Iconography and schemata: a communicating history in painting between China and the West, 1514-1885

In the West, Chinoiserie and Chinese export art have been studied extensively, however not until museology and modern curating revolutionised during the 1960s and 1970s, had researches in both fields fundamentally reached the breaking point in methods and approaches. In the past 30 years, it is discernable that Chinoiserie and Chinese export art could be merged under the banner of communicating art history, and comparative researches prevailed, which made such a tendency much more apparent. In Mainland China, serious studies have been conducted since the 1980s, further discoveries and arguments were made respectively based on the previous studies in the West. Nevertheless, the two researches have not been synthesized and recognized as a distinctive subject in the field of culture studies, cultural exchange and communication to be specific with the perspective of globalisation and modernisation. This book aims at elucidating that art history has never been absolutely isolated, geographically and culturally; and since the age of exploration, China and the West has been in direct contact, within which new tastes and styles emerged and changed the course of art. The curtain of communication between the two regions in painting was pulled up by the Portuguese explorers, who in 1514 reached China; and henceforth Westerners were able to trade with China directly. Catholic paintings were not only brought to China and gained tremendous response among the Chinese intellectuals, but also taught in Macau, where local artists started painting with Western manner. In Qing dynasty, paintings of Western manner were commissioned by the emperors for various purposes and the craftsmen at court brought the skills back to the provincial areas and reshaped the print industry. Meanwhile in Europe, Chinese objects appeared in masterpieces, and eventually paintings of Chinese taste were identified as Chinoiserie. Chinese fashion was extremely popular at the French court in the 18th century, and soon after it became prevalent throughout well nigh all European nations not only within the circle of aristocracy but also that of the common place. That social phenomenon was regard as Chinoiserie. More than a hundred paintings were selected to cover the time spin from 1514 to 1885, for representing the trajectory of as well as the turning points in the history of art, with degrees of profundity and accuracy. It is hoped that new discourses and approaches could be recognised and could benefit the future researches on connoisseurship, cultural exchange and social transition in early modern history of art. This book focuses on three different spheres of cultural production, namely religion, politics and economics, as a means to reconstruct the history and contextualise and de-contexualise objects of art for more reliable interpretations. By the end of the 19th century, it seemed that Chinoiserie as a social phenomenon in art was replaced by Japonaiserie, however in 1885, Japan declared abandoning sino-centric cultural sphere and embracing European civilisation with indestructible determination, as European culture was heading to the righteous path to the modern age. Even so, the artistic communication between China and the West did not cease to exist; and imperialist powers did not wipe out the traditional Chinese concept of art, rather China and the West both entered, ineluctably, into a new era of art: modernism. Chinoiseire and Chinese export paintings were generated throughout the history of globalication and cultural communication, and they could help reconstruct its history and brought its representation with degrees of the visualised grandiloquence and splendour

<i>Lactobacillus zeae</i> Protects <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> from Enterotoxigenic <i>Escherichia coli</i>-Caused Death by Inhibiting Enterotoxin Gene Expression of the Pathogen

<div><p>Background</p><p>The nematode <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> has become increasingly used for screening antimicrobials and probiotics for pathogen control. It also provides a useful tool for studying microbe-host interactions. This study has established a <i>C. elegans</i> life-span assay to preselect probiotic bacteria for controlling K88⁺ enterotoxigenic <i>Escherichia coli</i> (ETEC), a pathogen causing pig diarrhea, and has determined a potential mechanism underlying the protection provided by <i>Lactobacillus</i>.</p><p>Methodology/Principal Findings</p><p>Life-span of <i>C. elegans</i> was used to measure the response of worms to ETEC infection and protection provided by lactic acid-producing bacteria (LAB). Among 13 LAB isolates that varied in their ability to protect <i>C. elegans</i> from death induced by ETEC strain JG280, <i>Lactobacillus zeae</i> LB1 offered the highest level of protection (86%). The treatment with <i>Lactobacillus</i> did not reduce ETEC JG280 colonization in the nematode intestine. Feeding <i>E. coli</i> strain JFF4 (K88⁺ but lacking enterotoxin genes of <i>estA</i>, <i>estB</i>, and <i>elt</i>) did not cause death of worms. There was a significant increase in gene expression of <i>estA</i>, <i>estB</i>, and <i>elt</i> during ETEC JG280 infection, which was remarkably inhibited by isolate LB1. The clone with either <i>estA</i> or <i>estB</i> expressed in <i>E. coli</i> DH5α was as effective as ETEC JG280 in killing the nematode. However, the <i>elt</i> clone killed only approximately 40% of worms. The killing by the clones could also be prevented by isolate LB1. The same isolate only partially inhibited the gene expression of enterotoxins in both ETEC JG280 and <i>E. coli</i> DH5α <i>in-vitro</i>.</p><p>Conclusions/Significance</p><p>The established life-span assay can be used for studies of probiotics to control ETEC (for effective selection and mechanistic studies). Heat-stable enterotoxins appeared to be the main factors responsible for the death of <i>C. elegans</i>. Inhibition of ETEC enterotoxin production, rather than interference of its intestinal colonization, appears to be the mechanism of protection offered by <i>Lactobacillus</i>.</p></div

Effect of individual clones harboring an enterotoxin gene from ETEC JG280 on the life span of <i>C. elegans</i> in the absence or presence of <i>Lactobacillus</i>.

