Determination of ochratoxin A in coffee and tea samples by coupling second-order multivariate calibration and fluorescence spectroscopy

A new method to quantify the mycotoxin ochratoxin A (OTA) in coffee and tea samples is proposed based on second-order multivariate calibration and excitation-emission fluorescence matrix (EEFM) data. Experimental conditions were optimized by studying the effect of pH and various organized media on the fluorescence signal of OTA. For each analysed matrix (coffee grains and tea leaves), several sample pretreatments and calibration methods (external or standard addition) and data processing by chemometric models (e.g., parallel factor analysis/PARAFAC and multivariate curve resolution-alternating least squares/MCR-ALS) were evaluated and discussed. The MCR-ALS algorithm provided an adequate fit to the data for both samples, while PARAFAC was satisfactory only for the tea samples. Regarding the figures of merit, the limits of detection were in the range of 0.2–0.3 ng mL−1; furthermore, low relative prediction errors, between 2% and 4%, were achieved in both the fortified and real samples. Accordingly, the proposed methodology was applied to analyse fortified roasted and green coffee and real tea leaf samples. Satisfactory recoveries were achieved (ranging from 92 to 110%), and the obtained concentrations were in agreement with the values obtained by the reference method (based on high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection/HPLC-FLD). In addition, all samples contained OTA levels lower than the maximum permissible levels. Finally, the proposed strategy allows the use of green analytical chemistry principles; for instance, the use of organic solvents and the generation of waste products were significantly lower than for similar analytical methods reported in the literature.Fil: Gonzalez, Albani L.. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso; ChileFil: Lozano, Valeria Antonella. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Rosario. Instituto de Química Rosario. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Bioquímicas y Farmacéuticas. Instituto de Química Rosario; ArgentinaFil: Escandar, Graciela Monica. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Rosario. Instituto de Química Rosario. Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Facultad de Ciencias Bioquímicas y Farmacéuticas. Instituto de Química Rosario; ArgentinaFil: Bravo, Manuel A.. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso; Chil

Intra-Genomic Ribosomal RNA Polymorphism and Morphological Variation in Elphidium macellum Suggests Inter-Specific Hybridization in Foraminifera

Elphidium macellum is a benthic foraminifer commonly found in the Patagonian fjords. To test whether its highly variable morphotypes are ecophenotypes or different genotypes, we analysed 70 sequences of the SSU rRNA gene from 25 specimens. Unexpectedly, we identified 11 distinct ribotypes, with up to 5 ribotypes co-occurring within the same specimen. The ribotypes differ by varying blocks of sequence located at the end of stem-loop motifs in the three expansion segments specific to foraminifera. These changes, distinct from typical SNPs and indels, directly affect the structure of the expansion segments. Their mosaic distribution suggests that ribotypes originated by recombination of two or more clusters of ribosomal genes. We propose that this expansion segment polymorphism (ESP) could originate from hybridization of morphologically different populations of Patagonian Elphidium. We speculate that the complex geological history of Patagonia enhanced divergence of coastal foraminiferal species and contributed to increasing genetic and morphological variation

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

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries