Microarray-Based Transcriptomic Analysis of Differences between Long-Term Gregarious and Solitarious Desert Locusts

Desert locusts (Schistocerca gregaria) show an extreme form of phenotypic plasticity and can transform between a cryptic solitarious phase and a swarming gregarious phase. The two phases differ extensively in behavior, morphology and physiology but very little is known about the molecular basis of these differences. We used our recently generated Expressed Sequence Tag (EST) database derived from S. gregaria central nervous system (CNS) to design oligonucleotide microarrays and compare the expression of thousands of genes in the CNS of long-term gregarious and solitarious adult desert locusts. This identified 214 differentially expressed genes, of which 40% have been annotated to date. These include genes encoding proteins that are associated with CNS development and modeling, sensory perception, stress response and resistance, and fundamental cellular processes. Our microarray analysis has identified genes whose altered expression may enable locusts of either phase to deal with the different challenges they face. Genes for heat shock proteins and proteins which confer protection from infection were upregulated in gregarious locusts, which may allow them to respond to acute physiological challenges. By contrast the longer-lived solitarious locusts appear to be more strongly protected from the slowly accumulating effects of ageing by an upregulation of genes related to anti-oxidant systems, detoxification and anabolic renewal. Gregarious locusts also had a greater abundance of transcripts for proteins involved in sensory processing and in nervous system development and plasticity. Gregarious locusts live in a more complex sensory environment than solitarious locusts and may require a greater turnover of proteins involved in sensory transduction, and possibly greater neuronal plasticity

A randomized trial to assess the impact of opinion leader endorsed evidence summaries on the use of secondary prevention strategies in patients with coronary artery disease: the ESP-CAD trial protocol [NCT00175240]

BACKGROUND: Although numerous therapies have been shown to be beneficial in the prevention of myocardial infarction and/or death in patients with coronary disease, these therapies are under-used and this gap contributes to sub-optimal patient outcomes. To increase the uptake of proven efficacious therapies in patients with coronary disease, we designed a multifaceted quality improvement intervention employing patient-specific reminders delivered at the point-of-care, with one-page treatment guidelines endorsed by local opinion leaders ("Local Opinion Leader Statement"). This trial is designed to evaluate the impact of these Local Opinion Leader Statements on the practices of primary care physicians caring for patients with coronary disease. In order to isolate the effects of the messenger (the local opinion leader) from the message, we will also test an identical quality improvement intervention that is not signed by a local opinion leader ("Unsigned Evidence Statement") in this trial. METHODS: Randomized trial testing three different interventions in patients with coronary disease: (1) usual care versus (2) Local Opinion Leader Statement versus (3) Unsigned Evidence Statement. Patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease after cardiac catheterization (but without acute coronary syndromes) will be randomly allocated to one of the three interventions by cluster randomization (at the level of their primary care physician), if they are not on optimal statin therapy at baseline. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients demonstrating improvement in their statin management in the first six months post-catheterization. Secondary outcomes include examinations of the use of ACE inhibitors, anti-platelet agents, beta-blockers, non-statin lipid lowering drugs, and provision of smoking cessation advice in the first six months post-catheterization in the three treatment arms. Although randomization will be clustered at the level of the primary care physician, the design effect is anticipated to be negligible and the unit of analysis will be the patient. DISCUSSION: If either the Local Opinion Leader Statement or the Unsigned Evidence Statement improves secondary prevention in patients with coronary disease, they can be easily modified and applied in other communities and for other target conditions