Comparison of established and emerging biodosimetry assays

Rapid biodosimetry tools are required to assist with triage in the case of a large-scale radiation incident. Here, we aimed to determine the dose-assessment accuracy of the well-established dicentric chromosome assay (DCA) and cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay (CBMN) in comparison to the emerging γ-H2AX foci and gene expression assays for triage mode biodosimetry and radiation injury assessment. Coded blood samples exposed to 10 X-ray doses (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) of up to 6.4 Gy were sent to participants for dose estimation. Report times were documented for each laboratory and assay. The mean absolute difference (MAD) of estimated doses relative to the true doses was calculated. We also merged doses into binary dose categories of clinical relevance and examined accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the assays. Dose estimates were reported by the first laboratories within 0.3-0.4 days of receipt of samples for the γ-H2AX and gene expression assays compared to 2.4 and 4 days for the DCA and CBMN assays, respectively. Irrespective of the assay we found a 2.5-4-fold variation of interlaboratory accuracy per assay and lowest MAD values for the DCA assay (0.16 Gy) followed by CBMN (0.34 Gy), gene expression (0.34 Gy) and γ-H2AX (0.45 Gy) foci assay. Binary categories of dose estimates could be discriminated with equal efficiency for all assays, but at doses ≥1.5 Gy a 10% decrease in efficiency was observed for the foci assay, which was still comparable to the CBMN assay. In conclusion, the DCA has been confirmed as the gold standard biodosimetry method, but in situations where speed and throughput are more important than ultimate accuracy, the emerging rapid molecular assays have the potential to become useful triage tools

Friends and Foes from an Ant Brain's Point of View – Neuronal Correlates of Colony Odors in a Social Insect

Background: Successful cooperation depends on reliable identification of friends and foes. Social insects discriminate colony members (nestmates/friends) from foreign workers (non-nestmates/foes) by colony-specific, multi-component colony odors. Traditionally, complex processing in the brain has been regarded as crucial for colony recognition. Odor information is represented as spatial patterns of activity and processed in the primary olfactory neuropile, the antennal lobe (AL) of insects, which is analogous to the vertebrate olfactory bulb. Correlative evidence indicates that the spatial activity patterns reflect odor-quality, i.e., how an odor is perceived. For colony odors, alternatively, a sensory filter in the peripheral nervous system was suggested, causing specific anosmia to nestmate colony odors. Here, we investigate neuronal correlates of colony odors in the brain of a social insect to directly test whether they are anosmic to nestmate colony odors and whether spatial activity patterns in the AL can predict how odor qualities like ‘‘friend’’ and ‘‘foe’’ are attributed to colony odors. Methodology/Principal Findings: Using ant dummies that mimic natural conditions, we presented colony odors and investigated their neuronal representation in the ant Camponotus floridanus. Nestmate and non-nestmate colony odors elicited neuronal activity: In the periphery, we recorded sensory responses of olfactory receptor neurons (electroantennography), and in the brain, we measured colony odor specific spatial activity patterns in the AL (calcium imaging). Surprisingly, upon repeated stimulation with the same colony odor, spatial activity patterns were variable, and as variable as activity patterns elicited by different colony odors. Conclusions: Ants are not anosmic to nestmate colony odors. However, spatial activity patterns in the AL alone do not provide sufficient information for colony odor discrimination and this finding challenges the current notion of how odor quality is coded. Our result illustrates the enormous challenge for the nervous system to classify multi-component odors and indicates that other neuronal parameters, e.g., precise timing of neuronal activity, are likely necessary for attribution of odor quality to multi-component odors

Laboratory intercomparison of the dicentric chromosome analysis assay.

The study design and obtained results represent an intercomparison of various laboratories performing dose assessment using the dicentric chromosome analysis (DCA) as a diagnostic triage tool for individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25-5 Gy) as well as blind samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were sent to the participants. DCA was performed according to established protocols. The time taken to report dose estimates was documented for each laboratory. Additional information concerning laboratory organization/characteristics as well as assay performance was collected. The mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical aspects to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest report time was 2.4 days after sample arrival. DCA dose estimates were reported with high and comparable accuracy, with MAD values ranging between 0.16-0.5 Gy for both manual and automated scoring. No significant differences were found for dose estimates based either on 20, 30, 40 or 50 cells, suggesting that the scored number of cells can be reduced from 50 to 20 without loss of precision of triage dose estimates, at least for homogenous exposure scenarios. Triage categories of clinical significance could be discriminated efficiently using both scoring procedures

Laboratory intercomparison of the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay.

