Genetic variation exists for telomeric array organization within and among the genomes of normal, immortalized, and transformed chicken systems

This study investigated telomeric array organization of diverse chicken genotypes utilizing in vivo and in vitro cells having phenotypes with different proliferation potencies. Our experimental objective was to characterize the extent and nature of array variation present to explore the hypothesis that mega-telomeres are a universal and fixed feature of chicken genotypes. Four different genotypes were studied including normal (UCD 001, USDA-ADOL Line 0), immortalized (DF-1), and transformed (DT40) cells. Both cytogenetic and molecular approaches were utilized to develop an integrated view of telomeric array organization. It was determined that significant variation exists within and among chicken genotypes for chromosome-specific telomeric array organization and total genomic-telomeric sequence content. Although there was variation for mega-telomere number and distribution, two mega-telomere loci were in common among chicken genetic lines (GGA 9 and GGA W). The DF-1 cell line was discovered to maintain a complex derivative karyotype involving chromosome fusions in the homozygous and heterozygous condition. Also, the DF-1 cell line was found to contain the greatest amount of telomeric sequence per genome (17%) as compared to UCD 001 (5%) and DT40 (1.2%). The chicken is an excellent model for studying unique and universal features of vertebrate telomere biology, and characterization of the telomere length variation among genotypes will be useful in the exploration of mechanisms controlling telomere length maintenance in different cell types having unique phenotypes

How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program

Has classical gene position been practically reduced?

One of the defining features of the classical gene was its position (a band in the chromosome). In molecular genetics, positions are defined instead as nucleotide numbers and there is no clear correspondence with its classical counterpart. However, the classical gene position did not simply disappear with the development of the molecular approach, but survived in the lab associated to different genetic practices. The survival of classical gene position would illustrate Waters’ view about the practical persistence of the genetic approach beyond reductionism and anti-reductionist claims. We show instead that at the level of laboratory practices there are also reductive processes, operating through the rise and fall of different techniques. Molecular markers made the concept of classical gene position practically dispensable, leading us to rethink whether it had any causal role or was just a mere heuristi