De las aulas a los ambientes naturales... Conservamos nuestro patrimonio natural

El presente trabajo es resultado del proyecto de extensión UNNE res. 109/18 C.S., en el cual participaron integrantes de la FaCENA (UNNE), EBCo (MACN- CONICET), docentes y estudiantes de distintos niveles educativos de la provincia de Corrientes, guardaparques del Parque Pcial San Cayetano (PPSC, San Cayetano, Corrientes) y guías del Aluseo de Ciencias Naturales Amado Bonpland y de Casa Iberá (Corrientes, Corrientes). El objetivo principal fue fortalecer valores ambientales relacionados a temas de biodiversidad y conservación, principalmente mamíferos y sus ambientes naturales. Entre ellos, se trató aquellas especies bajo protección como los monumentos naturales de la provincia (aguará guazú, lobito de río, ciervo de los pantanos, venados de las pampas y oso hormiguero), y otras de importancia ecológica, cultural y/o económica como monos carayá, guazunchos, zorros, carpinchos y tatiíes. Esta experiencia fue un punto de partida para la integración didáctica entre los conocimientos científicos generados en la EBCo y la UNNE y los contenidos del Diseño Curricular de Corrientes, siendo la metodología talleres de educación no formal en las aulas y visitas guiadas al PPSC, Museo de Cs. Naturales Bonpland y/o Casa Iberá. Esta interacción permitió a la comunidad involucrada, el desarrollo de habilidades, actitudes y conocimientos en espacios generados para favorecer el reconocimiento, la reflexión, la valoración, el respeto de su Patrimonio Natural como un elemento clave hacia una mejor calidad de vida a futuro.Fil: Romero, Verónica Lorena. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Kowalewski, Miguel Martin. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia". Estación Biológica de Usos Múltiples (Sede Corrientes); ArgentinaFil: Cespedez, Jorge Abel. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste; ArgentinaFil: Godoy, Angelina M.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia". Estación Biológica de Usos Múltiples (Sede Corrientes); ArgentinaFil: Obregon, Cesar A.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia". Estación Biológica de Usos Múltiples (Sede Corrientes); ArgentinaFil: Romero, Barbara G.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia". Estación Biológica de Usos Múltiples (Sede Corrientes); ArgentinaFil: Fernandez, Patricia M.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia". Estación Biológica de Usos Múltiples (Sede Corrientes); ArgentinaFil: Alegre, Rocío A.. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales y Agrimensura; ArgentinaFil: Bay, Rodrigo. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales y Agrimensura; ArgentinaFil: Landi, Mauricio A.. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales y Agrimensura; ArgentinaFil: Mayer, Joaquin. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales y Agrimensura; ArgentinaFil: Pucheta, Daniela. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales y Agrimensura; ArgentinaFil: Quijano, Romina Florencia. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales y Agrimensura; ArgentinaFil: Romero, Marta I. G.. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales y Agrimensura; Argentin

Sugarcane (Saccharum X officinarum): A Reference Study for the Regulation of Genetically Modified Cultivars in Brazil

Global interest in sugarcane has increased significantly in recent years due to its economic impact on sustainable energy production. Sugarcane breeding and better agronomic practices have contributed to a huge increase in sugarcane yield in the last 30 years. Additional increases in sugarcane yield are expected to result from the use of biotechnology tools in the near future. Genetically modified (GM) sugarcane that incorporates genes to increase resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses could play a major role in achieving this goal. However, to bring GM sugarcane to the market, it is necessary to follow a regulatory process that will evaluate the environmental and health impacts of this crop. The regulatory review process is usually accomplished through a comparison of the biology and composition of the GM cultivar and a non-GM counterpart. This review intends to provide information on non-GM sugarcane biology, genetics, breeding, agronomic management, processing, products and byproducts, as well as the current technologies used to develop GM sugarcane, with the aim of assisting regulators in the decision-making process regarding the commercial release of GM sugarcane cultivars

DNA damage in different Eisenia andrei coelomocytes sub-populations after in vitro exposure to hydrogen peroxide

Earthworms play an essential role in providing soil fertility and may represent an important soil contamination bio-indicator. They are able to ingest soil particles, adsorb substances throughout the intestinal epithelium into the coelomic cavity, where chemicals can come in direct contact with coelomic fluid. Earthworm coelomic fluid shelters leucocytes (coelomocytes) that differ significantly both structurally and functionally. Cellular variability could lead to different susceptibility towards contaminants possibly present in soil ecosystem. In order to define population specific dose response to chemicals and to identify a homogeneous cell population to be used as a relevant biomarker, we investigated different coelomocytes subpopulation, obtained by Percoll density gradient centrifugation (5–35 %), exposed ex vivo to H2O2 in the range of concentration 15–120 µM. DNA damage levels were assessed by the comet assay on unseparated coelomocytes and on three enriched cellular fractions (light, medium and heavy density subpopulations). All tested samples showed a dose–response genotoxic effect following H2O2 exposure. Moreover, light density sub-population appeared more susceptible to oxidative insult highlighted by a significant increase in DNA damage indexes at lower concentrations of H2O2. Present data suggested that in these experimental condition coelomocytes light fraction may represent a more sensitive biomarker of genotoxic insult

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

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