Microsatellite mapping of adult-plant leaf rust resistance gene <Emphasis Type="Italic">Lr22a</Emphasis> in wheat

This study was conducted to identify microsatellite markers (SSR) linked to the adult-plant leaf rust resistance gene Lr22a and examine their cross-applicability for marker-assisted selection in different genetic backgrounds. Lr22a was previously introgressed from Aegilops tauschii Coss. to wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and located to chromosome 2DS. Comparing SSR alleles from the donor of Lr22a to two backcross lines and their recurrent parents showed that between two and five SSR markers were co-introgressed with Lr22a and the size range of the Ae. tauschii introgression was 9-20 cM. An F(2) population from the cross of 98B34-T4B x 98B26-N1C01 confirmed linkage between the introgressed markers and Lr22a on chromosome 2DS. The closest marker, GWM296, was 2.9 cM from Lr22a. One hundred and eighteen cultivars and breeding lines of different geographical origins were tested with GWM296. In total 14 alleles were amplified, however, only those lines predicted or known to carry Lr22a had the unique Ae. tauschii allele at GWM296 with fragments of 121 and 131 bp. Thus, GWM296 is useful for selecting Lr22a in diverse genetic backgrounds. Genotypes carrying Lr22a showed strong resistance to leaf rust in the field from 2002 to 2006. Lr22a is an ideal candidate to be included in a stack of leaf rust resistance genes because of its strong adult-plant resistance, low frequency of commercial deployment, and the availability of a unique marker.     

Microsatellite mapping of adult-plant leaf rust resistance gene <Emphasis Type="Italic">Lr22a</Emphasis> in wheat

This study was conducted to identify microsatellite markers (SSR) linked to the adult-plant leaf rust resistance gene Lr22a and examine their cross-applicability for marker-assisted selection in different genetic backgrounds. Lr22a was previously introgressed from Aegilops tauschii Coss. to wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and located to chromosome 2DS. Comparing SSR alleles from the donor of Lr22a to two backcross lines and their recurrent parents showed that between two and five SSR markers were co-introgressed with Lr22a and the size range of the Ae. tauschii introgression was 9–20 cM. An F₂ population from the cross of 98B34-T4B × 98B26-N1C01 confirmed linkage between the introgressed markers and Lr22a on chromosome 2DS. The closest marker, GWM296, was 2.9 cM from Lr22a. One hundred and eighteen cultivars and breeding lines of different geographical origins were tested with GWM296. In total 14 alleles were amplified, however, only those lines predicted or known to carry Lr22a had the unique Ae. tauschii allele at GWM296 with fragments of 121 and 131 bp. Thus, GWM296 is useful for selecting Lr22a in diverse genetic backgrounds. Genotypes carrying Lr22a showed strong resistance to leaf rust in the field from 2002 to 2006. Lr22a is an ideal candidate to be included in a stack of leaf rust resistance genes because of its strong adult-plant resistance, low frequency of commercial deployment, and the availability of a unique marker. An erratum to this article can be found at     

Are chicken embryos endotherms or ectotherms? A laboratory exercise integrating concepts in thermoregulation and metabolism

This investigative laboratory exercise uses the different relations between ambient temperature and metabolic rate in endotherms and ectotherms as a core concept to answer the following question: What thermoregulatory mode is employed by chicken embryos? Emphasis is placed on the physiological concepts that can be taught with this exercise, including methods for measuring rates of oxygen consumption, the relation between oxygen consumption and metabolic rate, the influence of temperature on metabolic rate, and the differences between endotherms and ectotherms both in the overall magnitude of metabolic rate and in the shape of the relation between metabolic rate and ambient temperature. Included in this article are respirometer designs suitable for teachers working with a wide variety of budgets and available equipment, specific laboratory protocols for collecting data, sample data, thought questions with sample answers, and suggestions for classroom implementation as a 1-, 2- or 3-wk laboratory exercise that can be taught at a variety of undergraduate levels.     

The strong-inference protocol: not just for grant proposals

The strong-inference protocol puts into action the important concepts in Platt's often-assigned, classic paper on the strong-inference method (10). Yet, perhaps because students are frequently performing experiments with known outcomes, the protocols they write as undergraduates are usually little more than step-by-step instructions for performing the experiment. The strong-inference protocol, however, includes an explicit statement of possible experimental outcomes and the interpretation that would follow from each. This approach encourages thorough planning, enhances the efficiency of experimental designs, and increases the power of statistical analysis by explicitly stating a priori predictions as well as the statistical methods that will be used to test them. A sample protocol for an experiment investigating temperature-metabolism relations in chicken embryos is provided to illustrate the important components of the strong-inference protocol and to encourage instructors to incorporate this powerful research tool into undergraduate laboratory courses.     

Dermatological conditions during TNF-α-blocking therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective study

Various dermatological conditions have been reported during tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α-blocking therapy, but until now no prospective studies have been focused on this aspect. The present study was set up to investigate the number and nature of clinically important dermatological conditions during TNF-α-blocking therapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). RA patients starting on TNF-α-blocking therapy were prospectively followed up. The numbers and natures of dermatological events giving rise to a dermatological consultation were recorded. The patients with a dermatological event were compared with a group of prospectively followed up RA control patients, naive to TNF-α-blocking therapy and matched for follow-up period. 289 RA patients started TNF-α-blocking therapy. 128 dermatological events were recorded in 72 patients (25%) during 911 patient-years of follow-up. TNF-α-blocking therapy was stopped in 19 (26%) of these 72 patients because of the dermatological event. More of the RA patients given TNF-α-blocking therapy (25%) than of the anti-TNF-α-naive patients (13%) visited a dermatologist during follow-up (P < 0.0005). Events were recorded more often during active treatment (0.16 events per patient-year) than during the period of withdrawal of TNF-α-blocking therapy (0.09 events per patient-year, P < 0.0005). The events recorded most frequently were skin infections (n = 33), eczema (n = 20), and drug-related eruptions (n = 15). Other events with a possible relation to TNF-α-blocking therapy included vasculitis, psoriasis, drug-induced systemic lupus erythematosus, dermatomyositis, and a lymphomatoid-papulosis-like eruption. This study is the first large prospective study focusing on dermatological conditions during TNF-α-blocking therapy. It shows that dermatological conditions are a significant and clinically important problem in RA patients receiving TNF-α-blocking therapy.