Conodont biostratigraphy of the Middle to Upper Devonian boundary beds in the Kielce area of the Holy Cross Mts

Principal stages in development of the conodont faunas of the passage facies area between the Kielce stromatoporoid-coral platform and Łysogóry intrashelf basin (sensu lato) in the vicinity of Kielce, the Holy Cross Mts, Central Poland, were apparently controlled by facies changeovers stemming from stepwise drowning of the Kielce shoal area. Abrupt transitions from an impoverished polygnathid to polygnathid-ancyrodellid (frequently enriched in Polygnathus? dengleri) to that of diverse pelagic polygnathid-mesotaxid (or icriodontid) biofacies, were a response to pulsatory eustatic rises. A sequence of early Ancyrodella species, crucial for recognition of the Middle/Upper Devonian boundary, is established at Wietrznia and Czarnów sections; in particular, a phyletic succession in the Wietrznia-I profile permits subdivision of the Mesotaxis falsiovalis Zone into at least 3 Ancyrodella levels of global correlation potential. Need of quantitative study of the early ancyrodellid variability, and revision of the series boundary-point in the global stratotype are emphasized, as well as complex ecologic provenances of ancyrodellids

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

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

Devonian lithostratigraphic units (Belgium)

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Comité national de Sciences géologiques

Groessens Éric, Bultynck Pierre. Comité national de Sciences géologiques . In: Bulletin de la Classe des sciences, tome 14, n°1-6, 2003. p. 238

Preface

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Comité national de Sciences géologiques

Groessens Éric, Bultynck Pierre. Comité national de Sciences géologiques . In: Bulletin de la Classe des sciences, tome 14, n°1-6, 2003. p. 238

Guide to a lithostratigraphic scale of Belgium: Preface

info:eu-repo/semantics/publishe