The gene order on Human Chromosome 15 and Chicken Chromosome 10 reveal multiple inter- and intrachromosomal rearrangements

Comparative mapping between the human and chicken genomes has revealed a striking conservation of synteny between the genomes of these two species, but the results have been based on low-resolution comparative maps. To address this conserved synteny in much more detail, a high-resolution human-chicken comparative map was constructed from human chromosome 15. Mapping, sequencing, and ordering of specific chicken bacterial artificial chromosomes has improved the comparative map of chromosome 15 (Hsa15) and the homologous regions in chicken with almost 100 new genes and/or expressed sequence tags. A comparison of Hsa15 with chicken identified seven conserved chromosomal segments between the two species. In chicken, these were on chromosome 1 (Gga1; two segments), Gga5 (two segments), and Gga10 (three segments). Although four conserved segments were also observed between Hsa15 and mouse, only one of the underlying rearrangement breakpoints was located at the same position as in chicken, indicating that the rearrangements generating the other three breakpoints occurred after the divergence of the rodent and the primate lineages. A high-resolution comparison of Gga10 with Hsa15 identified 19 conserved blocks, indicating the presence of at least 16 intrachromosomal rearrangement breakpoints in the bird lineage after the separation of birds and mammals. These results improve our knowledge of the evolution and dynamics of the vertebrate genomes and will aid in the clarification of the mechanisms that underlie the differentiation between the vertebrate species

The legitimacy of Orders of St. John : a historical and legal analysis and case study of a para-religious phenomenon

Chapter I (Introduction) starts with an orientation on problems caused by the co-existence of a confusing number of Orders of St. John, all basing their lineage on the original Order, formed around 1050, which would never have ended. The much energy consuming issue of recognised versus false Orders of St. John seems mainly caused because Alliance Orders donot allow other organisations of St. John to connect on equal footing to the charitable conceptof St. John, as developed since the late 19th century, harking back to the romanticised idealistic starting phase in the 11th century, when Amalfi merchants founded the originalOrder of St. John. The issues appear to be not purely academic, because in various countrieslaw suits were and are being conducted about them. Chapter I then goes into the subject of the study more closely, i.e. how to determine whenan Order of St. John has a legitimate character. In this context, a number of observations isnecessarily devoted to the important, but difficult subject of legitimacy. Hereafter, a number of questions of an historical-legal nature are formulated and a status quaestionis is provided. The issues appear to have been studied more or less by various authors, but not always systematically, while also more than once polemic treatment seems to occur. For these reasons, but also and mainly out of pure scientific curiosity, the authordeemed it necessary to prepare this study. It is hoped it will be regarded as an objectivecontribution and a responsible attempt to a more scientific debate, as well as a helping hand to those who, in whatsoever capacity, might be called upon to determine the legitimacy of anOrder of St. John. The method used is historical/critical-legal, as well as inductive, in which context an Order, qualified by many as an important false Order of St. John, was selected as departure point. Chapters II (A critical look at the historical developments) through VIII (Sixth phase (1940-2004): several Orders disputing each other’s legitimacy; the creation of The International Alliance of Orders Of St. John), contain a critical historical/legal analysis of developments inthe history of the original Order, respectively of the phenomenon of Orders of St. John,deemed of importance for this study. This history is subdivided into six more or less traditional phases. In this context, connected to the above indicated historical developments in each phase, various remarks are made and knowledge and insight are gained, which are ofimportance for the later responding to the research questions put in Chapter I. Chapter IX (Chivalric definitions) discusses some definitions of a chivalric Order which weredeveloped in the literature. Attention is also drawn to some international developments inthis context. Also some case-law and legislation is discussed. Chapter X (The organisation of the original Order) sketches the main lines of theorganisation of the original Order, i.e. the Order of St. John founded around 1050 and whichin the author’s view at any rate ended in the late 18th century. In Chapters XI (Discussion of some important contemporary Orders of St. John) throughXV (The Sovereign Military Order of Malta), a number of leading contemporary Orders of St. 2 John, i.e. the most important Alliance Orders and their statutes and by-laws, are discussed in the light of the previous chapters and the knowledge and insights gained there. In Chapter XVI (The legal nature and organisation of The Ecumenical Order), the legalnature and organisation of the above indicated socalled false specimen-Order of St. John and its statutes and by-laws, are discussed. In Chapter XVII (The specificity of an Order of St. John), the specificity (the own nature ofan Order of St. John), is discussed, also in the light of a comparison of Orders of St. John with some important service organisations, such as Rotary and Lions and with the important spiritual movement of Freemasonry. Chapter XVIII (Some competition law aspects) contains some remarks about variouscompetition law aspects, connected to actions in the framework of the phenomenon Ordersof St. John and also summarily discusses some case law. On the basis of the foregoing, Chapter XIX (Development of legitimacy criteria andresponding to questions), discusses a number of criteria put forward in the literature and onthat basis, three categories of legitimacy criteria are found, with which one might try todetermine the legitimacy of recognised as well as false Orders of St. John. In Chapter XX (Conclusions), the questions raised are answered as much as possible and anumber of specific and supplemental general conclusions from the research, are laid down.The outcome of the research appears to be of interest, not only to the specimen Orderselected, but also to other Orders of St. John and also otherwise. Sofar, the meaning of the notion ‘legitimacy’ with regard to the ‘historical self-image’ of the various Orders of St. John, was never really systematically charted. This led to a bigconfusion of tongues. By legal-historical analysis and by using The Ecumenical Order as a case study, tools are provided to enable critical testing of the criteria applied by various Orders of St. John with regard to their legitimacy claims and to pierce possible myth building. Through this, the author hopes to have developed an instrument which may be ofuse to researchers and others to better determine the legal-historical aspects and legitimacy claims of these para-religious ‘chivalric Orders’ and similar associations, such as Freemasonry, so that testing, inter alia to operative law in The Netherlands and elsewhere, is better enabled. At any rate it is useful to clearly state the author wanted to deal primarily with the legal aspects of this much more encompassing 19th and 20th century cultural phenomenon.​​​​​​​Religious Studie

