55 research outputs found

    Tributes to Family Law Scholars Who Helped Us Find Our Path

    Get PDF
    At some point after the virus struck, I had the idea that it would be appropriate and interesting to ask a number of experienced family law teachers to write a tribute about a more senior family law scholar whose work inspired them when they were beginning their careers. I mentioned this idea to some other long-term members of the professoriate, and they agreed that this could be a good project. So I reached out to some colleagues and asked them to participate. Many agreed to join the team. Some suggested other potential contributors, and some of these suggested faculty members also agreed to submit a tribute. The authors have written about a diverse group of distinguished scholars in the area of family law. We have included 12 scholars who have contributed substantially to the field, and they have also influenced those who have written about them here. The honored scholars and the tribute authors are as follows (organized alphabetically by the honoree): Homer H. Clark Jr. (1918-2015), by Ann Laquer Estin Cooper Davis, by Melissa MurrayPeggy Mary Ann Glendon, by June Carbone Herma Hill Kay (1934-2017), by Barbara A. Atwood Robert Levy, by Paul M. Kurtz Marygold (Margo) Shire Melli (1926-2018), by J. Thomas Oldham & Bruce M. Smyth Martha Minow, by Brian H. Bix Robert Mnookin, by Elizabeth S. Scott Twila Perry, by R.A. Lenhardt Dorothy E. Roberts, by Jessica Dixon Weaver Carol Sanger, by Solangel Maldonado Barbara Bennett Woodhouse, by Sacha M. Coupet Each colleague who participated in this project chose the scholar whose work he or she would celebrate. So, the list of those honored here is subjective and, to a certain extent, serendipitous. This Article is part of a Family Law Quarterly issue that also honors other pioneering contributors to the family law field. We hope to make this a continuing project and to have future opportunities to recognize the many scholars who have had a profound impact on their students – and on all of us – in addition to having an important impact on the development of the law. I trust the reader will find these tributes of interest

    Inhibition of Biofilm Formation, Quorum Sensing and Infection in Pseudomonas aeruginosa by Natural Products-Inspired Organosulfur Compounds

    Get PDF
    Using a microplate-based screening assay, the effects on Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1 biofilm formation of several S-substituted cysteine sulfoxides and their corresponding disulfide derivatives were evaluated. From our library of compounds, S-phenyl-L-cysteine sulfoxide and its breakdown product, diphenyl disulfide, significantly reduced the amount of biofilm formation by P. aeruginosa at levels equivalent to the active concentration of 4-nitropyridine-N-oxide (NPO) (1 mM). Unlike NPO, which is an established inhibitor of bacterial biofilms, our active compounds did not reduce planktonic cell growth and only affected biofilm formation. When used in a Drosophila-based infection model, both S-phenyl-L-cysteine sulfoxide and diphenyl disulfide significantly reduced the P. aeruginosa recovered 18 h post infection (relative to the control), and were non-lethal to the fly hosts. The possibility that the observed biofilm inhibitory effects were related to quorum sensing inhibition (QSI) was investigated using Escherichia coli-based reporters expressing P. aeruginosa lasR or rhIR response proteins, as well as an endogenous P. aeruginosa reporter from the lasI/lasR QS system. Inhibition of quorum sensing by S-phenyl-L-cysteine sulfoxide was observed in all of the reporter systems tested, whereas diphenyl disulfide did not exhibit QSI in either of the E. coli reporters, and showed very limited inhibition in the P. aeruginosa reporter. Since both compounds inhibit biofilm formation but do not show similar QSI activity, it is concluded that they may be functioning by different pathways. The hypothesis that biofilm inhibition by the two active compounds discovered in this work occurs through QSI is discussed

    The Drosophila melanogaster host model

    Get PDF
    The deleterious and sometimes fatal outcomes of bacterial infectious diseases are the net result of the interactions between the pathogen and the host, and the genetically tractable fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, has emerged as a valuable tool for modeling the pathogen–host interactions of a wide variety of bacteria. These studies have revealed that there is a remarkable conservation of bacterial pathogenesis and host defence mechanisms between higher host organisms and Drosophila. This review presents an in-depth discussion of the Drosophila immune response, the Drosophila killing model, and the use of the model to examine bacterial–host interactions. The recent introduction of the Drosophila model into the oral microbiology field is discussed, specifically the use of the model to examine Porphyromonas gingivalis–host interactions, and finally the potential uses of this powerful model system to further elucidate oral bacterial-host interactions are addressed
    corecore