GABAB Receptor Subunit GB1 at the Cell Surface Independently Activates ERK1/2 through IGF-1R Transactivation

BACKGROUND: Functional GABA(B) receptor is believed to require hetero-dimerization between GABA(B1) (GB1) and GABA(B2) (GB2) subunits. The GB1 extracellular domain is required for ligand binding, and the GB2 trans-membrane domain is responsible for coupling to G proteins. Atypical GABA(B) receptor responses observed in GB2-deficient mice suggested that GB1 may have activity in the absence of GB2. However the underlying mechanisms remain poorly characterized. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Here, by using cells overexpressing a GB1 mutant (GB1asa) with the ability to translocate to the cell surface in the absence of GB2, we show that GABA(B) receptor agonists, such as GABA and Baclofen, can induce ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the absence of GB2. Furthermore, we demonstrate that GB1asa induces ERK1/2 phosphorylation through Gi/o proteins and PLC dependent IGF-1R transactivation. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our data suggest that GB1 may form a functional receptor at the cell surface in the absence of GB2

Mining and state-space modeling and verification of sub-networks from large-scale biomolecular networks

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Biomolecular networks dynamically respond to stimuli and implement cellular function. Understanding these dynamic changes is the key challenge for cell biologists. As biomolecular networks grow in size and complexity, the model of a biomolecular network must become more rigorous to keep track of all the components and their interactions. In general this presents the need for computer simulation to manipulate and understand the biomolecular network model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In this paper, we present a novel method to model the regulatory system which executes a cellular function and can be represented as a biomolecular network. Our method consists of two steps. First, a novel scale-free network clustering approach is applied to the large-scale biomolecular network to obtain various sub-networks. Second, a state-space model is generated for the sub-networks and simulated to predict their behavior in the cellular context. The modeling results represent <it>hypotheses </it>that are tested against high-throughput data sets (microarrays and/or genetic screens) for both the natural system and perturbations. Notably, the dynamic modeling component of this method depends on the automated network structure generation of the first component and the sub-network clustering, which are both essential to make the solution tractable.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Experimental results on time series gene expression data for the human cell cycle indicate our approach is promising for sub-network mining and simulation from large-scale biomolecular network.</p

Measurement of CP asymmetry in D-0 -> K- K+ and D-0 -> pi(-) pi(+) decays

Time-integrated CP asymmetries in D-0 decays to the final states K- K+ and pi(-) pi(+) are measured using proton-proton collisions corresponding to 3 fb(-1) of integrated luminosity collected at centre-of-mass energies of 7 TeV and 8 TeV. The D-0 mesons are produced in semileptonic b-hadron decays, where the charge of the accompanying muon is used to determine the initial flavour of the charm meson. The difference in CP asymmetries between the two final states is measured to be Delta A(CP) = A(CP)(K- K+) ¿ A(CP)(pi(-) pi(+)) = (+0.14 +/- 0.16 (stat) +/- 0.08 (syst))% . A measurement of A(CP)(K- K+) is obtained assuming negligible CP violation in charm mixing and in Cabibbo-favoured D decays. It is found to be A(CP)(K- K+) = (-0.06 +/- 0.15 (stat) +/- 0.10 (syst))% , where the correlation coefficient between Delta A(CP) and A(CP)(K- K+) is rho = 0.28. By combining these results, the CP asymmetry in the D-0 -> pi(-) pi(+) channel is A(CP)(pi(-) pi(+)) = (-0.20 +/- 0.19 (stat) +/- 0.10 (syst))%

Protocol for developing a core outcome set for male infertility research : an international consensus development study

STUDY QUESTION We aim to develop, disseminate and implement a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future male infertility research. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Research into male infertility can be challenging to design, conduct and report. Evidence from randomized trials can be difficult to interpret and of limited ability to inform clinical practice for numerous reasons. These may include complex issues, such as variation in outcome measures and outcome reporting bias, as well as failure to consider the perspectives of men and their partners with lived experience of fertility problems. Previously, the Core Outcome Measure for Infertility Trials (COMMIT) initiative, an international consortium of researchers, healthcare professionals and people with fertility problems, has developed a core outcome set for general infertility research. Now, a bespoke core outcome set for male infertility is required to address the unique challenges pertinent to male infertility research. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, allied healthcare professionals, scientists, researchers and people with fertility problems, will be invited to participate. Formal consensus science methods will be used, including the modified Delphi method, modified Nominal Group Technique and the National Institutes of Health’s consensus development conference. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS An international steering group, including the relevant stakeholders outlined above, has been established to guide the development of this core outcome set. Possible core outcomes will be identified by undertaking a systematic review of randomized controlled trials evaluating potential treatments for male factor infertility. These outcomes will be entered into a modified Delphi method. Repeated reflection and re-scoring should promote convergence towards consensus outcomes, which will be prioritized during a consensus development meeting to identify a final core outcome set. We will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for individual core outcomes. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work has been supported by the Urology Foundation small project award, 2021. C.L.R.B. is the recipient of a BMGF grant and received consultancy fees from Exscentia and Exceed sperm testing, paid to the University of Dundee and speaking fees or honoraria paid personally by Ferring, Copper Surgical and RBMO. S.B. received royalties from Cambridge University Press, Speaker honoraria for Obstetrical and Gynaecological Society of Singapore, Merk SMART Masterclass and Merk FERRING Forum, paid to the University of Aberdeen. Payment for leadership roles within NHS Grampian, previously paid to self, now paid to University of Aberdeen. An Honorarium is received as Editor in Chief of Human Reproduction Open. M.L.E. is an advisor to the companies Hannah and Ro. B.W.M. received an investigator grant from the NHMRC, No: GNT1176437 is a paid consultant for ObsEva and has received research funding from Ferring and Merck. R.R.H. received royalties from Elsevier for a book, consultancy fees from Glyciome, and presentation fees from GryNumber Health and Aytu Bioscience. Aytu Bioscience also funded MiOXYS systems and sensors. Attendance at Fertility 2020 and Roadshow South Africa by Ralf Henkel was funded by LogixX Pharma Ltd. R.R.H. is also Editor in Chief of Andrologia and has been an employee of LogixX Pharma Ltd. since 2020. M.S.K. is an associate editor with Human Reproduction Open. K.Mc.E. received an honoraria for lectures from Bayer and Pharmasure in 2019 and payment for an ESHRE grant review in 2019. His attendance at ESHRE 2019 and AUA 2019 was sponsored by Pharmasure and Bayer, respectively. The remaining authors declare no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative registration No: 1586. Available at www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1586

