The GATA1s isoform is normally down-regulated during terminal haematopoietic differentiation and over-expression leads to failure to repress MYB, CCND2 and SKI during erythroid differentiation of K562 cells

Background: Although GATA1 is one of the most extensively studied haematopoietic transcription factors little is currently known about the physiological functions of its naturally occurring isoforms GATA1s and GATA1FL in humans—particularly whether the isoforms have distinct roles in different lineages and whether they have non-redundant roles in haematopoietic differentiation. As well as being of general interest to understanding of haematopoiesis, GATA1 isoform biology is important for children with Down syndrome associated acute megakaryoblastic leukaemia (DS-AMKL) where GATA1FL mutations are an essential driver for disease pathogenesis. <p/>Methods: Human primary cells and cell lines were analyzed using GATA1 isoform specific PCR. K562 cells expressing GATA1s or GATA1FL transgenes were used to model the effects of the two isoforms on in vitro haematopoietic differentiation. <p/>Results: We found no evidence for lineage specific use of GATA1 isoforms; however GATA1s transcripts, but not GATA1FL transcripts, are down-regulated during in vitro induction of terminal megakaryocytic and erythroid differentiation in the cell line K562. In addition, transgenic K562-GATA1s and K562-GATA1FL cells have distinct gene expression profiles both in steady state and during terminal erythroid differentiation, with GATA1s expression characterised by lack of repression of MYB, CCND2 and SKI. <p/>Conclusions: These findings support the theory that the GATA1s isoform plays a role in the maintenance of proliferative multipotent megakaryocyte-erythroid precursor cells and must be down-regulated prior to terminal differentiation. In addition our data suggest that SKI may be a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of children with DS-AMKL

Cross-language differences in fundamental frequency range: a comparison of English and German

