La Formación Springhill (Cretácico Inferior) y su megaflora en las estancias El Salitral y El Correntoso, Patagonia, Argentina

Se estudia la megaflora hallada como improntas y compresiones en areniscas y pelitas de la Formación Springhill (Berriasiano-Valanginiano) aflorante en las localidades Estancia El Salitral y Estancia El Correntoso, Santa Cruz. La Formación Springhill, en Estancia El Salitral, está compuesta por 92 metros de areniscas de color blanco a castaño amarillentas de grano grueso a fino, con pelitas subordinadas grises a negras, carbonosas con restos vegetales. Las psamitas presentan estructuras paralelas, masivas y entrecruzamientos en artesa. En la parte superior hay 2 metros de limonitas gris verdosas con bioturbación de ambiente marino. Continúan tres bancos de areniscas finas gris verdosas, calcáreas, cada uno separado por espesores cubiertos por derrubio, los que totalizan 25 metros de espesor y se incluyen tentativamente en la Formación Río Mayer depositada en un ambiente marino. La Formación Springhill en Estancia El Correntoso tiene un espesor de 29 metros apoyándose en discordancia sobre el Complejo El Quemado. Está compuesta por areniscas gruesas a finas cuarzosas de color blanco a castaño amarillentas y pelitas grises carbonosas semejantes a las de Estancia El Salitral. En ambas localidades se identificaron Ptilophyllum valvatum Seoane, P. antarcticum Archangelksy et Baldoni, P. ghiense Baldoni, dos nuevas especies de Ptilophyllum, Cycadolepis sp., una especie nueva de Otozamites, Elatocladus sp. y pteridospermas y helechos indeterminados. Se concluye que la Formación Springhill fue depositada en un ambiente fluvial con llanuras de inundación en el cual habitaba una megaflora cuyo grupo dominante eran las Bennettitales (85%) seguidas de Coniferales (12%) con poca presencia de Pteridospermopsida (2%) y pteridophyta (1%).Sesiones libresTrabajo financiado por proyectos ANPCyT PICT433/07 y CONICET PIP679Financing by ANPCyT PICT433/07 y CONICET PIP679Financiado por ANPCyT PICT433/07 y CONICET PIP679Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Muse

Banff 2022 liver group meeting report: monitoring long term allograft health.

The Banff Working Group on Liver Allograft Pathology met in September 2022. Participantsincluded hepatologists, surgeons, pathologists, immunologists and histocompatibility specialists.Presentations and discussions focused on the evaluation of long-term allograft health, including noninvasive and tissue monitoring, immunosuppression optimisation and long-term structural changes.Potential revision of the rejection classification scheme to better accommodate and communicate lateT cell-mediated rejection patterns and related structural changes, such as nodular regenerativehyperplasia, were discussed. Improved stratification of long-term maintenance immunosuppression tomatch the heterogeneity of patient settings will be central to improving long-term patient survival.Such personalised therapeutics are in turn contingent on better understanding and monitoring ofallograft status within a rational decision-making approach, likely to be facilitated in implementationwith emerging decision support tools. Proposed revisions to rejection classification emerging fromthe meeting include incorporation of interface hepatitis and fibrosis staging. These will be opened toonline testing, modified accordingly and subject to consensus discussion leading up to the next Banffconference

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

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

PI3Kinase signaling in glioblastoma

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary tumor of the CNS in the adult. It is characterized by exponential growth and diffuse invasiveness. Among many different genetic alterations in GBM, e.g., mutations of PTEN, EGFR, p16/p19 and p53 and their impact on aberrant signaling have been thoroughly characterized. A major barrier to develop a common therapeutic strategy is founded on the fact that each tumor has its individual genetic fingerprint. Nonetheless, the PI3K pathway may represent a common therapeutic target to most GBM due to its central position in the signaling cascade affecting proliferation, apoptosis and migration. The read-out of blocking PI3K alone or in combination with other cancer pathways should mainly focus, besides the cytostatic effect, on cell death induction since sublethal damage may induce selection of more malignant clones. Targeting more than one pathway instead of a single agent approach may be more promising to kill GBM cells

Evaluation of appendicitis risk prediction models in adults with suspected appendicitis

Background Appendicitis is the most common general surgical emergency worldwide, but its diagnosis remains challenging. The aim of this study was to determine whether existing risk prediction models can reliably identify patients presenting to hospital in the UK with acute right iliac fossa (RIF) pain who are at low risk of appendicitis. Methods A systematic search was completed to identify all existing appendicitis risk prediction models. Models were validated using UK data from an international prospective cohort study that captured consecutive patients aged 16–45 years presenting to hospital with acute RIF in March to June 2017. The main outcome was best achievable model specificity (proportion of patients who did not have appendicitis correctly classified as low risk) whilst maintaining a failure rate below 5 per cent (proportion of patients identified as low risk who actually had appendicitis). Results Some 5345 patients across 154 UK hospitals were identified, of which two‐thirds (3613 of 5345, 67·6 per cent) were women. Women were more than twice as likely to undergo surgery with removal of a histologically normal appendix (272 of 964, 28·2 per cent) than men (120 of 993, 12·1 per cent) (relative risk 2·33, 95 per cent c.i. 1·92 to 2·84; P < 0·001). Of 15 validated risk prediction models, the Adult Appendicitis Score performed best (cut‐off score 8 or less, specificity 63·1 per cent, failure rate 3·7 per cent). The Appendicitis Inflammatory Response Score performed best for men (cut‐off score 2 or less, specificity 24·7 per cent, failure rate 2·4 per cent). Conclusion Women in the UK had a disproportionate risk of admission without surgical intervention and had high rates of normal appendicectomy. Risk prediction models to support shared decision‐making by identifying adults in the UK at low risk of appendicitis were identified