Anti-graffiti coatings on stones for historical buildings in Turin (NW Italy)

The application of anti-graffiti products to stones belonging to architectural heritage is a common procedure that is currently complementary to traditional graffiti removal treatments, such as chemical and mechanical cleaning. In this study, two anti-graffiti coatings (a sacrificial product and a permanent one) were tested on four stones (with a different texture, mineralogy, and surface finish) commonly found in the historical city center of Turin (Italy). In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the anti-graffiti products, the removal of two graffiti paints with different compositions was tested. The results of the cleaning procedures performed on the surfaces coated with anti-graffiti products were evaluated, considering both the graffiti remains and the alterations induced on the surface. Chemical cleaning based on the use of a low-toxic ternary solvent mixture was applied on the unprotected stones for a comparison with the results obtained on the surfaces coated with anti-graffiti products. The samples were observed under stereomicroscopy and ultraviolet fluorescence photography and all of the treated surfaces were evaluated by roughness measurements, the contact sponge method, static contact angle measurements, and scanning electron microscopy. The composition of the anti-graffiti product, the graffiti paint to be cleaned, and the remover recommended by the manufacturer proved to be key factors for the cleaning effectiveness achieved on coated surfaces. Moreover, to a lesser extent, the mineralogy, texture, and surface finish of the stone also influenced the results of the cleaning procedures. The sacrificial anti-graffiti product enhanced the cleaning effectiveness on all stones if compared to uncoated surfaces; however, the permanence of coating remains on the surface after cleaning proved to be critical. Regarding the use of the permanent anti-graffiti products, intense disparate results were achieved, depending on the graffiti paint composition.Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad | Ref. IJCI-2017-3277

Gut Microbiota Profiling of Pediatric Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Obese Patients Unveiled by an Integrated Meta-omics-Based Approach

There is evidence that non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is affected by gut microbiota. Therefore, we investigated its modifications in paediatric NAFLD patients using targeted-metagenomics (MG) and metabolomics (MB). Stools were collected from 61 consecutive patients diagnosed with NAFL, NASH, or obesity and 54 healthy subjects (CTRLs), matched in a case-control fashion. Operational taxonomic units were pyrosequenced targeting 16S ribosomal RNA and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) determined by solid-phase micro-extraction GC-MS. The α-diversity was highest in CTRLs followed by obese, NASH, NAFL patients and β-diversity distinguished between patients and CTRLs, but not NAFL and NASH. Compared to CTRLs, in NAFLD patients Actinobacteria were significantly increased and Bacteroidetes reduced. There were no significant differences amongst NAFL, NASH, and obese groups. Overall NAFLD patients had increased levels of Bradyrhizobium, Anaerococcus, Peptoniphilus, Propionibacterium acnes, Dorea, Ruminococcus and reduced proportions of Oscillospira and Rikenellaceae compared to CTRLs. After reducing MG and MB data dimensionality, multivariate analyses indicated Oscillospira decrease in NAFL and NASH groups, and Ruminococcus, Blautia, and Dorea increase in NASH patients compared to CTRLs. Of the 292 VOCs, 26 were up- and 2 down-regulated in NAFLD patients. Multivariate analyses found that combination of Oscillospira, Rickenellaceae, Parabacteroides, Bacteroides fragilis, Sutterella, Lachnospiraceae, 4-methyl-2-pentanone, 1-butanol, and 2-butanone could discriminate NAFLD patients from CTRLs. Univariate analyses found significantly lower levels of Oscillospira and higher levels of 1-pentanol and 2-butanone in NAFL compared to CTRLs. In NASH, lower levels of Oscillospira were associated with higher abundance of Dorea, Ruminococcus and higher levels of 2-butanone, 4-methyl-2-pentanone compared to CTRLs

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

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

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

non present