<p>(A) Effect of individual enterotoxin clones on the life span of <i>C. elegans.</i> Worms were fed one of the following for 10 days: ♦,clone DH5α-16SRNA at 2×10⁸CFU/ml; ×, clone DH5α-LT at 2×10⁸CFU/ml; ▪, clone DH5α-STa at 2×10⁸CFU/ml; ▴, clone DH5α-STb at 2×10⁸CFU/ml; +, OP50 then ETEC JG280 at 2×10⁸CFU/ml. (B) and (C) Effect of isolates LB1 (<i>L. zeae</i>) and CL11 (<i>L. casei</i>)) on the life span of <i>C. elegans</i> infected with individual enterotoxin clones. Worms treated with ETEC JG280 isolate LB1, or CL11 only served as the controls for corresponding treatments. The concentration of all bacterial cultures used for the assays was 2×10⁸CFU/ml. In the treatment groups, worms were treated initially with a <i>Lactobacillus</i> isolate at 10⁸ CFU/ml for 18 h and then with an individual clone or ETEC JG280 (2×10⁸CFU/ml) for the remaining days. All the assays were kept for 10 days. ▪, isolate LB1 or CL11 only; •, isolate LB1 or CL11 and then clone DH5α-LT; ×, isolate LB1 or CL11 and then clone DH5α-STa; ♦, isolate LB1 or CL11 and then clone DH5α-STb; ▴, isolate LB1 or CL11 and then ETEC JG280; +, OP50 and then ETEC JG280.</p

Effect of feeding isolates LB1 (<i>Lactobacillus zeae</i>) and CL11 (<i>Lactobacillus casei</i>) on the survival of <i>C. elegans</i> infected with ETEC JG280 and on bacterial colonization of the nematode intestine.

<p>(A) Survival (%) of <i>C. elegans</i> in the presence or absence of <i>Lactobacillus</i>. (B) Colonization of ETEC JG280 in the intestine of worms. (C) Colonization of <i>Lactobacillus</i> in the intestine of worms. Control worms were fed <i>E. coli</i> OP50 only, either isolate LB1 or CL11 at 10⁸CFU/ml for 8 days. In other treatments, worms were first fed either <i>E. coli</i> OP50 or <i>Lactobacillus</i> (isolate LB1 or CL11) at 10⁸ CFU/ml for 18 h and then ETEC JG280 for the remaining days. Treatments:○, <i>E. coli</i> OP50 only; ▪, <i>E. coli</i> OP50 and then ETEC JG280; □, isolate LB1 only; •, isolate CL11 only; △, isolate LB1 and then JG280; × isolate CL11 and then JG280. The curves of two treatments (□ and ○) were almost overlapped in Panel A.</p

Establishment of a life-span assay of <i>C. elegans</i> infected with K88⁺ ETEC strain JG280.

<p>The life-span is expressed as survival of <i>C. elegans</i> during the assay after infection with JG280 at different cell concentrations. In the assay, worms were fed one of the following for 10 days: ○, <i>E. coli</i> OP50 (food for <i>C. elegans</i>) at 10⁸ CFU/ml; +, JG280 at 10⁷ CFU/ml; ▪, JFF4 at 5×10⁸ CFU/ml; ▴, JG280 at 2×10⁸CFU/ml; ×, JG280 at 5×10⁸CFU/ml.</p

TEM images showing the intestine of <i>C. elegans</i> and the colonization of ETEC and <i>L. zeae</i> LB1 in the nematode intestine.

