Chemotactic response and adaptation dynamics in Escherichia coli

Adaptation of the chemotaxis sensory pathway of the bacterium Escherichia coli is integral for detecting chemicals over a wide range of background concentrations, ultimately allowing cells to swim towards sources of attractant and away from repellents. Its biochemical mechanism based on methylation and demethylation of chemoreceptors has long been known. Despite the importance of adaptation for cell memory and behavior, the dynamics of adaptation are difficult to reconcile with current models of precise adaptation. Here, we follow time courses of signaling in response to concentration step changes of attractant using in vivo fluorescence resonance energy transfer measurements. Specifically, we use a condensed representation of adaptation time courses for efficient evaluation of different adaptation models. To quantitatively explain the data, we finally develop a dynamic model for signaling and adaptation based on the attractant flow in the experiment, signaling by cooperative receptor complexes, and multiple layers of feedback regulation for adaptation. We experimentally confirm the predicted effects of changing the enzyme-expression level and bypassing the negative feedback for demethylation. Our data analysis suggests significant imprecision in adaptation for large additions. Furthermore, our model predicts highly regulated, ultrafast adaptation in response to removal of attractant, which may be useful for fast reorientation of the cell and noise reduction in adaptation.Comment: accepted for publication in PLoS Computational Biology; manuscript (19 pages, 5 figures) and supplementary information; added additional clarification on alternative adaptation models in supplementary informatio

Publication and related biases in health services research: a systematic review of empirical evidence

Background: Publication and related biases (including publication bias, time-lag bias, outcome reporting bias and p-hacking) have been well documented in clinical research, but relatively little is known about their presence and extent in health services research (HSR). This paper aims to systematically review evidence concerning publication and related bias in quantitative HSR. Methods: Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, HMIC, CINAHL, Web of Science, Health Systems Evidence, Cochrane EPOC Review Group and several websites were searched to July 2018. Information was obtained from: (1) Methodological studies that set out to investigate publication and related biases in HSR; (2) Systematic reviews of HSR topics which examined such biases as part of the review process. Relevant information was extracted from included studies by one reviewer and checked by another. Studies were appraised according to commonly accepted scientific principles due to lack of suitable checklists. Data were synthesised narratively. Results: After screening 6155 citations, four methodological studies investigating publication bias in HSR and 184 systematic reviews of HSR topics (including three comparing published with unpublished evidence) were examined. Evidence suggestive of publication bias was reported in some of the methodological studies, but evidence presented was very weak, limited in both quality and scope. Reliable data on outcome reporting bias and p-hacking were scant. HSR systematic reviews in which published literature was compared with unpublished evidence found significant differences in the estimated intervention effects or association in some but not all cases. Conclusions: Methodological research on publication and related biases in HSR is sparse. Evidence from available literature suggests that such biases may exist in HSR but their scale and impact are difficult to estimate for various reasons discussed in this paper. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016052333

Role of lysophosphatidic acid receptor LPA2 in the development of allergic airway inflammation in a murine model of asthma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) plays a critical role in airway inflammation through G protein-coupled LPA receptors (LPA_1-3). We have demonstrated that LPA induced cytokine and lipid mediator release in human bronchial epithelial cells. Here we provide evidence for the role of LPA and LPA receptors in Th2-dominant airway inflammation.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p/> <p>Wild type, LPA₁heterozygous knockout mice (LPA₁^+/-), and LPA₂heterozygous knockout mice (LPA₂^+/-) were sensitized with inactivated <it>Schistosoma mansoni </it>eggs and local antigenic challenge with <it>Schistosoma mansoni </it>soluble egg Ag (SEA) in the lungs. Bronchoalveolar larvage (BAL) fluids and lung tissues were collected for analysis of inflammatory responses. Further, tracheal epithelial cells were isolated and challenged with LPA.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>BAL fluids from <it>Schistosoma mansoni </it>egg-sensitized and challenged wild type mice (4 days of challenge) showed increase of LPA level (~2.8 fold), compared to control mice. LPA₂^+/-mice, but not LPA₁^+/-mice, exposed to <it>Schistosoma mansoni </it>egg revealed significantly reduced cell numbers and eosinophils in BAL fluids, compared to challenged wild type mice. Both LPA₂^+/-and LPA₁^+/-mice showed decreases in bronchial goblet cells. LPA₂^+/-mice, but not LPA₁^+/-mice showed the decreases in prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and LPA levels in BAL fluids after SEA challenge. The PGE2 production by LPA was reduced in isolated tracheal epithelial cells from LPA₂^+/-mice. These results suggest that LPA and LPA receptors are involved in <it>Schistosoma mansoni </it>egg-mediated inflammation and further studies are proposed to understand the role of LPA and LPA receptors in the inflammatory process.</p

α1A-Adrenergic Receptor Induces Activation of Extracellular Signal-Regulated Kinase 1/2 through Endocytic Pathway

