Transduction of SIV-Specific TCR Genes into Rhesus Macaque CD8+ T Cells Conveys the Ability to Suppress SIV Replication

The SIV/rhesus macaque model for HIV/AIDS is a powerful system for examining the contribution of T cells in the control of AIDS viruses. To better our understanding of CD8(+) T-cell control of SIV replication in CD4(+) T cells, we asked whether TCRs isolated from rhesus macaque CD8(+) T-cell clones that exhibited varying abilities to suppress SIV replication could convey their suppressive properties to CD8(+) T cells obtained from an uninfected/unvaccinated animal.We transferred SIV-specific TCR genes isolated from rhesus macaque CD8(+) T-cell clones with varying abilities to suppress SIV replication in vitro into CD8(+) T cells obtained from an uninfected animal by retroviral transduction. After sorting and expansion, transduced CD8(+) T-cell lines were obtained that specifically bound their cognate SIV tetramer. These cell lines displayed appropriate effector function and specificity, expressing intracellular IFNγ upon peptide stimulation. Importantly, the SIV suppression properties of the transduced cell lines mirrored those of the original TCR donor clones: cell lines expressing TCRs transferred from highly suppressive clones effectively reduced wild-type SIV replication, while expression of a non-suppressing TCR failed to reduce the spread of virus. However, all TCRs were able to suppress the replication of an SIV mutant that did not downregulate MHC-I, recapitulating the properties of their donor clones.Our results show that antigen-specific SIV suppression can be transferred between allogenic T cells simply by TCR gene transfer. This advance provides a platform for examining the contributions of TCRs versus the intrinsic effector characteristics of T-cell clones in virus suppression. Additionally, this approach can be applied to develop non-human primate models to evaluate adoptive T-cell transfer therapy for AIDS and other diseases

There is no such thing as ‘undisturbed’ soil and sediment sampling: sampler-induced deformation of salt marsh sediments revealed by 3D X-ray computed tomography

Purpose: Within most environmental contexts, the collection of 'undisturbed' samples is widely relied-upon in studies of soil and sediment properties and structure. However, the impact of sampler-induced disturbance is rarely acknowledged, despite the potential significance of modification to sediment structure for the robustness of data interpretation. In this study, 3D-computed X-ray microtomography (μCT) is used to evaluate and compare the disturbance imparted by four commonly-used sediment sampling methods within a coastal salt-marsh. Materials and methods: Paired sediment core samples from a restored salt-marsh at Orplands Farm, Essex, UK were collected using four common sampling methods (push, cut, hammer and gouge methods). Sampling using two different area-ratio cores resulted in a total of 16 cores that were scanned using 3D X-Ray computed tomography, to identify and evaluate sediment structural properties of samples that can be attributed to sampling method. Results and discussion: 3D qualitative analysis identifies a suite of sampling-disturbance structures including gross-scale changes to sediment integrity and substantial modification of pore-space, structure and distribution, independent of sediment strength and stiffness. Quantitative assessment of changes to pore-space and sediment density arising from the four sampling methods offer a means of direct comparison between the impact of depth-sampling methods. Considerable disturbance to samples result from use of push, hammer and auguring samplers, whilst least disturbance is found in samples recovered by cutting and advanced trimming approaches. Conclusions: It is evident that with the small-bore tubes and samplers commonly used in environmental studies, all techniques result in disturbance to sediment structure to a far greater extent than previously reported, revealed by μCT. This work identifies and evaluates for the first time the full nature, extent and significance of internal sediment disturbance arising from common sampling methods

Finding patterns in urban tourist behaviour: a social network analysis approach based on TripAdvisor reviews

