Fluorescence and Adaptation of Color Images

Color plays a vitally important role in the world we live in. It surrounds us everywhere we go. Achromatic life, restricted to black, white and grey, is extremely dull. Color fascinates artists, for it adds enormously to aesthetic appreciation, directly invoking thoughts, emotions and feelings. Color fascinates scientists. For decades, scientists in color imaging, printing and digital photography have striven to satisfy increasing demands for accuracy in color reproduc- tion. Fluorescence is a very common phenomenon observed in many objects such as gems and corals, writing paper, clothes, and even laundry detergent. Traditional color imaging algo- rithms exclude fluorescence by assuming that all objects have only an ordinary reflective com- ponent. The first part of the thesis shows that the color appearance of an object with both reflective and fluorescent components can be represented as a linear combination of the two components. A linear model allows us to separate the two components using independent component analysis (ICA). We can then apply different algorithms to each component, and combine the results to form images with more accurate color. Displaying color images accurately is as important as reproducing color images accurately. The second part of the thesis presents a new, practical model for displaying color images on self-luminous displays such as LCD monitors. It shows that the model accounts for human visual system’s mixed adaptation condition and produces results comparable to many existing algorithms

Ars2 Links the Nuclear Cap-Binding Complex to RNA Interference and Cell Proliferation

SummaryHere we identify a component of the nuclear RNA cap-binding complex (CBC), Ars2, that is important for miRNA biogenesis and critical for cell proliferation. Unlike other components of the CBC, Ars2 expression is linked to the proliferative state of the cell. Deletion of Ars2 is developmentally lethal, and deletion in adult mice led to bone marrow failure whereas parenchymal organs composed of nonproliferating cells were unaffected. Depletion of Ars2 or CBP80 from proliferating cells impaired miRNA-mediated repression and led to alterations in primary miRNA processing in the nucleus. Ars2 depletion also reduced the levels of several miRNAs, including miR-21, let-7, and miR-155, that are implicated in cellular transformation. These findings provide evidence for a role for Ars2 in RNA interference regulation during cell proliferation

Genome-scale modeling of yeast: chronology, applications and critical perspectives

Over the last 15 years, several genome-scale metabolic models (GSMMs) were developed for different yeast species, aiding both the elucidation of new biological processes and the shift toward a bio-based economy, through the design of in silico inspired cell factories. Here, an historical perspective of the GSMMs built over time for several yeast species is presented and the main inheritance patterns among the metabolic reconstructions are highlighted. We additionally provide a critical perspective on the overall genome-scale modeling procedure, underlining incomplete model validation and evaluation approaches and the quest for the integration of regulatory and kinetic information into yeast GSMMs. A summary of experimentally validated model-based metabolic engineering applications of yeast species is further emphasized, while the main challenges and future perspectives for the field are finally addressedThis work was supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) under the scope of a Ph.D. grant (PD/BD/52336/2013), of the strategic funding of UID/BIO/04469/2013 unit and COMPETE 2020 (POCI-01–0145FEDER-006684) and also in the context of the EU-funded initiative ERA-NET for Industrial Biotechnology (ERA-IB-2/0003/2013), in addition to the BioTecNorte operation (NORTE-01–0145FEDER-000004) funded by European Regional Development Fund under the scope of Norte2020 - Programa Operacional Regional do Norte.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Evidence for kappa Meson Production in J/psi -> bar{K}^*(892)^0K^+pi^- Process

Based on 58 million BESII J/psi events, the bar{K}^*(892)^0K^+pi^- channel in K^+K^-pi^+pi^- is studied. A clear low mass enhancement in the invariant mass spectrum of K^+pi^- is observed. The low mass enhancement does not come from background of other J/psi decay channels, nor from phase space. Two independent partial wave analyses have been performed. Both analyses favor that the low mass enhancement is the kappa, an isospinor scalar resonant state. The average mass and width of the kappa in the two analyses are 878 +- 23^{+64}_{-55} MeV/c^2 and 499 +- 52^{+55}_{-87} MeV/c^2, respectively, corresponding to a pole at (841 +- 30^{+81}_{-73}) - i(309 +- 45^{+48}_{-72}) MeV/c^2.Comment: 17 pages, 5 figure

What scans we will read: imaging instrumentation trends in clinical oncology

Oncological diseases account for a significant portion of the burden on public healthcare systems with associated costs driven primarily by complex and long-lasting therapies. Through the visualization of patient-specific morphology and functional-molecular pathways, cancerous tissue can be detected and characterized non- invasively, so as to provide referring oncologists with essential information to support therapy management decisions. Following the onset of stand-alone anatomical and functional imaging, we witness a push towards integrating molecular image information through various methods, including anato-metabolic imaging (e.g., PET/ CT), advanced MRI, optical or ultrasound imaging. This perspective paper highlights a number of key technological and methodological advances in imaging instrumentation related to anatomical, functional, molecular medicine and hybrid imaging, that is understood as the hardware-based combination of complementary anatomical and molecular imaging. These include novel detector technologies for ionizing radiation used in CT and nuclear medicine imaging, and novel system developments in MRI and optical as well as opto-acoustic imaging. We will also highlight new data processing methods for improved non-invasive tissue characterization. Following a general introduction to the role of imaging in oncology patient management we introduce imaging methods with well-defined clinical applications and potential for clinical translation. For each modality, we report first on the status quo and point to perceived technological and methodological advances in a subsequent status go section. Considering the breadth and dynamics of these developments, this perspective ends with a critical reflection on where the authors, with the majority of them being imaging experts with a background in physics and engineering, believe imaging methods will be in a few years from now. Overall, methodological and technological medical imaging advances are geared towards increased image contrast, the derivation of reproducible quantitative parameters, an increase in volume sensitivity and a reduction in overall examination time. To ensure full translation to the clinic, this progress in technologies and instrumentation is complemented by progress in relevant acquisition and image-processing protocols and improved data analysis. To this end, we should accept diagnostic images as “data”, and – through the wider adoption of advanced analysis, including machine learning approaches and a “big data” concept – move to the next stage of non-invasive tumor phenotyping. The scans we will be reading in 10 years from now will likely be composed of highly diverse multi- dimensional data from multiple sources, which mandate the use of advanced and interactive visualization and analysis platforms powered by Artificial Intelligence (AI) for real-time data handling by cross-specialty clinical experts with a domain knowledge that will need to go beyond that of plain imaging

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