Comparative effects of various classes of mouse interferons on macrophage activation for tumor cell killing

The effects of mouse interferon-alpha (MuIFN-alpha), -beta (MuIFN-beta), and -gamma (MuIFN-gamma) on macrophage activation for tumor cell killing were determined by using proteose peptone-elicited peritoneal macrophages from C3H/HeN and C3H/HeJ mice under conditions that either included or were free of detectable endotoxin. Alone, under the conditions used, none of the interferons was able to activate macrophages directly for tumor cell killing. However, with a second signal provided to responsive macrophages by contaminating endotoxin, added bacterial lipopolysaccharide (LPS), or heat-killed Listeria monocytogenes (HKLM), all three types of interferon induced cytolytic activity, with MuIFN-gamma approximately 500 to 1000-fold more active than either MuIFN-alpha or -beta. Thus, all three interferons were able to prime macrophages for killing but required a second signal before cytolytic activity could be expressed. When MuIFN-gamma was mixed with either MuIFN-alpha or -beta and placed on macrophages, little or no killing developed. Mixtures of MuIFN-gamma with either MuIFN-alpha or -beta did increase the sensitivity of macrophages to triggering by LPS, however, compared with macrophages treated with MuIFN-gamma alone. The results are collectively important because they i) confirm that significant quantitative differences exist between the various interferons with regard to their capacity to prime macrophages for tumor cell killing; ii) indicate that to be an efficient activator each type of interferon must be combined with a second stimulus, such as LPS or HKLM; iii) show that neither MuIFN-alpha nor -beta can provide an efficient second triggering signal for macrophages that are primed by MuIFN-gamma; and iv) document that mixtures of MuIFN-gamma with either MuIFN-alpha or -beta are most efficient at inducing priming, compared with any one of the interferons used alone.     

α-MSH Stimulates Glucose Uptake in Mouse Muscle and Phosphorylates Rab-GTPase-Activating Protein TBC1D1 Independently of AMPK

The melanocortin system includes five G-protein coupled receptors (family A) defined as MC1R-MC5R, which are stimulated by endogenous agonists derived from proopiomelanocortin (POMC). The melanocortin system has been intensely studied for its central actions in body weight and energy expenditure regulation, which are mainly mediated by MC4R. The pituitary gland is the source of various POMC-derived hormones released to the circulation, which raises the possibility that there may be actions of the melanocortins on peripheral energy homeostasis. In this study, we examined the molecular signaling pathway involved in α-MSH-stimulated glucose uptake in differentiated L6 myotubes and mouse muscle explants. In order to examine the involvement of AMPK, we investigate α-MSH stimulation in both wild type and AMPK deficient mice. We found that α-MSH significantly induces phosphorylation of TBC1 domain (TBC1D) family member 1 (S237 and T596), which is independent of upstream PKA and AMPK. We find no evidence to support that α-MSH-stimulated glucose uptake involves TBC1D4 phosphorylation (T642 and S704) or GLUT4 translocation.     

Relationships Between Animal Health Monitoring and the Risk Assessment Process

Risk assessment is part of the risk analysis process as it is used in veterinary medicine to estimate risks related to international trade and food safety. Data from monitoring and surveillance systems (MO&SS) are used throughout the risk assessment process for hazard identification, release assessment, exposure assessment and consequence assessment. As the quality of risk assessments depends to a large extent on the availability and quality of input data, there is a close relationship between MO&SS and risk assessment. In order to improve the quality of risk assessments, MO&SS should be designed according to minimum quality standards. Second, recent scientific developments on state-of-the-art design and analysis of surveys need to be translated into field applications and legislation. Finally, knowledge about the risk assessment process among MO&SS planners and managers should be promoted in order to assure high-quality data.