Characterization of constricted fruit (ctf) Mutant Uncovers a Role for AtMYB117/LOF1 in Ovule and Fruit Development in Arabidopsis thaliana

Pistil and fruit morphogenesis is the result of a complex gene network that is not yet fully understood. A search for novel genes is needed to make a more comprehensive model of pistil and fruit development. Screening for mutants with alterations in fruit morphology generated by an activation tagging strategy resulted in the isolation of the ctf (constricted fruit) mutant. It is characterized by a) small and wrinkled fruits, with an enlarged replum, an amorphous structure of the septum and an irregular distribution of ovules and seeds; b) ectopic carpelloid structures in sepals bearing ovule-like structures and c) dwarf plants with curled rosette leaves. The overexpressed gene in ctf was AtMYB117, also named LOF1 (LATERAL ORGAN FUSION1). AtMYB117/LOF1 transcripts were localized in boundary regions of the vegetative shoot apical meristem and leaf primordia and in a group of cells in the adaxial base of petioles and bracts. Transcripts were also detected in the boundaries between each of the four floral whorls and during pistil development in the inner of the medial ridges, the placenta, the base of the ovule primordia, the epidermis of the developing septum and the outer cell layers of the ovule funiculi. Analysis of changes of expression of pistil-related genes in the ctf mutant showed an enhancement of SHATTERPROOF1 (SHP1) and SHP2 expression. All these results suggest that AtMYB117/LOF1 is recruited by a variety of developmental programs for the establishment of boundary regions, including the development of floral organs and the initiation of ovule outgrowth

The influence of visual flow and perceptual load on locomotion speed

Visual flow is used to perceive and regulate movement speed during locomotion. We assessed the extent to which variation in flow from the ground plane, arising from static visual textures, influences locomotion speed under conditions of concurrent perceptual load. In two experiments, participants walked over a 12-m projected walkway that consisted of stripes that were oriented orthogonal to the walking direction. In the critical conditions, the frequency of the stripes increased or decreased. We observed small, but consistent effects on walking speed, so that participants were walking slower when the frequency increased compared to when the frequency decreased. This basic effect suggests that participants interpreted the change in visual flow in these conditions as at least partly due to a change in their own movement speed, and counteracted such a change by speeding up or slowing down. Critically, these effects were magnified under conditions of low perceptual load and a locus of attention near the ground plane. Our findings suggest that the contribution of vision in the control of ongoing locomotion is relatively fluid and dependent on ongoing perceptual (and perhaps more generally cognitive) task demands

Identifying an indoor air exposure limit for formaldehyde considering both irritation and cancer hazards

Formaldehyde is a well-studied chemical and effects from inhalation exposures have been extensively characterized in numerous controlled studies with human volunteers, including asthmatics and other sensitive individuals, which provide a rich database on exposure concentrations that can reliably produce the symptoms of sensory irritation. Although individuals can differ in their sensitivity to odor and eye irritation, the majority of authoritative reviews of the formaldehyde literature have concluded that an air concentration of 0.3 ppm will provide protection from eye irritation for virtually everyone. A weight of evidence-based formaldehyde exposure limit of 0.1 ppm (100 ppb) is recommended as an indoor air level for all individuals for odor detection and sensory irritation. It has recently been suggested by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) that formaldehyde is causally associated with nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC) and leukemia. This has led US EPA to conclude that irritation is not the most sensitive toxic endpoint and that carcinogenicity should dictate how to establish exposure limits for formaldehyde. In this review, a number of lines of reasoning and substantial scientific evidence are described and discussed, which leads to a conclusion that neither point of contact nor systemic effects of any type, including NPC or leukemia, are causally associated with exposure to formaldehyde. This conclusion supports the view that the equivocal epidemiology studies that suggest otherwise are almost certainly flawed by identified or yet to be unidentified confounding variables. Thus, this assessment concludes that a formaldehyde indoor air limit of 0.1 ppm should protect even particularly susceptible individuals from both irritation effects and any potential cancer hazard