Joint position stand of the ISSP, FEPSAC, ASPASP, and AASP on professional accreditation

© 2018 Objectives: To situate the current status of accreditation in four key international societies, ASPASP, FEPSAC, AASP, and ISSP, in a historical backdrop and then to draw on these approaches to propose future directions and developments relating to practical standards. Design: A review of the origins and current status of accreditation in four international sport psychology societies is utilized to situate the recent prominence of professional standards and the importance of these in our global professional community. This review is written temporally from past, to present, to future prospects. Method: A presentation of societal accreditation foci is situated temporally using the following structure: (a) emergence and historical backdrop from each society, (b) emergence and reasoning for accreditation, (c) current societal standards/status of accreditation, (d) future developments in the society's accreditation system, and (e) reflections and recommendations for global standards, with suggestions of how this might be accomplished. Results: The presentation of scholarship is intended to serve as a form of advocacy for improved accreditation standards within the global professional community. The societal perspectives call for a balance between localized cultural infusion and proposed global guidelines upon which professionals might meet a converged reasonable practice threshold. Conclusions: Sport psychology accreditation is increasingly important as the applied realm of this profession spans community physical activity/recreation, and developmental and elite/professional sport. Accredited practices must integrate universal and local approaches

Supplemental Material - Early Childhood Income Instability and Mental Health in Adolescence: Parenting Stress and Child Maltreatment as Mediators

Supplemental Material for Early Childhood Income Instability and Mental Health in Adolescence: Parenting Stress and Child Maltreatment as Mediators by Liwei Zhang, Yuerong Liu, and Melissa Jonson-Reid in Child Maltreatment.</p

Schematic representation of the plantlet regeneration protocol for <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>.

<p>Schematic representation of the plantlet regeneration protocol for <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>.</p

A Family of CSαβ Defensins and Defensin-Like Peptides from the Migratory Locust, <i>Locusta migratoria</i>, and Their Expression Dynamics during Mycosis and Nosemosis

<div><p>Insect defensins are effector components of the innate defense system. During infection, these peptides may play a role in the control of pathogens by providing protective antimicrobial barriers between epithelial cells and the hemocoel. The cDNAs encoding four defensins of the migratory locust, <i>Locusta migratoria</i>, designated LmDEF 1, 3–5, were identified for the first time by transcriptome-targeted analysis. Three of the members of this CSαβ defensin family, LmDEF 1, 3, and 5, were detected in locust tissues. The pro regions of their sequences have little-shared identities with other insect defensins, though the predicted mature peptides align well with other insect defensins. Phylogenetic analysis indicates a completely novel position of both LmDEF 1 and 3, compared to defensins from hymenopterans. The expression patterns of the genes encoding LmDEFs in the fat body and salivary glands were studied in response to immune-challenge by the microsporidian pathogen <i>Nosema locustae</i> and the fungus <i>Metarhizium anisopliae</i> after feeding or topical application, respectively. Focusing on <i>Nosema</i>-induced immunity, qRT-PCR was employed to quantify the transcript levels of <i>LmDEFs</i>. A higher transcript abundance of <i>LmDEF5</i> was distributed more or less uniformly throughout the fat body along time. A very low baseline transcription of both <i>LmDEFs</i> 1 and 3 in naïve insects was indicated, and that transcription increases with time or is latent in the fat body or salivary glands of infected nymphs. In the salivary glands, expression of <i>LmDEF3</i> was 20-40-times higher than in the fat body post-microbial infection. A very low expression of <i>LmDEF3</i> could be detected in the fat body, but eventually increased with time up to a maximum at day 15. Delayed induction of transcription of these peptides in the fat body and salivary glands 5–15 days post-activation and the differential expression patterns suggest that the fat body/salivary glands of this species are active in the immune response against pathogens. The ability of <i>N</i>. <i>locustae</i> to induce salivary glands as well as fat body expression of defensins raises the possibility that these AMPs might play a key role in the development and/or tolerance of parasitic infections.</p></div

Effect of different treatments on the root induction from regenerated shoot of <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>.

<p><b>Note:</b> The data were collected after 4 weeks cultured on MS basal medium.</p><p>^{a, b}Means in the same column not sharing a common superscript are significantly different (P<0.05).</p><p>Effect of different treatments on the root induction from regenerated shoot of <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>.</p

Effect of different media compositions on adventitious buds induction from SN explants of <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>.

<p><b>Note:</b> The data were collected after 2 weeks cultured on induction medium.</p><p>^{a, b, c, d, e}Means in the same column not sharing a common superscript are significantly different (P<0.05).</p><p>Effect of different media compositions on adventitious buds induction from SN explants of <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>.</p

Cotyledonary embryo-cultured seedlings propagation of <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>.

<p>a) Germination induction for cotyledonary embryo of <i>C</i>. <i>camphora</i>, bar: 1.0 cm; b) EC seedlings transferred to the light culture, bar: 1.0 cm; c) multiple shoots sprouting from the basal section of seedling, bar: 1.0 cm; d) EC seedling line with high proliferation, bar: 1.0 cm; e) the basal section of the multiple shoots (BMS explant) from EC seedling, bar: 0.3 cm; f) the shoots proliferation of BMS explant after 2 weeks culture, bar: 1.0 cm.</p

Structural homology of LmDEFs to known antiprotozoal defensin.

<p>a, Alignment of LmDEF1, -3, and -5 with the antiprotozoal <i>Phlebotomus duboscqi</i> defensin (PhdDEF: Boulanger <i>et al</i>. [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0161585#pone.0161585.ref011" target="_blank">11</a>]). Percentage identity of LmDEFs to PhdDEF are shown at the end of each individual sequence; ^a denote the % identity with PhdDEF full peptide excluding the signal peptide, while ^b is denoting that % with the PhDEF mature active peptide. The amino acid residues are colored according to their physicochemical properties (red: small+ hydrophobic [incl. aromatic -Y]; blue: acidic; magenta: basic–H; green: hydroxyl + sulfhydryl + amine + G). The symbols under the alignment indicate: (*) identical sites; (:) conserved sites; (.) less conserved sites. The boxes indicate the six conserved cysteines; the conserved disulfide bridges are shown by # above these boxes (1–1; 2–2; 3–3). The active peptide cleavage site in PhdDEF is marked with a triangle; while the prodefensin is marked by a line. b, Three-dimensional <i>in silico</i> structure of “active” PhdDEF based on PDB entry 1icaA (defensin A of <i>Protophormia terraenovae</i>) as a template. The homology modeling was carried out with RaptorX; 40(100%) residues were modeled (<i>p</i>-value 9.45e-05). c, The secondary structure elements of PhdDEF predicted by ProFunc server for the purpose of comparison between it and LmDEFs (reported in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0161585#pone.0161585.g002" target="_blank">Fig 2</a>). It comprises 1 sheet, 1 beta hairpin, 1 beta bulge, 2 strands, 1 helix, 4 beta turns, and 3 disulfides.</p

Identity and similarity values among the four putative locust defensins.

<p>Identity and similarity values among the four putative locust defensins.</p

The expression pattern of <i>LmDEFs</i> in the fat body and salivary glands in locusts infected with <i>Nosema</i> on the 1^st, 3^rd, 10^th, and 15^th days post-infection in comparison to control at each time.

<p>PCR products, using qRT-PCR primers (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0161585#pone.0161585.s006" target="_blank">S2 Table</a>), were ran on 1.2% agarose gels and visualized by ethidium bromide staining. M, DNA-ladder; numbers preceding characters are gene numbers in healthy locust (h), or infected locust (i); A-actin gene.</p