Early evolution of the biotin-dependent carboxylase family

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Biotin-dependent carboxylases are a diverse family of carboxylating enzymes widespread in the three domains of life, and thus thought to be very ancient. This family includes enzymes that carboxylate acetyl-CoA, propionyl-CoA, methylcrotonyl-CoA, geranyl-CoA, acyl-CoA, pyruvate and urea. They share a common catalytic mechanism involving a biotin carboxylase domain, which fixes a CO₂molecule on a biotin carboxyl carrier peptide, and a carboxyl transferase domain, which transfers the CO₂moiety to the specific substrate of each enzyme. Despite this overall similarity, biotin-dependent carboxylases from the three domains of life carrying their reaction on different substrates adopt very diverse protein domain arrangements. This has made difficult the resolution of their evolutionary history up to now.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Taking advantage of the availability of a large amount of genomic data, we have carried out phylogenomic analyses to get new insights on the ancient evolution of the biotin-dependent carboxylases. This allowed us to infer the set of enzymes present in the last common ancestor of each domain of life and in the last common ancestor of all living organisms (the cenancestor). Our results suggest that the last common archaeal ancestor had two biotin-dependent carboxylases, whereas the last common bacterial ancestor had three. One of these biotin-dependent carboxylases ancestral to Bacteria most likely belonged to a large family, the CoA-bearing-substrate carboxylases, that we define here according to protein domain composition and phylogenetic analysis. Eukaryotes most likely acquired their biotin-dependent carboxylases through the mitochondrial and plastid endosymbioses as well as from other unknown bacterial donors. Finally, phylogenetic analyses support previous suggestions about the existence of an ancient bifunctional biotin-protein ligase bound to a regulatory transcription factor.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The most parsimonious scenario for the early evolution of the biotin-dependent carboxylases, supported by the study of protein domain composition and phylogenomic analyses, entails that the cenancestor possessed two different carboxylases able to carry out the specific carboxylation of pyruvate and the non-specific carboxylation of several CoA-bearing substrates, respectively. These enzymes may have been able to participate in very diverse metabolic pathways in the cenancestor, such as in ancestral versions of fatty acid biosynthesis, anaplerosis, gluconeogenesis and the autotrophic fixation of CO₂.</p

Production and processing of graphene and related materials

© 2020 The Author(s). We present an overview of the main techniques for production and processing of graphene and related materials (GRMs), as well as the key characterization procedures. We adopt a 'hands-on' approach, providing practical details and procedures as derived from literature as well as from the authors' experience, in order to enable the reader to reproduce the results. Section I is devoted to 'bottom up' approaches, whereby individual constituents are pieced together into more complex structures. We consider graphene nanoribbons (GNRs) produced either by solution processing or by on-surface synthesis in ultra high vacuum (UHV), as well carbon nanomembranes (CNM). Production of a variety of GNRs with tailored band gaps and edge shapes is now possible. CNMs can be tuned in terms of porosity, crystallinity and electronic behaviour. Section II covers 'top down' techniques. These rely on breaking down of a layered precursor, in the graphene case usually natural crystals like graphite or artificially synthesized materials, such as highly oriented pyrolythic graphite, monolayers or few layers (FL) flakes. The main focus of this section is on various exfoliation techniques in a liquid media, either intercalation or liquid phase exfoliation (LPE). The choice of precursor, exfoliation method, medium as well as the control of parameters such as time or temperature are crucial. A definite choice of parameters and conditions yields a particular material with specific properties that makes it more suitable for a targeted application. We cover protocols for the graphitic precursors to graphene oxide (GO). This is an important material for a range of applications in biomedicine, energy storage, nanocomposites, etc. Hummers' and modified Hummers' methods are used to make GO that subsequently can be reduced to obtain reduced graphene oxide (RGO) with a variety of strategies. GO flakes are also employed to prepare three-dimensional (3d) low density structures, such as sponges, foams, hydro- or aerogels. The assembly of flakes into 3d structures can provide improved mechanical properties. Aerogels with a highly open structure, with interconnected hierarchical pores, can enhance the accessibility to the whole surface area, as relevant for a number of applications, such as energy storage. The main recipes to yield graphite intercalation compounds (GICs) are also discussed. GICs are suitable precursors for covalent functionalization of graphene, but can also be used for the synthesis of uncharged graphene in solution. Degradation of the molecules intercalated in GICs can be triggered by high temperature treatment or microwave irradiation, creating a gas pressure surge in graphite and exfoliation. Electrochemical exfoliation by applying a voltage in an electrolyte to a graphite electrode can be tuned by varying precursors, electrolytes and potential. Graphite electrodes can be either negatively or positively intercalated to obtain GICs that are subsequently exfoliated. We also discuss the materials that can be amenable to exfoliation, by employing a theoretical data-mining approach. The exfoliation of LMs usually results in a heterogeneous dispersion of flakes with different lateral size and thickness. This is a critical bottleneck for applications, and hinders the full exploitation of GRMs produced by solution processing. The establishment of procedures to control the morphological properties of exfoliated GRMs, which also need to be industrially scalable, is one of the key needs. Section III deals with the processing of flakes. (Ultra)centrifugation techniques have thus far been the most investigated to sort GRMs following ultrasonication, shear mixing, ball milling, microfluidization, and wet-jet milling. It allows sorting by size and thickness. Inks formulated from GRM dispersions can be printed using a number of processes, from inkjet to screen printing. Each technique has specific rheological requirements, as well as geometrical constraints. The solvent choice is critical, not only for the GRM stability, but also in terms of optimizing printing on different substrates, such as glass, Si, plastic, paper, etc, all with different surface energies. Chemical modifications of such substrates is also a key step. Sections IV-VII are devoted to the growth of GRMs on various substrates and their processing after growth to place them on the surface of choice for specific applications. The substrate for graphene growth is a key determinant of the nature and quality of the resultant film. The lattice mismatch between graphene and substrate influences the resulting crystallinity. Growth on insulators, such as SiO2, typically results in films with small crystallites, whereas growth on the close-packed surfaces of metals yields highly crystalline films. Section IV outlines the growth of graphene on SiC substrates. This satisfies the requirements for electronic applications, with well-defined graphene-substrate interface, low trapped impurities and no need for transfer. It also allows graphene structures and devices to be measured directly on the growth substrate. The flatness of the substrate results in graphene with minimal strain and ripples on large areas, allowing spectroscopies and surface science to be performed. We also discuss the surface engineering by intercalation of the resulting graphene, its integration with Si-wafers and the production of nanostructures with the desired shape, with no need for patterning. Section V deals with chemical vapour deposition (CVD) onto various transition metals and on insulators. Growth on Ni results in graphitized polycrystalline films. While the thickness of these films can be optimized by controlling the deposition parameters, such as the type of hydrocarbon precursor and temperature, it is difficult to attain single layer graphene (SLG) across large areas, owing to the simultaneous nucleation/growth and solution/precipitation mechanisms. The differing characteristics of polycrystalline Ni films facilitate the growth of graphitic layers at different rates, resulting in regions with differing numbers of graphitic layers. High-quality films can be grown on Cu. Cu is available in a variety of shapes and forms, such as foils, bulks, foams, thin films on other materials and powders, making it attractive for industrial production of large area graphene films. The push to use CVD graphene in applications has also triggered a research line for the direct growth on insulators. The quality of the resulting films is lower than possible to date on metals, but enough, in terms of transmittance and resistivity, for many applications as described in section V. Transfer technologies are the focus of section VI. CVD synthesis of graphene on metals and bottom up molecular approaches require SLG to be transferred to the final target substrates. To have technological impact, the advances in production of high-quality large-area CVD graphene must be commensurate with those on transfer and placement on the final substrates. This is a prerequisite for most applications, such as touch panels, anticorrosion coatings, transparent electrodes and gas sensors etc. New strategies have improved the transferred graphene quality, making CVD graphene a feasible option for CMOS foundries. Methods based on complete etching of the metal substrate in suitable etchants, typically iron chloride, ammonium persulfate, or hydrogen chloride although reliable, are time- and resourceconsuming, with damage to graphene and production of metal and etchant residues. Electrochemical delamination in a low-concentration aqueous solution is an alternative. In this case metallic substrates can be reused. Dry transfer is less detrimental for the SLG quality, enabling a deterministic transfer. There is a large range of layered materials (LMs) beyond graphite. Only few of them have been already exfoliated and fully characterized. Section VII deals with the growth of some of these materials. Amongst them, h-BN, transition metal tri- and di-chalcogenides are of paramount importance. The growth of h-BN is at present considered essential for the development of graphene in (opto) electronic applications, as h-BN is ideal as capping layer or substrate. The interesting optical and electronic properties of TMDs also require the development of scalable methods for their production. Large scale growth using chemical/physical vapour deposition or thermal assisted conversion has been thus far limited to a small set, such as h-BN or some TMDs. Heterostructures could also be directly grown

