Gene expression signatures associated with chronic endometritis revealed by RNA sequencing

IntroductionChronic endometritis (CE) is a persistent inflammatory condition of the endometrium characterized by the infiltration of plasma cells in the endometrial stroma. CD138 immunohistochemistry is considered to improve the CE diagnosis rate.MethodsUsing the number of CD138-positive cells equal or greater than five as a diagnostic criterion for CE, we identified 24 CE and 33 non-CE cases among women with infertility. We conducted RNA-sequencing analysis for these 57 cases in total as an attempt to elucidate the molecular pathogenesis of CE and to search for new biomarkers for CE.Results and DiscussionBy comparing CE and non-CE groups, we identified 20 genes upregulated in the endometria of CE patients, including 12 immunoglobulin-related genes and eight non-immunoglobulin genes as differentially expressed genes. The eight genes were MUC5AC, LTF, CAPN9, MESP1, ACSM1, TVP23A, ALOX15, and MZB1. By analyzing samples in the proliferative and secretory phases of the menstrual cycle separately, we also identified four additional non-immunoglobulin genes upregulated in CE endometria: CCDC13 by comparing the samples in the proliferative phase, and OVGP1, MTUS2, and CLIC6 by comparing the samples in the secretory phase. Although the genes upregulated in CE may serve as novel diagnostic markers of CE, many of them were upregulated only in a limited number of CE cases showing an extremely high number of CD138-positive cells near or over one hundred. Exceptionally, TVP23A was upregulated in the majority of CE cases regardless of the number of CD138-positive cells. The upregulation of TVP23A in the endometria of CE cases may reflect the pathophysiology of a cell-type or cell-types intrinsic to the endometrium rather than the accumulation of plasma cells. Our data, consisting of clinical and transcriptomic information for CE and non-CE cases, helped us identify gene expression signatures associated with CE

Langues et cultures, systèmes et traduction

Nous essaierons dans cet article de mettre en regard des langues de même et diverses origines afin de montrer leurs points communs et leurs différences (concernant leur fonctionnement dans un but de traduction). Ceci nous amènera à revoir la notion de « mot », de « parties du discours ». Nous pourrons montrer aussi combien la perception du monde à travers les civilisations joue son rôle dans l’organisation des langues (les traces du passé dans la pensée en sont des témoins comme le montrent les proverbes et autres composés). L’arabe, le chinois, le coréen, l’espagnol, le français, l’italien, le japonais, le polonais, le portugais, le roumain, le russe, le sanskrit, le thaï et le turc serviront de base à nos remarques et études. Toutes ces remarques nous conduiront, à travers des exemples, à la traduction en général et à la traduction automatique ou aide (dictionnaires) à la traduction en particulier.In this paper we compare languages having the same origin and others with different roots so as to demonstrate what they have in common and how they differ for the purpose of machine translation. In doing so, we will revisit the notions of ‘word’ and ‘part of speech’. These comparisons demonstrate how different are the views of the world through civilisations, and their impact on the structure of languages (compounds, idioms, proverbs will served our demonstration). Arabic, Chinese, French, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Sanskrit, Spanish, Thai and Turkish will be at the basis of our studies. These comparisons aim at showing through examples how dictionaries should be organised and how to obtain acceptable translations made by machine

Transcription and Translation Products of the Cytolysin Gene psm-mec on the Mobile Genetic Element SCCmec Regulate Staphylococcus aureus Virulence

The F region downstream of the mecI gene in the SCCmec element in hospital-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (HA-MRSA) contains two bidirectionally overlapping open reading frames (ORFs), the fudoh ORF and the psm-mec ORF. The psm-mec ORF encodes a cytolysin, phenol-soluble modulin (PSM)-mec. Transformation of the F region into the Newman strain, which is a methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) strain, or into the MW2 (USA400) and FRP3757 (USA300) strains, which are community-acquired MRSA (CA-MRSA) strains that lack the F region, attenuated their virulence in a mouse systemic infection model. Introducing the F region to these strains suppressed colony-spreading activity and PSMα production, and promoted biofilm formation. By producing mutations into the psm-mec ORF, we revealed that (i) both the transcription and translation products of the psm-mec ORF suppressed colony-spreading activity and promoted biofilm formation; and (ii) the transcription product of the psm-mec ORF, but not its translation product, decreased PSMα production. These findings suggest that both the psm-mec transcript, acting as a regulatory RNA, and the PSM-mec protein encoded by the gene on the mobile genetic element SCCmec regulate the virulence of Staphylococcus aureus

