83 research outputs found
Dissociation of circadian and circatidal time-keeping in the marine crustacean Eurydice pulchra
BACKGROUND: Tidal (12.4 hr) cycles of behavior and physiology adapt intertidal organisms to temporally complex coastal environments, yet their underlying mechanism is unknown. However, the very existence of an independent “circatidal” clock has been disputed, and it has been argued that tidal rhythms arise as a submultiple of a circadian clock, operating in dual oscillators whose outputs are held in antiphase i.e., ∼12.4 hr apart. RESULTS: We demonstrate that the intertidal crustacean Eurydice pulchra (Leach) exhibits robust tidal cycles of swimming in parallel to circadian (24 hr) rhythms in behavioral, physiological and molecular phenotypes. Importantly, ∼12.4 hr cycles of swimming are sustained in constant conditions, they can be entrained by suitable stimuli, and they are temperature compensated, thereby meeting the three criteria that define a biological clock. Unexpectedly, tidal rhythms (like circadian rhythms) are sensitive to pharmacological inhibition of Casein kinase 1, suggesting the possibility of shared clock substrates. However, cloning the canonical circadian genes of E. pulchra to provide molecular markers of circadian timing and also reagents to disrupt it by RNAi revealed that environmental and molecular manipulations that confound circadian timing do not affect tidal timing. Thus, competent circadian timing is neither an inevitable nor necessary element of tidal timekeeping. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that tidal rhythms are driven by a dedicated circatidal pacemaker that is distinct from the circadian system of E. pulchra, thereby resolving a long-standing debate regarding the nature of the circatidal mechanism
Disclosure and rationality: Comparative risk information and decision-making about prevention
With the growing focus on prevention in medicine, studies of how to describe risk have become increasing important. Recently, some researchers have argued against giving patients "comparative risk information," such as data about whether their baseline risk of developing a particular disease is above or below average. The concern is that giving patients this information will interfere with their consideration of more relevant data, such as the specific chance of getting the disease (the "personal risk"), the risk reduction the treatment provides, and any possible side effects. I explore this view and the theories of rationality that ground it, and I argue instead that comparative risk information can play a positive role in decision-making. The criticism of disclosing this sort of information to patients, I conclude, rests on a mistakenly narrow account of the goals of prevention and the nature of rational choice in medicine
Revisiting the Gaia Hypothesis: Maximum Entropy, Kauffman’s ‘Fourth Law’ and Physiosemeiosis
- …