Production and processing of graphene and related materials

We present an overview of the main techniques for production and processing of graphene and related materials (GRMs), as well as the key characterization procedures. We adopt a 'hands-on' approach, providing practical details and procedures as derived from literature as well as from the authors' experience, in order to enable the reader to reproduce the results. Section I is devoted to 'bottom up' approaches, whereby individual constituents are pieced together into more complex structures. We consider graphene nanoribbons (GNRs) produced either by solution processing or by on-surface synthesis in ultra high vacuum (UHV), as well carbon nanomembranes (CNM). Production of a variety of GNRs with tailored band gaps and edge shapes is now possible. CNMs can be tuned in terms of porosity, crystallinity and electronic behaviour. Section II covers 'top down' techniques. These rely on breaking down of a layered precursor, in the graphene case usually natural crystals like graphite or artificially synthesized materials, such as highly oriented pyrolythic graphite, monolayers or few layers (FL) flakes. The main focus of this section is on various exfoliation techniques in a liquid media, either intercalation or liquid phase exfoliation (LPE). The choice of precursor, exfoliation method, medium as well as the control of parameters such as time or temperature are crucial. A definite choice of parameters and conditions yields a particular material with specific properties that makes it more suitable for a targeted application. We cover protocols for the graphitic precursors to graphene oxide (GO). This is an important material for a range of applications in biomedicine, energy storage, nanocomposites, etc. Hummers' and modified Hummers' methods are used to make GO that subsequently can be reduced to obtain reduced graphene oxide (RGO) with a variety of strategies. GO flakes are also employed to prepare three-dimensional (3d) low density structures, such as sponges, foams, hydro- or aerogels. The assembly of flakes into 3d structures can provide improved mechanical properties. Aerogels with a highly open structure, with interconnected hierarchical pores, can enhance the accessibility to the whole surface area, as relevant for a number of applications, such as energy storage. The main recipes to yield graphite intercalation compounds (GICs) are also discussed. GICs are suitable precursors for covalent functionalization of graphene, but can also be used for the synthesis of uncharged graphene in solution. Degradation of the molecules intercalated in GICs can be triggered by high temperature treatment or microwave irradiation, creating a gas pressure surge in graphite and exfoliation. Electrochemical exfoliation by applying a voltage in an electrolyte to a graphite electrode can be tuned by varying precursors, electrolytes and potential. Graphite electrodes can be either negatively or positively intercalated to obtain GICs that are subsequently exfoliated. We also discuss the materials that can be amenable to exfoliation, by employing a theoretical data-mining approach. The exfoliation of LMs usually results in a heterogeneous dispersion of flakes with different lateral size and thickness. This is a critical bottleneck for applications, and hinders the full exploitation of GRMs produced by solution processing. The establishment of procedures to control the morphological properties of exfoliated GRMs, which also need to be industrially scalable, is one of the key needs. Section III deals with the processing of flakes. (Ultra)centrifugation techniques have thus far been the most investigated to sort GRMs following ultrasonication, shear mixing, ball milling, microfluidization, and wet-jet milling. It allows sorting by size and thickness. Inks formulated from GRM dispersions can be printed using a number of processes, from inkjet to screen printing. Each technique has specific rheological requirements, as well as geometrical constraints. The solvent choice is critical, not only for the GRM stability, but also in terms of optimizing printing on different substrates, such as glass, Si, plastic, paper, etc, all with different surface energies. Chemical modifications of such substrates is also a key step. Sections IV–VII are devoted to the growth of GRMs on various substrates and their processing after growth to place them on the surface of choice for specific applications. The substrate for graphene growth is a key determinant of the nature and quality of the resultant film. The lattice mismatch between graphene and substrate influences the resulting crystallinity. Growth on insulators, such as SiO2, typically results in films with small crystallites, whereas growth on the close-packed surfaces of metals yields highly crystalline films. Section IV outlines the growth of graphene on SiC substrates. This satisfies the requirements for electronic applications, with well-defined graphene-substrate interface, low trapped impurities and no need for transfer. It also allows graphene structures and devices to be measured directly on the growth substrate. The flatness of the substrate results in graphene with minimal strain and ripples on large areas, allowing spectroscopies and surface science to be performed. We also discuss the surface engineering by intercalation of the resulting graphene, its integration with Si-wafers and the production of nanostructures with the desired shape, with no need for patterning. Section V deals with chemical vapour deposition (CVD) onto various transition metals and on insulators. Growth on Ni results in graphitized polycrystalline films. While the thickness of these films can be optimized by controlling the deposition parameters, such as the type of hydrocarbon precursor and temperature, it is difficult to attain single layer graphene (SLG) across large areas, owing to the simultaneous nucleation/growth and solution/precipitation mechanisms. The differing characteristics of polycrystalline Ni films facilitate the growth of graphitic layers at different rates, resulting in regions with differing numbers of graphitic layers. High-quality films can be grown on Cu. Cu is available in a variety of shapes and forms, such as foils, bulks, foams, thin films on other materials and powders, making it attractive for industrial production of large area graphene films. The push to use CVD graphene in applications has also triggered a research line for the direct growth on insulators. The quality of the resulting films is lower than possible to date on metals, but enough, in terms of transmittance and resistivity, for many applications as described in section V. Transfer technologies are the focus of section VI. CVD synthesis of graphene on metals and bottom up molecular approaches require SLG to be transferred to the final target substrates. To have technological impact, the advances in production of high-quality large-area CVD graphene must be commensurate with those on transfer and placement on the final substrates. This is a prerequisite for most applications, such as touch panels, anticorrosion coatings, transparent electrodes and gas sensors etc. New strategies have improved the transferred graphene quality, making CVD graphene a feasible option for CMOS foundries. Methods based on complete etching of the metal substrate in suitable etchants, typically iron chloride, ammonium persulfate, or hydrogen chloride although reliable, are time- and resource-consuming, with damage to graphene and production of metal and etchant residues. Electrochemical delamination in a low-concentration aqueous solution is an alternative. In this case metallic substrates can be reused. Dry transfer is less detrimental for the SLG quality, enabling a deterministic transfer. There is a large range of layered materials (LMs) beyond graphite. Only few of them have been already exfoliated and fully characterized. Section VII deals with the growth of some of these materials. Amongst them, h-BN, transition metal tri- and di-chalcogenides are of paramount importance. The growth of h-BN is at present considered essential for the development of graphene in (opto) electronic applications, as h-BN is ideal as capping layer or substrate. The interesting optical and electronic properties of TMDs also require the development of scalable methods for their production. Large scale growth using chemical/physical vapour deposition or thermal assisted conversion has been thus far limited to a small set, such as h-BN or some TMDs. Heterostructures could also be directly grown. Section VIII discusses advances in GRM functionalization. A broad range of organic molecules can be anchored to the sp2 basal plane by reductive functionalization. Negatively charged graphene can be prepared in liquid phase (e.g. via intercalation chemistry or electrochemically) and can react with electrophiles. This can be achieved both in dispersion or on substrate. The functional groups of GO can be further derivatized. Graphene can also be noncovalently functionalized, in particular with polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons that assemble on the sp2 carbon network by π–π stacking. In the liquid phase, this can enhance the colloidal stability of SLG/FLG. Approaches to achieve noncovalent on-substrate functionalization are also discussed, which can chemically dope graphene. Research efforts to derivatize CNMs are also summarized, as well as novel routes to selectively address defect sites. In dispersion, edges are the most dominant defects and can be covalently modified. This enhances colloidal stability without modifying the graphene basal plane. Basal plane point defects can also be modified, passivated and healed in ultra-high vacuum. The decoration of graphene with metal nanoparticles (NPs) has also received considerable attention, as it allows to exploit synergistic effects between NPs and graphene. Decoration can be either achieved chemically or in the gas phase. All LMs, can be functionalized and we summarize emerging approaches to covalently and noncovalently functionalize MoS2 both in the liquid and on substrate. Section IX describes some of the most popular characterization techniques, ranging from optical detection to the measurement of the electronic structure. Microscopies play an important role, although macroscopic techniques are also used for the measurement of the properties of these materials and their devices. Raman spectroscopy is paramount for GRMs, while PL is more adequate for non-graphene LMs (see section IX.2). Liquid based methods result in flakes with different thicknesses and dimensions. The qualification of size and thickness can be achieved using imaging techniques, like scanning probe microscopy (SPM) or transmission electron microscopy (TEM) or spectroscopic techniques. Optical microscopy enables the detection of flakes on suitable surfaces as well as the measurement of optical properties. Characterization of exfoliated materials is essential to improve the GRM metrology for applications and quality control. For grown GRMs, SPM can be used to probe morphological properties, as well as to study growth mechanisms and quality of transfer. More generally, SPM combined with smart measurement protocols in various modes allows one to get obtain information on mechanical properties, surface potential, work functions, electrical properties, or effectiveness of functionalization. Some of the techniques described are suitable for 'in situ' characterization, and can be hosted within the growth chambers. If the diagnosis is made 'ex situ', consideration should be given to the preparation of the samples to avoid contamination. Occasionally cleaning methods have to be used prior to measurement