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) activate mitogen-activated protein kinases through a number of distinct pathways in cells. Increasing evidence has suggested that endosomal signaling has an important role in receptor signal transduction. Here we investigated the involvement of endocytosis in α1A-adrenergic receptor (α1A-AR)-induced activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2). Agonist-mediated endocytic traffic of α1A-AR was assessed by real-time imaging of living, stably transfected human embryonic kidney 293A cells (HEK-293A). α1A-AR was internalized dynamically in cells with agonist stimulation, and actin filaments regulated the initial trafficking of α1A-AR. α1A-AR-induced activation of ERK1/2 but not p38 MAPK was sensitive to disruption of endocytosis, as demonstrated by 4°C chilling, dynamin mutation and treatment with cytochalasin D (actin depolymerizing agent). Activation of protein kinase C (PKC) and C-Raf by α1A-AR was not affected by 4°C chilling or cytochalasin D treatment. U73122 (a phospholipase C [PLC] inhibitor) and Ro 31–8220 (a PKC inhibitor) inhibited α1B-AR- but not α1A-AR-induced ERK1/2 activation. These data suggest that the endocytic pathway is involved in α1A-AR-induced ERK1/2 activation, which is independent of Gq/PLC/PKC signaling

Expression and function of G-protein-coupled receptorsin the male reproductive tract

This review focuses on the expression and function of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (mAChRs), α1-adrenoceptors and relaxin receptors in the male reproductive tract. The localization and differential expression of mAChR and α1-adrenoceptor subtypes in specific compartments of the efferent ductules, epididymis, vas deferens, seminal vesicle and prostate of various species indicate a role for these receptors in the modulation of luminal fluid composition and smooth muscle contraction, including effects on male fertility. Furthermore, the activation of mAChRs induces transactivation of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and the Sertoli cell proliferation. The relaxin receptors are present in the testis, RXFP1 in elongated spermatids and Sertoli cells from rat, and RXFP2 in Leydig and germ cells from rat and human, suggesting a role for these receptors in the spermatogenic process. The localization of both receptors in the apical portion of epithelial cells and smooth muscle layers of the vas deferens suggests an involvement of these receptors in the contraction and regulation of secretion.Esta revisão enfatiza a expressão e a função dos receptores muscarínicos, adrenoceptores α1 e receptores para relaxina no sistema reprodutor masculino. A expressão dos receptores muscarínicos e adrenoceptores α1 em compartimentos específicos de dúctulos eferentes, epidídimo, ductos deferentes, vesícula seminal e próstata de várias espécies indica o envolvimento destes receptores na modulação da composição do fluido luminal e na contração do músculo liso, incluindo efeitos na fertilidade masculina. Além disso, a ativação dos receptores muscarínicos leva à transativação do receptor para o fator crescimento epidermal e proliferação das células de Sertoli. Os receptores para relaxina estão presentes no testículo, RXFP1 nas espermátides alongadas e células de Sertoli de rato e RXFP2 nas células de Leydig e germinativas de ratos e humano, sugerindo o envolvimento destes receptores no processo espermatogênico. A localização de ambos os receptores na porção apical das células epiteliais e no músculo liso dos ductos deferentes de rato sugere um papel na contração e na regulação da secreção.Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP) Escola Paulista de Medicina Departamento de FarmacologiaUNIFESP, EPM, Depto. de FarmacologiaSciEL

Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies

BACKGROUND: Systematic literature searching is recognised as a critical component of the systematic review process. It involves a systematic search for studies and aims for a transparent report of study identification, leaving readers clear about what was done to identify studies, and how the findings of the review are situated in the relevant evidence. Information specialists and review teams appear to work from a shared and tacit model of the literature search process. How this tacit model has developed and evolved is unclear, and it has not been explicitly examined before. The purpose of this review is to determine if a shared model of the literature searching process can be detected across systematic review guidance documents and, if so, how this process is reported in the guidance and supported by published studies. METHOD: A literature review. Two types of literature were reviewed: guidance and published studies. Nine guidance documents were identified, including: The Cochrane and Campbell Handbooks. Published studies were identified through 'pearl growing', citation chasing, a search of PubMed using the systematic review methods filter, and the authors' topic knowledge. The relevant sections within each guidance document were then read and re-read, with the aim of determining key methodological stages. Methodological stages were identified and defined. This data was reviewed to identify agreements and areas of unique guidance between guidance documents. Consensus across multiple guidance documents was used to inform selection of 'key stages' in the process of literature searching. RESULTS: Eight key stages were determined relating specifically to literature searching in systematic reviews. They were: who should literature search, aims and purpose of literature searching, preparation, the search strategy, searching databases, supplementary searching, managing references and reporting the search process. CONCLUSIONS: Eight key stages to the process of literature searching in systematic reviews were identified. These key stages are consistently reported in the nine guidance documents, suggesting consensus on the key stages of literature searching, and therefore the process of literature searching as a whole, in systematic reviews. Further research to determine the suitability of using the same process of literature searching for all types of systematic review is indicated