The Relationship Between Sleep Quality and Memory

Sleep quality and memory are both relevant topics in today’s society, especially among college students. Purpose: To determine if there is a correlation between sleep quality and short-term memory including objective and subjective measures. Methods: This study consisted of 25 participants, 6 males and 19 females, ages ranging from 19 to 22 (20.8±0.8 years), who avoided stimulants, caffeine or other sleep altering drugs for at least eight hours. Our participants were recruited via word of mouth, poster, and discussions in classroom settings. Participants memorized a list of 30 words for two minutes and then had two minutes to recall and write as many words as possible. Sleep quality was measured with the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index and then scored using the official Pittsburg Index score sheet, and perceived memory was scored at face value. An independent t-test was used to determine if there was a significant difference between genders on their sleep quality, Memory Functioning Questionnaire scores, and their ability to recall words. Results: The test revealed no significant difference (p=0.68) between the sleep quality of males (7±3) and females (7±3). There was also no significant difference (p=0.16) between the number of words recalled by males (14±4 words) and females (11±3 words). The difference between the Memory Functioning Questionnaire scores of males (318±37) and females (282±55) was not significant (p=0.10). No significant difference (p=0.45) was found between science majors (8±4) and non-science majors (8±3) on sleep quality. Similarly, Memory Functioning Questionnaire scores were not significantly different (p=0.73) for science majors (285±52) and non-science majors (293±55). The test for recalled words also showed no significant difference (p=0.99) between science majors (12±3 words) and non-science majors (12±3 words)

Synthesis Paper: Targeted Livestock Grazing: Prescription for Healthy Rangelands

Targeted livestock grazing is a proven tool for manipulating rangeland vegetation, and current knowledge about targeted livestock grazing is extensive and expanding rapidly. Targeted grazing prescriptions optimize the timing, frequency, intensity, and selectivity of grazing (or browsing) in combinations that purposely exert grazing/browsing pressure on specific plant species or portions of the landscape. Targeted grazing differs from traditional grazing management in that the goal of targeted grazing is to apply defoliation or trampling to achieve specific vegetation management objectives, whereas the goal of traditional livestock grazing management is generally the production of livestock commodities. A shared aim of targeted livestock grazing and traditional grazing management is to sustain healthy soils, flora, fauna, and water resources that, in turn, can sustain natural ecological processes (e.g., nutrient cycle, water cycle, energy flow). Targeted grazing prescriptions integrate knowledge of plant ecology, livestock nutrition, and livestock foraging behavior. Livestock can be focused on target areas through fencing, herding, or supplement placement. Although practices can be developed to minimize the impact of toxins contained in target plants, the welfare of the animals used in targeted grazing must be a priority. Monitoring is needed to determine if targeted grazing is successful and to refine techniques to improve efficacy and efficiency. Examples of previous research studies and approaches are presented to highlight the ecological benefits that can be achieved when targeted grazing is applied properly. These cases include ways to suppress invasive plants and ways to enhance wildlife habitat and biodiversity. Future research should address the potential to select more adapted and effective livestock for targeted grazing and the associated animal welfare concerns with this practice. Targeted livestock grazing provides land managers a viable alternative to mechanical, chemical, and prescribed fire treatments to manipulate rangeland vegetation

Gene Expression Analysis of Developing Cell Groups in the Pretectal Region of Xenopus laevis

Our previous analysis of progenitor domains in the pretectum of Xenopus revealed three molecularly distinct anteroposterior subdivisions, identified as precommissural (PcP), juxtacommissural (JcP), and commissural (CoP) histogenetic domains (Morona et al. [2011] J Comp Neurol 519:1024–1050). Here we analyzed at later developmental stages the nuclei derived from these areas, attending to their gene expression patterns and histogenesis. Transcription-factor gene markers were used to selectively map derivatives of each domain: Pax7 and Pax6 (CoP); Foxp1 and Six3 (JcP); and Xiro1, VGlut2, Ebf1, and Ebf3 (PcP). Additional genoarchitectural information was provided by the expression of Gbx2, NPY, Lhx1, and Lhx9. This allowed both unambiguous characterization of the anuran pretectal nuclei with regard to their origin in the three early anteroposterior progenitor domains, and their comparison with counterparts in the chick and mouse pretectum. Our observations demonstrated a molecular conservation, during practically all the stages analyzed, for most of the main markers used to define genoarchitecturally the main derivatives of each pretectal domain. We found molecular evidence to propose homologous derivatives from the CoP (olivary pretectal, parvocellular, and magnocellular posterior commissure and lateral terminal nuclei), JcP (spiriformis lateral and lateral terminal nuclei), and PcP (anterior pretectal nucleus) to those described in avian studies. These results represent significant progress in the comprehension of the diencephalic region of Xenopus and show that the organization of the pretectum possesses many features shared with birds