The ℓs\ell^s-boundedness of a family of integral operators on UMD Banach function spaces

We prove the $\ell^s$-boundedness of a family of integral operators with an operator-valued kernel on UMD Banach function spaces. This generalizes and simplifies earlier work by Gallarati, Veraar and the author, where the $\ell^s$-boundedness of this family of integral operators was shown on Lebesgue spaces. The proof is based on a characterization of $\ell^s$-boundedness as weighted boundedness by Rubio de Francia.Comment: 13 pages. Generalization of arXiv:1410.665

Mutation increasing β-carotene concentrations does not adversely affect concentrations of essential mineral elements in pepper fruit

<div><p>Vitamin and mineral deficiencies are prevalent in human populations throughout the world. Vitamin A deficiency affects hundreds of millions of pre-school age children in low income countries. Fruits of pepper (<i>Capsicum annuum</i> L.) can be a major dietary source of precursors to Vitamin A biosynthesis, such as β-carotene. Recently, pepper breeding programs have introduced the orange-fruited (<i>of</i>) trait of the mutant variety Oranzheva kapiya, which is associated with high fruit β-carotene concentrations, to the mutant variety Albena. In this manuscript, concentrations of β-carotene and mineral elements (magnesium, phosphorus, sulphur, potassium, zinc, calcium, manganese, iron and copper) were compared in fruit from P31, a red-fruited genotype derived from the variety Albena, and M38, a genotype developed by transferring the orange-fruited mutation (<i>of</i>) into Albena. It was observed that fruit from M38 plants had greater β-carotene concentration at both commercial and botanical maturity (4.9 and 52.7 mg / kg fresh weight, respectively) than fruit from P31 plants (2.3 and 30.1 mg / kg fresh weight, respectively). The mutation producing high β-carotene concentrations in pepper fruits had no detrimental effect on the concentrations of mineral elements required for human nutrition.</p></div

Reappraising Social Insect Behavior through Aversive Responsiveness and Learning

Background: The success of social insects can be in part attributed to their division of labor, which has been explained by a response threshold model. This model posits that individuals differ in their response thresholds to task-associated stimuli, so that individuals with lower thresholds specialize in this task. This model is at odds with findings on honeybee behavior as nectar and pollen foragers exhibit different responsiveness to sucrose, with nectar foragers having higher response thresholds to sucrose concentration. Moreover, it has been suggested that sucrose responsiveness correlates with responsiveness to most if not all other stimuli. If this is the case, explaining task specialization and the origins of division of labor on the basis of differences in response thresholds is difficult. Methodology: To compare responsiveness to stimuli presenting clear-cut differences in hedonic value and behavioral contexts, we measured appetitive and aversive responsiveness in the same bees in the laboratory. We quantified proboscis extension responses to increasing sucrose concentrations and sting extension responses to electric shocks of increasing voltage. We analyzed the relationship between aversive responsiveness and aversive olfactory conditioning of the sting extension reflex, and determined how this relationship relates to division of labor. Principal Findings: Sucrose and shock responsiveness measured in the same bees did not correlate, thus suggesting that they correspond to independent behavioral syndromes, a foraging and a defensive one. Bees which were more responsiv

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