This paper presents a systematic comparison of various measures of f0 range in female speakers of English and German. F0 range was analysed along two dimensions, level (i.e. overall f0 height) and span (extent of f0 modulation within a given speech sample). These were examined using two types of measures, one based on 'long-term distributional' (LTD) methods, and the other based on specific landmarks in speech that are linguistic in nature ('linguistic' measures). The various methods were used to identify whether and on what basis or bases speakers of these two languages differ in f0 range. Findings yielded significant cross-language differences in both dimensions of f0 range, but effect sizes were found to be larger for span than for level, and for linguistic than for LTD measures. The linguistic measures also uncovered some differences between the two languages in how f0 range varies through an intonation contour. This helps shed light on the relation between intonational structure and f0 range.caslAltenberg, E. P., and Ferrand, C. T. (2006). Fundamental frequency in monolingual English, bilingual English=Russian, and bilingual English- Cantonese young adult women,- J. Voice 20(1), 89-96. Awan, S. N., and Mueller, P. B. (1996). Speaking fundamental frequency characteristics of white, African American, and Hispanic kindergartners,- J. Speech. Hear. Res. 39(3), 573-577. Baken, R. J., and Orlikoff, R. F. (2000). Clinical Measurement of Speech and Voice, 2nd ed. (Singular Publishing Group, San Diego, CA). Banse, R., and Scherer, K. R. (1996). Acoustic profiles in vocal emotion expression,- J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 70(3), 614-636. Beckman, M., and Ayers Elam, G. (1997). Guidelines for ToBI Labeling, version 3 (Ohio State University, Ohio). Benjamini, Y., and Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate-a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing,- J. R. Statist. Soc. B 57(1), 289-300. Boersma, P., and Weenink, D. (2007). Praat: Doing phonetics by computer (version 4.6) [computer program],- http:==www.praat.org= (Last viewed May 14, 2007). Breen, M., Dilley, L. C., Kraemer, J., and Gibson, E. (2012). Inter-transcriber agreement for two systems of prosodic annotation: ToBI (Tones and Break Indices) and RaP (Rhythm and Pitch),- Corpus Linguist. Linguist. Theory (in press). Brown, A., and Docherty, G. J. (1995). Phonetic variation in dysarthric speech as a function of sampling task,- Eur. J. Disord. Commun. 30(1), 17-35. Chen, S. H. (2005). The effects of tones on speaking frequency and intensity ranges in Mandarin and Min dialects,- J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 117(5), 3225-3230. Clark-Carter, D. (1997). Doing Quantitative Psychological Research: From Design to Report (Psychology Press, Hove, East Sussex). Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient for agreement for nominal scales,- Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20, 37-46. Deutsch, D., Le, J., Shen, J., and Henthorn, T. (2009). The pitch levels of female speech in two Chinese villages,- J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 125(5), EL208-EL213. Diehl, J. J., Watson, D., Bennetto, L., Mcdonough, J., and Gunlogson, C. (2009). An acoustic analysis of prosody in high-functioning autism,- Appl. Psycholinguist. 30(3), 385-404. Dilley, L. C., and Brown, M. (2007). Effects of pitch range variation on f0 extrema in an imitation task,- J. Phonetics 35(4), 523-551. Dolson, M. (1994). The pitch of speech as a function of linguistic community,- Music. Percept. 11(3), 321-331. Eady, S. J. (1982). Differences in the F0 patterns of speech: Tone language versus stress language,- Lang. Speech 25, 29-42. Eckert, H., and Laver, J. (1994). Menschen und ihre Stimmen: Aspekte der vokalen Kommunikation (Humans and their Voices: Aspects of Vocal Communication) (Psychologie Verlags Union, Weinheim). Escudero, D., Aguilar, L., Vanrell, M. M., and Prieto, P. (2012). Analysis of inter-transcriber consistency in the Cat_ToBI prosodic labelling system,- Speech Communications, retrieved from http:==prosodia.upf. edu=home=arxiu=publicacions=escudero-et-al_analysis-intertranscriberconsistency- cattobi.pdf (Last viewed December 21, 2011). Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics using SPSS, 2nd ed. (SAGE Publications, London). Gibbon, D. (1998). German Intonation,- in Intonation Systems: A Survey of Twenty Languages, edited by D. J. Hirst and A. Di Christo (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 78-95. Grabe, E. (1998). Comparative intonational phonology: English and German,- Ph.D. thesis, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics Nijmegen, Max Planck Institute Series in Psycholinguistics No. 7, Wageningen, Ponsen en Looien. Gussenhoven, C., Repp, B. H., Rietveld, A., Rump, H. H., and Terken, J. (1997). The perceptual prominence of fundamental frequency peaks,- J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102(5), 3009-3022. Hanley, T. D., Snidecor, J. C., and Ringel, R. L. (1967). Some acoustic differences among languages,- Phonetica 14, 97-107. Hirschberg, J., and Ward, G. (1992). The influence of pitch range, duration, amplitude, and spectral features on the interpretation of the rise fall rise intonation contour in English,- J. Phonetics 20(2), 241-251. Hollien, H., Hollien, P. A., and de Jong, G. (1997). Effects of three parameters on speaking fundamental frequency,- J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 102(5), 2984-2992. Hubbard, K., and Trauner, D. A. (2007). Intonation and emotion in autistic spectrum disorders,- J. Psycholinguist. Res. 36(2), 159-173. Keating, P., and Kuo, G. (2010). Comparison of speaking fundamental frequency in English and Mandarin,- UCLA Work. Papers Phonetics 108, 164-187. Kreiman, J., and Van Lancker Sidtis, D. (2011). Foundations of Voice Studies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Voice Production and Perception (John Wiley and Sons, Chichester). Ladd, D. R. (2008). Intonational Phonology, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge). Ladd, D. R., Silverman, K. E. A., Tolkmitt, F., Bergmann, G., and Scherer, K. R. (1985). Evidence for the independent function of intonation contour type, voice quality, and F0 range in signaling speaker affect,- J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 78(2), 435-444. Landis, J., and Koch, G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data,- Biometrics 33(1), 159-174. Liberman, M., and Pierrehumbert, J. (1984). Intonational invariance under changes in pitch range and length,- in Language Sound Structure, edited by M. Aronoff, R. Oehrle, F. Kelley, and B. W. Stephens (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 157-233. Majewski, W., Hollien, H., and Zalewski, J. (1972). Speaking fundamental frequency of Polish adult males,- Phonetica 25(2), 119-125. Mangold, M., and Grebe, P. (2005). Duden Ausspracheworterbuch (Duden Pronunciation Dictionary), 6th ed. (Dudenverlag, Mannheim). Nishio, M., and Niimi, S. (2008). Changes in speaking fundamental frequency characteristics with aging,- Folia Phoniatr. Logo. 60(3), 120-127. NIST=SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods, (2010). http:==www.itl.nist.gov=div898=handbook= (Last viewed October 26, 2010). Patterson, D. (2000). A linguistic approach to pitch range modelling,- Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh. Pierrehumbert, J. (1979). Perception of fundamental-frequency declination,- J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 66(2), 363-369. Pierrehumbert, J. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation,- Ph.D. thesis, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Rendall, D., Vokey, J. R., and Nemeth, C. (2007). Lifting the curtain on the Wizard of Oz: Biased voice-based impressions of speaker size,- J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 33(5), 1208-1219. Sobin, C., and Alpert, M. (1999). Emotion in speech: The acoustic attributes of fear, anger, sadness, and joy,- J. Psycholinguist. Res. 28(4), 347-365. Terken, J. (1994). Fundamental-frequency and perceived prominence of accented syllables II: Nonfinal accents,- J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 95(6), 3662-3665. 't Hart, J., Collier, R., and Cohen, A. (1990). A Perceptual Study of Intonation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge). Van Bezooijen, R. (1995). Sociocultural aspects of pitch differences between Japanese and Dutch women,- Lang. Speech 38, 253-265. Van Dommelen, W. A., and Moxness, B. H. (1995). Acoustic parameters in speaker height and weight identification: Sex-specific behaviour,- Lang. Speech 38, 267-287. Wells, J. C. (1982). Accents of English (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), Vols. 1-3. Yoon, T., Chavarria, S., Cole, J., and Hasegawa, M. (2004). Intertranscriber reliability of prosodic labeling on telephone conversation using ToBI,- Proc. Interspeech 2004, 2729-2732.131pub2622pub

