29 research outputs found

    Effect of a Dual Task on Postural Control in Dyslexic Children

    Get PDF
    Several studies have examined postural control in dyslexic children; however, their results were inconclusive. This study investigated the effect of a dual task on postural stability in dyslexic children. Eighteen dyslexic children (mean age 10.3±1.2 years) were compared with eighteen non-dyslexic children of similar age. Postural stability was recorded with a platform (TechnoConcept®) while the child, in separate sessions, made reflex horizontal and vertical saccades of 10° of amplitude, and read a text silently. We measured the surface and the mean speed of the center of pressure (CoP). Reading performance was assessed by counting the number of words read during postural measures. Both groups of children were more stable while performing saccades than while reading a text. Furthermore, dyslexic children were significantly more unstable than non-dyslexic children, especially during the reading task. Finally, the number of words read by dyslexic children was significantly lower than that of non-dyslexic children and, in contrast to the non-dyslexic children. In line with the U-shaped non-linear interaction model, we suggest that the attention consumed by the reading task could be responsible for the loss of postural control in both groups of children. The postural instability observed in dyslexic children supports the hypothesis that such children have a lack of integration of multiple sensorimotor inputs

    Oak root response to ectomycorrhizal symbiosis establishment: RNA-Seq derived transcript identification and expression profiling

    Get PDF
    Ectomycorrhizal symbiosis is essential for the life and health of trees in temperate and boreal forests where it plays a major role in nutrient cycling and in functioning of the forest ecosystem. Trees with ectomycorrhizal root tips are more tolerant to environmental stresses, such as drought, and biotic stresses such as root pathogens. Detailed information on these molecular processes is essential for the understanding of symbiotic tissue development in order to optimize the benefits of this natural phenomenon. Next generation sequencing tools allow the analysis of non model ectomycorrhizal plant-fungal interactions that can contribute to find the "symbiosis toolkits" and better define the role of each partner in the mutualistic interaction. By using 454 pyrosequencing we compared ectomycorrhizal cork oak roots with non-symbiotic roots. From the two cDNA libraries sequenced, over 2 million reads were obtained that generated 19,552 cork oak root unique transcripts. A total of 2238 transcripts were found to be differentially expressed when ECM roots were compared with non-symbiotic roots. Identification of up- and down-regulated gens in ectomycorrhizal roots lead to a number of insights into the molecular mechanisms governing this important symbiosis. In cork oak roots, ectomycorrhizal colonization resulted in extensive cell wall remodelling, activation of the secretory pathway, alterations in flavonoid biosynthesis, and expression of genes involved in the recognition of fungal effectors. In addition, we identified genes with putative roles in symbiotic processes such as nutrient exchange with the fungal partner, lateral root formation or root hair decay. These findings provide a global overview of the transcriptome of an ectomycorrhizal host root, and constitute a foundation for future studies on the molecular events controlling this important symbiosis.This work was funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (www.fct.pt) in the frame of the project Cork Oak EST Consortium SOBREIRO/0034/2009. Post-doc grant to MS was supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (SFRH/BPD/25661/2005). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript

    Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

    Get PDF
    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 (4th edition)

    Get PDF

    Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

    Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

    Get PDF
    Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

    Produção de hidrogênio verde nos aterros sanitários gaúchos: uma análise técnica e econômica

    No full text
    O presente estudo teve como objetivo avaliar o potencial produtivo e o custo da geração de H2V a partir da reforma a vapor do biometano em aterros sanitários localizados no RS

    Ações extensionistas e o diálogo com as comunidades contemporâneas.

    No full text
    As possibilidades que o tema desta segunda edição da Coleção Extensão e Sociedade oportuniza são muitas, porque o diálogo é a condição essencial da Extensão Universitária, a ponto de ser um princípio determinante. Portanto, quando a chamada foi lançada para que os autores submetessem textos oriundos de ações extensionistas, já se esperava que as submissões desenhassem um quadro de diversidade ampla. A expectativa foi cumprida. O que se poderá observar nesta coletânea é como o princípio do diálogo ocorre em campos diversos. Sobre tal aspecto, há de se observar que para a extensão, o diálogo deve ocorrer entre diferentes grupos. A Universidade é, de modo geral, um grupo e a sociedade, abarca todos os demais. Isto, diga-se logo, sob um ponto de vista amplo, porque quanto mais o olhar se aproxima dos fatos, encontram-se no primeiro grupo, muitos outros, tão diversos entre si quanto o são aqueles que se resolveu reunir em uma categoria imensa: a sociedade. Portanto, os influxos desejáveis no processo dialógico são esperados dentro e entre os grupos e é, possivelmente, a maior energia que uma atividade extensionista possa gerar: a ebulição de ideias (nem sempre convergentes) que o diálogo entre os diversos, internos e externos, acaba gerando no processo de interação. E como não há extensão sem interação, vamos aceitar que quando os dois universos, o acadêmico e a sociedade, aproximam-se, nem sempre é possível saber quais os planetas, de cada dimensão, que orbitarão no processo interativo
    corecore