene and protein expression of Wnt pathways in pituitary tumors and whether these expression correlate to clinical outcome.</p> <p>Materials and Methods</p><p>Genes of the Wnt canonical pathway: activating ligands (<i>WNT11, WNT4, WNT5A</i>), binding inhibitors (<i>DKK3, sFRP1</i>), β-catenin (<i>CTNNB1</i>), β-catenin degradation complex (<i>APC, AXIN1, GSK3β</i>), inhibitor of β-catenin degradation complex (<i>AKT1</i>), sequester of β-catenin (<i>CDH1</i>), pathway effectors (<i>TCF7, MAPK8, NFAT5</i>), pathway mediators (<i>DVL-1, DVL-2, DVL-3, PRICKLE, VANGL1</i>), target genes (<i>MYB, MYC, WISP2, SPRY1, TP53, CCND1</i>); calcium dependent pathway (<i>PLCB1, CAMK2A, PRKCA, CHP</i>); and planar cell polarity pathway (<i>PTK7, DAAM1, RHOA</i>) were evaluated by QPCR, in 19 GH-, 18 ACTH-secreting, 21 non-secreting (NS) pituitary tumors, and 5 normal pituitaries. Also, the main effectors of canonical (β-catenin), planar cell polarity (JNK), and calcium dependent (NFAT5) Wnt pathways were evaluated by immunohistochemistry.</p> <p>Results</p><p>There are no differences in gene expression of canonical and non-canonical Wnt pathways between all studied subtypes of pituitary tumors and normal pituitaries, except for <i>WISP2,</i> which was over-expressed in ACTH-secreting tumors compared to normal pituitaries (4.8x; p = 0.02), NS pituitary tumors (7.7x; p = 0.004) and GH-secreting tumors (5.0x; p = 0.05). β-catenin, NFAT5 and JNK proteins showed no expression in normal pituitaries and in any of the pituitary tumor subtypes. Furthermore, no association of the studied gene or protein expression was observed with tumor size, recurrence, and progressive disease. The hierarchical clustering showed a regular pattern of genes of the canonical and non-canonical Wnt pathways randomly distributed throughout the dendrogram.</p> <p>Conclusions</p><p>Our data reinforce previous reports suggesting no activation of canonical Wnt pathway in pituitary tumorigenesis. Moreover, we describe, for the first time, evidence that non-canonical Wnt pathways are also not mis-expressed in the pituitary tumors.</p> </div

Immunocytochemistry for β-catenin, JNK, and NFAT5 in normal pituitaries, ACTH-secreting pituitary tumor, GH-secreting pituitary tumor, and non-secreting pituitary tumor (x40).

<p>ACTH and GH immune positivity are shown in the region of the tumor sample immunostained for β-catenin, JNK and NFAT. Craniopharyngioma tissue and two positive samples from GH-secreting pituitary tumors were used as positive controls for β-catenin, NFAT5, and JNK antibodies, respectively.</p

Wnt Pathway gene expression in Pituitary Tumors.

<p>Wnt Pathway gene expression in Pituitary Tumors.</p

Hierarchical clustering for canonical and non-canonical Wnt pathway genes in normal pituitary and in different subtypes of the pituitary tumors.

<p>HN: normal pituitary; ACTH: ACTH-secreting pituitary tumor; GH: GH-secreting pituitary tumor; NS: non-secreting pituitary tumor.</p

ZAC1, SSTR2 and SSTR3 expression in NFPA, somatotropinomas and normal pituitaries.

<div><p>Comparison of <i>ZAC1</i> (A), <i>SSTR2</i> (B) and <i>SSTR3</i> (C) mRNA expression levels among normal pituitaries (NP), somatotropinomas (somatotroph) and non-functioning pituitary adenomas (NFPA). The outliers were excluded.</p> <p>The Kruskall-Wallis test was used to compare the mRNA expression among the three groups and the Mann-Whitney test for comparison between NFPA and normal pituitaries and somatotropinomas.</p></div