Patients with Crohn's disease have longer post-operative in-hospital stay than patients with colon cancer but no difference in complications' rate

BACKGROUNDRight hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection are used to treat benign conditions like Crohn's disease (CD) and malignant ones like colon cancer (CC).AIMTo investigate differences in pre- and peri-operative factors and their impact on post-operative outcome in patients with CC and CD.METHODSThis is a sub-group analysis of the European Society of Coloproctology's prospective, multi-centre snapshot audit. Adult patients with CC and CD undergoing right hemicolectomy or ileocecal resection were included. Primary outcome measure was 30-d post-operative complications. Secondary outcome measures were post-operative length of stay (LOS) at and readmission.RESULTSThree hundred and seventy-five patients with CD and 2,515 patients with CC were included. Patients with CD were younger (median = 37 years for CD and 71 years for CC (P < 0.01), had lower American Society of Anesthesiology score (ASA) grade (P < 0.01) and less comorbidity (P < 0.01), but were more likely to be current smokers (P < 0.01). Patients with CD were more frequently operated on by colorectal surgeons (P < 0.01) and frequently underwent ileocecal resection (P < 0.01) with higher rate of de-functioning/primary stoma construction (P < 0.01). Thirty-day post-operative mortality occurred exclusively in the CC group (66/2515, 2.3%). In multivariate analyses, the risk of post-operative complications was similar in the two groups (OR 0.80, 95%CI: 0.54-1.17; P = 0.25). Patients with CD had a significantly longer LOS (Geometric mean 0.87, 95%CI: 0.79-0.95; P < 0.01). There was no difference in re-admission rates. The audit did not collect data on post-operative enhanced recovery protocols that are implemented in the different participating centers.CONCLUSIONPatients with CD were younger, with lower ASA grade, less comorbidity, operated on by experienced surgeons and underwent less radical resection but had a longer LOS than patients with CC although complication's rate was not different between the two groups

Retrotransposons Are the Major Contributors to the Expansion of the Drosophila ananassae Muller F Element

The discordance between genome size and the complexity of eukaryotes can partly be attributed to differences in repeat density. The Muller F element (∼5.2 Mb) is the smallest chromosome in Drosophila melanogaster, but it is substantially larger (>18.7 Mb) in D. ananassae. To identify the major contributors to the expansion of the F element and to assess their impact, we improved the genome sequence and annotated the genes in a 1.4-Mb region of the D. ananassae F element, and a 1.7-Mb region from the D element for comparison. We find that transposons (particularly LTR and LINE retrotransposons) are major contributors to this expansion (78.6%), while Wolbachia sequences integrated into the D. ananassae genome are minor contributors (0.02%). Both D. melanogaster and D. ananassae F-element genes exhibit distinct characteristics compared to D-element genes (e.g., larger coding spans, larger introns, more coding exons, and lower codon bias), but these differences are exaggerated in D. ananassae. Compared to D. melanogaster, the codon bias observed in D. ananassae F-element genes can primarily be attributed to mutational biases instead of selection. The 5′ ends of F-element genes in both species are enriched in dimethylation of lysine 4 on histone 3 (H3K4me2), while the coding spans are enriched in H3K9me2. Despite differences in repeat density and gene characteristics, D. ananassae F-element genes show a similar range of expression levels compared to genes in euchromatic domains. This study improves our understanding of how transposons can affect genome size and how genes can function within highly repetitive domains

The impact of stapling technique and surgeon specialism on anastomotic failure after right?sided colorectal resection: an international multicentre, prospective audit

Aim There is little evidence to support choice of technique and configuration for stapled anastomoses after right hemicolectomy and ileocaecal resection. This study aimed to determine the relationship between stapling technique and anastomotic failure. Method Any unit performing gastrointestinal surgery was invited to contribute data on consecutive adult patients undergoing right hemicolectomy or ileocolic resection to this prospective, observational, international, multicentre study. Patients undergoing stapled, side?to?side ileocolic anastomoses were identified and multilevel, multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to explore factors associated with anastomotic leak. Results One thousand three hundred and forty?seven patients were included from 200 centres in 32 countries. The overall anastomotic leak rate was 8.3%. Upon multivariate analysis there was no difference in leak rate with use of a cutting stapler for apical closure compared with a noncutting stapler (8.4% vs 8.0%, OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.54–1.53, P = 0.72). Oversewing of the apical staple line, whether in the cutting group (7.9% vs 9.7%, OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.52–1.46, P = 0.60) or noncutting group (8.9% vs 5.7%, OR 1.40, 95% CI 0.46–4.23, P = 0.55) also conferred no benefit in terms of reducing leak rates. Surgeons reporting to be general surgeons had a significantly higher leak rate than those reporting to be colorectal surgeons (12.1% vs 7.3%, OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.04–2.64, P = 0.04). Conclusion This study did not identify any difference in anastomotic leak rates according to the type of stapling device used to close the apical aspect. In addition, oversewing of the anastomotic staple lines appears to confer no benefit in terms of reducing leak rates. Although general surgeons operated on patients with more high?risk characteristics than colorectal surgeons, a higher leak rate for general surgeons which remained after risk adjustment needs further exploration