Both reversible self-association and structural changes underpin molecular viscoelasticity of mAb solutions

The role of antibody structure (conformation) in solution rheology is probed. It is demonstrated here that pH-dependent changes in the tertiary structure of 2 mAb solutions lead to viscoelasticity and not merely a shear viscosity (η) increase. Steady shear flow curves on mAb solutions are reported over broad pH (3.0 ≤ pH ≤ 8.7) and concentration (2 mg/mL ≤ c ≤ 120 mg/mL) ranges to comprehensively characterize their rheology. Results are interpreted using size exclusion chromatography, differential scanning calorimetry, analytical ultracentrifugation, near-UV circular dichroism, and dynamic light scattering. Changes in tertiary structure with concentration lead to elastic yield stress and increased solution viscosity in solution of “mAb1.” These findings are supported by dynamic light scattering and differential scanning calorimetry, which show increased hydrodynamic radius of mAb1 at low pH and a reduced melting temperature Tm, respectively. Conversely, another molecule at 120 mg/mL solution concentration is a strong viscoelastic gel due to perturbed tertiary structure (seen in circular dichroism) at pH 3.0, but the same molecule responds as a viscous liquid due to reversible self-association at pH 7.4 (verified by analytical ultracentrifugation). Both protein–protein interactions and structural perturbations govern pH-dependent viscoelasticity of mAb solutions

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

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

Earth Virtualization Engines (EVE)

To manage Earth in the Anthropocene, new tools, new institutions, and new forms of international cooperation will be required. Earth Virtualization Engines is proposed as an international federation of centers of excellence to empower all people to respond to the immense and urgent challenges posed by climate change

Crop Residue Burning and Its Relationship between Health, Agriculture Value Addition, and Regional Finance

Crop residue burning (CRB) poses a serious threat to the climate, soil fertility, human health and wellbeing, and air quality, which increases mortality rates and slumps agricultural productivity. This study conducts a pan-India analysis of CRB burning based on the spatial characteristic of crop residue management practices and analyzes the linkage among health, agriculture value addition, and regional finance using the simultaneous equation to find the causality and panel quantile regression for direct effect and intergroup difference. We discuss some of the alternative crop residue management practices and policy interventions. Along with in situ management, this paper discusses ex situ crop residue management (CRM) solutions. The ex situ effort to manage crop residue failed due to the scarcity of the supply chain ecosystem. Force of habit and time constrain coupled with risk aversion have made farmers reluctant to adopt these solutions. Our results show that financial viability and crop residue have bidirectional causality; therefore, both the central and state governments must provide a financial solution to lure farmers into adopting residue management practices. Our analysis shows that framers are likely to adopt the management solution (farmers have some economic benefits) and are reluctant to adopt the scientific solution because the scientific solution, such as “pusa decomposer”, is constrained by the weather, temperature, and humidity, and these parameters vary throughout India