LvNotch signaling plays a dual role in regulating the position of the ectoderm-endoderm boundary in the sea urchin embryo

The molecular mechanisms guiding the positioning of the ectoderm-endoderm boundary along the animal-vegetal axis of the sea urchin embryo remain largely unknown. We report here a role for the sea urchin homolog of the Notch receptor, LvNotch, in mediating the position of this boundary. Overexpression of an activated form of LvNotch throughout the embryo shifts the ectoderm-endoderm boundary more animally along the animal-vegetal axis, whereas expression of a dominant negative form shifts the border vegetally. Mosaic experiments that target activated and dominant negative forms of LvNotch into individual blastomeres of the early embryo, combined with lineage analyses, further reveal that LvNotch signaling mediates the position of this boundary by distinct mechanisms within the animal versus vegetal portions of the embryo. In the animal region of the embryo, LvNotch signaling acts cell autonomously to promote endoderm formation more animally, while in the vegetal portion, LvNotch signaling also promotes the ectoderm-endoderm boundary more animally, but through a cell non-autonomous mechanism. We further demonstrate that vegetal LvNotch signaling controls the localization of nuclear β-catenin at the ectoderm-endoderm boundary. Based on these results, we propose that LvNotch signaling promotes the position of the ectoderm-endoderm boundary more animally via two mechanisms: (1) a cell-autonomous function within the animal region of the embryo, and (2) a cell non-autonomous role in the vegetal region that regulates a signal(s) mediating ectoderm-endoderm position, possibly through the control of nuclear β-catenin at the boundary

An analysis of sulphide deformation in low grade metamorphic environments

Imperial Users onl

Interview with Farrell Keas McClay

An interview with Farrell Keas McClay regarding her experiences in a one-room school house.https://scholars.fhsu.edu/ors/1036/thumbnail.jp

A community-based group-guided self-help intervention for low mood and stress: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

<br>Background: Depression is a mental health condition which affects millions of people each year, with worldwide rates increasing. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is recommended in the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the treatment of depression. However, waiting lists can cause delays for face-to-face therapy. Also a proportion of people decline to present for help through the health service – the so-called treatment gap. Self-referral to CBT using community-based group interventions delivered by a voluntary sector organization may serve to resolve this problem. The aim of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to determine the efficacy of such a guided CBT self-help course, the ‘Living Life to the Full’ (LLTTF) classes delivered by the charity Action on Depression (AOD). The primary outcome is level of depression at 6 months assessed using the patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ9) depression scale. Secondary measures include levels of anxiety and social functioning.</br> <br>Methods/design: Participants with symptoms of low mood will be recruited from the community through newspaper adverts and also via the AOD website. Participants will receive either immediate or delayed access to guided CBT self-help classes - the eight session LLTTF course. The primary endpoint will be at 6 months at which point the delayed group will be offered the intervention. Levels of depression, anxiety and social functioning will be assessed and an economic analysis will be carried out.</br> <br>Discussion: This RCT will test whether the LLTTF intervention is effective and/or cost-effective. If the LLTTF community-based classes are found to be cost effective, they may be helpful as both an intervention for those already seeking care in the health service, as well as those seeking help outside that setting, widening access to psychological therapy.</br&gt

Mediation in Medical Treatment: A More Effective Way to Manage Disputes

The right to refuse medical treatment is based on a competent persons due process rights guaranteed by the fifth amendment. Incompetent persons do not have the right to refuse medical treatment. Instead, a process called “substituted judgement” is used to determine what care they will receive. A family member will then make medical decisions on behalf of the incompetent person while they are unable. Disagreements between guardians or between guardians and physicians lead to a court deciding the proper medical treatment. There two major challenges that arise with the substituted judgement process are that family members often do not know the wishes of the incompetent person and that there is no requirement for the family member to make decisions in accordance with those wishes. Advanced directives aim to solve this problem but have failed because they are hardly ever used or are too unclear to be helpful to the surrogate decision-maker. Most states and hospitals have a dispute resolution process that takes place within the hospital before turning to the court. The hospital’s dispute resolution is often ineffective because the surrogate decision maker lacks medical knowledge, does not understand the decision making process, or has come to distrust and resent the doctors and hospital. This Comment proposes that a mediator unaffiliated with the hospital would be more effective resolving disputes. A third-party mediator is able to remedy the power imbalances between the doctors and family, and is able to provide a neutral ground to discuss the treatment plan. Maximizing the effectiveness of dispute resolution will lead to better medical decision-making and ensure that the incompetent person’s best interest is cared for

Pain management in palliative care : choice of analgesia

Pain occurs in 40 to 80% of patients with advanced progressive disease.1 Despite the publications of various guidelines and research in this area together with an extensive choice of analgesia, pain management still presents a challenge in everyday practice. Pain is defined as an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage2 or in simpler terms “pain is what the patient says hurts.”peer-reviewe

Alien Registration- Mcclay, Henry (Fort Fairfield, Aroostook County)

https://digitalmaine.com/alien_docs/36520/thumbnail.jp

Lord Byron’s Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage: Scoping a Twenty-First-Century Digital Book History Resource

There is a growing awareness of the potential capacity of publishing archives to provide an accurate and forensic level of detail to all aspects of the writing, production, sales and reception of books and texts. This level and range of detail which archival sources can supply often means a greater accuracy, nuance, and clarity can be provided to the publishing story, to the benefit of not only book and publishing history, but wider bib­liographic, biographic, and historic studies. Whilst a significant amount of research in these areas has been undertaken with publishing archives, it has had restricted impact and exposure due to the limited access and avail­ability of the print and digital formats in which it has appeared. However, current developments in digital presentation and platforms offers the op­portunity to unite current print and digital resources in a more unified way, whilst also providing a basis to significantly expand with new research and materials. This more unified approach broadens the interdisciplinary appeal and usefulness of publishing archive resources making them relevant and useable to a modern research community and audience. This paper will use Lord Byron's poem Childe Harold's Pilgrimage. A Roumant (1812) as an example of what publishing resources are available for constructing a detailed publishing and literary history and how the scale and type of ma­terials requires a twenty-first-century solution to maximize the potential and use

The place of religion in the American public square: Christianity, civil religion, and the enduring contribution of Richard John Neuhaus

"It is a rather daunting task to address the place of religion in American public life. The question is so rich, so complex, and often so divisive, even contentious. It brings together the two things that American folk wisdom teaches us, from a very early age, that we should not discuss in polite company: religion and politics. And indeed, one widely held, and widely respected, view of the matter is that one should say as little as possible in public about either religion or politics. While there are times when this is good advice, and represents the acme of prudence, it will hardly do for us as a general principle. A form of “civility” that is achieved only by our remaining studiously silent about the things that matter to us most, and are most fundamental to the health of our civil society, is not really civility, but merely an uneasy and impoverished social peace. Nor is this the kind of society that the American Constitutional order envisioned. The first item in our Bill of Rights makes it clear that the Framers placed religion in a very high place—not only as the first and most fundamental of our freedoms, but as a mental and moral and social right whose “free exercise” we also are promised."(...