Phylogeny of Echinoderm Hemoglobins

Recent genomic information has revealed that neuroglobin and cytoglobin are the two principal lineages of vertebrate hemoglobins, with the latter encompassing the familiar myoglobin and α-globin/β-globin tetramer hemoglobin, and several minor groups. In contrast, very little is known about hemoglobins in echinoderms, a phylum of exclusively marine organisms closely related to vertebrates, beyond the presence of coelomic hemoglobins in sea cucumbers and brittle stars. We identified about 50 hemoglobins in sea urchin, starfish and sea cucumber genomes and transcriptomes, and used Bayesian inference to carry out a molecular phylogenetic analysis of their relationship to vertebrate sequences, specifically, to assess the hypothesis that the neuroglobin and cytoglobin lineages are also present in echinoderms.The genome of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus encodes several hemoglobins, including a unique chimeric 14-domain globin, 2 androglobin isoforms and a unique single androglobin domain protein. Other strongylocentrotid genomes appear to have similar repertoires of globin genes. We carried out molecular phylogenetic analyses of 52 hemoglobins identified in sea urchin, brittle star and sea cucumber genomes and transcriptomes, using different multiple sequence alignment methods coupled with Bayesian and maximum likelihood approaches. The results demonstrate that there are two major globin lineages in echinoderms, which are related to the vertebrate neuroglobin and cytoglobin lineages. Furthermore, the brittle star and sea cucumber coelomic hemoglobins appear to have evolved independently from the cytoglobin lineage, similar to the evolution of erythroid oxygen binding globins in cyclostomes and vertebrates.The presence of echinoderm globins related to the vertebrate neuroglobin and cytoglobin lineages suggests that the split between neuroglobins and cytoglobins occurred in the deuterostome ancestor shared by echinoderms and vertebrates

Impact of vital signs screening & clinician prompting on alcohol and tobacco screening and intervention rates: a pre-post intervention comparison

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Though screening and intervention for alcohol and tobacco misuse are effective, primary care screening and intervention rates remain low. Previous studies have increased intervention rates using vital signs screening for tobacco misuse and clinician prompts for screen-positive patients for both alcohol and tobacco misuse. This pilot study's aims were: (1) To determine the feasibility of combined vital signs screening for tobacco and alcohol misuse, (2) To assess the impact of vital signs screening on alcohol and tobacco screening and intervention rates, and (3) To assess the additional impact of tobacco assessment prompts on intervention rates.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In five outpatient practices, nurses measuring vital signs were trained to routinely ask a single tobacco question, a prescreening question that identified current drinkers, and the single alcohol screening question for current drinkers. After 4-8 weeks, clinicians were trained in tobacco intervention and nurses were trained to give tobacco abusers a tobacco questionnaire which also served as a clinician intervention prompt. Screening and intervention rates were measured using patient exit interviews (n = 622) at baseline, during the "screening only" period, and during the tobacco prompting phase. Changes in screening and intervention rates were compared using chi square analyses and test of linear trends. Clinic staff were interviewed regarding patient and staff acceptability. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the impact of nurse screening on clinician intervention, the impact of alcohol intervention on concurrent tobacco intervention, and the impact of tobacco intervention on concurrent alcohol intervention.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Alcohol and tobacco screening rates and alcohol intervention rates increased after implementing vital signs screening (p < .05). During the tobacco prompting phase, clinician intervention rates increased significantly for both alcohol (12.4%, p < .001) and tobacco (47.4%, p = .042). Screening by nurses was associated with clinician advice to reduce alcohol use (OR 13.1; 95% CI 6.2-27.6) and tobacco use (OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.3-5.2). Acceptability was high with nurses and patients.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Vital signs screening can be incorporated in primary care and increases alcohol screening and intervention rates. Tobacco assessment prompts increase both alcohol and tobacco interventions. These simple interventions show promise for dissemination in primary care settings.</p