Association of Escherichia coli O157:H7 tir polymorphisms with human infection

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Emerging molecular, animal model and epidemiologic evidence suggests that Shiga-toxigenic <it>Escherichia coli </it>O157:H7 (STEC O157) isolates vary in their capacity to cause human infection and disease. The translocated intimin receptor (<it>tir</it>) and intimin (<it>eae</it>) are virulence factors and bacterial receptor-ligand proteins responsible for tight STEC O157 adherence to intestinal epithelial cells. They represent logical genomic targets to investigate the role of sequence variation in STEC O157 pathogenesis and molecular epidemiology. The purposes of this study were (1) to identify <it>tir </it>and <it>eae </it>polymorphisms in diverse STEC O157 isolates derived from clinically ill humans and healthy cattle (the dominant zoonotic reservoir) and (2) to test any observed <it>tir </it>and <it>eae </it>polymorphisms for association with human (vs bovine) isolate source.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Five polymorphisms were identified in a 1,627-bp segment of <it>tir</it>. Alleles of two <it>tir </it>polymorphisms, <it>tir </it>255 T>A and repeat region 1-repeat unit 3 (RR1-RU3, presence or absence) had dissimilar distributions among human and bovine isolates. More than 99% of 108 human isolates possessed the <it>tir </it>255 T>A T allele and lacked RR1-RU3. In contrast, the <it>tir </it>255 T>A T allele and RR1-RU3 absence were found in 55% and 57%, respectively, of 77 bovine isolates. Both polymorphisms associated strongly with isolate source (p < 0.0001), but not by pulsed field gel electrophoresis type or by <it>stx</it>1 and <it>stx</it>2 status (as determined by PCR). Two <it>eae </it>polymorphisms were identified in a 2,755-bp segment of 44 human and bovine isolates; 42 isolates had identical <it>eae </it>sequences. The <it>eae </it>polymorphisms did not associate with isolate source.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Polymorphisms in <it>tir </it>but not <it>eae </it>predict the propensity of STEC O157 isolates to cause human clinical disease. The over-representation of the <it>tir </it>255 T>A T allele in human-derived isolates vs the <it>tir </it>255 T>A A allele suggests that these isolates have a higher propensity to cause disease. The high frequency of bovine isolates with the A allele suggests a possible bovine ecological niche for this STEC O157 subset.</p

The genomes of two key bumblebee species with primitive eusocial organization

Background: The shift from solitary to social behavior is one of the major evolutionary transitions. Primitively eusocial bumblebees are uniquely placed to illuminate the evolution of highly eusocial insect societies. Bumblebees are also invaluable natural and agricultural pollinators, and there is widespread concern over recent population declines in some species. High-quality genomic data will inform key aspects of bumblebee biology, including susceptibility to implicated population viability threats. Results: We report the high quality draft genome sequences of Bombus terrestris and Bombus impatiens, two ecologically dominant bumblebees and widely utilized study species. Comparing these new genomes to those of the highly eusocial honeybee Apis mellifera and other Hymenoptera, we identify deeply conserved similarities, as well as novelties key to the biology of these organisms. Some honeybee genome features thought to underpin advanced eusociality are also present in bumblebees, indicating an earlier evolution in the bee lineage. Xenobiotic detoxification and immune genes are similarly depauperate in bumblebees and honeybees, and multiple categories of genes linked to social organization, including development and behavior, show high conservation. Key differences identified include a bias in bumblebee chemoreception towards gustation from olfaction, and striking differences in microRNAs, potentially responsible for gene regulation underlying social and other traits. Conclusions: These two bumblebee genomes provide a foundation for post-genomic research on these key pollinators and insect societies. Overall, gene repertoires suggest that the route to advanced eusociality in bees was mediated by many small changes in many genes and processes, and not by notable expansion or depauperation

ICAR: endoscopic skull‐base surgery

n/

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field