Explosive expansion of βγ-Crystallin genes in the ancestral vertebrate

In jawed vertebrates, βγ-crystallins are restricted to the eye lens and thus excellent markers of lens evolution. These βγ-crystallins are four Greek key motifs/two domain proteins, whereas the urochordate βγ-crystallin has a single domain. To trace the origin of the vertebrate βγ-crystallin genes, we searched for homologues in the genomes of a jawless vertebrate (lamprey) and of a cephalochordate (lancelet). The lamprey genome contains orthologs of the gnathostome βB1-, βA2- and γN-crystallin genes and a single domain γN-crystallin-like gene. It contains at least two γ-crystallin genes, but lacks the gnathostome γS-crystallin gene. The genome also encodes a non-lenticular protein containing βγ-crystallin motifs, AIM1, also found in gnathostomes but not detectable in the uro- or cephalochordate genome. The four cephalochordate βγ-crystallin genes found encode two-domain proteins. Unlike the vertebrate βγ-crystallins but like the urochordate βγ-crystallin, three of the predicted proteins contain calcium-binding sites. In the cephalochordate βγ-crystallin genes, the introns are located within motif-encoding region, while in the urochordate and in the vertebrate βγ-crystallin genes the introns are between motif- and/or domain encoding regions. Coincident with the evolution of the vertebrate lens an ancestral urochordate type βγ-crystallin gene rapidly expanded and diverged in the ancestral vertebrate before the cyclostomes/gnathostomes split. The β- and γN-crystallin genes were maintained in subsequent evolution, and, given the selection pressure imposed by accurate vision, must be essential for lens function. The γ-crystallin genes show lineage specific expansion and contraction, presumably in adaptation to the demands on vision resulting from (changes in) lifestyle

Attitudes towards sickness absence and sickness presenteeism in health and care sectors in Norway and Denmark: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: In the health and care sector, sickness absence and sickness presenteeism are frequent phenomena and constitute a field in need of exploration. Attitudes towards sickness absence involve also attitudes towards sickness presenteeism, i.e. going to work while sick, confirmed by previous studies. Sickness behavior, reflecting attitudes on work absence, could differ between countries and influence absence rates. But little is known about attitudes towards sickness absence and sickness presenteeism in the health and care sectors in Norway and Denmark. The aim of the present paper is therefore to explore attitudes towards sickness absence and sickness presenteeism among nursing home employees in both countries. METHODS: Eight focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide, the main attention of which was attitudes towards sickness absence and sickness presenteeism. FGDs were conducted in two nursing homes in Norway and two in Denmark, with different geographic locations: one in a rural area and one in an urban area in each country. FGDs were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using framework analysis to identify major themes and explanatory patterns. RESULTS: Four major significant themes were identified from the FGDs: a) sickness absence and sickness presenteeism, b) acceptable causes of sickness absence, c) job identity, and d) organization of work and physical aspects of the workplace. Our analyses showed that social commitment and loyalty to residents and colleagues was important for sickness absence and sickness presenteeism, as were perceived acceptable and non-acceptable reasons for sickness absence. Organization of work and physical aspects of the workplace were also found to have an influence on attitudes towards sickness absence. CONCLUSIONS: The general interpretation of the findings was that attitudes towards sickness absence and sickness presenteeism among nursing home employees were embedded in situational patterns of moral relationships and were connected to a specific job identity. These patterns were constituted by the perception of colleagues, the social commitment to residents, and they influence on what was deemed as acceptable and non-acceptable reasons for sickness absence. In other words, attitudes towards sickness absence and sickness presenteeism were socially and morally determined at personal levels by an overall concept of work, independent of country