Gaia Data Release 2. Kinematics of globular clusters and dwarf galaxies around the Milky Way

AIMS: The goal of this paper is to demonstrate the outstanding quality of the second data release of the Gaia mission and its power for constraining many different aspects of the dynamics of the satellites of the Milky Way. We focus here on determining the proper motions of 75 Galactic globular clusters, nine dwarf spheroidal galaxies, one ultra-faint system, and the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds. METHODS: Using data extracted from the Gaia archive, we derived the proper motions and parallaxes for these systems, as well as their uncertainties. We demonstrate that the errors, statistical and systematic, are relatively well understood. We integrated the orbits of these objects in three different Galactic potentials, and characterised their properties. We present the derived proper motions, space velocities, and characteristic orbital parameters in various tables to facilitate their use by the astronomical community. RESULTS: Our limited and straightforward analyses have allowed us for example to (i) determine absolute and very precise proper motions for globular clusters; (ii) detect clear rotation signatures in the proper motions of at least five globular clusters; (iii) show that the satellites of the Milky Way are all on high-inclination orbits, but that they do not share a single plane of motion; (iv) derive a lower limit for the mass of the Milky Way of 9.1{_₂.₆⁺⁶·²} x 10¹¹ M⊙ based on the assumption that the Leo I dwarf spheroidal is bound; (v) derive a rotation curve for the Large Magellanic Cloud based solely on proper motions that is competitive with line-of-sight velocity curves, now using many orders of magnitude more sources; and (vi) unveil the dynamical effect of the bar on the motions of stars in the Large Magellanic Cloud. CONCLUSIONS: All these results highlight the incredible power of the Gaia astrometric mission, and in particular of its second data release

Gaia Data Release 2 Variable stars in the colour-absolute magnitude diagram

Context. The ESA Gaia mission provides a unique time-domain survey for more than 1.6 billion sources with G ≲ 21 mag. Aims. We showcase stellar variability in the Galactic colour-absolute magnitude diagram (CaMD). We focus on pulsating, eruptive, and cataclysmic variables, as well as on stars that exhibit variability that is due to rotation and eclipses. Methods. We describe the locations of variable star classes, variable object fractions, and typical variability amplitudes throughout the CaMD and show how variability-related changes in colour and brightness induce “motions”. To do this, we use 22 months of calibrated photometric, spectro-photometric, and astrometric Gaia data of stars with a significant parallax. To ensure that a large variety of variable star classes populate the CaMD, we crossmatched Gaia sources with known variable stars. We also used the statistics and variability detection modules of the Gaia variability pipeline. Corrections for interstellar extinction are not implemented in this article. Results. Gaia enables the first investigation of Galactic variable star populations in the CaMD on a similar, if not larger, scale as was previously done in the Magellanic Clouds. Although the observed colours are not corrected for reddening, distinct regions are visible in which variable stars occur. We determine variable star fractions to within the current detection thresholds of Gaia. Finally, we report the most complete description of variability-induced motion within the CaMD to date. Conclusions. Gaia enables novel insights into variability phenomena for an unprecedented number of stars, which will benefit the understanding of stellar astrophysics. The CaMD of Galactic variable stars provides crucial information on physical origins of variability in a way that has previously only been accessible for Galactic star clusters or external galaxies. Future Gaia data releases will enable significant improvements over this preview by providing longer time series, more accurate astrometry, and additional data types (time series BP and RP spectra, RVS spectra, and radial velocities), all for much larger samples of stars

Immunoglobulin, glucocorticoid, or combination therapy for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a propensity-weighted cohort study

Background Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a hyperinflammatory condition associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, has emerged as a serious illness in children worldwide. Immunoglobulin or glucocorticoids, or both, are currently recommended treatments. Methods The Best Available Treatment Study evaluated immunomodulatory treatments for MIS-C in an international observational cohort. Analysis of the first 614 patients was previously reported. In this propensity-weighted cohort study, clinical and outcome data from children with suspected or proven MIS-C were collected onto a web-based Research Electronic Data Capture database. After excluding neonates and incomplete or duplicate records, inverse probability weighting was used to compare primary treatments with intravenous immunoglobulin, intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, using intravenous immunoglobulin as the reference treatment. Primary outcomes were a composite of inotropic or ventilator support from the second day after treatment initiation, or death, and time to improvement on an ordinal clinical severity scale. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation, clinical deterioration, fever, and coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN69546370. Findings We enrolled 2101 children (aged 0 months to 19 years) with clinically diagnosed MIS-C from 39 countries between June 14, 2020, and April 25, 2022, and, following exclusions, 2009 patients were included for analysis (median age 8·0 years [IQR 4·2–11·4], 1191 [59·3%] male and 818 [40·7%] female, and 825 [41·1%] White). 680 (33·8%) patients received primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin, 698 (34·7%) with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, 487 (24·2%) with glucocorticoids alone; 59 (2·9%) patients received other combinations, including biologicals, and 85 (4·2%) patients received no immunomodulators. There were no significant differences between treatments for primary outcomes for the 1586 patients with complete baseline and outcome data that were considered for primary analysis. Adjusted odds ratios for ventilation, inotropic support, or death were 1·09 (95% CI 0·75–1·58; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids and 0·93 (0·58–1·47; corrected p value=1·00) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Adjusted average hazard ratios for time to improvement were 1·04 (95% CI 0·91–1·20; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, and 0·84 (0·70–1·00; corrected p value=0·22) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Treatment escalation was less frequent for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids (OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·11–0·20]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoids alone (0·68 [0·50–0·93]; p=0·014) versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Persistent fever (from day 2 onward) was less common with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids compared with either intravenous immunoglobulin alone (OR 0·50 [95% CI 0·38–0·67]; p<0·0001) or glucocorticoids alone (0·63 [0·45–0·88]; p=0·0058). Coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Interpretation Recovery rates, including occurrence and resolution of coronary artery aneurysms, were similar for primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin when compared to glucocorticoids or intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids. Initial treatment with glucocorticoids appears to be a safe alternative to immunoglobulin or combined therapy, and might be advantageous in view of the cost and limited availability of intravenous immunoglobulin in many countries. Funding Imperial College London, the European Union's Horizon 2020, Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Foundation, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, and National Institutes of Health

An Electrifying Choice for the 2019 Chemistry Nobel Prize: Goodenough, Whittingham, and Yoshino

As editors of a materials chemistry journal, we are thrilled at the awarding of the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry to John B. Goodenough, M. Stanley Whittingham, and Akira Yoshino, for their contributions that have led to the modern lithium ion battery (Figure 1). As the Nobel Prize Committee states succinctly, “They created a rechargeable world.”(1) The commercial and societal rewards of experimental research typically require decades to reach fruition, and lithium ion batteries were no different, with crucial leads dating back to the 1960s, and even earlier.(2) Materials chemistry journals only emerged 30 years ago with the advent of Chemistry of Materials, the Journal of Materials Chemistry, and Advanced Materials in 1989. Much of the earlier work in battery materials appeared beforehand in electrochemistry, physics, and solid state journals. The key fundamental discovery underpinning the lithium ion battery was the understanding and application of ion intercalation, in this case,(3) lithium ions inserted between the layers in graphite, metal sulfides, and, eventually, oxides that were commercialized. This Nobel Prize was evenly split three ways because, as the Nobel committee correctly observed, the contributions of all three inventors were essential to the success of the commercialization of the lithium ion battery

y+ LAT-1 mediates transport of the potent and selective iNOS inhibitor, GW274150, in control J774 macrophages

The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com--Copyright Springer --DOI : 10.1007/s00726-005-0311-9Peer reviewe