Developments in ICT and the massive growth in social media usage have increased the availability of data on travel behaviour. This brings an array of new possibilities to improve destination management through Data-driven decisions. This data, however, needs to be analysed and interpreted in order to be beneficial for destination management. Different kinds of methodologies and data have already been applied to analyse spatial behaviour of tourists between and within destinations. The novelty of our paper in this sense that we apply a relational approach by conducting a network analysis methodology on a readily available big data source: user generated content (UGC) from TripAdvisor. The collected data from the city of Antwerp, Belgium shows how locals, Belgians, Europeans and non-Europeans have distinct review patterns, but also shows recurring behavioural patterns. By comparing the relational constellation of the review network to the spatial distribution of central and peripheral attractions, hotels and restaurants, we discuss the added value of social network analysis on UGC for translating (big) data into applicable information and knowledge. The results show a dominant position of a limited number of clustered attractions in the historic city centre, and shows how geographical proximity and relational proximity are interrelated for international reviewers but less for domestic reviewers. This finding is translated into a set of recommendations for policy makers and destination managers trying to accomplish a better distribution of tourists over the entire destination

The COVID-19 response system and collective social service provision. Strategic network dimensions and proximity considerations

©2020. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This document is the Accepted version of a Published Work that appeared in final form inService Business. To access the final edited and published work see https://doi.org/10.1007/s11628-020-00421-wThis paper aims to study and question the emerging social response network to the COVID-19 health crisis in the Valencian region (Spain). Our approach is twofold: a network approach using social network analysis techniques and a social services approach. We seek to analyze the diferent roles, strategic positions, ego-density and brokerage of the participating organizations. Furthermore, we examine the critical factors for explaining why the diferent organizations in the ecosystem cooperate. We fnd that associations and knowledge agents play the most relevant roles. Conversely, local and non-local governments rarely played brokerage roles to coordinate or inter-connect isolated operations of individual organizations. Finally, our results suggest important guidelines for practitioners that may facilitate the collaboration, coordination, and performance of a response network in the future

Entrepreneurship research in service industries: a literature classification and trend analysis

