Microanatomy of Adult Zebrafish Extraocular Muscles

Binocular vision requires intricate control of eye movement to align overlapping visual fields for fusion in the visual cortex, and each eye is controlled by 6 extraocular muscles (EOMs). Disorders of EOMs are an important cause of symptomatic vision loss. Importantly, EOMs represent specialized skeletal muscles with distinct gene expression profile and susceptibility to neuromuscular disorders. We aim to investigate and describe the anatomy of adult zebrafish extraocular muscles (EOMs) to enable comparison with human EOM anatomy and facilitate the use of zebrafish as a model for EOM research. Using differential interference contrast (DIC), epifluorescence microscopy, and precise sectioning techniques, we evaluate the anatomy of zebrafish EOM origin, muscle course, and insertion on the eye. Immunofluorescence is used to identify components of tendons, basement membrane and neuromuscular junctions (NMJs), and to analyze myofiber characteristics. We find that adult zebrafish EOM insertions on the globe parallel the organization of human EOMs, including the close proximity of specific EOM insertions to one another. However, analysis of EOM origins reveals important differences between human and zebrafish, such as the common rostral origin of both oblique muscles and the caudal origin of the lateral rectus muscles. Thrombospondin 4 marks the EOM tendons in regions that are highly innervated, and laminin marks the basement membrane, enabling evaluation of myofiber size and distribution. The NMJs appear to include both en plaque and en grappe synapses, while NMJ density is much higher in EOMs than in somatic muscles. In conclusion, zebrafish and human EOM anatomy are generally homologous, supporting the use of zebrafish for studying EOM biology. However, anatomic differences exist, revealing divergent evolutionary pressures

The impact of laxative use upon symptoms in patients with proven slow transit constipation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Constipation severity is often defined by symptoms including feelings of complete evacuation, straining, stool frequency and consistency. These descriptors are mostly obtained in the absence of laxative use. For many constipated patients laxative usage is ubiquitous and long standing. Our aim was to determine the impact of laxative use upon the stereotypic constipation descriptors.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients with confirmed slow transit constipation completed 3-week stool diaries, detailing stool frequency and form, straining, laxative use and pain and bloating scores. Each diary day was classified as being under laxative affect (laxative affected days) or not (laxative unaffected days). Unconditional logistic regression was used to assess the affects of laxatives on constipation symptoms.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Ninety four patients with scintigraphically confirmed slow transit constipation were enrolled in the study. These patients reported a stool frequency of 5.6 ± 4.3 bowel motions/week, only 21 patients reported <3 bowel motions/week. Similarly, 21 patients reported a predominant hard stool at defecation. The majority (90%) of patients reported regular straining. A regular feeling of complete evacuation was reported in just 7 patients. Daily pain and/or bloating were reported by 92% of patients. When compared with laxative unaffected days, on the laxative affected days patients had a higher stool frequency (OR 2.23; <it>P </it><0.001) and were more likely to report loose stools (OR 1.64; <it>P </it><0.009). Laxatives did not increase the number of bowel actions associated with a feeling of complete evacuation. Laxative use had no affect upon straining, pain or bloating scores</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The reporting of frequent and loose stools with abdominal pain and/or bloating is common in patients with slow transit constipation. While laxative use is a significant contributor to altering stool frequency and form, laxatives have no apparent affect on pain or bloating or upon a patients feeling of complete evacuation. These factors need to be taken into account when using constipation symptoms to define this population.</p

Exploring public discourses about emerging technologies through statistical clustering of open-ended survey questions

The primary method by which social scientists describe public opinion about science and technology is to present frequencies from fixed response survey questions and to use multivariate statistical models to predict where different groups stand with regard to perceptions of risk and benefit. Such an approach requires measures of individual preference which can be aligned numerically in an ordinal or, preferably, a continuous manner along an underlying evaluative dimension – generally the standard 5- or 7-point attitude question. The key concern motivating the present paper is that, due to the low salience and “difficult” nature of science for members of the general public, it may not be sensible to require respondents to choose from amongst a small and predefined set of evaluative response categories. Here, we pursue a different methodological approach: the analysis of textual responses to “open-ended” questions, in which respondents are asked to state, in their own words, what they understand by the term “DNA.” To this textual data we apply the statistical clustering procedures encoded in the Alceste software package to detect and classify underlying discourse and narrative structures. We then examine the extent to which the classifications, thus derived, can aid our understanding of how the public develop and use “everyday” images of, and talk about, biomedicine to structure their evaluations of emerging technologies