<p>(A) Cross section of the whole intestine of <i>C. elegans</i>. L: the lumen of intestine; W: the wall of intestine. (B) Colonization of ETEC JG280 in the intestine with a bacterial cell attached to the intestinal surface. E: ETEC JG280 cell; S: inner surface of the intestine; L: the lumen of intestine. (C) Co-existence of ETEC JG280 and <i>L. zeae</i> LB1 in the intestinal lumen of worms. E: ETEC JG280 cells; LAC: <i>L. zeae</i> LB1 cells. (D) Image of ETEC JG280 cells showing the inner and outer members of G-negative bacterium. IM: inner member; OM: outer member. The size of images is indicated by the scale bars.</p

Statistical analysis of the protection effect of lactic acid-producing bacterial isolates on <i>C. elegans</i> infected with ETEC JG280^a.

a<p>Summary of two or more separate experiments. Survival of worms on the last day (day 10) of the assays with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.</p>b<p>E+JG280: treatment with <i>E. coli</i> OP50 and then with ETEC K88 strain JG280. In the assays with LAB isolates, the nematode was firstly treated with a LAB isolate and then with ETEC JG280.</p>c<p>C, isolates from chickens; P, isolates from pigs.</p>d<p>Putative species identity was determined by BLAST analysis of sequences of 16S rRNA genes. Sequence similarities between the isolates and the 16S rDNA database sequences were 98 to 100%. Among the thirteen isolates, CL10, CL11, CL12, S64 and LB1 have been reported previously (7).</p>e<p>DT50, the time at which half of the worms were dead.</p>f<p>Comparisons of survival curves. L+J, <i>C. elegans</i> was treated with <i>Lactobacillus</i> and then JG280. L+J vs <i>E. coli</i> OP50, the statistical difference between the group of <i>C. elegans</i> treated with <i>Lactobacillus</i> followed by JG280 and the group of <i>C. elegans</i> treated with <i>E. coli</i> OP50 only (control group). L+J vs E+J, the statistical difference between the group of <i>C. elegans</i> treated with <i>Lactobacillus</i> followed by JG280 and the group of <i>C. elegans</i> treated with <i>E. coli</i> OP50 followed by JG280.</p

Gene expression of enterotoxins in ETEC strain JG280 during the life-span assay in the presence or absence of <i>L. zeae</i> LB1.

<p>The baseline (Gridline bar) is the level of gene expression of three enterotoxins in ETEC JG280 just before mixing with <i>C. elegans</i> (day 0). (A), (B), and (C) represent the expression level of <i>estA</i> (STa), <i>estB</i> (STb), and <i>elt</i> (LT), respectively, produced by ETEC JG280, in the absence (black bars) or presence of <i>L. zeae</i> LB1 (grey bars) on day 1, 2, and 3. Relative expression was determined using the 2^−ΔΔCt method as the ratio of gene transcript level of each time point to zero time point ETEC JG280 (day 0 before inoculation of <i>C. elegans</i>) and expressed as fold changes. Data are presented as mean ± S.D. Means marked with different letters (a, b, c,) are significantly different at <i>P</i> values of <0.05 within the ETEC JG280 group. Means marked with different letters (A, B, C) are significantly different at <i>P</i> values of <0.05 within the <i>L. zeae</i> LB1 group. *Represents significant difference from the ETEC JG280 group within the same day.</p

Alteration of the Microbiota and Virulence Gene Expression in <i>E</i>. <i>coli</i> O157:H7 in Pig Ligated Intestine with and without AE Lesions

<div><p>Background</p><p>Previously we found that <i>E</i>. <i>coli</i> O157:H7 inoculated into ligated pig intestine formed attaching and effacing (AE) lesions in some pigs but not in others. The present study evaluated changes in the microbial community and in virulence gene expression in <i>E</i>. <i>coli</i> O157:H7 in ligated pig intestine in which the bacteria formed AE lesions or failed to form AE lesions.</p><p>Methodology/Principal Findings</p><p>The intestinal microbiota was assessed by RNA-based denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) analysis. The DGGE banding patterns showed distinct differences involving two bands which had increased intensity specifically in AE-negative pigs (AE- bands) and several bands which were more abundant in AE-positive pigs. Sequence analysis revealed that the two AE- bands belonged to <i>Veillonella caviae</i>, a species with probiotic properties, and <i>Bacteroides</i> sp. Concurrent with the differences in microbiota, gene expression analysis by quantitative PCR showed that, compared with AE negative pigs, <i>E</i>. <i>coli </i>O157:H7 in AE positive pigs had upregulated genes for putative adhesins, non-LEE encoded <i>nleA</i> and quorum sensing <i>qseF</i>, acid resistance gene <i>ureD</i>, and genes from the locus of enterocyte effacement (LEE).</p><p>Conclusions/Significance</p><p>The present study demonstrated that AE-positive pigs had reduced activities or populations of <i>Veillonella caviae</i> and <i>Bacterioides</i> sp. compared with AE-negative pigs. Further studies are required to understand how the microbiota was changed and the role of these organisms in the control of <i>E</i>. <i>coli</i> O157:H7.</p></div

Sequence analysis of bands associated with AE-positive and AE-negative ligated ileal loops of pigs inoculated with <i>E</i>. <i>coli</i> O157:H7.

<p>Sequence analysis of bands associated with AE-positive and AE-negative ligated ileal loops of pigs inoculated with <i>E</i>. <i>coli</i> O157:H7.</p