Protocol for developing a core outcome set for male infertility research: an international consensus development study

Study question: We aim to develop, disseminate and implement a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future male infertility research.What is known already: Research into male infertility can be challenging to design, conduct and report. Evidence from randomized trials can be difficult to interpret and of limited ability to inform clinical practice for numerous reasons. These may include complex issues, such as variation in outcome measures and outcome reporting bias, as well as failure to consider the perspectives of men and their partners with lived experience of fertility problems. Previously, the Core Outcome Measure for Infertility Trials (COMMIT) initiative, an international consortium of researchers, healthcare professionals and people with fertility problems, has developed a core outcome set for general infertility research. Now, a bespoke core outcome set for male infertility is required to address the unique challenges pertinent to male infertility research.Study design size duration: Stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, allied healthcare professionals, scientists, researchers and people with fertility problems, will be invited to participate. Formal consensus science methods will be used, including the modified Delphi method, modified Nominal Group Technique and the National Institutes of Health's consensus development conference.Participants/materials setting methods: An international steering group, including the relevant stakeholders outlined above, has been established to guide the development of this core outcome set. Possible core outcomes will be identified by undertaking a systematic review of randomized controlled trials evaluating potential treatments for male factor infertility. These outcomes will be entered into a modified Delphi method. Repeated reflection and re-scoring should promote convergence towards consensus outcomes, which will be prioritized during a consensus development meeting to identify a final core outcome set. We will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for individual core outcomes.Study funding/competing interests: This work has been supported by the Urology Foundation small project award, 2021. C.L.R.B. is the recipient of a BMGF grant and received consultancy fees from Exscentia and Exceed sperm testing, paid to the University of Dundee and speaking fees or honoraria paid personally by Ferring, Copper Surgical and RBMO. S.B. received royalties from Cambridge University Press, Speaker honoraria for Obstetrical and Gynaecological Society of Singapore, Merk SMART Masterclass and Merk FERRING Forum, paid to the University of Aberdeen. Payment for leadership roles within NHS Grampian, previously paid to self, now paid to University of Aberdeen. An Honorarium is received as Editor in Chief of Human Reproduction Open. M.L.E. is an advisor to the companies Hannah and Ro. B.W.M. received an investigator grant from the NHMRC, No: GNT1176437 is a paid consultant for ObsEva and has received research funding from Ferring and Merck. R.R.H. received royalties from Elsevier for a book, consultancy fees from Glyciome, and presentation fees from GryNumber Health and Aytu Bioscience. Aytu Bioscience also funded MiOXYS systems and sensors. Attendance at Fertility 2020 and Roadshow South Africa by Ralf Henkel was funded by LogixX Pharma Ltd. R.R.H. is also Editor in Chief of Andrologia and has been an employee of LogixX Pharma Ltd. since 2020. M.S.K. is an associate editor with Human Reproduction Open. K.Mc.E. received an honoraria for lectures from Bayer and Pharmasure in 2019 and payment for an ESHRE grant review in 2019. His attendance at ESHRE 2019 and AUA 2019 was sponsored by Pharmasure and Bayer, respectively. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.</p

Standards in semen examination: publishing reproducible and reliable data based on high-quality methodology

Biomedical science is rapidly developing in terms of more transparency, openness and reproducibility of scientific publications. This is even more important for all studies that are based on results from basic semen examination. Recently two concordant documents have been published: the 6th edition of the WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination and Processing of Human Semen, and the International Standard ISO 23162:2021. With these tools, we propose that authors should be instructed to follow these laboratory methods in order to publish studies in peer-reviewed journals, preferable by using a checklist as suggested in an Appendix to this article