17 research outputs found

    The Grizzly, November 5, 1982

    Get PDF
    Clinic Offered for Ski-Bums • Outstanding Choral Students Chosen • U.C. Poses for Posterity • Letters to the Editor: Greeks Piqued • USGA Notes • President\u27s Corner • Ropes and Chains or Can You Eat Plasterboard? • Protheatre Presents Comedy at its Best • The Messiah is Coming! • The World\u27s Largest Picture at Ursinus: Get Yours Now! • Take That, West Chester! • Soccer Season Ends With Win Over Widener • Bear Pack Waltzes to Victory • Bears Battle But Lose War • Lady Bears Dominatehttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/grizzlynews/1087/thumbnail.jp

    Rat Stem-Cell Factor Induces Splenocytes Capable Of Regenerating The Thymus

    Get PDF
    Cytokine regulation of prethymic T-lymphoid progenitor-cell proliferation and/or differentiation has not been well-defined, although much is known of cytokine regulation of hemopoietic stem- and progenitor-cell development. Here we use a recently identified hemopoietic growth factor, stem-cell factor (SCF) (a form of the c-kit ligand), and a transplant model of thymocyte regeneration to assess the effect of SCF on the in vivo generation of prethymic, thymocyte progenitor-cell activity. We show that recombinant rat SCF (rrSCF164 administered to weanling rats selectively induces an increase in thymocyte progenitor activity in the spleens of treated rats as compared to rats treated with vehicle, polyethylene glycol (PEG)-conjugated rat albumin, or recombinant human granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rhG-CSF). These data demonstrate that administration of SCF in vivo affects extrathymic-origin thymocyte regenerating cells and may influence, directly or indirectly, early prethymic stages of T-cell lymphopoiesis in addition to its known effect on early stages of myelopoiesis and erythropoiesis

    "Enabling conditions for inter-and trans-disciplinary integration: Commonalities and differences across geographical regions"

    No full text
    International audienceAlthough integration is often considered critical to success or failure of inter-and trans-disciplinary (ITD) research projects or programs (Defila et al., 2006; O'Rourke et al., 2016), widespread consensus on what integration actually means is lacking (O'Rourke et al., 2019; Pohl et al., 2021). We treat integration as a process of combining a wide range of perspectives not only from different disciplines (interdisciplinary integration), but also from research, policy, and practice (transdisciplinary integration) in order to advance fundamental understanding of complex societal problems, and to formulate 'socially robust' solutions (Hoffmann et al., 2017a). We likewise refer to integration as the result or output that emerges from this process (O'Rourke et al., 2016). Following O'Rourke et al. (2019) and Pohl et al. (2021), integration occurs at different phases of an ideal-typical ITD research process and yields different types of integration in different contexts depending among others on the specific purpose, scale and scope of ITD projects or programs (Klein, 2008). Finally, we distinguish knowledge elaboration from knowledge regulation (Lund, 2019). We argue that integration does not happen automatically, but needs to be proactively led to ensure research projects or programs live up their ITD ambition (Hoffmann et al., 2017b; Deutsch et al., 2021). We also posit that leading integration does not take place in a vacuum (Brundiers et al., 2013), but requires conditions enabling integration. This contribution explores what kind of enabling conditions project or program leaders and researchers need-and create-to leverage integration. It draws lessons from a variety of cases across various geographical regions, specificall
    corecore