Interlinguistic Divergences in Papillon Multilingual Dictionary

International audienceThe Papillon project aims at building a multilingual pivot dictionary by voluntary contributors in collaboration on the Internet. The data obtained is then publicly available. The macrostructure of the dictionary is composed by a monolingual volume for each language and a pivot volume which links the monolingual entries hrough interlingual links. The microstructure is based on the combinatory and explanatory lexicography, thus fairly rich and very detailed. We discuss here about how to solve the problems raised by the divergence of the predicates' argument structures in a multilingual context. If the entry is a predicate, the semantic formula describing the entry will represent this predicate. However, the number and the position of the arguments may vary a lot among languages. For example, there is a position shift in the arguments between the English predicate "X1 miss Y1" and its French equivalent "X2 manque à Y2" with X1=Y2 and Y1=X2. We propose a way to note this divergence in order to translate structures correctly

Divergences interlinguistiques dans le dictionnaire multilingue Papillon

International audienceThe Papillon project aims at building a multilingual pivot dictionary by voluntary contributors in collaboration on the Internet. The data obtained is then publicly available. The macrostructure of the dictionary is composed by a monolingual volume for each language and a pivot volume which links the monolingual entries hrough interlingual links. The microstructure is based on the combinatory and explanatory lexicography, thus fairly rich and very detailed. We discuss here about how to solve the problems raised by the divergence of the predicates' argument structures in a multilingual context. If the entry is a predicate, the semantic formula describing the entry will represent this predicate. However, the number and the position of the arguments may vary a lot among languages. For example, there is a position shift in the arguments between the English predicate "X1 miss Y1" and its French equivalent "X2 manque à Y2" with X1=Y2 and Y1=X2. We propose a way to note this divergence in order to translate structures correctly

Traduction automatique (divergences de traduction entre le japonais et le français)

Des phrases obtenues à l'issue de traduction montrent des divergences variées et importantes surtout quand il s'agit de langues éloignées comme le japonais et le français. Le but du présent travail est de mettre en évidence la divergence de traduction de ces langues et d'appliquer ce qui en sera dégagé à un système de transfert. Pour ce faire nous nous intéressons particulièrement à leur disparité qui s'observe au niveau de la structure prédicat-arguments. Nous y avons entre autres recensé des changements de catégorie prédicative, changement de voix, une diversification de la distribution actancielle et différentes formes du prédicat actualisé. Ces disparités sont souvent, d'après nous, corrélées et ont des souches communes. Elles peuvent s'expliquer par ce que Pottier appelle statuts événementiels du prédicat, c'est-à-dire que selon que le procès à exprimer est au statif ou à l'évolutif, la façon de le représenter devient différente. Cette différenciation dépend largement du lexique dont chaque langue dispose et des contraintes syntactico-sémantiques que chaque langue impose à son lexique. Nous avons ainsi essayé de dégager des facteurs qui sont à la fois corrélés entre les faits divergents et communs à nos deux langues. Nous les avons par la suite inscrits dans la description de chaque item lexical, en considérant qu'ils permettent au système de transfert de déclencher des opérations qui neutralisent la disparité. Après avoir présenté la formalisation de ces descriptions lexicales qui sont basées sur la grammaire de l'unification, nous montrons le processus de transfert que le système mène à l'aide des indications des facteurs communs.Sentences obtained by translation show varied and important syntactic discrepancies. This is true especially when the sentences are in distant languages such as Japanese and French. This work described here explores the issue of translation divergence of these particular languages in order to apply the results of this investigation to our transfer system. With this intention we are interested in the discrepancy observed at the level of verbal argument structures. We put special focus on changes of lexical category, changes of voice, diversification of the actancial distribution and various forms of actualized predicate. These disparities often are correlated with each other and have common origins. For example they can be explained by what Pottier calls event statutes' of the predicate. That is, according to whether the event to be expressed is one of state or evolution, the way of representing the event is different. Furthermore, this differentiation largely depends on the lexicon of each language and also on the syntactico-semantic constraints which each language imposes on its lexicon. We have thus endeavored to extract factors which, on the one hand, are correlated between the diverging facts and, on the other hand, are common to our two languages. We have included these factors in the lexical description, in considering that they thus enable the transfer system to apply operations which neutralize the disparity. Having formalized these lexical descriptions which are based on unification grammar, we show how the transfer system uses the common factors in order to neutralize the discrepancy.BESANCON-BU Lettres (250562101) / SudocSudocFranceF