The focus of the study is an intercomparison of laboratories' dose-assessment performances using the cytokinesis-block micronucleus (CBMN) assay as a diagnostic triage tool for individual radiation dose assessment. Homogenously X-irradiated (240 kVp, 1 Gy/min) blood samples for establishing calibration data (0.25-5 Gy) as well as blind samples (0.1-6.4 Gy) were sent to the participants. The CBMN assay was performed according to protocols individually established and varying among participating laboratories. The time taken to report dose estimates was documented for each laboratory. Additional information concerning laboratory organization/characteristics as well as assay performance was collected. The mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated and radiation doses were merged into four triage categories reflecting clinical aspects to calculate accuracy, sensitivity and specificity. The earliest report time was 4 days after sample arrival. The CBMN dose estimates were reported with high accuracy (MAD values of 0.20-0.50 Gy at doses below 6.4 Gy for both manual and automated scoring procedures), but showed a limitation of the assay at the dose point of 6.4 Gy, which resulted in a clear dose underestimation in all cases. The MAD values (without 6.4 Gy) differed significantly (P = 0.03) between manual (0.25 Gy, SEM = 0.06, n = 4) or automated scoring procedures (0.37 Gy, SEM = 0.08, n = 5), but lowest MAD were equal (0.2 Gy) for both scoring procedures. Likewise, both scoring procedures led to the same allocation of dose estimates to triage categories of clinical significance (about 83% accuracy and up to 100% specificity)

Evaluation of the annual Canadian biodosimetry network intercomparisons

Purpose: To evaluate the importance of annual intercomparisons for maintaining the capacity and capabilities of a well-established biodosimetry network in conjunction with assessing efficient and effective analysis methods for emergency response. Materials and methods: Annual intercomparisons were conducted between laboratories in the Canadian National Biological Dosimetry Response Plan. Intercomparisons were performed over a six-year period and comprised of the shipment of 10-12 irradiated, blinded blood samples for analysis by each of the participating laboratories. Dose estimates were determined by each laboratory using the dicentric chromosome assay (conventional and QuickScan scoring) and where possible the cytokinesis block micronucleus (CBMN) assay. Dose estimates were returned to the lead laboratory for evaluation and comparison. Results: Individual laboratories performed comparably from year to year with only slight fluctuations in performance. Dose estimates using the dicentric chromosome assay were accurate about 80% of the time and the QuickScan method for scoring the dicentric chromosome assay was proven to reduce the time of analysis without having a significant effect on the dose estimates. Although analysis with the CBMN assay was comparable to QuickScan scoring with respect to speed, the accuracy of the dose estimates was greatly reduced. Conclusions: Annual intercomparisons are necessary to maintain a network of laboratories for emergency response biodosimetry as they evoke confidence in their capabilities

Discrimination between workers of Acromyrmex subterraneus molestans from monogynous and polygynous colonies

Behavioral assays were conducted with individuals from monogynous and polygynous colonies of Acromyrmex subterraneus molestans to evaluate the discriminatory ability of ant workers. These bioassays showed that this subspecies could not discriminate among non-nestmates or nestmate workers. However, nestmates of these same colonies did discriminate among workers of another subspecies Ac. subterraneus subterraneus. When discrimation occurred there were no differences in the response of workers from either monogynous or polygynous colonies. Similarities or differences in the chemical profile of both subspecies explained the absence or occurence of aggressiveness among workers. The chemical profile of colonies of the same subspecies was very similar among them, although distinct among subspecies. The number of queens did not influence the cuticular chemical composition of the workers or their behavior.<br>Ensaios comportamentais foram conduzidos com indivíduos de colônias monogínicas e poligínicas de Acromyrmex subterraneus molestans a fim de avaliar a habilidade discriminatória de suas operárias. Estes bioensaios mostraram que esta subespécie não é capaz de discriminar entre não companheiras e companheiras de ninho. Entretanto, companheiras de mesma colônia discriminam operárias pertencentes à outra subespécie, Ac. subterraneus subterraneus. Nesta situação, não houve diferença na resposta de operárias oriundas de colônias monogínicas e poligínicas. Similaridades ou diferenças no perfil químico de ambas as subespécies podem explicar a ausência ou presença de agressividade entre operárias. O perfil químico de colônias de mesma subespécie foi muito similar entre si e muito distinto entre subespécies. O número de rainhas não influenciou a composição química cuticular das operárias e nem o seu comportamento discriminatório