Possible limitations of dolphin echolocation: a simulation study based on a cross-modal matching experiment

© The Author(s), 2021. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Wei, C., Hoffmann-Kuhnt, M., Au, W. W. L., Ho, A. Z. H., Matrai, E., Feng, W., Ketten, D. R., & Zhang, Y. Possible limitations of dolphin echolocation: a simulation study based on a cross-modal matching experiment. Scientific Reports, 11(1), (2021): 6689, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85063-2.Dolphins use their biosonar to discriminate objects with different features through the returning echoes. Cross-modal matching experiments were conducted with a resident bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops aduncus). Four types of objects composed of different materials (water-filled PVC pipes, air-filled PVC pipes, foam ball arrays, and PVC pipes wrapped in closed-cell foam) were used in the experiments, respectively. The size and position of the objects remained the same in each case. The data collected in the experiment showed that the dolphin’s matching accuracy was significantly different across the cases. To gain insight into the underlying mechanism in the experiments, we used finite element methods to construct two-dimensional target detection models of an echolocating dolphin in the vertical plane, based on computed tomography scan data. The acoustic processes of the click’s interaction with the objects and the surrounding media in the four cases were simulated and compared. The simulation results provide some possible explanations for why the dolphin performed differently when discriminating the objects that only differed in material composition in the previous matching experiments.One of the authors, Wei. C is supported by a Forrest Research Foundation Fellowship. Support for D. Ketten for this effort was provided by the Joint Industry Programme and by the Helmholtz Foundation. This work was also supported by the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology (HIMB) contribution No. 1630 and School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST) contribution No. 9452

Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome

The sequence of the human genome encodes the genetic instructions for human physiology, as well as rich information about human evolution. In 2001, the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium reported a draft sequence of the euchromatic portion of the human genome. Since then, the international collaboration has worked to convert this draft into a genome sequence with high accuracy and nearly complete coverage. Here, we report the result of this finishing process. The current genome sequence (Build 35) contains 2.85 billion nucleotides interrupted by only 341 gaps. It covers ∼99% of the euchromatic genome and is accurate to an error rate of ∼1 event per 100,000 bases. Many of the remaining euchromatic gaps are associated with segmental duplications and will require focused work with new methods. The near-complete sequence, the first for a vertebrate, greatly improves the precision of biological analyses of the human genome including studies of gene number, birth and death. Notably, the human enome seems to encode only 20,000-25,000 protein-coding genes. The genome sequence reported here should serve as a firm foundation for biomedical research in the decades ahead

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

Sound propagation in the near and far-field of a broadband echolocating dolphin and a narrowband echolocating porpoise

The echolocation signals emitted by odontocetes can be roughly classified into three broad categories: broadband high-frequency echolocation signals, narrowband high-frequency echolocation signals, and frequency modulated clicks. Previous measurements of broadband echolocation signals propagation in the bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) did not find any evidence of focusing as the signals travel from the near to far-field. Finite element analysis (FEA) of high-resolution CT scan data was used to examine signal propagation of broadband echolocation signals of dolphins and narrowband echolocation signals of porpoises. The FEA results were used to simulate the propagation of clicks from phonic lips, traveling through the forehead, and finally transmission into the seawater. Biosonar beam formation in the near-field and far-field including the amplitude contours for the two species was determined. The finite element model was validated by finding the simulated amplitude contour in the horizontal plane was consistent with prior direct measurement results for Tursiops. Furthermore, the simulated far-field transmission beam patterns in both vertical and horizontal planes were also qualitatively consistent with results measured from live animals. This study shows that there is no evidence of convergence for either Tursiops or Phocoena as the sound propagates from near-field to far-field

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

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

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

International audienceIn 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