Goyazensolide,a schistosomicidal heliangolide from Eremanthus goyazensis

Isolation and structure determination of goyazensolide, a new heliangolide responsible for the schistosomicidal properties of Eremanthus goyazensis Sch.-Bip., is reported.     

Short-latency ionic effects of nerve growth factor deprivation and readministration on ganglionic cells

Nerve growth factor (NGF) is likely to exert its trophic action on dorsal root ganglion (DRG) and on sympathetic ganglion neurons by controlling a crucial function of these cells. This function would in turn regulate other cellular machineries and, ultimately, lead to the traditional NGF consequences, such as survival and neuritic growth. A corollary of this view is that the key to NGF action must lie in short-latency events, occurring within minutes of NGF administration. Chick embryo DRG dissociates have proved to be an effective experimental system to investigate short-latency responses to NGF, in that (1) measurable functional deficits develop over 6 h of NGF deprivation in vitro and (2) delayed presentation of NGF promptly and fully restores the defective function. The first deficit observed in this experimental system, a decline in RNA-labeling capability, led to the recognition that NGF controls the transport of selected exogenous substrates, all of which are Na⁺-coupled and depend on an Na⁺ gradient across the neuronal membrane. Subsequent work showed that NGF controlled such transport systems by actually regulating the neuronal ability to control intracellular Na⁺. Under NGF deprivation, the DRG cells accumulate Na⁺ to levels that reflect, and presumably equate, the extracellular Na⁺ concentrations. Conversely, on delayed NGF administration, the accumulated Na⁺ is actively extruded to an extent and at a speed that depends on the NGF concentration. The Na⁺ response is elicited by both Beta and 7S NGF, but not by other proteins tested. All ganglionic systems that display a requirement for exogenous NGF in culture have also displayed the Na⁺ response to NGF. The Na⁺ response is grossly paralleled by a K⁺ response. DRG dissociates, in which intracellular K⁺ has been pre-equilibrated with extracellular ⁸⁶Rb⁺, lose their ⁸⁶Rb⁺ over 6 h of NGF deprivation and restore it on delayed NGF administration. The regulation by NGF of mechanisms controlling intracellular Na⁺ and K⁺ levels in their target neurons is likely to occupy an early and fundamentl place in the sequence of events underlying the mode of action of this factor.     

Misconceptions about parsimony analysis of endemicity

Parsimony analysis of endemicity (PAE) has been widely criticized in the recent literature based on methodology rather than on theory. Here I argue that most of the criticisms of PAE result from confusion between the dynamic and static approaches of PAE, by both users and critics of the method. Originally, PAE (the dynamic approach) was proposed primarily for historical comparisons of biotic distributions based on geological and stratigraphical information; that is, the stratigraphical record of the biota within two or more horizons was used to evaluate changes (layer by layer) in their distributional patterns. This led to an analysis of the biota throughout space and through time. On the other hand, the static approach excluded the temporal component and based the analysis on a single geological horizon. Most problems exemplified and discussed in the literature refer to the static approach. In addition to this defence of the original PAE, I present some new criticisms regarding the application of PAE using artificially delimited areas (for example areas defined by geopolitical boundaries), which may lead to incorrect interpretations. Recently, several variations of static PAE have appeared: some designed to accommodate ecological data (e.g. parsimony analysis of distributions – PAD); others that incorporate phylogenetic content (e.g. cladistic analysis of distributions and endemism – CADE); and some that have been integrated with other historical methods (e.g. panbiogeography) in order to detect and evaluate hypotheses of biogeographical homologies. Biogeographers, both ecological and historical, should be aware of the problems and limitations of both dynamic and static PAE and evaluate new variations of PAE (PAD, CADE, etc.). Finally, I argue in favour of an independent and pluralist discipline of biogeography that treats biogeography as related to systematics but not dependent on it, as some scholars have assumed.