U.S. Cultural Diplomacy and Archeology: Soft Power, Hard Heritage

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 generated a maelstrom of images. There were cities lit by the “shock and awe” bombardment, the falling statues, the traumatized civilians and scene after scene of coalition forces vainly searching for weapons of mass destruction. But among the most peculiarly troubling were the images of the looting of Iraq’s national museum. The human suffering was sadly familiar to the TV audience around the world but the looting broke new ground. The images of looting spoke of the depth of the anarchy into which Iraq was tumbling. They represented the destruction of something greater than the immediate bricks and mortar, blood and bone of a twenty-first century nation; something ancient, irreplaceable and shared: a part of the heritage of all humanity. But the real political impact of those images came from the U.S. military’s failure to either anticipate the action (despite similar smaller incidents during the previous Gulf War) or to react to stop it. It seemed that American indifference had led to what the press dubbed “The greatest cultural disaster of the last 500 years.” The dismissive remark of the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that “stuff happens” added the final twist to a poisonous cocktail guaranteed to corrode the image of U.S. as benevolent, wise or respectful of other nations or even its own shared origins. The State Department noticed the disaster and set about a campaign to do what it could to correct the image of American ambivalence over the collective heritage of humanity. That work is a major focus of this book

Use of portable blood physiology point-of-care devices for basic and applied research on vertebrates: a review

Non-human vertebrate blood is commonly collected and assayed for a variety of applications, including veterinary diagnostics and physiological research. Small, often non-lethal samples enable the assessment and monitoring of the physiological state and health of the individual. Traditionally, studies that rely on blood physiology have focused on captive animals or, in studies conducted in remote settings, have required the preservation and transport of samples for later analysis. In either situation, large, laboratory-bound equipment and traditional assays and analytical protocols are required. The use of point-of-care (POC) devices to measure various secondary blood physiological parameters, such as metabolites, blood gases and ions, has become increasingly popular recently, due to immediate results and their portability, which allows the freedom to study organisms in the wild. Here, we review the current uses of POC devices and their applicability to basic and applied studies on a variety of non-domesticated species. We located 79 individual studies that focused on non-domesticated vertebrates, including validation and application of POC tools. Studies focused on a wide spectrum of taxa, including mammals, birds and herptiles, although the majority of studies focused on fish, and typical variables measured included blood glucose, lactate and pH. We found that calibrations for species-specific blood physiology values are necessary, because ranges can vary within and among taxa and are sometimes outside the measurable range of the devices. In addition, although POC devices are portable and robust, most require durable cases, they are seldom waterproof/water-resistant, and factors such as humidity and temperature can affect the performance of the device. Overall, most studies concluded that POC devices are suitable alternatives to traditional laboratory devices and eliminate the need for transport of samples; however, there is a need for greater emphasis on rigorous calibration and validation of these units and appreciation of their limitations

The tetraspanin Tspan15 is an essential subunit of an ADAM10 scissor complex

A disintegrin and metalloprotease 10 (ADAM10) is a transmembrane protein essential for embryonic development, and its dysregulation underlies disorders such as cancer, Alzheimer's disease, and inflammation. ADAM10 is a molecular scissor that proteolytically cleaves the extracellular region from >100 substrates, including Notch, amyloid precursor protein, cadherins, growth factors, and chemokines. ADAM10 has been recently proposed to function as six distinct scissors with different substrates, depending on its association with one of six regulatory tetraspanins, termed TspanC8s. However, it remains unclear to what degree ADAM10 function critically depends on a TspanC8 partner, and a lack of monoclonal antibodies specific for most TspanC8s has hindered investigation of this question. To address this knowledge gap, here we designed an immunogen to generate the first monoclonal antibodies targeting Tspan15, a model TspanC8. The immunogen was created in an ADAM10-knockout mouse cell line stably overexpressing human Tspan15, because we hypothesized that expression in this cell line would expose epitopes that are normally blocked by ADAM10. Following immunization of mice, this immunogen strategy generated four Tspan15 antibodies. Using these antibodies, we show that endogenous Tspan15 and ADAM10 co-localize on the cell surface, that ADAM10 is the principal Tspan15-interacting protein, that endogenous Tspan15 expression requires ADAM10 in cell lines and primary cells, and that a synthetic ADAM10/Tspan15 fusion protein is a functional scissor. Furthermore, two of the four antibodies impaired ADAM10/Tspan15 activity. These findings suggest that Tspan15 directly interacts with ADAM10 in a functional scissor complex

America\u27s Raj: Kipling, Masculinity and Empire

The posters for Gunga Din promised much: \u27Thrills for a thousand movies, plundered for one mighty show\u27. That show was a valentine to the British Raj, in which three sergeants (engagingly played by Cary Grant, Victor McLaglen, and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr.) defeat marauding hoards of \u27natives\u27 with the aid of their \u27Uncle Tom\u27 water bearer, Gunga Din (Sam Jaffe)[Plate VII]. Audiences loved it. Its racism notwithstanding, even an astute viewer like Bertolt Brecht confessed: \u27My heart was touched ... f felt like applauding and laughed in all the right places\u27. 1 Outwardly the film had little to do with the United States. Most of the cast were British-born and its screenplay claimed to be \u27from the poem by Rudyard Kipling\u27 .2 Yet the film was neither British or faithful to Kipling, but solidly American: directed by George Stevens for RKO, with a screenplay by Oxford-educated Joel Sayre and Stevens\u27s regular collaborator Fred Guiol.