17 research outputs found

    Etiology of the membrane potential of rat white fat adipocytes

    Get PDF
    The plasma membrane potential (Vm) is key to many physiological processes, however its ionic aetiology in white fat adipocytes is poorly characterised. To address this question, we have employed the perforated patch current-clamp and cell-attached patch-clamp methods in isolated primary white fat adipocytes and their cellular model: 3T3-L1. The resting Vm of primary and 3T3-L1 adipocytes were -32.1Âą1.2mV (n=95) and -28.8Âą1.2mV (n=87), respectively. Vm was independent of cell size and fat content. Elevation of extracellular [K+] to 50mM by equimolar substitution of bath Na+ did not affect Vm, whereas substitution of bath Na+ with the membrane impermeant cation N-methyl-D-glucamine+ hyperpolarized Vm by 16mV, data indicative of a non-selective cation permeability. Substitution of 133mM extracellular Cl- with gluconate, depolarised Vm to +5.5, whereas Cl- substitution with I- caused a -9mV hyperpolarization. Isoprenaline (10ÂĩM) but not insulin (100nM) significantly depolarized Vm. Single-channel ion activity was voltage independent; currents were indicative for Cl- with an inward slope conductance of 16Âą1.3pS (n=11) and a reversal potential close to the Cl- equilibrium potential: -29Âą1.6mV. Reduction of extracellular Cl- elevated the intracellular Ca2+ of adipocytes. In conclusion, the Vm of white fat adipocyte is well described by the Goldman-Hodgkin-Katz equation with a predominant permeability to Cl-. Consequently, changes in serum Cl- homeostasis or the adipocyte’s permeability to this anion via drugs will affect its Vm, intracellular Ca2+ and ultimately its function and its role in metabolic control

    āļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļīāļ—āļ˜āļīāļœāļĨāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ„āļ­āļĄāļžāļīāļ§āđ€āļ•āļ­āļĢāđŒāļŠāđˆāļ§āļĒāļŠāļ­āļ™ āđ€āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡ āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļĒāļēāļ•āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĄāļ°āđ€āļĢāđ‡āļ‡ Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Instruction of the Pharmacology of Anticancer Drugs