Production and processing of graphene and related materials

© 2020 The Author(s). We present an overview of the main techniques for production and processing of graphene and related materials (GRMs), as well as the key characterization procedures. We adopt a 'hands-on' approach, providing practical details and procedures as derived from literature as well as from the authors' experience, in order to enable the reader to reproduce the results. Section I is devoted to 'bottom up' approaches, whereby individual constituents are pieced together into more complex structures. We consider graphene nanoribbons (GNRs) produced either by solution processing or by on-surface synthesis in ultra high vacuum (UHV), as well carbon nanomembranes (CNM). Production of a variety of GNRs with tailored band gaps and edge shapes is now possible. CNMs can be tuned in terms of porosity, crystallinity and electronic behaviour. Section II covers 'top down' techniques. These rely on breaking down of a layered precursor, in the graphene case usually natural crystals like graphite or artificially synthesized materials, such as highly oriented pyrolythic graphite, monolayers or few layers (FL) flakes. The main focus of this section is on various exfoliation techniques in a liquid media, either intercalation or liquid phase exfoliation (LPE). The choice of precursor, exfoliation method, medium as well as the control of parameters such as time or temperature are crucial. A definite choice of parameters and conditions yields a particular material with specific properties that makes it more suitable for a targeted application. We cover protocols for the graphitic precursors to graphene oxide (GO). This is an important material for a range of applications in biomedicine, energy storage, nanocomposites, etc. Hummers' and modified Hummers' methods are used to make GO that subsequently can be reduced to obtain reduced graphene oxide (RGO) with a variety of strategies. GO flakes are also employed to prepare three-dimensional (3d) low density structures, such as sponges, foams, hydro- or aerogels. The assembly of flakes into 3d structures can provide improved mechanical properties. Aerogels with a highly open structure, with interconnected hierarchical pores, can enhance the accessibility to the whole surface area, as relevant for a number of applications, such as energy storage. The main recipes to yield graphite intercalation compounds (GICs) are also discussed. GICs are suitable precursors for covalent functionalization of graphene, but can also be used for the synthesis of uncharged graphene in solution. Degradation of the molecules intercalated in GICs can be triggered by high temperature treatment or microwave irradiation, creating a gas pressure surge in graphite and exfoliation. Electrochemical exfoliation by applying a voltage in an electrolyte to a graphite electrode can be tuned by varying precursors, electrolytes and potential. Graphite electrodes can be either negatively or positively intercalated to obtain GICs that are subsequently exfoliated. We also discuss the materials that can be amenable to exfoliation, by employing a theoretical data-mining approach. The exfoliation of LMs usually results in a heterogeneous dispersion of flakes with different lateral size and thickness. This is a critical bottleneck for applications, and hinders the full exploitation of GRMs produced by solution processing. The establishment of procedures to control the morphological properties of exfoliated GRMs, which also need to be industrially scalable, is one of the key needs. Section III deals with the processing of flakes. (Ultra)centrifugation techniques have thus far been the most investigated to sort GRMs following ultrasonication, shear mixing, ball milling, microfluidization, and wet-jet milling. It allows sorting by size and thickness. Inks formulated from GRM dispersions can be printed using a number of processes, from inkjet to screen printing. Each technique has specific rheological requirements, as well as geometrical constraints. The solvent choice is critical, not only for the GRM stability, but also in terms of optimizing printing on different substrates, such as glass, Si, plastic, paper, etc, all with different surface energies. Chemical modifications of such substrates is also a key step. Sections IV-VII are devoted to the growth of GRMs on various substrates and their processing after growth to place them on the surface of choice for specific applications. The substrate for graphene growth is a key determinant of the nature and quality of the resultant film. The lattice mismatch between graphene and substrate influences the resulting crystallinity. Growth on insulators, such as SiO2, typically results in films with small crystallites, whereas growth on the close-packed surfaces of metals yields highly crystalline films. Section IV outlines the growth of graphene on SiC substrates. This satisfies the requirements for electronic applications, with well-defined graphene-substrate interface, low trapped impurities and no need for transfer. It also allows graphene structures and devices to be measured directly on the growth substrate. The flatness of the substrate results in graphene with minimal strain and ripples on large areas, allowing spectroscopies and surface science to be performed. We also discuss the surface engineering by intercalation of the resulting graphene, its integration with Si-wafers and the production of nanostructures with the desired shape, with no need for patterning. Section V deals with chemical vapour deposition (CVD) onto various transition metals and on insulators. Growth on Ni results in graphitized polycrystalline films. While the thickness of these films can be optimized by controlling the deposition parameters, such as the type of hydrocarbon precursor and temperature, it is difficult to attain single layer graphene (SLG) across large areas, owing to the simultaneous nucleation/growth and solution/precipitation mechanisms. The differing characteristics of polycrystalline Ni films facilitate the growth of graphitic layers at different rates, resulting in regions with differing numbers of graphitic layers. High-quality films can be grown on Cu. Cu is available in a variety of shapes and forms, such as foils, bulks, foams, thin films on other materials and powders, making it attractive for industrial production of large area graphene films. The push to use CVD graphene in applications has also triggered a research line for the direct growth on insulators. The quality of the resulting films is lower than possible to date on metals, but enough, in terms of transmittance and resistivity, for many applications as described in section V. Transfer technologies are the focus of section VI. CVD synthesis of graphene on metals and bottom up molecular approaches require SLG to be transferred to the final target substrates. To have technological impact, the advances in production of high-quality large-area CVD graphene must be commensurate with those on transfer and placement on the final substrates. This is a prerequisite for most applications, such as touch panels, anticorrosion coatings, transparent electrodes and gas sensors etc. New strategies have improved the transferred graphene quality, making CVD graphene a feasible option for CMOS foundries. Methods based on complete etching of the metal substrate in suitable etchants, typically iron chloride, ammonium persulfate, or hydrogen chloride although reliable, are time- and resourceconsuming, with damage to graphene and production of metal and etchant residues. Electrochemical delamination in a low-concentration aqueous solution is an alternative. In this case metallic substrates can be reused. Dry transfer is less detrimental for the SLG quality, enabling a deterministic transfer. There is a large range of layered materials (LMs) beyond graphite. Only few of them have been already exfoliated and fully characterized. Section VII deals with the growth of some of these materials. Amongst them, h-BN, transition metal tri- and di-chalcogenides are of paramount importance. The growth of h-BN is at present considered essential for the development of graphene in (opto) electronic applications, as h-BN is ideal as capping layer or substrate. The interesting optical and electronic properties of TMDs also require the development of scalable methods for their production. Large scale growth using chemical/physical vapour deposition or thermal assisted conversion has been thus far limited to a small set, such as h-BN or some TMDs. Heterostructures could also be directly grown

