Two Earth-sized planets orbiting Kepler-20

Since the discovery of the first extrasolar giant planets around Sun-like stars, evolving observational capabilities have brought us closer to the detection of true Earth analogues. The size of an exoplanet can be determined when it periodically passes in front of (transits) its parent star, causing a decrease in starlight proportional to its radius. The smallest exoplanet hitherto discovered has a radius 1.42 times that of the Earth's radius (R Earth), and hence has 2.9 times its volume. Here we report the discovery of two planets, one Earth-sized (1.03R Earth) and the other smaller than the Earth (0.87R Earth), orbiting the star Kepler-20, which is already known to host three other, larger, transiting planets. The gravitational pull of the new planets on the parent star is too small to measure with current instrumentation. We apply a statistical method to show that the likelihood of the planetary interpretation of the transit signals is more than three orders of magnitude larger than that of the alternative hypothesis that the signals result from an eclipsing binary star. Theoretical considerations imply that these planets are rocky, with a composition of iron and silicate. The outer planet could have developed a thick water vapour atmosphere.Comment: Letter to Nature; Received 8 November; accepted 13 December 2011; Published online 20 December 201

A phase II clinical trial of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide followed by thalidomide for angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma. An NCRI clinical trial. CRUK number C17050/A5320.

Accepted version (12 month embargo

Experimental Microbial Evolution of Extremophiles

Experimental microbial evolutions (EME) involves studying closely a microbial population after it has been through a large number of generations under controlled conditions (Kussell 2013). Adaptive laboratory evolution (ALE) selects for fitness under experimentally imposed conditions (Bennett and Hughes 2009; Dragosits and Mattanovich 2013). However, experimental evolution studies focusing on the contributions of genetic drift and natural mutation rates to evolution are conducted under non-selective conditions to avoid changes imposed by selection (Hindré et al. 2012). To understand the application of experimental evolutionary methods to extremophiles it is essential to consider the recent growth in this field over the last decade using model non-extremophilic microorganisms. This growth reflects both a greater appreciation of the power of experimental evolution for testing evolutionary hypotheses and, especially recently, the new power of genomic methods for analyzing changes in experimentally evolved lineages. Since many crucial processes are driven by microorganisms in nature, it is essential to understand and appreciate how microbial communities function, particularly with relevance to selection. However, many theories developed to understand microbial ecological patterns focus on the distribution and the structure of diversity within a microbial population comprised of single species (Prosser et al. 2007). Therefore an understanding of the concept of species is needed. A common definition of species using a genetic concept is a group of interbreeding individuals that is isolated from other such groups by barriers of recombination (Prosser et al. 2007). An alternative ecological species concept defines a species as set of individuals that can be considered identical in all relevant ecological traits (Cohan 2001). This is particularly important because of the abundance and deep phylogenetic complexity of microbial communities. Cohan postulated that “bacteria occupy discrete niches and that periodic selection will purge genetic variation within each niche without preventing divergence between the inhabitants of different niches”. The importance of gene exchange mechanisms likely in bacteria and archaea and therefore extremophiles, arises from the fact that their genomes are divided into two distinct parts, the core genome and the accessory genome (Cohan 2001). The core genome consists of genes that are crucial for the functioning of an organism and the accessory genome consists of genes that are capable of adapting to the changing ecosystem through gain and loss of function. Strains that belong to the same species can differ in the composition of accessory genes and therefore their capability to adapt to changing ecosystems (Cohan 2001; Tettelin et al. 2005; Gill et al. 2005). Additional ecological diversity exists in plasmids, transposons and pathogenicity islands as they can be easily shared in a favorable environment but still be absent in the same species found elsewhere (Wertz et al. 2003). This poses a major challenge for studying ALE and community microbial ecology indicating a continued need to develop a fitting theory that connects the fluid nature of microbial communities to their ecology (Wertz et al. 2003; Coleman et al. 2006). Understanding the nature and contribution of different processes that determine the frequencies of genes in any population is the biggest concern in population and evolutionary genetics (Prosser et al. 2007) and it is critical for an understanding of experimental evolution

