230 research outputs found

    Identification of \u3ci\u3eFrancisella tularensis\u3c/i\u3e subsp. \u3ci\u3etularensis \u3c/i\u3eA1 and A2 Infections by Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

    Get PDF
    Francisella tularensis subsp. tularensis (type A) is subdivided into clades A1 and A2. Human tularemia infections caused by A1 and A2 differ with respect to clinical outcome; A1 infections are associated with a higher case fatality rate. In this study, we develop and evaluate TaqMan polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for identification of A1 and A2. Both assays were shown to be specific to either A1 or A2, with sensitivities of 10 genomic equivalents. Real-time PCR results for identification of A1 and A2 were in complete agreement with results obtained by pulsed field gel electrophoresis analysis or conventional PCR when specimens from sporadic tularemia cases and a tularemia outbreak involving both A1 and A2 were tested. In addition, outbreak samples not previously typed to the clade level could be classified as A1 or A2. The assays described here provide new diagnostic tools with a level of sensitivity not previously available for identification of A1 and A2 infections

    Identification of \u3ci\u3eFrancisella tularensis\u3c/i\u3e subsp. \u3ci\u3etularensis \u3c/i\u3eA1 and A2 Infections by Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

    Get PDF
    Francisella tularensis subsp. tularensis (type A) is subdivided into clades A1 and A2. Human tularemia infections caused by A1 and A2 differ with respect to clinical outcome; A1 infections are associated with a higher case fatality rate. In this study, we develop and evaluate TaqMan polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for identification of A1 and A2. Both assays were shown to be specific to either A1 or A2, with sensitivities of 10 genomic equivalents. Real-time PCR results for identification of A1 and A2 were in complete agreement with results obtained by pulsed field gel electrophoresis analysis or conventional PCR when specimens from sporadic tularemia cases and a tularemia outbreak involving both A1 and A2 were tested. In addition, outbreak samples not previously typed to the clade level could be classified as A1 or A2. The assays described here provide new diagnostic tools with a level of sensitivity not previously available for identification of A1 and A2 infections

    Multiple Francisella tularensis Subspecies and Clades, Tularemia Outbreak, Utah

    Get PDF
    In July 2007, a deer fly–associated outbreak of tularemia occurred in Utah. Human infections were caused by 2 clades (A1 and A2) of Francisella tularensis subsp. tularensis. Lagomorph carcasses from the area yielded evidence of infection with A1 and A2, as well as F. tularensis subsp. holarctica. These findings indicate that multiple subspecies and clades can cause disease in a localized outbreak of tularemia

    Multidifferential study of identified charged hadron distributions in ZZ-tagged jets in proton-proton collisions at s=\sqrt{s}=13 TeV

    Full text link
    Jet fragmentation functions are measured for the first time in proton-proton collisions for charged pions, kaons, and protons within jets recoiling against a ZZ boson. The charged-hadron distributions are studied longitudinally and transversely to the jet direction for jets with transverse momentum 20 <pT<100< p_{\textrm{T}} < 100 GeV and in the pseudorapidity range 2.5<η<42.5 < \eta < 4. The data sample was collected with the LHCb experiment at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1.64 fb1^{-1}. Triple differential distributions as a function of the hadron longitudinal momentum fraction, hadron transverse momentum, and jet transverse momentum are also measured for the first time. This helps constrain transverse-momentum-dependent fragmentation functions. Differences in the shapes and magnitudes of the measured distributions for the different hadron species provide insights into the hadronization process for jets predominantly initiated by light quarks.Comment: All figures and tables, along with machine-readable versions and any supplementary material and additional information, are available at https://cern.ch/lhcbproject/Publications/p/LHCb-PAPER-2022-013.html (LHCb public pages

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

    Get PDF
    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
    corecore