Mitochondrial dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

A comprehensive literature search was performed to collate evidence of mitochondrial dysfunction in autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) with two primary objectives. First, features of mitochondrial dysfunction in the general population of children with ASD were identified. Second, characteristics of mitochondrial dysfunction in children with ASD and concomitant mitochondrial disease (MD) were compared with published literature of two general populations: ASD children without MD, and non-ASD children with MD. The prevalence of MD in the general population of ASD was 5.0% (95% confidence interval 3.2, 6.9%), much higher than found in the general population (∼0.01%). The prevalence of abnormal biomarker values of mitochondrial dysfunction was high in ASD, much higher than the prevalence of MD. Variances and mean values of many mitochondrial biomarkers (lactate, pyruvate, carnitine and ubiquinone) were significantly different between ASD and controls. Some markers correlated with ASD severity. Neuroimaging, in vitro and post-mortem brain studies were consistent with an elevated prevalence of mitochondrial dysfunction in ASD. Taken together, these findings suggest children with ASD have a spectrum of mitochondrial dysfunction of differing severity. Eighteen publications representing a total of 112 children with ASD and MD (ASD/MD) were identified. The prevalence of developmental regression (52%), seizures (41%), motor delay (51%), gastrointestinal abnormalities (74%), female gender (39%), and elevated lactate (78%) and pyruvate (45%) was significantly higher in ASD/MD compared with the general ASD population. The prevalence of many of these abnormalities was similar to the general population of children with MD, suggesting that ASD/MD represents a distinct subgroup of children with MD. Most ASD/MD cases (79%) were not associated with genetic abnormalities, raising the possibility of secondary mitochondrial dysfunction. Treatment studies for ASD/MD were limited, although improvements were noted in some studies with carnitine, co-enzyme Q10 and B-vitamins. Many studies suffered from limitations, including small sample sizes, referral or publication biases, and variability in protocols for selecting children for MD workup, collecting mitochondrial biomarkers and defining MD. Overall, this evidence supports the notion that mitochondrial dysfunction is associated with ASD. Additional studies are needed to further define the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in ASD

