15 research outputs found

    Diversity, Phylogeny and Expression Patterns of Pou and Six Homeodomain Transcription Factors in Hydrozoan Jellyfish Craspedacusta sowerbyi

    Get PDF
    Formation of all metazoan bodies is controlled by a group of selector genes including homeobox genes, highly conserved across the entire animal kingdom. The homeobox genes from Pou and Six classes are key members of the regulation cascades determining development of sensory organs, nervous system, gonads and muscles. Besides using common bilaterian models, more attention has recently been targeted at the identification and characterization of these genes within the basal metazoan phyla. Cnidaria as a diploblastic sister group to bilateria with simple and yet specialized organs are suitable models for studies on the sensory organ origin and the associated role of homeobox genes. In this work, Pou and Six homeobox genes, together with a broad range of other sensory-specific transcription factors, were identified in the transcriptome of hydrozoan jellyfish Craspedacusta sowerbyi. Phylogenetic analyses of Pou and Six proteins revealed cnidarian-specific sequence motifs and contributed to the classification of individual factors. The majority of the Craspedacusta sowerbyi Pou and Six homeobox genes are predominantly expressed in statocysts, manubrium and nerve ring, the tissues with sensory and nervous activities. The described diversity and expression patterns of Pou and Six factors in hydrozoan jellyfish highlight their evolutionarily conserved functions. This study extends the knowledge of the cnidarian genome complexity and shows that the transcriptome of hydrozoan jellyfish is generally rich in homeodomain transcription factors employed in the regulation of sensory and nervous functions

    Memory Self-Efficacy Beliefs Modulate Brain Activity when Encoding Real-World Future Intentions

    Get PDF
    Background: While the use of different cognitive strategies when encoding episodic memory information has been extensively investigated, modulation of brain activity by memory self-efficacy beliefs has not been studied yet. Methodology/Principal Findings: Sixteen young adults completed the prospective and retrospective metamemory questionnaire, providing individual subjective judgments of everyday memory function. The day after, using functional magnetic resonance imaging, the participants had to memorize real-world intentions (e. g., return a book to the library), which were performed later on in a virtual environment. Participants also performed offline cognitive tasks evaluating executive functions, working memory, and attention. During encoding, activity was found in medial temporal lobe, left prefrontal cortex, medial parietal regions, occipital areas, and regions involved in (pre) motor processes. Based on results from the questionnaire, the group was split into low and high memory self-efficacy believers. Comparison of encoding-related brain activity between the 2 groups revealed that the low memory self-efficacy believers activated more the hippocampus bilaterally, right posterior parahippocampal cortex, precuneus, and left lateral temporal cortex. By contrast, more activity was found in dorsal anterior cingulate gyrus for the high-memory believers. In addition, the low-memory believers performed more poorly at feature binding and (at trend) manipulating visuospatial information in working memory. Conclusion/Significance: Overall, these findings indicate that memory self-efficacy beliefs modulate brain activity during intentional encoding. Low memory self-efficacy believers activated more brain areas involved in visuospatial operations such as the hippocampus. Possibly, this increase reflects attempts to compensate for poor performance of certain neurocognitive processes, such as feature binding. By contrast, high-memory believers seemed to rely more on executive-like processes involved in cognitive control.This work was funded by the 2007 Goran Gustafsson Award in Medicine and a grant from the Swedish Research Council to Lars Nyberg. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.</p
    corecore