Feeding ecology of the transparent goby <em>Aphia minuta</em> (Pisces, Gobiidae) in the northwestern Adriatic Sea

The feeding ecology of the transparent goby Aphia minuta was examined in spring (May 2003) in the coastal waters off Comacchio, in the northwestern Adriatic Sea. Stomach content analysis indicated A. minuta to be a planktivorous species, feeding exclusively on pelagic invertebrates. The diet composition was dominated by the calanoid copepods Acartia clausi and Temora longicornis, followed in decreasing order of importance by other copepods (especially calanoids and Oncaea spp.) and larvae of decapods, polychaetes and bivalves. A. minuta exhibited a generalistic feeding strategy with a relatively broad niche width. Abundant taxa in the environment, such as A. clausi and T. longicornis, were seldom selected, whereas rare taxa, such as larvae of polychaetes and decapods, were highly selected. According to the observed ontogenetic shift in diet, small-size individuals relied preferentially on juvenile T. longicornis and Oncaea spp., whereas large-sized specimens consumed preferably A. clausi and calanoids. The positive relationship found between prey and fish size may help to mitigate the intraspecific competition for food resources

The read-across hypothesis and environmental risk assessment of pharmaceuticals

This article is made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund. Copyright © 2013 American Chemical Society.Pharmaceuticals in the environment have received increased attention over the past decade, as they are ubiquitous in rivers and waterways. Concentrations are in sub-ng to low μg/L, well below acute toxic levels, but there are uncertainties regarding the effects of chronic exposures and there is a need to prioritise which pharmaceuticals may be of concern. The read-across hypothesis stipulates that a drug will have an effect in non-target organisms only if the molecular targets such as receptors and enzymes have been conserved, resulting in a (specific) pharmacological effect only if plasma concentrations are similar to human therapeutic concentrations. If this holds true for different classes of pharmaceuticals, it should be possible to predict the potential environmental impact from information obtained during the drug development process. This paper critically reviews the evidence for read-across, and finds that few studies include plasma concentrations and mode of action based effects. Thus, despite a large number of apparently relevant papers and a general acceptance of the hypothesis, there is an absence of documented evidence. There is a need for large-scale studies to generate robust data for testing the read-across hypothesis and developing predictive models, the only feasible approach to protecting the environment.BBSRC Industrial Partnership Award BB/ I00646X/1 and BBSRC Industrial CASE Partnership Studentship BB/I53257X/1 with AstraZeneca Safety Health and Environment Research Programme

Genomewide Analyses Define Different Modes of Transcriptional Regulation by Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-β/δ (PPARβ/δ)

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are nuclear receptors with essential functions in lipid, glucose and energy homeostasis, cell differentiation, inflammation and metabolic disorders, and represent important drug targets. PPARs heterodimerize with retinoid X receptors (RXRs) and can form transcriptional activator or repressor complexes at specific DNA elements (PPREs). It is believed that the decision between repression and activation is generally governed by a ligand-mediated switch. We have performed genomewide analyses of agonist-treated and PPARβ/δ-depleted human myofibroblasts to test this hypothesis and to identify global principles of PPARβ/δ-mediated gene regulation. Chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-Seq) of PPARβ/δ, H3K4me3 and RNA polymerase II enrichment sites combined with transcriptional profiling enabled the definition of 112 bona fide PPARβ/δ target genes showing either of three distinct types of transcriptional response: (I) ligand-independent repression by PPARβ/δ; (II) ligand-induced activation and/or derepression by PPARβ/δ; and (III) ligand-independent activation by PPARβ/δ. These data identify PPRE-mediated repression as a major mechanism of transcriptional regulation by PPARβ/δ, but, unexpectedly, also show that only a subset of repressed genes are activated by a ligand-mediated switch. Our results also suggest that the type of transcriptional response by a given target gene is connected to the structure of its associated PPRE(s) and the biological function of its encoded protein. These observations have important implications for understanding the regulatory PPAR network and PPARβ/δ ligand-based drugs

Evacetrapib and Cardiovascular Outcomes in High-Risk Vascular Disease

BACKGROUND: The cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib substantially raises the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level, reduces the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level, and enhances cellular cholesterol efflux capacity. We sought to determine the effect of evacetrapib on major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high-risk vascular disease. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, we enrolled 12,092 patients who had at least one of the following conditions: an acute coronary syndrome within the previous 30 to 365 days, cerebrovascular atherosclerotic disease, peripheral vascular arterial disease, or diabetes mellitus with coronary artery disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either evacetrapib at a dose of 130 mg or matching placebo, administered daily, in addition to standard medical therapy. The primary efficacy end point was the first occurrence of any component of the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: At 3 months, a 31.1% decrease in the mean LDL cholesterol level was observed with evacetrapib versus a 6.0% increase with placebo, and a 133.2% increase in the mean HDL cholesterol level was seen with evacetrapib versus a 1.6% increase with placebo. After 1363 of the planned 1670 primary end-point events had occurred, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the trial be terminated early because of a lack of efficacy. After a median of 26 months of evacetrapib or placebo, a primary end-point event occurred in 12.9% of the patients in the evacetrapib group and in 12.8% of those in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.11; P=0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Although the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib had favorable effects on established lipid biomarkers, treatment with evacetrapib did not result in a lower rate of cardiovascular events than placebo among patients with high-risk vascular disease. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ACCELERATE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01687998 .)