T1DBase: update 2011, organization and presentation of large-scale data sets for type 1 diabetes research

T1DBase (http://www.t1dbase.org) is web platform, which supports the type 1 diabetes (T1D) community. It integrates genetic, genomic and expression data relevant to T1D research across mouse, rat and human and presents this to the user as a set of web pages and tools. This update describes the incorporation of new data sets, tools and curation efforts as well as a new website design to simplify site use. New data sets include curated summary data from four genome-wide association studies relevant to T1D, HaemAtlas—a data set and tool to query gene expression levels in haematopoietic cells and a manually curated table of human T1D susceptibility loci, incorporating genetic overlap with other related diseases. These developments will continue to support T1D research and allow easy access to large and complex T1D relevant data sets

T1DBase: integration and presentation of complex data for type 1 diabetes research

T1DBase () [Smink et al. (2005) Nucleic Acids Res., 33, D544–D549; Burren et al. (2004) Hum. Genomics, 1, 98–109] is a public website and database that supports the type 1 diabetes (T1D) research community. T1DBase provides a consolidated T1D-oriented view of the complex data world that now confronts medical researchers and enables scientists to navigate from information they know to information that is new to them. Overview pages for genes and markers summarize information for these elements. The Gene Dossier summarizes information for a list of genes. GBrowse [Stein et al. (2002) Genome Res., 10, 1599–1610] displays genes and other features in their genomic context, and Cytoscape [Shannon et al. (2003) Genome Res., 13, 2498–2504] shows genes in the context of interacting proteins and genes. The Beta Cell Gene Atlas shows gene expression in β cells, islets, and related cell types and lines, and the Tissue Expression Viewer shows expression across other tissues. The Microarray Viewer shows expression from more than 20 array experiments. The Beta Cell Gene Expression Bank contains manually curated gene and pathway annotations for genes expressed in β cells. T1DMart is a query tool for markers and genotypes. PosterPages are ‘home pages’ about specific topics or datasets. The key challenge, now and in the future, is to provide powerful informatics capabilities to T1D scientists in a form they can use to enhance their research

Size characterization of airborne SiO2 nanoparticles with on-line and off-line measurement techniques: an interlaboratory comparison study

Results of an interlaboratory comparison on size characterization of SiO2 airborne nanoparticles using on-line and off-line measurement techniques are discussed. This study was performed in the framework of Technical Working Area (TWA) 34\u2014\u2018\u2018Properties of Nanoparticle Populations\u2019\u2019 of the Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards (VAMAS) in the project no. 3 \u2018\u2018Techniques for characterizing size distribution of airborne nanoparticles\u2019\u2019. Two types of nano-aerosols, consisting of (1) one population of nanoparticles with a mean diameter between 30.3 and 39.0 nm and (2) two populations of non-agglomerated nanoparticles with mean diameters between, respectively, 36.2\u201346.6 nm and 80.2\u201389.8 nm, were generated for characterization measurements. Scanning mobility particle size spectrometers (SMPS) were used for on-line measurements of size distributions of the produced nano-aerosols. Transmission electron microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and atomic force microscopy were used as off-line measurement techniques for nanoparticles characterization. Samples were deposited on appropriate supports such as grids, filters, andmica plates by electrostatic precipitation and a filtration technique using SMPS controlled generation upstream. The results of the main size distribution parameters (mean and mode diameters), obtained from several laboratories, were compared based on metrological approaches including metrological traceability, calibration, and evaluation of the measurement uncertainty. Internationally harmonized measurement procedures for airborne SiO2 nanoparticles characterization are proposed

Nanoparticle Characterization - Supplementary Comparison on Nanoparticle Size

Nanoparticles with size in the range from 10 nm to 300 nm and from three different materials (Au 10 nm, Ag 20 nm, and PSL 30 nm, 100 nm and 300 nm) were used in this supplementary comparison. The selected nanoparticles meet the requirements of different measurement methods such as Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM), Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM), Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS), and Differential Mobility Analyzer (DMA), Small Angle X-Ray Scattering and for forth.All 37 participating laboratories returned results, but not all laboratories were able to perform measurement of all 5 nanoparticles.In order to determine the degree of equivalence (DOE), two reference values were considered in this comparison: the method dependent reference value (MRV) and the global reference value (GRV). The MRVs were determined for different measurement methods according to the corresponding reported uncertainties and measurement values from the participants. Each measurement method owns its own MRV. Since the measurement data from DLS were very different from and inconsistent with the measurement data from the other methods, the MRV for DLS was used in the En number calculation for the measurement data reported from the DLS method. The GRV was determined from the MRVs and their uncertainties of all the measurement methods except DLS, and was applied in the En number calculations for the measurement data reported from AFM, EM, DMA and SAXS methods.The assumption that the particles are spherical was commonly made in the nanoparticle measurements. Non-sphericity of particles, if exists, could have different impacts on different measurement methods. It is also important to note that the methods used are measuring mean diameters of a population of particles, not just a single particle, and that the meaning of the mean diameter could differ for different methods. Probably if participants include a different specific contribution in the uncertainty in a harmonized way, taking the non-cancelled method-dependent "systematic" errors into account, it may be easier to compare the results