BioSentinel: Monitoring DNA Damage Repair Beyond Low Earth Orbit on a 6U Nanosatellite

We are designing and developing a 6U nanosatellite as a secondary payload to fly aboard NASAs Space Launch System (SLS) Exploration Mission (EM) 1, scheduled for launch in late 2017. For the first time in over forty years, direct experimental data from biological studies beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) will be obtained during BioSentinels 12- to 18-month mission. BioSentinel will measure the damage and repair of DNA in a biological organism and allow us to compare that to information from onboard physical radiation sensors. This data will be available for validation of existing models and for extrapolation to humans.The BioSentinel experiment will use the organism Saccharomyces cerevisiae (yeast) to report DNA double-strand-break (DSB) events that result from space radiation. DSB repair exhibits striking conservation of repair proteins from yeast to humans. The flight strain will include engineered genetic defects that prevent growth and division until a radiation-induced DSB activates the yeasts DNA repair mechanisms. The triggered culture growth and metabolic activity directly indicate a DSB and its repair. The yeast will be carried in the dry state in independent microwells with support electronics. The measurement subsystem will sequentially activate and monitor wells, optically tracking cell growth and metabolism. BioSentinel will also include TimePix radiation sensors implemented by JSCs RadWorks group. Dose and Linear Energy Transfer (LET) data will be compared directly to the rate of DSB-and-repair events measured by the S. cerevisiae biosentinels. BioSentinel will mature nanosatellite technologies to include: deep space communications and navigation, autonomous attitude control and momentum management, and micropropulsion systems to provide an adaptable nanosatellite platform for deep space uses

BioSentinel: DNA Damage-and-Repair Experiment Beyond Low Earth Orbit

No abstract availabl

An Unexpected Function of the Prader-Willi Syndrome Imprinting Center in Maternal Imprinting in Mice

Genomic imprinting is a phenomenon that some genes are expressed differentially according to the parent of origin. Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) and Angelman syndrome (AS) are neurobehavioral disorders caused by deficiency of imprinted gene expression from paternal and maternal chromosome 15q11–q13, respectively. Imprinted genes at the PWS/AS domain are regulated through a bipartite imprinting center, the PWS-IC and AS-IC. The PWS-IC activates paternal-specific gene expression and is responsible for the paternal imprint, whereas the AS-IC functions in the maternal imprint by allele-specific repression of the PWS-IC to prevent the paternal imprinting program. Although mouse chromosome 7C has a conserved PWS/AS imprinted domain, the mouse equivalent of the human AS-IC element has not yet been identified. Here, we suggest another dimension that the PWS-IC also functions in maternal imprinting by negatively regulating the paternally expressed imprinted genes in mice, in contrast to its known function as a positive regulator for paternal-specific gene expression. Using a mouse model carrying a 4.8-kb deletion at the PWS-IC, we demonstrated that maternal transmission of the PWS-IC deletion resulted in a maternal imprinting defect with activation of the paternally expressed imprinted genes and decreased expression of the maternally expressed imprinted gene on the maternal chromosome, accompanied by alteration of the maternal epigenotype toward a paternal state spread over the PWS/AS domain. The functional significance of this acquired paternal pattern of gene expression was demonstrated by the ability to complement PWS phenotypes by maternal inheritance of the PWS-IC deletion, which is in stark contrast to paternal inheritance of the PWS-IC deletion that resulted in the PWS phenotypes. Importantly, low levels of expression of the paternally expressed imprinted genes are sufficient to rescue postnatal lethality and growth retardation in two PWS mouse models. These findings open the opportunity for a novel approach to the treatment of PWS

The psychological science accelerator’s COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data

A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

A Many-analysts Approach to the Relation Between Religiosity and Well-being

The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N = 10, 535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

In COVID-19 Health Messaging, Loss Framing Increases Anxiety with Little-to-No Concomitant Benefits: Experimental Evidence from 84 Countries

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., "If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others") or potential gains (e.g., "If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others")? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

The Psychological Science Accelerator’s COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data