Volume III. DUNE far detector technical coordination

open966siAcknowledgments This document was prepared by the DUNE collaboration using the resources of the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab), a U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, HEP User Facility. Fermilab is managed by Fermi Research Alliance, LLC (FRA), acting under Contract No. DE-AC02-07CH11359. The DUNE collaboration also acknowledges the international, national, and regional funding agencies supporting the institutions who have contributed to completing this Technical Design Report.The preponderance of matter over antimatter in the early universe, the dynamics of the supernovae that produced the heavy elements necessary for life, and whether protons eventually decay-these mysteries at the forefront of particle physics and astrophysics are key to understanding the early evolution of our universe, its current state, and its eventual fate. The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) is an international world-class experiment dedicated to addressing these questions as it searches for leptonic charge-parity symmetry violation, stands ready to capture supernova neutrino bursts, and seeks to observe nucleon decay as a signature of a grand unified theory underlying the standard model. The DUNE far detector technical design report (TDR) describes the DUNE physics program and the technical designs of the single- A nd dual-phase DUNE liquid argon TPC far detector modules. Volume III of this TDR describes how the activities required to design, construct, fabricate, install, and commission the DUNE far detector modules are organized and managed. This volume details the organizational structures that will carry out and/or oversee the planned far detector activities safely, successfully, on time, and on budget. It presents overviews of the facilities, supporting infrastructure, and detectors for context, and it outlines the project-related functions and methodologies used by the DUNE technical coordination organization, focusing on the areas of integration engineering, technical reviews, quality assurance and control, and safety oversight. Because of its more advanced stage of development, functional examples presented in this volume focus primarily on the single-phase (SP) detector module.openAbi B.; Acciarri R.; Acero M.A.; Adamov G.; Adams D.; Adinolfi M.; Ahmad Z.; Ahmed J.; Alion T.; Monsalve S.A.; Alt C.; Anderson J.; Andreopoulos C.; Andrews M.; Andrianala F.; Andringa S.; Ankowski A.; Antonova M.; Antusch S.; Aranda-Fernandez A.; Ariga A.; Arnold L.O.; Arroyave M.A.; Asaadi J.; Aurisano A.; Aushev V.; Autiero D.; Azfar F.; Back H.; Back J.J.; Backhouse C.; Baesso P.; Bagby L.; Bajou R.; Balasubramanian S.; Baldi P.; Bambah B.; Barao F.; Barenboim G.; Barker G.; Barkhouse W.; Barnes C.; Barr G.; Monarca J.B.; Barros N.; Barrow J.L.; Bashyal A.; Basque V.; Bay F.; Alba J.B.; Beacom J.F.; Bechetoille E.; Behera B.; Bellantoni L.; Bellettini G.; Bellini V.; Beltramello O.; Belver D.; Benekos N.; Neves F.B.; Berger J.; Berkman S.; Bernardini P.; Berner R.M.; Berns H.; Bertolucci S.; Betancourt M.; Bezawada Y.; Bhattacharjee M.; Bhuyan B.; Biagi S.; Bian J.; Biassoni M.; Biery K.; Bilki B.; Bishai M.; Bitadze A.; Blake A.; Siffert B.B.; Blaszczyk F.; Blazey G.; Blucher E.; Boissevain J.; Bolognesi S.; Bolton T.; Bonesini M.; Bongrand M.; Bonini F.; Booth A.; Booth C.; Bordoni S.; Borkum A.; Boschi T.; Bostan N.; Bour P.; Boyd S.; Boyden D.; Bracinik J.; Braga D.; Brailsford D.; Brandt A.; Bremer J.; Brew C.; Brianne E.; Brice S.J.; Brizzolari C.; Bromberg C.; Brooijmans G.; Brooke J.; Bross A.; Brunetti G.; Buchanan N.; Budd H.; Caiulo D.; Calafiura P.; Calcutt J.; Calin M.; Calvez S.; Calvo E.; Camilleri L.; Caminata A.; Campanelli M.; Caratelli D.; Carini G.; Carlus B.; Carniti P.; Terrazas I.C.; Carranza H.; Castillo A.; Castromonte C.; Cattadori C.; Cavalier F.; Cavanna F.; Centro S.; Cerati G.; Cervelli A.; Villanueva A.C.; Chalifour M.; Chang C.; Chardonnet E.; Chatterjee A.; Chattopadhyay S.; Chaves J.; Chen H.; Chen M.; Chen Y.; Cherdack D.; Chi C.; Childress S.; Chiriacescu A.; Cho K.; Choubey S.; Christensen A.; Christian D.; Christodoulou G.; Church E.; Clarke P.; Coan T.E.; Cocco A.G.; Coelho J.; Conley E.; Conrad J.; Convery M.; Corwin L.; Cotte P.; Cremaldi L.; Cremonesi L.; Crespo-Anadon J.I.; Cristaldo E.; Cross R.; Cuesta C.; Cui Y.; Cussans D.; Dabrowski M.; Motta H.D.; Peres L.D.S.; David Q.; Davies G.S.; Davini S.; Dawson J.; De K.; Almeida R.M.D.; Debbins P.; Bonis I.D.; Decowski M.; Gouvea A.D.; Holanda P.C.D.; Astiz I.L.D.I.; Deisting A.; Jong P.D.; Delbart A.; Delepine D.; Delgado M.; Dell'acqua A.; Lurgio P.D.; Neto J.R.D.M.; Demuth D.M.; Dennis S.; Densham C.; Deptuch G.; Roeck A.D.; Romeri V.D.; Vries J.D.; Dharmapalan R.; Dias M.; Diaz F.; Diaz J.; Domizio S.D.; Giulio L.D.; Ding P.; Noto L.D.; Distefano C.; Diurba R.; Diwan M.; Djurcic Z.; Dokania N.; Dolinski M.; Domine L.; Douglas D.; Drielsma F.; Duchesneau D.; Duffy K.; Dunne P.; Durkin T.; Duyang H.; Dvornikov O.; Dwyer D.; Dyshkant A.; Eads M.; Edmunds D.; Eisch J.; Emery S.; Ereditato A.; Escobar C.; Sanchez L.E.; Evans J.J.; Ewart E.; Ezeribe A.C.; Fahey K.; Falcone A.; Farnese C.; Farzan Y.; Felix J.; Fernandez-Martinez E.; Menendez P.F.; Ferraro F.; Fields L.; Filkins A.; Filthaut F.; Fitzpatrick R.S.; Flanagan W.; Fleming B.; Flight R.; Fowler J.; Fox W.; Franc J.; Francis K.; Franco D.; Freeman J.; Freestone J.; Fried J.; Friedland A.; Fuess S.; Furic I.; Furmanski A.P.; Gago A.; Gallagher H.; Gallego-Ros A.; Gallice N.; Galymov V.; Gamberini E.; Gamble T.; Gandhi R.; Gandrajula R.; Gao S.; Garcia-Gamez D.; Garcia-Peris M.A.; Gardiner S.; Gastler D.; Ge G.; Gelli B.; Gendotti A.; Gent S.; Ghorbani-Moghaddam Z.; Gibin D.; Gil-Botella I.; Girerd C.; Giri A.; Gnani D.; Gogota O.; Gold M.; Gollapinni S.; Gollwitzer K.; Gomes R.A.; Bermeo L.G.; Fajardo L.S.G.; Gonnella F.; Gonzalez-Cuevas J.; Goodman M.C.; Goodwin O.; Goswami S.; Gotti C.; Goudzovski E.; Grace C.; Graham M.; Gramellini E.; Gran R.; Granados E.; Grant A.; Grant C.; Gratieri D.; Green P.; Green S.; Greenler L.; Greenwood M.; Greer J.; Griffith C.; Groh M.; Grudzinski J.; Grzelak K.; Gu W.; Guarino V.; Guenette R.; Guglielmi A.; Guo B.; Guthikonda K.; Gutierrez R.; Guzowski P.; Guzzo M.M.; Gwon S.; Habig A.; Hackenburg A.; Hadavand H.; Haenni R.; Hahn A.; Haigh J.; Haiston J.; Hamernik T.; Hamilton P.; Han J.; Harder K.; Harris D.A.; Hartnell J.; Hasegawa T.; Hatcher R.; Hazen E.; Heavey A.; Heeger K.M.; Hennessy K.; Henry S.; Morquecho M.H.; Herner K.; Hertel L.; Hesam A.S.; Hewes J.; Pichardo A.H.; Hill T.; Hillier S.J.; Himmel A.; Hoff J.; Hohl C.; Holin A.; Hoppe E.; Horton-Smith G.A.; Hostert M.; Hourlier A.; Howard B.; Howell R.; Huang J.; Huang J.; Hugon J.; Iles G.; Iliescu A.M.; Illingworth R.; Ioannisian A.; Itay R.; Izmaylov A.; James E.; Jargowsky B.; Jediny F.; Jesus-Valls C.; Ji X.; Jiang L.; Jimenez S.; Jipa A.; Joglekar A.; Johnson C.; Johnson R.; Jones B.; Jones S.; Jung C.; Junk T.; Jwa Y.; Kabirnezhad M.; Kaboth A.; Kadenko I.; Kamiya F.; Karagiorgi G.; Karcher A.; Karolak M.; Karyotakis Y.; Kasai S.; Kasetti S.P.; Kashur L.; Kazaryan N.; Kearns E.; Keener P.; Kelly K.J.; Kemp E.; Ketchum W.; Kettell