AE9, AP9 and SPM: New Models for Specifying the Trapped Energetic Particle and Space Plasma Environment

The radiation belts and plasma in the Earth’s magnetosphere pose hazards to satellite systems which restrict design and orbit options with a resultant impact on mission performance and cost. For decades the standard space environment specification used for spacecraft design has been provided by the NASA AE8 and AP8 trapped radiation belt models. There are well-known limitations on their performance, however, and the need for a new trapped radiation and plasma model has been recognized by the engineering community for some time. To address this challenge a new set of models, denoted AE9/AP9/SPM, for energetic electrons, energetic protons and space plasma has been developed. The new models offer significant improvements including more detailed spatial resolution and the quantification of uncertainty due to both space weather and instrument errors. Fundamental to the model design, construction and operation are a number of new data sets and a novel statistical approach which captures first order temporal and spatial correlations allowing for the Monte-Carlo estimation of flux thresholds for user-specified percentile levels (e.g., 50th and 95th) over the course of the mission. An overview of the model architecture, data reduction methods, statistics algorithms, user application and initial validation is presented in this paper.United States. Air Force (e contracts FA8718-05-C-0036, FA8718-10-C-001, FA8721-05-C-0002 and FA8802-09-C-0001)United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (grant NNG05GM22G

AFRL's demonstration and science experiments (DSX) mission

The Air Force Research Laboratory, Space Vehicles Directorate (AFRL/RV) has developed the Demonstration and Science Experiments (DSX) mission to research technologies needed to significantly advance Department of Defense (DoD) capabilities to operate spacecraft in the harsh radiation environment of Medium-Earth Orbits (MEO). The ability to operate effectively in the MEO environment significantly increases the DoD's capability to field space systems that provide persistent global space surveillance and reconnaissance, high-speed satellite-based communication, lower-cost GPS navigation, and protection from space weather and environmental effects on a responsive satellite platform. The three DSX physics-based research/experiment areas are: 1. Wave Particle Interaction Experiment (WPIx): Researching the physics of Very-Low-Frequency (VLF) electromagnetic wave transmissions through the ionosphere and in the magnetosphere and characterizing the feasibility of natural and man-made VLF waves to reduce and precipitate space radiation; 2. Space Weather Experiment (SWx): Characterizing, mapping, and modeling the space radiation environment in MEO, an orbital regime attractive for future DoD, Civil, and Commercial missions; and 3. Space Environmental Effects (SFx): Researching and characterizing the MEO space weather effects on spacecraft electronics and materials. Collectively, thirteen individual payloads are combined together from these three research areas and integrated onto a single platform (DSX) which provides a low-cost opportunity for AFRL due to their common requirements. All three experiments require a 3-axis stabilized spacecraft bus (but no propulsion), a suite of radiation sensors, and extended duration in a low inclination, elliptical, MEO orbit. DSX will be launch-ready in summer 2010 for a likely launch comanifest with an operational DoD satellite on an Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV)

The Trapped Proton Environment in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO)

Energetic proton flux maps of the differential flux intensity in the medium-Earth orbit (MEO) regime (altitudes ~ 7000-15,000 km) are developed from measurements taken by detectors aboard the Combined Release and Radiation Effects Satellite (CRRES), HEO-F1, HEO-F3 and ICO satellites. Measurement errors have been estimated by cross-calibrating to a standard sensor aboard the GOES satellite during solar proton events. Spectral inversion techniques were employed to derive differential flux spectra from the HEO and ICO integral channel dosimeters. Two methods for combining the four different satellite data sets on a standard energy and coordinate grid are presented and the ramifications due to limited spatial and temporal coverage are explored. Comparison to the NASA AP-8 models shows the new model median flux maps to be of approximately equivalent or lower magnitude in the slot region while new model 95th percentile maps are always higher. Implications for the proton dose received by MEO satellites are discussed.United States. Air Force (Contract FA8721-10-C-0007

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

International audienceIn 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

non present