The meaning and measurement of implementation climate

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Climate has a long history in organizational studies, but few theoretical models integrate the complex effects of climate during innovation implementation. In 1996, a theoretical model was proposed that organizations could develop a positive climate for implementation by making use of various policies and practices that promote organizational members' means, motives, and opportunities for innovation use. The model proposes that implementation climate--or the extent to which organizational members perceive that innovation use is expected, supported, and rewarded--is positively associated with implementation effectiveness. The implementation climate construct holds significant promise for advancing scientific knowledge about the organizational determinants of innovation implementation. However, the construct has not received sufficient scholarly attention, despite numerous citations in the scientific literature. In this article, we clarify the meaning of implementation climate, discuss several measurement issues, and propose guidelines for empirical study.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Implementation climate differs from constructs such as organizational climate, culture, or context in two important respects: first, it has a strategic focus (implementation), and second, it is innovation-specific. Measuring implementation climate is challenging because the construct operates at the organizational level, but requires the collection of multi-dimensional perceptual data from many expected innovation users within an organization. In order to avoid problems with construct validity, assessments of within-group agreement of implementation climate measures must be carefully considered. Implementation climate implies a high degree of within-group agreement in climate perceptions. However, researchers might find it useful to distinguish implementation climate level (the average of implementation climate perceptions) from implementation climate strength (the variability of implementation climate perceptions). It is important to recognize that the implementation climate construct applies most readily to innovations that require collective, coordinated behavior change by many organizational members both for successful implementation and for realization of anticipated benefits. For innovations that do not possess these attributes, individual-level theories of behavior change could be more useful in explaining implementation effectiveness.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>This construct has considerable value in implementation science, however, further debate and development is necessary to refine and distinguish the construct for empirical use.</p

Highly Divergent Mitochondrial ATP Synthase Complexes in Tetrahymena thermophila

Tetrahymena ATP synthase, an evolutionarily divergent protein complex, has a very unusual structure and protein composition including a unique Fo subunit a and at least 13 proteins with no orthologs outside of the ciliate lineage

De Novo Truncating Mutations in WASF1 Cause Intellectual Disability with Seizures.

Next-generation sequencing has been invaluable in the elucidation of the genetic etiology of many subtypes of intellectual disability in recent years. Here, using exome sequencing and whole-genome sequencing, we identified three de novo truncating mutations in WAS protein family member 1 (WASF1) in five unrelated individuals with moderate to profound intellectual disability with autistic features and seizures. WASF1, also known as WAVE1, is part of the WAVE complex and acts as a mediator between Rac-GTPase and actin to induce actin polymerization. The three mutations connected by Matchmaker Exchange were c.1516C>T (p.Arg506Ter), which occurs in three unrelated individuals, c.1558C>T (p.Gln520Ter), and c.1482delinsGCCAGG (p.Ile494MetfsTer23). All three variants are predicted to partially or fully disrupt the C-terminal actin-binding WCA domain. Functional studies using fibroblast cells from two affected individuals with the c.1516C>T mutation showed a truncated WASF1 and a defect in actin remodeling. This study provides evidence that de novo heterozygous mutations in WASF1 cause a rare form of intellectual disability

Nothing Lasts Forever: Environmental Discourses on the Collapse of Past Societies

The study of the collapse of past societies raises many questions for the theory and practice of archaeology. Interest in collapse extends as well into the natural sciences and environmental and sustainability policy. Despite a range of approaches to collapse, the predominant paradigm is environmental collapse, which I argue obscures recognition of the dynamic role of social processes that lie at the heart of human communities. These environmental discourses, together with confusion over terminology and the concepts of collapse, have created widespread aporia about collapse and resulted in the creation of mixed messages about complex historical and social processes

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