    Get PDF
    āļ§āļąāļ•āļ–āļļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļ‡āļ„āđŒ: āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āđ€āļ›āļĢāļĩāļĒāļšāđ€āļ—āļĩāļĒāļšāļœāļĨāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āļŦāļĨāļąāļ‡āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ āļēāļ„āļšāļĢāļĢāļĒāļēāļĒ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđ€āļ­āļāļŠāļēāļĢāļ›āļĢāļ°āļāļ­āļšāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™ (handout) āđāļĨāļ°āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ„āļ­āļĄāļžāļīāļ§āđ€āļ•āļ­āļĢāđŒāļŠāđˆāļ§āļĒāļŠāļ­āļ™ (computer-assisted instruction; CAI) āđ€āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡ āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļĒāļēāļ•āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĄāļ°āđ€āļĢāđ‡āļ‡ āđƒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļœāļĨāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™ āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļ‡āļ—āļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļžāļķāļ‡āļžāļ­āđƒāļˆāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļ•āđˆāļ­āļŠāļ·āđˆāļ­ āļ§āļīāļ˜āļĩāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē: āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ•āļąāļ§āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡ āļ„āļ·āļ­ āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒāļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ›āļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆ 3 āļĄāļŦāļēāļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļĨāļąāļĒāļĄāļŦāļēāļŠāļēāļĢāļ„āļēāļĄ āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļœāđˆāļēāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ āļēāļ„āļšāļĢāļĢāļĒāļēāļĒ āđ€āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡ āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļĒāļēāļ•āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĄāļ°āđ€āļĢāđ‡āļ‡āļĄāļēāđāļĨāđ‰āļ§ 3 āļ§āļąāļ™ āļˆāļģāļ™āļ§āļ™ 91 āļ„āļ™ āļŠāļļāđˆāļĄāđāļšāļšāđāļšāđˆāļ‡āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ āļđāļĄāļīāļˆāļēāļāđ€āļāļĢāļ”āđ€āļ‰āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒāļŠāļ°āļŠāļĄ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļŠāļļāđˆāļĄāđāļšāđˆāļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™ 2 āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄ āļ„āļ·āļ­ āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄ (n = 46) āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒ handout āđāļĨāļ°āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ—āļ”āļĨāļ­āļ‡ (n = 45) āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒ CAI āđ‚āļ”āļĒāđƒāļŠāđ‰āđ€āļ§āļĨāļē 80 āļ™āļēāļ—āļĩ āļāļģāļŦāļ™āļ”āđƒāļŦāđ‰āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡ 2 āļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŦāđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļąāļ™ 3 āļ§āļąāļ™ āļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āļœāļĨāđ‚āļ”āļĒāđ€āļ›āļĢāļĩāļĒāļšāđ€āļ—āļĩāļĒāļšāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄāđāļĨāļ°āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ—āļ”āļĨāļ­āļ‡ āđ„āļ”āđ‰āđāļāđˆ āļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āđ€āļ‰āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđāļšāļšāļ—āļ”āļŠāļ­āļšāļāđˆāļ­āļ™āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™ (PreInt) āļŦāļĨāļąāļ‡āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļ‹āđ‰āļģāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļ—āļąāļ™āļ—āļĩ (PostInt2) āļŦāļĨāļąāļ‡āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļ‹āđ‰āļģāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŦāđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļąāļ™ 15 āļ§āļąāļ™ (Ret15) āļœāļĨāļŠāļ­āļšāļāļĨāļēāļ‡āļ āļēāļ„ (āļŦāļĨāļąāļ‡āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļ‹āđ‰āļģāļŦāđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļąāļ™ 25 āļ§āļąāļ™) āđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļžāļķāļ‡āļžāļ­āđƒāļˆāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļ•āđˆāļ­āļŠāļ·āđˆāļ­ āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē: āļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļēāļŦāļĨāļąāļ‡āļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļ‹āđ‰āļģāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŠāļ­āļ‡āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĄāļĩāļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āđ€āļ‰āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒ PostInt2 āļŠāļđāļ‡āļāļ§āđˆāļē PreInt āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļ™āļąāļĒāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļī (P-value < 