Plastisol Foaming Process. Decomposition of the Foaming Agent, Polymer Behavior in the Corresponding Temperature Range and Resulting Foam Properties

The decomposition of azodicarbonamide, used as foaming agent in PVC - plasticizer (1/1) plastisols was studied by DSC. Nineteen different plasticizers, all belonging to the ester family, two being polymeric (polyadipates), were compared. The temperature of maximum decomposition rate (in anisothermal regime at 5 K min-1 scanning rate), ranges between 434 and 452 K. The heat of decomposition ranges between 8.7 and 12.5 J g -1. Some trends of variation of these parameters appear significant and are discussed in terms of solvent (matrix) and viscosity effects on the decomposition reactions. The shear modulus at 1 Hz frequency was determined at the temperature of maximum rate of foaming agent decomposition, and differs significantly from a sample to another. The foam density was determined at ambient temperature and the volume fraction of bubbles was used as criterion to judge the efficiency of the foaming process. The results reveal the existence of an optimal shear modulus of the order of 2 kPa that corresponds roughly to plasticizer molar masses of the order of 450 ± 50 g mol-1. Heavier plasticizers, especially polymeric ones are too difficult to deform. Lighter plasticizers such as diethyl phthalate (DEP) deform too easily and presumably facilitate bubble collapse

Mean-field transport theory for the two-flavour NJL model

By making decomposition of the Wigner function simultaneously in both the spinor and the isospin spaces we derive a set of kinetic equations for the quark distribution functions and the spin densities. A detailed analysis of the consequences imposed by the chiral invariance on the form of the transport equations is presented.Comment: Revtex, 25 pages, no figure

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

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

Candidate system analysis in ADHD: Evaluation of nine genes involved in dopaminergic neurotransmission identifies associsation with BRD1

Objectives: Several pharmacological and genetic studies support the involvement of the dopamine neurotransmitter system in the aetiology of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Based on this information we evaluated the contribution to ADHD of nine genes involved in dopaminergic neurotransmission (DRD1, DRD2, DRD3, DRD4, DRD5, DAT1, TH, DBH and COMT). Methods: We genotyped a total of 61 tagging single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in a sample of 533 ADHD patients (322 children and 211 adults), 533 sex-matched unrelated controls and additional 196 nuclear ADHD families from Spain. Results: The single- and multiple-marker analysis in both population and family-based approaches provided preliminary evidence for the contribution of DRD1 to combined-type ADHD in children (P = 8.8e-04; OR = 1.50 (1.18–1.90) and P = 0.0061; OR = 1.73 (1.23–2.45)) but not in adults. Subsequently, we tested positive results for replication in an independent sample of 353 German families with combined-type ADHD children and replicated the initial association between DRD1 and childhood ADHD (P = 8.4e-05; OR = 3.67 (2.04–6.63)). Conclusions: The replication of the association between DRD1 and ADHD in two European cohorts highlights the validity of our finding and supports the involvement of DRD1 in childhood ADHD