Lifting capacity is associated with central sensitization and non-organic signs in patients with chronic back pain

Purpose: To analyze the associations between lifting capacity, and central sensitization (CS) and non-organic signs (NOS) in patients with chronic back pain (CBP) attending vocational rehabilitation. Materials and methods: Cross-sectional observational multicenter study among patients with CBP undergoing a return to work assessment within care as usual. Main analyses: step 1: partial correlation between lifting capacity, and CS, NOS, and additional variables; step 2: multiple regression in stepwise forward method for dependent variable lifting capacity, and for independent variables CS and NOS, and additional variables significant (p < 0.05) at step 1. All analyses were controlled for sex. Results: Fifty-six patients of mean age 42.5 years and 59% women participated in the study. Correlations between lifting capacity and CS and NOS were r = –0.53 and r = –0.50, respectively. CS and NOS, as well as age and sex, contributed significantly to the final regression model, which explained 57.6% of variance. Conclusions: After controlling for confounders, CS and NOS were negatively associated with lifting capacity in patients with CBP. Explained variance was substantially higher than previously reported studies.Implications for Rehabilitation The identification of central sensitization and non-organic signs (NOS) in patients with chronic back pain can alert clinicians about central nervous system being in a hypersensitive state and about pain behavior. Central sensitization and NOS are relevant determinants of lifting capacity. Better understanding of the factors affecting lifting capacity lead to better design and tailoring of interventions, resulting in optimized vocational rehabilitation programs and faster return to work

A pilot study in the association between Waddell Non-organic Signs and Central Sensitization

Study design: A cross-sectional observational multicenter pilot-study was performed within care as usual in three rehabilitation centers in the Netherlands. Objective: To explore the relationship between Waddell Non-organic Signs (NOS) and Central Sensitization (CS) in patients with chronic back pain. Summary of background data: A possible relationship between NOS and CS is theoretically plausible, but it has never been tested. Methods: A cross-sectional observational multicenter pilot-study was performed in three rehabilitation centers in the Netherlands. Patients with chronic back pain were included. Main measures were Waddell's NOS, a battery of eight clinical tests performed during a physical examination, and Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), a questionnaire measuring symptoms originating from CS. Analyses included Spearman correlation and univariate multiple regression analysis with NOS as dependent variable, CSI as independent, and controlled for confounders (psychosocial variables). Results: Data of n = 56 patients (59% female, mean age 42.6 years) were obtained. Correlation between NOS and CSI was rs = 0.34 (p = 0.01). After controlling for confounders, CSI did not independently predict NOS. Conclusion: In this pilot study, CS was moderately related to NOS, but CS did not independently contribute to NOS after controlling for confounders. The results suggest that NOS may not exclusively be non-organic tests, although questions remain. The results of this pilot study can help to develop larger studies to allow replication and more detailed analyses