S.; Khabibullin M.; Khotjantsev A.; Khvedelidze A.; Kim D.; King B.; Kirby B.; Kirby M.; Klein J.; Koehler K.; Koerner L.W.; Kohn S.; Koller P.P.; Kordosky M.; Kosc T.; Kose U.; Kostelecky V.; Kothekar K.; Krennrich F.; Kreslo I.; Kudenko Y.; Kudryavtsev V.; Kulagin S.; Kumar J.; Kumar R.; Kuruppu C.; Kus V.; Kutter T.; Lambert A.; Lande K.; Lane C.E.; Lang K.; Langford T.; Lasorak P.; Last D.; Lastoria C.; Laundrie A.; Lawrence A.; Lazanu I.; Lazur R.; Le T.; Learned J.; Lebrun P.; Miotto G.L.; Lehnert R.; De Oliveira M.L.; Leitner M.; Leyton M.; Li L.; Li S.; Li S.; Li T.; Li Y.; Liao H.; Lin C.; Lin S.; Lister A.; Littlejohn B.R.; Liu J.; Lockwitz S.; Loew T.; Lokajicek M.; Lomidze I.; Long K.; Loo K.; Lorca D.; Lord T.; Losecco J.; Louis W.C.; Luk K.; Luo X.; Lurkin N.; Lux T.; Luzio V.P.; MacFarland D.; MacHado A.; MacHado P.; MacIas C.; MacIer J.; Maddalena A.; Madigan P.; Magill S.; Mahn K.; Maio A.; Maloney J.A.; Mandrioli G.; Maneira J.C.; Manenti L.; Manly S.; Mann A.; Manolopoulos K.; Plata M.M.; Marchionni A.; Marciano W.; Marfatia D.; Mariani C.; Maricic J.; Marinho F.; Marino A.D.; Marshak M.; Marshall C.; Marshall J.; Marteau J.; Martin-Albo J.; Martinez N.; Caicedo D.A.M.; Martynenko S.; Mason K.; Mastbaum A.; Masud M.; Matsuno S.; Matthews J.; Mauger C.; Mauri N.; Mavrokoridis K.; Mazza R.; Mazzacane A.; Mazzucato E.; McCluskey E.; McConkey N.; McFarland K.S.; McGrew C.; McNab A.; Mefodiev A.; Mehta P.; Melas P.; Mellinato M.; Mena O.; Menary S.; Mendez H.; Menegolli A.; Meng G.; Messier M.; Metcalf W.; Mewes M.; Meyer H.; Miao T.; Michna G.; Miedema T.; Migenda J.; Milincic R.; Miller W.; Mills J.; Milne C.; Mineev O.; Miranda O.G.; Miryala S.; Mishra C.; Mishra S.; Mislivec A.; Mladenov D.; Mocioiu I.; Moffat K.; Moggi N.; Mohanta R.; Mohayai T.A.; Mokhov N.; Molina J.A.; Bueno L.M.; Montanari A.; Montanari C.; Montanari D.; Zetina L.M.M.; Moon J.; Mooney M.; Moor A.; Moreno D.; Morgan B.; Morris C.; Mossey C.; Motuk E.; Moura C.A.; Mousseau J.; Mu W.; Mualem L.; Mueller J.; Muether M.; Mufson S.; Muheim F.; Muir A.; Mulhearn M.; Muramatsu H.; Murphy S.; Musser J.; Nachtman J.; Nagu S.; Nalbandyan M.; Nandakumar R.; Naples D.; Narita S.; Navas-Nicolas D.; Nayak N.; Nebot-Guinot M.; Necib L.; Negishi K.; Nelson J.K.; Nesbit J.; Nessi M.; Newbold D.; Newcomer M.; Newhart D.; Nichol R.; Niner E.; Nishimura K.; Norman A.; Northrop R.; Novella P.; Nowak J.A.; Oberling M.; Campo A.O.D.; Olivier A.; Onel Y.; Onishchuk Y.; Ott J.; Pagani L.; Pakvasa S.; Palamara O.; Palestini S.; Paley J.M.; Pallavicini M.; Palomares C.; Pantic E.; Paolone V.; Papadimitriou V.; Papaleo R.; Papanestis A.; Paramesvaran S.; Parke S.; Parsa Z.; Parvu M.; Pascoli S.; Pasqualini L.; Pasternak J.; Pater J.; Patrick C.; Patrizii L.; Patterson R.B.; Patton S.; Patzak T.; Paudel A.; Paulos B.; Paulucci L.; Pavlovic Z.; Pawloski G.; Payne D.; Pec V.; Peeters S.J.; Penichot Y.; Pennacchio E.; Penzo A.; Peres O.L.; Perry J.; Pershey D.; Pessina G.; Petrillo G.; Petta C.; Petti R.; Piastra F.; Pickering L.; Pietropaolo F.; Pillow J.; Plunkett R.; Poling R.; Pons X.; Poonthottathil N.; Pordes S.; Potekhin M.; Potenza R.; Potukuchi B.V.; Pozimski J.; Pozzato M.; Prakash S.; Prakash T.; Prince S.; Prior G.; Pugnere D.; Qi K.; Qian X.; Raaf J.; Raboanary R.; Radeka V.; Rademacker J.; Radics B.; Rafique A.; Raguzin E.; Rai M.; Rajaoalisoa M.; Rakhno I.; Rakotondramanana H.; Rakotondravohitra L.; Ramachers Y.; Rameika R.; Delgado M.R.; Ramson B.; Rappoldi A.; Raselli G.; Ratoff P.; Ravat S.; Razafinime H.; Real J.; Rebel B.; Redondo D.; Reggiani-Guzzo M.; Rehak T.; Reichenbacher J.; Reitzner S.D.; Renshaw A.; Rescia S.; Resnati F.; Reynolds A.; Riccobene G.; Rice L.C.; Rielage K.; Rigaut Y.; Rivera D.; Rochester L.; Roda M.; Rodrigues P.; Alonso M.R.; Rondon J.R.; Roeth A.; Rogers H.; Rosauro-Alcaraz S.; Rossella M.; Rout J.; Roy S.; Rubbia A.; Rubbia C.; Russell B.; Russell J.; Ruterbories D.; Saakyan R.; Sacerdoti S.; Safford T.; Sahu N.; Sala P.; Samios N.; Sanchez M.; Sanders D.A.; Sankey D.; Santana S.; Santos-Maldonado M.; Saoulidou N.; Sapienza P.; Sarasty C.; Sarcevic I.; Savage G.; Savinov V.; Scaramelli A.; Scarff A.; Scarpelli A.; Schaffer T.; Schellman H.; Schlabach P.; Schmitz D.; Scholberg K.; Schukraft A.; Segreto E.; Sensenig J.; Seong I.; Sergi A.; Sergiampietri F.; Sgalaberna D.; Shaevitz M.; Shafaq S.; Shamma M.; Sharma H.R.; Sharma R.; Shaw T.; Shepherd-Themistocleous C.; Shin S.; Shooltz D.; Shrock R.; Simard L.; Simos N.; Sinclair J.; Sinev G.; Singh J.; Singh V.; Sipos R.; Sippach F.; Sirri G.; Sitraka A.; Siyeon K.; Smargianaki D.; Smith A.; Smith A.; Smith E.; Smith P.; Smolik J.; Smy M.; Snopok P.; Nunes M.S.; Sobel H.; Soderberg M.; Salinas C.J.S.; Soldner-Rembold S.; Solomey N.; Solovov V.; Sondheim W.E.; Sorel M.; Soto-Oton J.; Sousa A.; Soustruznik K.; Spagliardi F.; Spanu M.; Spitz J.; Spooner N.J.; Spurgeon K.; Staley R.; Stancari M.; Stanco L.; Steiner H.; Stewart J.; Stillwell B.; Stock J.; Stocker F.; Stokes T.; Strait M.; Strauss T.; Striganov S.; Stuart A.; Summers D.; Surdo A.; Susic V.; Suter L.; Sutera C.; Svoboda R.; Szczerbinska B.; Szelc A.; Talaga R.; Tanaka H.; Oregui B.T.; Tapper A.; Tariq S.; Tatar E.; Tayloe R.; Teklu A.; Tenti M.; Terao K.; Ternes C.A.; Terranova F.; Testera G.; Thea A.; Thompson J.L.; Thorn C.; Timm S.; Tonazzo A.; Torti M.; Tortola M.; Tortorici F.; Totani D.; Toups M.; Touramanis C.; Trevor J.; Trzaska W.H.; Tsai Y.T.; Tsamalaidze Z.; Tsang K.; Tsverava N.; Tufanli S.; Tull C.; Tyley E.; Tzanov M.; Uchida M.A.; Urheim J.; Usher T.; Vagins M.; Vahle P.; Valdiviesso G.; Valencia E.; Vallari Z.; Valle J.W.; Vallecorsa S.; Berg R.V.; De Water R.G.V.; Forero D.V.; Varanini F.; Vargas D.; Varner G.; Vasel J.; Vasseur G.; Vaziri K.; Ventura S.; Verdugo A.; Vergani S.; Vermeulen M.A.; Verzocchi M.; De Souza H.V.; Vignoli C.; Vilela C.; Viren B.; Vrba T.; Wachala T.; Waldron A.V.; Wallbank M.; Wang H.; Wang J.; Wang Y.; Wang Y.; Warburton K.; Warner D.; Wascko M.; Waters D.; Watson A.; Weatherly P.; Weber A.; Weber M.; Wei H.; Weinstein A.; Wenman D.; Wetstein M.; While M.R.; White A.; Whitehead L.H.; Whittington D.; Wilking M.J.; Wilkinson C.; Williams Z.; Wilson F.; Wilson R.J.; Wolcott J.; Wongjirad T.; Wood K.; Wood L.; Worcester E.; Worcester M.; Wret C.; Wu W.; Wu W.; Xiao Y.; Yang G.; Yang T.; Yershov N.; Yonehara K.; Young T.; Yu B.; Yu J.; Zalesak J.; Zambelli L.; Zamorano B.; Zani A.; Zazueta L.; Zeller G.; Zennamo J.; Zeug K.; Zhang C.; Zhao M.; Zhivun E.; Zhu G.; Zimmerman E.D.; Zito M.; Zucchelli S.; Zuklin J.; Zutshi V.; Zwaska R.Abi B.; Acciarri R.; Acero M.A.; Adamov G.; Adams D.; Adinolfi M.; Ahmad Z.; Ahmed J.; Alion T.; Monsalve S.A.; Alt C.; Anderson J.; Andreopoulos C.; Andrews M.; Andrianala F.; Andringa S.; Ankowski A.; Antonova M.; Antusch S.; Aranda-Fernandez A.; Ariga A.; Arnold L.O.; Arroyave M.A.; Asaadi J.; Aurisano A.; Aushev V.; Autiero D.; Azfar F.; Back H.; Back J.J.; Backhouse C.; Baesso P.; Bagby L.; Bajou R.; Balasubramanian S.; Baldi P.; Bambah B.; Barao F.; Barenboim G.; Barker G.; Barkhouse W.; Barnes C.; Barr G.; Monarca J.B.; Barros N.; Barrow J.L.; Bashyal A.; Basque V.; Bay F.; Alba J.B.; Beacom J.F.; Bechetoille E.; Behera B.; Bellantoni L.; Bellettini G.; Bellini V.; Beltramello O.; Belver