Current responses to light and dark at −0.4 V. The grey shaded zones indicate dark conditions.

<p>Current responses to light and dark at −0.4 V. The grey shaded zones indicate dark conditions.</p

Cyclic voltammograms of strain A8 on glassy carbon under anaerobic conditions.

<p>Cyclic voltammograms of strain A8 on glassy carbon under anaerobic conditions.</p

Light microscope (1000×) pictures of microalgae isolates.

<p>Light microscope (1000×) pictures of microalgae isolates.</p

Scanning electron micrographs of A8 cell.

<p>A: Magnification×2000; B: Magnification×11000. The strain A8 shows small dents observed at the poles (shown in thin arrow).</p

Phylogenetic tree of strain A8 and closely related species based on ITS sequences of ribosomal DNA.

<p>The tree was constructed using the neighbor-joining method. The numbers at nodes indicate the percentages of occurrence of the branching order in 1000 bootstrapped trees for values greater than 50%. Scale bar = 1% divergence.</p

Comparison of the Dynesys Dynamic Stabilization System and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease

<div><p>Background</p><p>There have been few studies comparing the clinical and radiographic outcomes between the Dynesys dynamic stabilization system and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). The objective of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of Dynesys and PLIF for lumbar degenerative disease.</p><p>Methods</p><p>Of 96 patients with lumbar degenerative disease included in this retrospectively analysis, 46 were treated with the Dynesys system and 50 underwent PLIF from July 2008 to March 2011. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated. We also evaluated the occurrence of radiographic and symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration (ASD).</p><p>Results</p><p>The mean follow-up time in the Dynesys group was 53.6 ± 5.3 months, while that in the PLIF group was 55.2 ± 6.8 months. At the final follow-up, the Oswestry disability index and visual analogue scale score were significantly improved in both groups. The range of motion (ROM) of stabilized segments in Dynesys group decreased from 7.1 ± 2.2° to 4.9 ± 2.2° (<i>P</i> < 0.05), while that of in PLIF group decreased from 7.3 ± 2.3° to 0° (<i>P</i> < 0.05). The ROM of the upper segments increased significantly in both groups at the final follow-up, the ROM was higher in the PLIF group. There were significantly more radiographic ASDs in the PLIF group than in the Dynesys group. The incidence of complications was comparable between groups.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>Both Dynesys and PLIF can improve the clinical outcomes for lumbar degenerative disease. Compared to PLIF, Dynesys stabilization partially preserves the ROM of the stabilized segments, limits hypermobility in the upper adjacent segment, and may prevent the occurrence of ASD.</p></div

Radiographic outcomes of the two groups.

<p>Radiographic outcomes of the two groups.</p

Clinical outcomes of the two groups.

<p>Clinical outcomes of the two groups.</p

The radiological data of the patients with lumbar disc herniation in the PLIF group.

<p>A 44-year-old male patient underwent PLIF due to lumbar disc herniation in L4/5. A: The preoperative lumbar MRI. B-C: The preoperative flexion and extension X-rays, the ROM of L4/5 was 12°; D: The lumbar MRI at 50 months after the operation; E-F: The flexion and extension X-rays 50 months after the operation, the ROM of L4/5 was 0°.ROM: range of motion; PLIF: posterior lumbar interbody fusion.</p

Table_3_HMGN2 and Histone H1.2: potential targets of a novel probiotic mixture for seasonal allergic rhinitis.XLS

BackgroundAllergic rhinitis (AR) is a common nasal inflammatory disorder that severely affects an individual's quality of life (QoL) and poses a heavy financial burden. In addition to routine treatments, probiotic intervention has emerged as a promising strategy for preventing and alleviating allergic diseases. The main objective of this study was to determine the effect of a novel multi-strain probiotic mixture on AR symptoms and investigate potential targets underlying the probiotic intervention.MethodsA randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical study was conducted on AR patients who were allergic to autumnal pollens (n = 31). Placebo or a novel probiotic mixture, composed of Lactobacillus rhamnosus (L. rhamnosus) HN001, L. acidophilus NCFM, Bifidobacterium lactis (B. lactis) Bi-07, L. paracasei LPC-37, and L. reuteri LE16, was administered after 2 months. The therapeutic efficacy was evaluated by a symptom assessment scale. Before and during the pollen season, blood samples were collected, and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated for further tandem mass tags (TMTs)-based quantitative proteomic analyses. Potential targets and underlying pathological pathways were explored using bioinformatics methods.ResultsDuring the pollen season, the rhinoconjunctivitis symptom score of participants who were administered probiotics (probiotic group, n = 15) was significantly lower than those administered placebo (placebo group, n = 15) (P = 0.037). The proteomic analyses identified 60 differentially expressed proteins (DEPs) in the placebo group, and subsequent enrichment analyses enriched a series of pathways and biological processes, including signaling pathways of inflammation, coagulation cascade, lipid, carbohydrate and amino acid metabolic pathways, and transcription and translation processes. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression extracted five main elements, namely, GSTO1, ATP2A2, MCM7, PROS1, and TRIM58, as signature proteins. A total of 17 DEPs were identified in the probiotic group, and there was no pathway enriched. Comparison of DEPs in the two groups revealed that the expression levels of the high-mobility group nucleosome-binding domain-containing protein 2 (HMGN2) and Histone H1.2 presented an opposite trend with different interventions.ConclusionOur data showed that AR symptoms alleviated after treatment with the novel multi-strain probiotic mixture, and the proteomic analyses suggested that HMGN2 and Histone H1.2 might be targets of probiotic intervention for seasonal AR.</p