In this paper, the influence of entrepreneurship on service management research is examined. Entrepreneurship research occupies a central place in organizational theory and strategic thinking, but its theories and models have little influence on business management. Entrepreneurship research can have a better integration with other areas of management, but there is still certain isolation. This article reviews the emerging areas in entrepreneurship research that provides complementary theoretical framework to service business models. In order to determine the areas in service management research in which entrepreneurship theories can be useful, a classification of the papers published in the last 2 years in the JCR service management journals is carried out. The study concludes that innovation is the most outstanding priority in service management research that can be enriched by entrepreneurial theories. The entrepreneurial approach to networks and institutional environment are the theoretical frameworks that better suit to introduce entrepreneurship variables as antecedents in business innovation models.Devece Carañana, CA.; Palacios Marqués, D.; Fernández Piqueras, R. (2011). Entrepreneurship research in service industries: a literature classification and trend analysis. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. 7(4):479-493. doi:10.1007/s11365-011-0205-0S47949374Abreu, M., Grinevich, V., & Kitson, M. (2010). Policies to enhance the ‘hidden innovation’ in services: evidence and lessons from the UK. Service Industries Journal, 30(1), 99–118.Acs, Z. J., & Mueller, P. (2008). Employment effects of business dynamics: mice, gazelles and elephants. Small Business Economics, 30(1), 85–100.Alpkan, L., Bulut, C., Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., & Kilic, K. (2010). Organizational support for intrapreneurship and its interaction with human capital to enhance innovative performance. Management Decision, 48(5), 732–755.Altinay, L., & Okumus, F. (2010). Franchise partner selection decision making. Service Industries Journal, 30(6), 929–946.Arendt, S., & Brettel, M. (2010). Understanding the influence of corporate social responsibility on corporate identity, image, and firm performance. Management Decision, 48(10), 1469–1492.Audretsch, D. B., & Thurik, R. (2001). What’s new about the new economy? Sources of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(1), 267–315.Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillem, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 30(1), 1–22.Baggio, R., & Cooper, C. (2010). Knowledge transfer in a tourism destination: the effects of a network structure. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1757–1771.Baregheh, A., Rowley, J., & Sambrook, S. (2009). Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation. Management Decision, 47(8), 1323–1322.Barin, L., & Avila, E. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and green management: relation between headquarters and subsidiary in multinational corporations. Management Decision, 47(7), 1174–1199.Baumol, W. J. (1990). Entrepreneurship: productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 893–921.Bendle, L. J., & Patterson, I. (2010). The centrality of service organizations and their leisure networks. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1607–1619.Bhide, A. (2008). The venturesome economy: How innovation sustains prosperity in a more connected world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Bras, J. M., Costa, C., & Buhalis, D. (2010). Network analysis and wine routes: the case of the Bairrada Wine Route. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1621–1641.Casson, M., & Della Giusta, M. (2007). Entrepreneurship and social capital—Analysing the impact of social networks on entrepreneurial activity from a rational action perspective. International Small Business Journal, 25(3), 220–244.Chell, E. (2007). Social enterprise and entrepreneurship. International Small Business Journal, 25(1), 5–26.Collinson, S., & Gregson, G. (2003). Knowledge networks for new technology-based firms: an international comparison of local entrepreneurship promotion. R&D Management, 33(2), 189–208.de Lucio, I. F., Mas-Verdu, F., & Tortosa, E. (2010). Regional innovation policies: the persistence of the linear model in Spain. Service Industries Journal, 30(5), 749–762.Drucker, P. F., Bang, A., Cleemann, C. M., & Bramming, P. (2010). How to create business value in the knowledge economy: Accelerating thoughts of Peter F. Drucker. Management Decision, 48(4), 616–627.Fan, Y. W., & Ku, E. (2010). Customer focus, service process fit and customer relationship management profitability: the effect of knowledge sharing. Service Industries Journal, 30(2), 203–223.Fuglsang, L., & Mattsson, J. (2009). An integrative model of care ethics in public innovation. Service Industries Journal, 29(1), 21–34.Fyrberg, A., & Juriado, R. (2009). What about interaction? Networks and brands as integrators within service-dominant logic. Journal of Service Management, 20(3–4), 420–432.Hagedoorn, J. (1996). Innovation and entrepreneurship: Schumpeter revisited. Industrial and Corporate Change, 5(3), 883–896.Hoang, H., & Antoncic, B. (2003). Network-based research in entrepreneurship: a critical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 165–187.Hogreve, J., & Gremler, D. D. (2009). Twenty years of service guarantee research a synthesis. Journal of Service Research, 11(4), 322–343.Hsueh, J. T., Lin, N. P., & Li, H. C. (2010). The effects of network embeddedness on service innovation performance. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1723–1736.Huang, J. Y., Chou, T. C., & Lee, G. G. (2010). Imitative innovation strategies: understanding resource management of competent followers. Management Decision, 48(6), 952–975.Joyner, B., & Payne, D. (2002). Evolution and implementation: a study of values, business ethics and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 41(4), 297–311.Kletz, P. (2009). Research in social responsibility: a challenge for management education. Management Decision, 47(10), 1582–1594.Koschatzky, K., & Stahlecker, T. (2010). The emergence of new modes of RD services in Germany. Service Industries Journal, 30(5), 685–700.Lin, W. B. (2010). Relevant factors that affect service recovery performance. Service Industries Journal, 30(6), 891–910.Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: a source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business, 41(1), 35–44.Martin, R. J., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: The case for a definition. Stanford Social Innovation Review, Spring, 29–39Martinez-Gomez, V., Baviera-Puig, A., & Mas-Verdu, F. (2010). Innovation policy, services and internationalisation: the role of technology centres. Service Industries Journal, 30(1), 43–54.Mas-Verdu, F., Ribeiro, D., & Dobon, S. R. (2010a). Government policies and services: an approach to the international context. Service Industries Journal, 30(1), 1–10.Mas-Verdu, F., Soriano, D. R., & Dobon, S. R. (2010b). Regional development and innovation: the role of services. Service Industries Journal, 30(5), 633–641.McGee, J. E., Peterson, M., Mueller, S. L., & Sequeira, J. M. (2009). Entrepreneurial self-efficacy: refining the measure. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(4), 965–988.McLeod, M. T., Vaughan, D. R., & Edwards, J. (2010). Knowledge networks in the tourism sector of the Bournemouth, Poole, and Christchurch conurbation: preliminary analysis. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1651–1667.Melia, M. R., Perez, A. B., & Dobon, S. R. (2010). The influence of innovation orientation on the internationalisation of SMEs in the service sector. Service Industries Journal, 30(5), 777–791.Minniti, M. (2008). The role of government policy on entrepreneurial activity: productive, unproductive, or destructive? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(5), 779–790.Mitra, J., & Abubakar, Y. A. (2010). Entrepreneurship, growth and the high impact firms in regions. Proceedings of Academy of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 43–60.Murphy, P. J., & Coombes, S. C. (2009). A model of social entrepreneurship discovery. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(3), 325–336.North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.OECD (2004). Promoting entrepreneurship and innovative SMEs in a global economy: Toward a more responsible and inclusive globalisation. 2nd OECD Converence of Ministers responsible for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Istanbul, Turkey. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/6/12/31919223.pdf . Accessed 21 May 2010.Ostrom, A. L., Bitner, M. J., Brown, S. W., Burkhard, K. A., Goul, M., Smith-Daniels, V., et al. (2010). Moving forward and making a difference: research priorities for the science of service. Jounal of Service Research, 13(1), 4–36.Pao, H. W., Wu, H. L., & Pan, W. H. (2010). How does a new institution spread? Travel agencies’ adoption of the service quality assurance programme. Service Industries Journal, 30(7), 1047–1061.Pardo-del Val, M. (2010). Services supporting female entrepreneurs. Service Industries Journal, 30(9), 1479–1498.Pechlaner, H., & Bachinger, M. (2010). Knowledge networks of innovative businesses: an explorative study in the region of Ingolstadt. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1737–1756.Pyo, S. (2010). Measuring tourism chain performance. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1669–1682.Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2007). Let’s put the person back into entrepreneurship research: a meta-analysis on the relationship between business owners’ personality traits, business creation, and success. European Journal of work and organizational psychology, 16(4), 353–385.Rendtorff, J. D. (2009). Basic ethical principles applied to service industries. Service Industries Journal, 29(1), 9–19.Romero-Martinez, A. M., Ortiz-de-Urbina-Criado, M., & Soriano, D. R. (2010). Evaluating European Union support for innovation in Spanish small and medium enterprises. Service Industries Journal, 30(5), 671–683.Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Scott, N., & Laws, E. (2010). Advances in service networks research. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1581–1592.Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.Shook, C. L., Priem, R. L., & McGee, J. E. (2003). Venture creation and the enterprising individual: a review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 29(3), 379–399.Smallbone, D., Welter, F., Voytovich, A., & Egorov, I. (2010). Government and entrepreneurship in transition economies: the case of small firms in business services in Ukraine. Service Industries Journal, 30(5), 655–670.Thompson, D. W., Panwar, R., & Hansen, E. N. (2010). Examining social responsibility orientation gaps between society and industry executives. Management Decision, 48(1), 156–171.Thurik, R., & Wennekers, S. (2004). Entrepreneurship, small business and economic growth. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(1), 140–149.Toivonen, M., & Tuominen, T. (2009). Emergence of innovations in services. Service Industries Journal, 29(7), 887–902.Urbano, D., Toledano, N., & Ribeiro, D. (2010). Support policy for the tourism business: a comparative case study in Spain. Service Industries Journal, 30(1), 119–131.Vellecco, I., & Mancino, A. (2010). Sustainability and tourism development in three Italian destinations: stakeholders’ opinions and behaviours. Service Industries Journal, 30(13), 2201–2223.Wagener, S., Gorgievski, M., & Rijsdijk, S. A. (2010). Businessman or host? Individual differences between entrepreneurs and small business owners in the hospitality industry. Service Industries Journal, 30(9), 1513–1527.Wegner, A., Lee, D., & Weiler, B. (2010). Important ‘ingredients’ for successful tourism/protected area partnerships: partners’ policy recommendations. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1643–1650.Wiklund, J., Davidsson, P., Audretsch, D. B., & Karlsson, C. (2011). The future of entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 35(1), 1–9.Wu, L. Y., Wang, C. J., Tseng, C. Y., & Wu, M. C. (2009). Founding team and start-up competitive advantage. Management Decision, 47(2), 345–358.Yoon, W., & Hyun, E. (2010). Economic, social and institutional conditions of network governance: Network governance in East Asia. Management Decision, 48(8), 1212–1229.Zehrer, A., & Raich, F. (2010). Applying a lifecycle perspective to explain tourism network development. Service Industries Journal, 30(10), 1683–1705