D.; Benekos N.; Neves F.B.; Berger J.; Berkman S.; Bernardini P.; Berner R.M.; Berns H.; Bertolucci S.; Betancourt M.; Bezawada Y.; Bhattacharjee M.; Bhuyan B.; Biagi S.; Bian J.; Biassoni M.; Biery K.; Bilki B.; Bishai M.; Bitadze A.; Blake A.; Siffert B.B.; Blaszczyk F.; Blazey G.; Blucher E.; Boissevain J.; Bolognesi S.; Bolton T.; Bonesini M.; Bongrand M.; Bonini F.; Booth A.; Booth C.; Bordoni S.; Borkum A.; Boschi T.; Bostan N.; Bour P.; Boyd S.; Boyden D.; Bracinik J.; Braga D.; Brailsford D.; Brandt A.; Bremer J.; Brew C.; Brianne E.; Brice S.J.; Brizzolari C.; Bromberg C.; Brooijmans G.; Brooke J.; Bross A.; Brunetti G.; Buchanan N.; Budd H.; Caiulo D.; Calafiura P.; Calcutt J.; Calin M.; Calvez S.; Calvo E.; Camilleri L.; Caminata A.; Campanelli M.; Caratelli D.; Carini G.; Carlus B.; Carniti P.; Terrazas I.C.; Carranza H.; Castillo A.; Castromonte C.; Cattadori C.; Cavalier F.; Cavanna F.; Centro S.; Cerati G.; Cervelli A.; Villanueva A.C.; Chalifour M.; Chang C.; Chardonnet E.; Chatterjee A.; Chattopadhyay S.; Chaves J.; Chen H.; Chen M.; Chen Y.; Cherdack D.; Chi C.; Childress S.; Chiriacescu A.; Cho K.; Choubey S.; Christensen A.; Christian D.; Christodoulou G.; Church E.; Clarke P.; Coan T.E.; Cocco A.G.; Coelho J.; Conley E.; Conrad J.; Convery M.; Corwin L.; Cotte P.; Cremaldi L.; Cremonesi L.; Crespo-Anadon J.I.; Cristaldo E.; Cross R.; Cuesta C.; Cui Y.; Cussans D.; Dabrowski M.; Motta H.D.; Peres L.D.S.; David Q.; Davies G.S.; Davini S.; Dawson J.; De K.; Almeida R.M.D.; Debbins P.; Bonis I.D.; Decowski M.; Gouvea A.D.; Holanda P.C.D.; Astiz I.L.D.I.; Deisting A.; Jong P.D.; Delbart A.; Delepine D.; Delgado M.; Dell'acqua A.; Lurgio P.D.; Neto J.R.D.M.; Demuth D.M.; Dennis S.; Densham C.; Deptuch G.; Roeck A.D.; Romeri V.D.; Vries J.D.; Dharmapalan R.; Dias M.; Diaz F.; Diaz J.; Domizio S.D.; Giulio L.D.; Ding P.; Noto L.D.; Distefano C.; Diurba R.; Diwan M.; Djurcic Z.; Dokania N.; Dolinski M.; Domine L.; Douglas D.; Drielsma F.; Duchesneau D.; Duffy K.; Dunne P.; Durkin T.; Duyang H.; Dvornikov O.; Dwyer D.; Dyshkant A.; Eads M.; Edmunds D.; Eisch J.; Emery S.; Ereditato A.; Escobar C.; Sanchez L.E.; Evans J.J.; Ewart E.; Ezeribe A.C.; Fahey K.; Falcone A.; Farnese C.; Farzan Y.; Felix J.; Fernandez-Martinez E.; Menendez P.F.; Ferraro F.; Fields L.; Filkins A.; Filthaut F.; Fitzpatrick R.S.; Flanagan W.; Fleming B.; Flight R.; Fowler J.; Fox W.; Franc J.; Francis K.; Franco D.; Freeman J.; Freestone J.; Fried J.; Friedland A.; Fuess S.; Furic I.; Furmanski A.P.; Gago A.; Gallagher H.; Gallego-Ros A.; Gallice N.; Galymov V.; Gamberini E.; Gamble T.; Gandhi R.; Gandrajula R.; Gao S.; Garcia-Gamez D.; Garcia-Peris M.A.; Gardiner S.; Gastler D.; Ge G.; Gelli B.; Gendotti A.; Gent S.; Ghorbani-Moghaddam Z.; Gibin D.; Gil-Botella I.; Girerd C.; Giri A.; Gnani D.; Gogota O.; Gold M.; Gollapinni S.; Gollwitzer K.; Gomes R.A.; Bermeo L.G.; Fajardo L.S.G.; Gonnella F.; Gonzalez-Cuevas J.; Goodman M.C.; Goodwin O.; Goswami S.; Gotti C.; Goudzovski E.; Grace C.; Graham M.; Gramellini E.; Gran R.; Granados E.; Grant A.; Grant C.; Gratieri D.; Green P.; Green S.; Greenler L.; Greenwood M.; Greer J.; Griffith C.; Groh M.; Grudzinski J.; Grzelak K.; Gu W.; Guarino V.; Guenette R.; Guglielmi A.; Guo B.; Guthikonda K.; Gutierrez R.; Guzowski P.; Guzzo M.M.; Gwon S.; Habig A.; Hackenburg A.; Hadavand H.; Haenni R.; Hahn A.; Haigh J.; Haiston J.; Hamernik T.; Hamilton P.; Han J.; Harder K.; Harris D.A.; Hartnell J.; Hasegawa T.; Hatcher R.; Hazen E.; Heavey A.; Heeger K.M.; Hennessy K.; Henry S.; Morquecho M.H.; Herner K.; Hertel L.; Hesam A.S.; Hewes J.; Pichardo A.H.; Hill T.; Hillier S.J.; Himmel A.; Hoff J.; Hohl C.; Holin A.; Hoppe E.; Horton-Smith G.A.; Hostert M.; Hourlier A.; Howard B.; Howell R.; Huang J.; Huang J.; Hugon J.; Iles G.; Iliescu A.M.; Illingworth R.; Ioannisian A.; Itay R.; Izmaylov A.; James E.; Jargowsky B.; Jediny F.; Jesus-Valls C.; Ji X.; Jiang L.; Jimenez S.; Jipa A.; Joglekar A.; Johnson C.; Johnson R.; Jones B.; Jones S.; Jung C.; Junk T.; Jwa Y.; Kabirnezhad M.; Kaboth A.; Kadenko I.; Kamiya F.; Karagiorgi G.; Karcher A.; Karolak M.; Karyotakis Y.; Kasai S.; Kasetti S.P.; Kashur L.; Kazaryan N.; Kearns E.; Keener P.; Kelly K.J.; Kemp E.; Ketchum W.; Kettell S.; Khabibullin M.; Khotjantsev A.; Khvedelidze A.; Kim D.; King B.; Kirby B.; Kirby M.; Klein J.; Koehler K.; Koerner L.W.; Kohn S.; Koller P.P.; Kordosky M.; Kosc T.; Kose U.; Kostelecky V.; Kothekar K.; Krennrich F.; Kreslo I.; Kudenko Y.; Kudryavtsev V.; Kulagin S.; Kumar J.; Kumar R.; Kuruppu C.; Kus V.; Kutter T.; Lambert A.; Lande K.; Lane C.E.; Lang K.; Langford T.; Lasorak P.; Last D.; Lastoria C.; Laundrie A.; Lawrence A.; Lazanu I.; Lazur R.; Le T.; Learned J.; Lebrun P.; Miotto G.L.; Lehnert R.; De Oliveira M.L.; Leitner M.; Leyton M.; Li L.; Li S.; Li S.; Li T.; Li Y.; Liao H.; Lin C.; Lin S.; Lister A.; Littlejohn B.R.; Liu J.; Lockwitz S.; Loew T.; Lokajicek M.; Lomidze I.; Long K.; Loo K.; Lorca D.; Lord T.; Losecco J.; Louis W.C.; Luk K.; Luo X.; Lurkin N.; Lux T.; Luzio V.P.; MacFarland D.; MacHado A.; MacHado P.; MacIas C.; MacIer J.; Maddalena A.; Madigan P.; Magill S.; Mahn K.; Maio A.; Maloney J.A.; Mandrioli G.; Maneira J.C.; Manenti L.; Manly S.; Mann A.; Manolopoulos K.; Plata M.M.; Marchionni A.; Marciano W.; Marfatia D.; Mariani C.; Maricic J.; Marinho F.; Marino A.D.; Marshak M.; Marshall C.; Marshall J.; Marteau J.; Martin-Albo J.; Martinez N.; Caicedo D.A.M.; Martynenko S.; Mason K.; Mastbaum A.; Masud M.; Matsuno S.; Matthews J.; Mauger C.; Mauri N.; Mavrokoridis K.; Mazza R.; Mazzacane A.; Mazzucato E.; McCluskey E.; McConkey N.; McFarland K.S.; McGrew C.; McNab A.; Mefodiev A.; Mehta P.; Melas P.; Mellinato M.; Mena O.; Menary S.; Mendez H.; Menegolli A.; Meng G.; Messier M.; Metcalf W.; Mewes M.; Meyer H.; Miao T.; Michna G.; Miedema T.; Migenda J.; Milincic R.; Miller W.; Mills J.; Milne C.; Mineev O.; Miranda O.G.; Miryala S.; Mishra C.; Mishra S.; Mislivec A.; Mladenov D.; Mocioiu I.; Moffat K.; Moggi N.; Mohanta R.; Mohayai T.A.; Mokhov N.; Molina J.A.; Bueno L.M.; Montanari A.; Montanari C.; Montanari D.; Zetina L.M.M.; Moon J.; Mooney M.; Moor A.; Moreno D.; Morgan B.; Morris C.; Mossey C.; Motuk E.; Moura C.A.; Mousseau J.; Mu W.; Mualem L.; Mueller J.; Muether M.; Mufson S.; Muheim F.; Muir A.; Mulhearn M.; Muramatsu H.; Murphy S.; Musser J.; Nachtman J.; Nagu S.; Nalbandyan M.; Nandakumar R.; Naples D.; Narita S.; Navas-Nicolas D.; Nayak N.; Nebot-Guinot M.; Necib L.; Negishi K.; Nelson J.K.; Nesbit J.; Nessi M.; Newbold D.; Newcomer M.; Newhart D.; Nichol R.; Niner E.; Nishimura K.; Norman A.; Northrop R.; Novella P.; Nowak J.A.; Oberling M.; Campo A.O.D.; Olivier A.; Onel Y.; Onishchuk Y.; Ott J.; Pagani L.; Pakvasa S.; Palamara O.; Palestini S.; Paley J.M.; Pallavicini M.; Palomares C.; Pantic E.; Paolone V.; Papadimitriou V.; Papaleo R.; Papanestis A.; Paramesvaran S.; Parke S.; Parsa Z.; Parvu M.; Pascoli S.; Pasqualini L.; Pasternak J.; Pater J.; Patrick C.; Patrizii L.; Patterson R.B.; Patton S.; Patzak T.; Paudel A.; Paulos B.; Paulucci L.; Pavlovic Z.; Pawloski G.; Payne D.; Pec V.; Peeters S.J.; Penichot Y.; Pennacchio E.; Penzo A.; Peres O.L.; Perry J.; Pershey D.; Pessina G.; Petrillo G.; Petta C.; Petti R.; Piastra F.; Pickering

