Nuclear criticality project plan for the Hanford Site tank farms

The mission of this project is to provide a defensible technical basis report in support of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). This technical basis report will also be used to resolve technical issues associated with the nuclear criticality safety issue. The strategy presented in this project plan includes an integrated programmatic and organizational approach. The scope of this project plan includes the provision of a criticality technical basis supporting document (CTBSD) to support the FSAR as well as for resolution of the nuclear criticality safety issue. Specifically, the CTBSD provides the requisite technical analysis to support the FSAR hazard and accident analysis as well as for the determination of the required FSAR limits and controls. The scope of The CTBSD will provide a baseline for understanding waste partitioning and distribution phenomena and mechanistics for current operational activities inclusive of single-shell tanks, double-shell tanks, double-contained receiver tanks, and miscellaneous underground storage tanks.. Although the FSAR does not include future operational activities, the waste partitioning and distribution phenomena and mechanistics work scope identified in this project plan provide a sound technical basis as a point of departure to support independent safety analyses for future activities. The CTBSD also provides the technical basis for resolution of the technical issues associated with the nuclear criticality safety issue. In addition to the CTBSD, additional documentation will be required to fully resolve U.S. Department of Energy-Headquarters administrative and programmatic issues. The strategy and activities defined in this project plan provide a CTBSD for the FSAR and for accelerated resolution of the safety issue in FY 1996. On April 30, 1992, a plant review committee reviewed the Final Safety Analysis Reports for the single-shell, double-shell, and aging waste tanks in light of the conclusions of the inadequate waste characterization with respect to fissile material. The review indicated that the conclusion in the FSARS, that a criticality is not credible, cannot be supported for a full range of potential tank constituents. Therefore, a USQ was declared. Development of a credible scenario leading to a criticality proved to be extremely difficult, given the paucity of data on the quantity and distribution of fissile material in the tanks. The objective of this project plan is to develop a strategy and technical approach to provide a CTBSD for the FSAR and for resolution of the nuclear criticality safety issue pertaining to tank farm waste storage and transfer operations. The strategy and technical approach identified in this project plan include definition of administrative and technical tasks. Technical analyses will include mechanistic studies, historical data review, and additional limited neutronics analysis. Completion of these studies will be documented in a CTBSD to support the existing criticality technical basis. The CTBSD will be incorporated in the criticality portion of the FSAR

Long-term outcome prediction by clinicopathological risk classification algorithms in node-negative breast cancer--comparison between Adjuvant!, St Gallen, and a novel risk algorithm used in the prospective randomized Node-Negative-Breast Cancer-3 (NNBC-3) trial.

Defining risk categories in breast cancer is of considerable clinical significance. We have developed a novel risk classification algorithm and compared its prognostic utility to the Web-based tool Adjuvant! and to the St Gallen risk classification. After a median follow-up of 10 years, we retrospectively analyzed 410 consecutive node-negative breast cancer patients who had not received adjuvant systemic therapy. High risk was defined by any of the following criteria: (i) age <35 years, (ii) grade 3, (iii) human epithelial growth factor receptor-2 positivity, (iv) vascular invasion, (v) progesterone receptor negativity, (vi) grade 2 tumors >2 cm. All patients were also characterized using Adjuvant! and the St Gallen 2007 risk categories. We analyzed disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The Node-Negative-Breast Cancer-3 (NNBC-3) algorithm enlarged the low-risk group to 37% as compared with Adjuvant! (17%) and St Gallen (18%), respectively. In multivariate analysis, both Adjuvant! [P = 0.027, hazard ratio (HR) 3.81, 96% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-12.47] and the NNBC-3 risk classification (P = 0.049, HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.00-3.81) significantly predicted OS, but only the NNBC-3 algorithm retained its prognostic significance in multivariate analysis for DFS (P < 0.0005). The novel NNBC-3 risk algorithm is the only clinicopathological risk classification algorithm significantly predicting DFS as well as OS

Long-term outcome prediction by clinicopathological risk classification algorithms in node-negative breast cancer—comparison between Adjuvant!, St Gallen, and a novel risk algorithm used in the prospective randomized Node-Negative-Breast Cancer-3 (NNBC-3) trial

Background: Defining risk categories in breast cancer is of considerable clinical significance. We have developed a novel risk classification algorithm and compared its prognostic utility to the Web-based tool Adjuvant! and to the St Gallen risk classification. Patients and methods: After a median follow-up of 10 years, we retrospectively analyzed 410 consecutive node-negative breast cancer patients who had not received adjuvant systemic therapy. High risk was defined by any of the following criteria: (i) age 2 cm. All patients were also characterized using Adjuvant! and the St Gallen 2007 risk categories. We analyzed disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: The Node-Negative-Breast Cancer-3 (NNBC-3) algorithm enlarged the low-risk group to 37% as compared with Adjuvant! (17%) and St Gallen (18%), respectively. In multivariate analysis, both Adjuvant! [P = 0.027, hazard ratio (HR) 3.81, 96% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-12.47] and the NNBC-3 risk classification (P = 0.049, HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.00-3.81) significantly predicted OS, but only the NNBC-3 algorithm retained its prognostic significance in multivariate analysis for DFS (P < 0.0005). Conclusion: The novel NNBC-3 risk algorithm is the only clinicopathological risk classification algorithm significantly predicting DFS as well as O

EMF1 and PRC2 Cooperate to Repress Key Regulators of Arabidopsis Development

EMBRYONIC FLOWER1 (EMF1) is a plant-specific gene crucial to Arabidopsis vegetative development. Loss of function mutants in the EMF1 gene mimic the phenotype caused by mutations in Polycomb Group protein (PcG) genes, which encode epigenetic repressors that regulate many aspects of eukaryotic development. In Arabidopsis, Polycomb Repressor Complex 2 (PRC2), made of PcG proteins, catalyzes trimethylation of lysine 27 on histone H3 (H3K27me3) and PRC1-like proteins catalyze H2AK119 ubiquitination. Despite functional similarity to PcG proteins, EMF1 lacks sequence homology with known PcG proteins; thus, its role in the PcG mechanism is unclear. To study the EMF1 functions and its mechanism of action, we performed genome-wide mapping of EMF1 binding and H3K27me3 modification sites in Arabidopsis seedlings. The EMF1 binding pattern is similar to that of H3K27me3 modification on the chromosomal and genic level. ChIPOTLe peak finding and clustering analyses both show that the highly trimethylated genes also have high enrichment levels of EMF1 binding, termed EMF1_K27 genes. EMF1 interacts with regulatory genes, which are silenced to allow vegetative growth, and with genes specifying cell fates during growth and differentiation. H3K27me3 marks not only these genes but also some genes that are involved in endosperm development and maternal effects. Transcriptome analysis, coupled with the H3K27me3 pattern, of EMF1_K27 genes in emf1 and PRC2 mutants showed that EMF1 represses gene activities via diverse mechanisms and plays a novel role in the PcG mechanism

Antagonistic Roles of SEPALLATA3, FT and FLC Genes as Targets of the Polycomb Group Gene CURLY LEAF

In Arabidopsis, mutations in the Pc-G gene CURLY LEAF (CLF) give early flowering plants with curled leaves. This phenotype is caused by mis-expression of the floral homeotic gene AGAMOUS (AG) in leaves, so that ag mutations largely suppress the clf phenotype. Here, we identify three mutations that suppress clf despite maintaining high AG expression. We show that the suppressors correspond to mutations in FPA and FT, two genes promoting flowering, and in SEPALLATA3 (SEP3) which encodes a co-factor for AG protein. The suppression of the clf phenotype is correlated with low SEP3 expression in all case and reveals that SEP3 has a role in promoting flowering in addition to its role in controlling floral organ identity. Genetic analysis of clf ft mutants indicates that CLF promotes flowering by reducing expression of FLC, a repressor of flowering. We conclude that SEP3 is the key target mediating the clf phenotype, and that the antagonistic effects of CLF target genes masks a role for CLF in promoting flowering

Control of Flowering and Cell Fate by LIF2, an RNA Binding Partner of the Polycomb Complex Component LHP1

