30 research outputs found

    De-Novo Assembly and Analysis of the Heterozygous Triploid Genome of the Wine Spoilage Yeast Dekkera bruxellensis AWRI1499

    Get PDF
    Despite its industrial importance, the yeast species Dekkera (Brettanomyces) bruxellensis has remained poorly understood at the genetic level. In this study we describe whole genome sequencing and analysis for a prevalent wine spoilage strain, AWRI1499. The 12.7 Mb assembly, consisting of 324 contigs in 99 scaffolds (super-contigs) at 26-fold coverage, exhibits a relatively high density of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Haplotype sampling for 1.2% of open reading frames suggested that the D. bruxellensis AWRI1499 genome is comprised of a moderately heterozygous diploid genome, in combination with a divergent haploid genome. Gene content analysis revealed enrichment in membrane proteins, particularly transporters, along with oxidoreductase enzymes. Availability of this assembly and annotation provides a resource for further investigation of genomic organization in this species, and functional characterization of genes that may confer important phenotypic traits

    Five omic technologies are concordant in differentiating the biochemical characteristics of the berries of five grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) cultivars

    Get PDF

    Interpretación de la cápsula endoscópica: el papel del personal no especializado Capsule endoscopy interpretation: The role of physician extenders

    No full text
    Introducción y objetivos: la cápsula endoscópica (CE) ha supuesto una nueva era en el estudio del intestino delgado. No obstante, el tiempo empleado por el gastroenterólogo en este procedimiento es mayor del deseable y no se han evaluado completamente alternativas al personal especializado. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la precisión de personal no especializado en la interpretación de la CE. Material y métodos: un gastroenterólogo con experiencia en CE y personal no especializado revisaron independientemente 20 procedimientos. Los hallazgos de cada participante eran desconocidos por el resto. Un consenso formado por los participantes y un segundo gastroenterólogo fue empleado como gold standard. Se analizaron número, tipo y localización de las imágenes seleccionadas y tiempo de evacuación gástrica (tEG), tiempo de tránsito en intestino delgado (tTID) y tiempo empleado por los participantes. Resultados: la sensibilidad y la especificidad global fueron del 79 y 99% para el gastroenterólogo; del 86 y 43% para la enfermera; y del 80 y 57% para el residente. Las 34 lesiones "mayores" consideradas por consenso fueron detectadas por los tres participantes. El acuerdo entre consenso y participantes para clasificar e interpretar las imágenes fue de buena a excelente (&kappa; de 0,55 a 1). No se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en el tEG y tTID obtenido por consenso y participantes. El gastroenterólogo fue el más rápido en revisar los procedimientos (51,9 &plusmn; 13,5 minutos versus 62,2 &plusmn; 19 y 60,9 &plusmn; 17,1 para enfermera y residente, respectivamente; p Background and aims: capsule endoscopy (CE) allows for a new era in small-bowel examination. Nevertheless, physicians' time for CE-interpretation remains longer than desirable. Alternative strategies to physicians have not been widely investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of physician extenders in CE-interpretation. Material and methods: one CE-experienced gastroenterologist and two physician extenders reviewed independently 20 CE-procedures. Each reader was blinded to the findings of their colleagues. A consensus formed by the readers and a second CE-experienced gastroenterologist was used as gold standard. Number, type and location of images selected, character of CE-exams and their relationship with indications were recorded. Gastric emptying time (GEt), small-bowel transit time (SBTt) and time spent by readers were also noted. Results: sensitivity and specificity for "overall" lesions was 79 and 99% for the gastroenterologist; 86 and 43% for the nurse; and 80 and 57% for the resident. All 34 "major" lesions considered by consensus were found by the readers. Agreement between consensus and readers for images classification and procedures interpretation was good to excellent (&kappa; from 0.55 to 1). No significant differences were found in the GEt and SBTt obtained by consensus and readers. The gastroenterologist was faster than physician extenders (mean time spent was 51.9 &plusmn; 13.5 minutes versus 62.2 &plusmn; 19 and 60.9 &plusmn; 17.1 for nurse and resident, respectively; p < 0.05). Conclusions: physician extenders could be the perfect complement to gastroenterologists for CE-interpretation but gastroenterologists should supervise their findings. Future cost-efficacy analyses are required to assess the benefits of this alternative
    corecore