First measurement of coherent ρ0 photoproduction in ultra-peripheral Xe–Xe collisions at √sNN = 5.44 TeV

The first measurement of the coherent photoproduction of ρ0 vector mesons in ultra-peripheral Xe–Xe collisions at sNN=5.44 TeV is presented. This result, together with previous HERA γp data and γ–Pb measurements from ALICE, describes the atomic number (A) dependence of this process, which is particularly sensitive to nuclear shadowing effects and to the approach to the black-disc limit of QCD at a semi-hard scale. The cross section of the Xe+Xe→ρ0+Xe+Xe process, measured at midrapidity through the decay channel ρ0→π+π−, is found to be dσ/dy=131.5±5.6(stat.)−16.9+17.5(syst.) mb. The ratio of the continuum to resonant contributions for the production of pion pairs is also measured. In addition, the fraction of events accompanied by electromagnetic dissociation of either one or both colliding nuclei is reported. The dependence on A of cross section for the coherent ρ0 photoproduction at a centre-of-mass energy per nucleon of the γA system of WγA,n=65 GeV is found to be consistent with a power-law behaviour σ(γA→ρ0A)∝Aα with a slope α=0.96±0.02(syst.). This slope signals important shadowing effects, but it is still far from the behaviour expected in the black-disc limit.publishedVersio

Scintillation light detection in the 6-m drift-length ProtoDUNE Dual Phase liquid argon TPC

DUNE is a dual-site experiment for long-baseline neutrino oscillation studies, neutrino astrophysics and nucleon decay searches. ProtoDUNE Dual Phase (DP) is a 6  ×  6  ×  6 m 3 liquid argon time-projection-chamber (LArTPC) that recorded cosmic-muon data at the CERN Neutrino Platform in 2019-2020 as a prototype of the DUNE Far Detector. Charged particles propagating through the LArTPC produce ionization and scintillation light. The scintillation light signal in these detectors can provide the trigger for non-beam events. In addition, it adds precise timing capabilities and improves the calorimetry measurements. In ProtoDUNE-DP, scintillation and electroluminescence light produced by cosmic muons in the LArTPC is collected by photomultiplier tubes placed up to 7 m away from the ionizing track. In this paper, the ProtoDUNE-DP photon detection system performance is evaluated with a particular focus on the different wavelength shifters, such as PEN and TPB, and the use of Xe-doped LAr, considering its future use in giant LArTPCs. The scintillation light production and propagation processes are analyzed and a comparison of simulation to data is performed, improving understanding of the liquid argon properties

Supernova neutrino burst detection with the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment

The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE), a 40-kton underground liquid argon time projection chamber experiment, will be sensitive to the electron-neutrino flavor component of the burst of neutrinos expected from the next Galactic core-collapse supernova. Such an observation will bring unique insight into the astrophysics of core collapse as well as into the properties of neutrinos. The general capabilities of DUNE for neutrino detection in the relevant few- to few-tens-of-MeV neutrino energy range will be described. As an example, DUNE's ability to constrain the νe spectral parameters of the neutrino burst will be considered

The DUNE Far Detector Interim Design Report, Volume 3: Dual-Phase Module

The DUNE IDR describes the proposed physics program and technical designs of the DUNE far detector modules in preparation for the full TDR to be published in 2019. It is intended as an intermediate milestone on the path to a full TDR, justifying the technical choices that flow down from the high-level physics goals through requirements at all levels of the Project. These design choices will enable the DUNE experiment to make the ground-breaking discoveries that will help to answer fundamental physics questions. Volume 3 describes the dual-phase module's subsystems, the technical coordination required for its design, construction, installation, and integration, and its organizational structure