0.001) āđāļ•āđˆāđ„āļĄāđˆāļžāļšāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ•āļāļ•āđˆāļēāļ‡āđ€āļĄāļ·āđˆāļ­āđ€āļ›āļĢāļĩāļĒāļšāđ€āļ—āļĩāļĒāļšāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄ āđ€āļŠāđˆāļ™āđ€āļ”āļĩāļĒāļ§āļāļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ›āļĢāļĩāļĒāļšāđ€āļ—āļĩāļĒāļšāļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āđ€āļ‰āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļ”āļŠāļ­āļšāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļ‡āļ—āļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡ PostInt2 āđāļĨāļ° Ret15 āđƒāļ™āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ™āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļŠāļ­āļšāļāļĨāļēāļ‡āļ āļēāļ„ āļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļēāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄāđāļĨāļ°āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ—āļ”āļĨāļ­āļ‡āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āļĄāļēāļāļāļ§āđˆāļēāļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĒāļĨāļ° 90 āđ‚āļ”āļĒāđ„āļĄāđˆāļžāļšāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ•āļāļ•āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļąāļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļīāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāđ€āļŠāđˆāļ™āļāļąāļ™ āļžāļšāļ§āđˆāļēāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ—āļ”āļĨāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļžāļķāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđƒāļ™āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ™āļ āļēāļžāļ›āļĢāļ°āļāļ­āļš āļ‚āļ™āļēāļ”āļ•āļąāļ§āļ­āļąāļāļĐāļĢāđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļāļĢāļ°āļŠāļąāļšāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļ™āļ·āđ‰āļ­āļŦāļēāļĄāļēāļāļāļ§āđˆāļēāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄ (P-value < 0.05) āļŠāļĢāļļāļ›: āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļšāļ—āļ§āļ™āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļ•āļ™āđ€āļ­āļ‡āļŦāļĨāļąāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ āļēāļ„āļšāļĢāļĢāļĒāļēāļĒāļ‹āđ‰āļģāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ„āļĢāļąāđ‰āļ‡āļˆāļēāļ CAI āļŦāļĢāļ·āļ­ handout āļŠāđˆāļ§āļĒāļŠāđˆāļ‡āđ€āļŠāļĢāļīāļĄāļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĢāļđāđ‰āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļ‚āđ‰āļēāđƒāļˆāđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļ‡āļ—āļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĒāļēāļ§āļ™āļēāļ™āļ–āļķāļ‡ 25 āļ§āļąāļ™ āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āļšāļ—āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ„āļ­āļĄāļžāļīāļ§āđ€āļ•āļ­āļĢāđŒāļŠāđˆāļ§āļĒāļŠāļ­āļ™, āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļĒāļēāļ•āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĄāļ°āđ€āļĢāđ‡āļ‡, āļœāļĨāļŠāļąāļĄāļĪāļ—āļ˜āļīāđŒāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™, āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļ‡āļ—āļ™āļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰Objective: To compare learning effectiveness and retention and satisfaction of providing a traditional handout and computer-assisted instruction (CAI) for post-lecture review of information on the pharmacology of anticancer drugs. Methods: A total of 91 3rd year pharmacy students of Mahasarakham University were enrolled in the study. All participants attended the lecture of pharmacology of anticancer drugs 3 days before the experiment. Students were allocated to 2 groups by stratified random sampling based on accumulated grade point average (GPAX). Of these, 46 students were assigned to control group (handout), and 45 students to test group (CAI). Eighty minutes was set for each of the two self-study sessions 3 days apart. All participants were assessed using a pre-test (PreInt), post-tests given immediateoy after the two self-study sessions (PostInt2), and retention tests given 15 days (Ret15) after the second self-study session. Midterm examination (given 25 days after the second self-study session) and student satisfaction were also identified. Results: At PostInt2, participants in both groups had significantly higher scores than PreInt (P–value < 0.001). However, no significant difference between groups was detected. In terms of learning retention, no significant differences were detected between PostInt2 and Ret15. Both groups scored well in their midterm examinations, with all scores over 90%, and no significant difference detected between groups. Regarding the average satisfaction scores for lecture reviewing materials, these were significantly higher for CAI than the handout (p<0.05), with students preferring the imagery, text size and conciseness of the CAI. Conclusion: Students’ learning effectiveness and long-term learning retention (25 days) could be improved when lecture content was reviewed with either CAI or a handout. Further improvements could be achievable if a second self-study session with CAI or a handout was scheduled. Keywords: computer-assisted instruction (CAI), pharmacology of anticancer drugs, learning effectiveness, learning retentio

    āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļąāļāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒāđ„āļ—āļĒ Learning Motivation of Thai Pharmacy Students

    Get PDF
    āļ§āļąāļ•āļ–āļļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļ‡āļ„āđŒ: āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļ·āļ­āļŠāļģāļŦāļĢāļąāļšāļ§āļąāļ”āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒāđ„āļ—āļĒ āđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒ āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ›āļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆ 1 - 6 āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļĄāļŦāļēāļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļĨāļąāļĒāļĄāļŦāļēāļŠāļēāļĢāļ„āļēāļĄ āđāļĨāļ°āđ€āļ›āļĢāļĩāļĒāļšāđ€āļ—āļĩāļĒāļšāđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļ•āđ‰āļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļ›āļĨāļēāļĒāļ āļēāļ„āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē āļ§āļīāļ˜āļĩāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē: āļœāļđāđ‰āļ§āļīāļˆāļąāļĒāļžāļąāļ’āļ™āļēāđāļšāļšāļŠāļģāļĢāļ§āļˆāđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒāđ‚āļ”āļĒāđāļ›āļĨāļˆāļēāļ Modified Archer’s Health Professions Motivation Survey (MAHPMS) āļ‚āļ­āļ‡ Perrot and Deloney (2013) āļĢāļ§āļĄāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļ„āļģāļ–āļēāļĄ 62 āļ‚āđ‰āļ­ āļ›āļĢāļ°āļāļ­āļšāļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļ•āļąāļ§āļŠāļĩāđ‰āļ§āļąāļ”āļŦāļĨāļąāļ 4 āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āđ„āļ”āđ‰āđāļāđˆ āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰ (3 āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒ) āļāļĨāļĒāļļāļ—āļ˜āđŒāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰ (2 āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒ) āļ›āļąāļˆāļˆāļąāļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰ (2 āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒ) āđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĒāļēāļāļ‡āđˆāļēāļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļĨāļ·āļ­āļāļ—āļģ (2 āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒ) āđ‚āļ”āļĒāđƒāļŠāđ‰ Likert scale 5 āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļš (1 = āđ€āļŦāđ‡āļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļ™āđ‰āļ­āļĒāļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāļļāļ”, 5 = āđ€āļŦāđ‡āļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļĄāļēāļāļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāļļāļ”) āđ„āļ”āđ‰āļ—āļ”āļŠāļ­āļšāļ„āļļāļ“āļŠāļĄāļšāļąāļ•āļīāļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļ·āļ­ āđ€āļāđ‡āļšāļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļĄāļđāļĨāđƒāļ™āļ āļēāļ„āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē 1/2563 āļ—āļĩāđˆāļŠāđˆāļ§āļ‡āļ•āđ‰āļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļ›āļĨāļēāļĒāļ āļēāļ„āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē āđ„āļ”āđ‰āđ€āļ›āļĢāļĩāļĒāļšāđ€āļ—āļĩāļĒāļšāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ•āđˆāļēāļ‡āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āļ•āļąāļ§āļŠāļĩāđ‰āļ§āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđāļ•āđˆāļĨāļ°āļ•āļąāļ§āļŠāļĩāđ‰āļ§āļąāļ”āļŦāļĨāļąāļ āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē: āđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļ·āļ­āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ•āļĢāļ‡āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āđ€āļ™āļ·āđ‰āļ­āļŦāļēāđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĒāļ‡āđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļ­āļ”āļ„āļĨāđ‰āļ­āļ‡āļ āļēāļĒāđƒāļ™āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļĒāļ­āļĄāļĢāļąāļšāđ„āļ”āđ‰ āđƒāļ™āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļ—āļļāļāļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ›āļĩāļ™āļąāđ‰āļ™ āļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āđƒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒāđāļšāļšāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰ āļāļĨāļĒāļļāļ—āļ˜āđŒāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒāđāļšāļšāđ€āļŠāļīāļ‡āļĢāļļāļ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļ§āļšāļ„āļļāļĄāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒāđāļšāļšāļ›āļąāļˆāļˆāļąāļĒāļ āļēāļĒāđƒāļ™ āļĄāļĩāļ„āđˆāļēāļŠāļđāļ‡āļāļ§āđˆāļēāļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ•āļąāļ§āļŠāļĩāđ‰āļ§āļąāļ”āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒāļ­āļ·āđˆāļ™āđƒāļ™āļ•āļąāļ§āļŠāļĩāđ‰āļ§āļąāļ”āļŦāļĨāļąāļāđ€āļ”āļĩāļĒāļ§āļāļąāļ™āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļ™āļąāļĒāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļī (P-value < 0.05) āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ›āļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆ 1 - 5 āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĨāļ·āļ­āļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ‡āđˆāļēāļĒāļŠāļđāļ‡āļāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĒāļēāļ āđāļ•āđˆāļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ›āļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆ 6 āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĨāļ·āļ­āļāļ‡āļēāļ™āļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļĒāļēāļāļŠāļđāļ‡āļāļ§āđˆāļē āđƒāļ™āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ‡āļ›āļĨāļēāļĒāļ āļēāļ„ āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ›āļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆ 1, 4 āđāļĨāļ° 6 āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒāđāļšāļšāđ„āļĄāđˆāļĄāļĩāđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāđ€āļžāļīāđˆāļĄāļŠāļđāļ‡āļ‚āļķāđ‰āļ™āļˆāļēāļāļ•āđ‰āļ™āļ āļēāļ„āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļ™āļąāļĒāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļī (P-value < 0.05) āļ‚āļ“āļ°āļ—āļĩāđˆāļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āļŠāļąāđ‰āļ™āļ›āļĩāļ—āļĩāđˆ 2 āđāļĨāļ° 3 āļĄāļĩāļ„āļ°āđāļ™āļ™āđ€āļ›āđ‰āļēāļŦāļĄāļēāļĒāļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļĒāđˆāļ­āļĒāđāļšāļšāđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļĢāļđāđ‰āļĨāļ”āļĨāļ‡āļˆāļēāļāļ•āđ‰āļ™āļ āļēāļ„āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļ™āļąāļĒāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļāļ—āļēāļ‡āļŠāļ–āļīāļ•āļī (P-value < 0.05) āļŠāļĢāļļāļ›: āđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļ·āļ­āļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™āļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒāļ‰āļšāļąāļšāļ āļēāļĐāļēāđ„āļ—āļĒāļĄāļĩāļ„āļļāļ“āļŠāļĄāļšāļąāļ•āļīāļ—āļēāļ‡āļˆāļīāļ•āļ§āļīāļ—āļĒāļēāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĒāļ­āļĄāļĢāļąāļšāđ„āļ”āđ‰āđāļĨāļ°āļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āļ§āļąāļ”āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāđ„āļ”āđ‰ āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆāļ—āļēāļ‡āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļĢāļĩāļĒāļ™, āļ™āļīāļŠāļīāļ•āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒ, āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ—āļēāļ‡āđ€āļ āļŠāļąāļŠāļĻāļēāļŠāļ•āļĢāđŒ āđ€āļ„āļĢāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ‡āļĄāļ·āļ­āļ§āļąāļ”āđāļĢāļ‡āļˆāļđāļ‡āđƒāļˆObjective: To develop a questionnaire for measuring learning motivation of Thai pharmacy students, to measure learning motivation of 1st – 6th year pharmacy students of Mahasarakham University, and compare learning motivation at the beginning and the end of the semester. Methods: The Modified Archer’s Health Professions Motivation Survey (MAHPMS) of Perrot and Deloney (2013) was translated into Thai language. Of 62 items, 4 domans or indicators consisted of goal orientation (3 sub-domains), learning strategy (2 sub-domains), locus of control (2 sub-domains) and preference for task difficulty (2 sub-domains). The response was a Likert-type ratingscale of 1-least favored, to 5-strongest preference. Psychometri properties were tested. Data were collected in the first semester of the academic year of 2020. Within each domain, scores of sub-domains were compared. Results: Content validity and internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire were acceptable. Scores of mastery oriented goal sub-domain of learning goal, meta-cognitive sub-domain of learning strategy, and internal sub-domain of locus of control in students in all years of study were significantly higher than other sub-domains in their respective domain (P-value < 0.05). Students in their 1st – 5th year had scores of easy task higher than difficult ones; while the opposite was true for the 6th year students. At the end of the semester, students in 1st, 4th and 6th year of study had scores of academic alienation sub-domain of learning goal increased (P-value < 0.05), and 2nd and 3rd year students had scores of mastery oriented goal sub-domain decreased (P-value < 0.05). Conclusion: Thai version of the questionnaire for measuring learning motivation of pharmacy students had acceptable psychometric proterties and was able to measure learning motivation. Keywords: learning motivation, pharmacy students, pharmacy education, motivation assessment too

    CaV1.2 and CaV1.3 voltage-gated L-type Ca2+ channels in rat white fat adipocytes

    Get PDF
    L-type channel antagonists are of therapeutic benefit in the treatment of hyperlipidaemia and insulin resistance. Our aim was to identify L-type voltage-gated Ca2+ channels in white fat adipocytes, and determine if they affect intracellular Ca2+, lipolysis and lipogenesis. We used a multidisciplinary approach of molecular biology, confocal microscopy, Ca2+ imaging and metabolic assays to explore this problem using adipocytes isolated from adult rat epididymal fat pads. CaV1.2, CaV1.3 and CaV1.1 alpha1, beta and alpha2delta subunits were detected at the gene expression level. The CaV1.2 and CaV1.3 alpha1 subunits were identified in the plasma membrane at the protein level. Confocal microscopy with fluorescent antibodies labelled CaV1.2 in the plasma membrane. Ca2+ imaging revealed that the intracellular Ca2+ concentration, [Ca2 +]i was reversibly decreased by removal of extracellular Ca2+, an effect mimicked by verapamil, nifedipine and Co2+, all blockers of L-type channels, whereas the Ca2+ channel agonist BAY-K8644 increased [Ca2+]i. The finding that the magnitude of these effects correlated with basal [Ca2+]i suggests that adipocyte [Ca2+]i is controlled by L-type Ca2+ channels that are constitutively active at the adipocyte depolarized membrane potential. Pharmacological manipulation of L-type channel activity modulated both basal and catecholamine-stimulated lipolysis but not insulin-induced glucose uptake or lipogenesis. We conclude that white adipocytes have constitutively active L-type Ca2+ channels which explains their sensitivity of lipolysis to Ca2+ channel modulators. Our data suggest CaV1.2 as a potential novel therapeutic target in the treatment of obesity

    Roles of Calcium in Adipocyte Cell Function

    Full text link
    EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

    Antibiofilm and antibacterial activities of lupinifolin in combination with protein synthesis inhibitors against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

    Full text link
    Introduction: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-derived biofilm formation is a crucial virulence factor, which essentially contributes to therapeutic challenges. This study aims to evaluate the antibiofilm and antibacterial formation activities of lupinifolin, a prenylated flavanone derived from Derris reticulata Craib. stem, in combination with protein synthesis inhibitors. Methods: The crystal violet biofilm formation assay was performed to determine the biofilm formation activity. The synergistic antibacterial activities were evaluated using the checkerboard and time-kill assays. Results: Lupinifolin and tetracycline significantly reduced MRSA biofilm formation with IC50 values of 15.32 Âą 5.98 and 13.42 Âą 5.90 Âĩg/mL, respectively. On the contrary, the individual treatment of streptomycin and clindamycin tended to enhance biofilm formation. Lupinifolin at the sub-MIC of 8 Âĩg/mL in combination with certain sub-MICs of tetracycline (8 and 16 Âĩg/mL), streptomycin (16, 32, and 64 Âĩg/mL), or clindamycin (4, 8, and 16 Âĩg/mL) caused significant inhibitions against MRSA biofilm formation (P<0.05). The combination of lupinifolin and streptomycin exhibited a synergy (FIC index <0.625), confirmed in the time-kill assay. Conversely, the combination of lupinifolin and tetracycline or clindamycin resulted in no interaction (FIC indices of 1.0078 and <1.0156, respectively). Conclusion: The antibacterial synergy of lupinifolin and streptomycin possibly contributed to their antibiofilm-forming activity. However, the combinations of lupinifolin and tetracycline or clindamycin conceivably executed their antibiofilm activity directly against the MRSA biofilm formation process. These findings indicate a potential role for lupinifolin as an antibiofilm enhancer to diminish MRSA biofilm formation
    corecore