Modulation of Functional Activities of Chicken Heterophils by Recombinant Chicken IFN-γ

The objective of the present studies was to examine the in vitro effects of recombinant chicken interferon-γ (rChIFN-γ) on shape change, phagocytosis, and the oxidative/nonoxidative killing activities of day-old chicken heterophils. Heterophils (4 × 106/ml) were incubated with various concentrations of recombinant ChIFN-γ from both Escherichia coli and transfected Cos cells for 2 h at 39°C. The incubation of the neonatal heterophils with rChIFN-γ resulted in significantly greater numbers of cells with membrane shape change when compared with the mock-treated heterophils. Both Cos cell-derived and E. coli-derived ChIFN-γ significantly increased (p < 0.01) the phagocytosis of opsonized or nonopsonized Salmonella enteritidis by the neonatal heterophils in a concentration-dependent manner. Incubation with ChIFN-γ induced no direct stimulation of the respiratory burst by the chicken heterophils but did prime the heterophils for a significantly strengthened respiratory burst to subsequent stimulation with opsonized zymosan (OZ). Lastly, incubation of the heterophils with ChIFN-γ primed the cells for a significant increase in the release of β-D-glucuronidase following stimulation with OZ. These results show that neonatal avian heterophils can respond to cytokine modulation with enhanced functional competence, suggesting that ChIFN-γ can enhance the immune competence of the innate defenses of chickens during the first week of life

History of clinical transplantation

How transplantation came to be a clinical discipline can be pieced together by perusing two volumes of reminiscences collected by Paul I. Terasaki in 1991-1992 from many of the persons who were directly involved. One volume was devoted to the discovery of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), with particular reference to the human leukocyte antigens (HLAs) that are widely used today for tissue matching.1 The other focused on milestones in the development of clinical transplantation.2 All the contributions described in both volumes can be traced back in one way or other to the demonstration in the mid-1940s by Peter Brian Medawar that the rejection of allografts is an immunological phenomenon.3,4 © 2008 Springer New York

Comment letters to the National Commission on Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting, 1987 (Treadway Commission) Vol. 2

https://egrove.olemiss.edu/aicpa_sop/1662/thumbnail.jp

Economics of at-reactor spent fuel storage alternatives

Estimates of costs that would be incurred by a utility providing enhanced storage capability for spent LWR fuel are presented. The cost data are arranged to assist in estimating and evaluating costs for specific storage situations. Estimated storage costs are provided in a series of tables providing cost factors or arrays for each alternative method of storage considered, and the additional costs involved in various options of pre-storage preparation of the fuel. Cost data are provided for (1) storage enhancement within an existing storage pool, by reracking and/or consolidation of fuel; (2) construction and use of an additional, separate water basin for storage; and (3) utilization of dry storage options. Costs are given for canning of integral assemblies and for consolidation and canning of fuel. In each case, the storage facilities are assumed to be located at an existing reactor site. If a separate site were to be utilized for storage, appropriate site development and maintenance costs would need to be added. The basic cost tables are tied togeter by a decision tree logic diagram designed to simulate the decision steps a utility planner might take in selecting from alternative storage technologies to best meet the requirements of his situation. Using the decision tree and its associated tables, example calculations were made to show the life cycle storage costs for a hypothetical case assuming a pressurized water reactor (PWR) site. The reactor was assumed to discharge 40 assemblies (18.4 MTU) of spent fuel each year; costs were estimated for storage periods of 1, 5, and 15 yrs, respectively. Discounted life cycle storage costs in thousands of dollars and unit costs in dollars per kilogram of initial uranium content are shown for this hypothetical site. Cost for spent fuel storage are dependent upon conditions at each reactor site and the most economical method is not expected to be the same at all sites