Ratio of Hadronic Decay Rates of J\psi and \psi(2S) and the \rho\pi Puzzle

The so-called \rho\pi puzzle of J\psi and \psi(2S) decays is examined using the experimental data available to date. Two different approaches were taken to estimate the ratio of J\psi and \psi(2S) hadronic decay rates. While one of the estimates could not yield the exact ratio of \psi(2S) to J\psi inclusive hadronic decay rates, the other, based on a computation of the inclusive ggg decay rate for \psi(2S) (J\psi) by subtracting other decay rates from the total decay rate, differs by two standard deviations from the naive prediction of perturbative QCD, even though its central value is nearly twice as large as what was naively expected. A comparison between this ratio, upon making corrections for specific exclusive two-body decay modes, and the corresponding experimental data confirms the puzzles in J\psi and \psi(2S) decays. We find from our analysis that the exclusively reconstructed hadronic decays of the \psi(2S) account for only a small fraction of its total decays, and a ratio exceeding the above estimate should be expected to occur for a considerable number of the remaining decay channels. We also show that the recent new results from the BES experiment provide crucial tests of various theoretical models proposed to explain the puzzle.Comment: 8 pages, no figure, 4 table

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

Solvothermal Synthesis of Zincblende and Wurtzite CuInS₂ Nanocrystals and Their Photovoltaic Application

We report a simple solvothermal synthesis approach to the growth of CuInS₂ nanocrystals with zincblende- and wurtzite-phase structures. Zincblende nanocrystals with particle sizes of 10–20 nm were produced using oleylamine as the solvent. When ethylenediamine was used as the solvent, similarly sized wurtzite nanocrystals with some degree of particle aggregation were formed. Use of a mixture of these solvents gave products with mixed phases including some polyhedral nanostructures. The crystal phases of these nanocrystals were carefully determined by X-ray diffraction and transmission electron microscopy analysis. All the samples exhibit strong absorption from the entire visible light region to the near-infrared region beyond 1300 nm. Pure-phase zincblende and wurtzite CuInS₂ nanocrystals were employed as ink in the fabrication of solar cells. The spray-coated nanocrystal layer was subjected to a selenization process. A power conversion efficiency of ∼0.74% and a good external quantum efficiency profile over broad wavelengths have been measured. The results demonstrate that wurtzite and zincblende CuInS₂ nanocrystals may be attractive precursors to light-absorbing materials for making efficient photovoltaic devices

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

non present

Erratum to: Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) (Autophagy, 12, 1, 1-222, 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356

No abstract available