Polycomb Repressive Complexes (PRC) modulate the epigenetic status of key cell fate and developmental regulators in eukaryotes. The chromo domain protein LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN1 (LHP1) is a subunit of a plant PRC1-like complex in Arabidopsis thaliana and recognizes histone H3 lysine 27 trimethylation, a silencing epigenetic mark deposited by the PRC2 complex. We have identified and studied an LHP1-Interacting Factor2 (LIF2). LIF2 protein has RNA recognition motifs and belongs to the large hnRNP protein family, which is involved in RNA processing. LIF2 interacts in vivo, in the cell nucleus, with the LHP1 chromo shadow domain. Expression of LIF2 was detected predominantly in vascular and meristematic tissues. Loss-of-function of LIF2 modifies flowering time, floral developmental homeostasis and gynoecium growth determination. lif2 ovaries have indeterminate growth and produce ectopic inflorescences with severely affected flowers showing proliferation of ectopic stigmatic papillae and ovules in short-day conditions. To look at how LIF2 acts relative to LHP1, we conducted transcriptome analyses in lif2 and lhp1 and identified a common set of deregulated genes, which showed significant enrichment in stress-response genes. By comparing expression of LHP1 targets in lif2, lhp1 and lif2 lhp1 mutants we showed that LIF2 can either antagonize or act with LHP1. Interestingly, repression of the FLC floral transcriptional regulator in lif2 mutant is accompanied by an increase in H3K27 trimethylation at the locus, without any change in LHP1 binding, suggesting that LHP1 is targeted independently from LIF2 and that LHP1 binding does not strictly correlate with gene expression. LIF2, involved in cell identity and cell fate decision, may modulate the activity of LHP1 at specific loci, during specific developmental windows or in response to environmental cues that control cell fate determination. These results highlight a novel link between plant RNA processing and Polycomb regulation

Kicking against the PRCs - a domesticated transposase antagonises silencing mediated by polycomb group proteins and is an accessory component of polycomb repressive complex 2

The Polycomb group (PcG) and trithorax group (trxG) genes play crucial roles in development by regulating expression of homeotic and other genes controlling cell fate. Both groups catalyse modifications of chromatin, particularly histone methylation, leading to epigenetic changes that affect gene activity. The trxG antagonizes the function of PcG genes by activating PcG target genes, and consequently trxG mutants suppress PcG mutant phenotypes. We previously identified the ANTAGONIST OF LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN1 (ALP1) gene as a genetic suppressor of mutants in the Arabidopsis PcG gene LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN1 (LHP1). Here, we show that ALP1 interacts genetically with several other PcG and trxG components and that it antagonizes PcG silencing. Transcriptional profiling reveals that when PcG activity is compromised numerous target genes are hyper-activated in seedlings and that in most cases this requires ALP1. Furthermore, when PcG activity is present ALP1 is needed for full activation of several floral homeotic genes that are repressed by the PcG. Strikingly, ALP1 does not encode a known chromatin protein but rather a protein related to PIF/Harbinger class transposases. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that ALP1 is broadly conserved in land plants and likely lost transposase activity and acquired a novel function during angiosperm evolution. Consistent with this, immunoprecipitation and mass spectrometry (IP-MS) show that ALP1 associates, in vivo, with core components of POLYCOMB REPRESSIVE COMPLEX 2 (PRC2), a widely conserved PcG protein complex which functions as a H3K27me3 histone methyltransferase. Furthermore, in reciprocal pulldowns using the histone methyltransferase CURLY LEAF (CLF), we identify not only ALP1 and the core PRC2 components but also plant-specific accessory components including EMBRYONIC FLOWER 1 (EMF1), a transcriptional repressor previously associated with PRC1-like complexes. Taken together our data suggest that ALP1 inhibits PcG silencing by blocking the interaction of the core PRC2 with accessory components that promote its HMTase activity or its role in inhibiting transcription. ALP1 is the first example of a domesticated transposase acquiring a novel function as a PcG component. The antagonistic interaction of a modified transposase with the PcG machinery is novel and may have arisen as a means for the cognate transposon to evade host surveillance or for the host to exploit features of the transposition machinery beneficial for epigenetic regulation of gene activity.Fil: Liang, Shih Chieh. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Hartwig, Ben. Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research; AlemaniaFil: Perera, Pumi. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Mora Garcia, Santiago. Fundación Instituto Leloir; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Instituto de Investigaciones Bioquimicas de Buenos Aires; ArgentinaFil: de Leau, Erica. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Thornton, Harry. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Lima de Alves, Flavia. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Rapsilber, Juri. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Yang, Suxin. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: James, Geo Velikkakam. Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research; AlemaniaFil: Schneeberger, Korbinian. Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research; AlemaniaFil: Finnegan, E. Jean. University of Edinburgh; Reino UnidoFil: Turck, Franziska. Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research; AlemaniaFil: Goodrich, Justin. Mc Gill University; Canad