Mypt1 regulates Bmp signaling to promote embryonic exocrine pancreas growth in zebrafish

Myosin phosphatase targeting subunit 1 (Mypt1) is the regulatory subunit of myosin phosphatase which dephosphorylates the light chain of myosin II to inhibit its contraction. Although biochemical properties of Mypt1 have been characterized in detail, its biological functions in organisms are not well understood. The zebrafish mypt1 ^sq181 allele was found defective in the ventral pancreatic bud and extrapancreatic duct development, resulting in dysplasia of exocrine pancreas. In mypt1 ^sq181 mutant, the early growth of the ventral pancreatic bud was initiated but failed to expand due to impaired cell proliferation and increased cell apoptosis. As Mypt1 is essential for cell migration, the loss‐of‐function of Mypt1 in the mutant disrupted the lateral plate mesoderm migration during gut looping, therefore, altering the Bmp2a expression pattern within it, and eventually leading to impaired Bmp signaling in the adjacent exocrine pancreas. Overexpression of bmp2a could rescue the development of exocrine pancreas, suggesting that the impaired Bmp2a signaling is responsible for the pancreatic development defects. Bmp2a has been reported to promote the early specification of the ventral pancreatic bud, and our study reveals that it continues to serve as a cell proliferation/survival signal to ensure pancreatic bud growth properly in zebrafish.     

The 'National' and the 'Cosmos'. The emergence of synthetic biology in China

How can grass-roots movements evolve into a national research strategy? The bottom-up emergence of synthetic biology in China could give some pointers.Given its potential to aid developments in renewable energy, biosensors, sustainable chemical industries, microbial drug factories and biomedical devices, synthetic biology has enormous implications for economic development. Many countries are therefore implementing strategies to promote progress in this field. Most notably, the USA is considered to be the leader in exploring the industrial potential of synthetic biology (Rodemeyer, 2009). Synthetic biology in Europe has benefited from several cross-border studies, such as the ‘New and Emerging Science and Technology'' programme (NEST, 2005) and the ‘Towards a European Strategy for Synthetic Biology'' project (TESSY; Gaisser et al, 2008). Yet, little is known in the West about Asia''s role in this ‘new industrial revolution'' (Kitney, 2009). In particular, China is investing heavily in scientific research for future developments, and is therefore likely to have an important role in the development of synthetic biology.Initial findings seem to indicate that the emergence of synthetic biology in China has been a bottom-up construction of a new scientific framework…In 2010, as part of a study of the international governance of synthetic biology, the author visited four leading research teams in three Chinese cities (Beijing, Tianjin and Hefei). The main aims of the visits were to understand perspectives in China on synthetic biology, to identify core themes among its scientific community, and to address questions such as ‘how did synthetic biology emerge in China?'', ‘what are the current funding conditions?'', ‘how is synthetic biology generally perceived?'' and ‘how is it regulated?''. Initial findings seem to indicate that the emergence of synthetic biology in China has been a bottom-up construction of a new scientific framework; one that is more dynamic and comprises more options than existing national or international research and development (R&D) strategies. Such findings might contribute to Western knowledge of Chinese R&D, but could also expose European and US policy-makers to alternative forms and patterns of research governance that have emerged from a grass-roots level.…the process of developing a framework is at least as important to research governance as the big question it might eventually addressA dominant narrative among the scientists interviewed is the prospect of a ‘big-question'' strategy to promote synthetic-biology research in China. This framework is at a consultation stage and key questions are still being discussed. Yet, fieldwork indicates that the process of developing a framework is at least as important to research governance as the big question it might eventually address. According to several interviewees, this approach aims to organize dispersed national R&D resources into one grand project that is essential to the technical development of the field, preferably focusing on an industry-related theme that is economically appealling to the Chinese public.Chinese scientists have a pragmatic vision for research; thinking of science in terms of its ‘instrumentality'' has long been regarded as characteristic of modern China (Schneider, 2003). However, for a country in which the scientific community is sometimes described as an “uncoordinated ‘bunch of loose ends''” (Cyranoski, 2001) “with limited synergies between them” (OECD, 2007), the envisaged big-question approach implies profound structural and organizational changes. Structurally, the approach proposes that the foundational (industry-related) research questions branch out into various streams of supporting research and more specific short-term research topics. Within such a framework, a variety of Chinese universities and research institutions can be recruited and coordinated at different levels towards solving the big question.It is important to note that although this big-question strategy is at a consultation stage and supervised by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), the idea itself has emerged in a bottom-up manner. One academic who is involved in the ongoing ministerial consultation recounted that, “It [the big-question approach] was initially conversations among we scientists over the past couple of years. We saw this as an alternative way to keep up with international development and possibly lead to some scientific breakthrough. But we are happy to see that the Ministry is excited and wants to support such an idea as well.” As many technicalities remain to be addressed, there is no clear time-frame yet for when the project will be launched. Yet, this nationwide cooperation among scientists with an emerging commitment from MOST seems to be largely welcomed by researchers. Some interviewees described the excitement it generated among the Chinese scientific community as comparable with the establishment of “a new ‘moon-landing'' project”.Of greater significance than the time-frame is the development process that led to this proposition. On the one hand, the emergence of synthetic biology in China has a cosmopolitan feel: cross-border initiatives such as international student competitions, transnational funding opportunities and social debates in Western countries—for instance, about biosafety—all have an important role. On the other hand, the development of synthetic biology in China has some national particularities. Factors including geographical proximity, language, collegial familiarity and shared interests in economic development have all attracted Chinese scientists to the national strategy, to keep up with their international peers. Thus, to some extent, the development of synthetic biology in China is an advance not only in the material synthesis of the ‘cosmos''—the physical world—but also in the social synthesis of aligning national R&D resources and actors with the global scientific community.To comprehend how Chinese scientists have used national particularities and global research trends as mutually constructive influences, and to identify the implications of this for governance, this essay examines the emergence of synthetic biology in China from three perspectives: its initial activities, the evolution of funding opportunities, and the ongoing debates about research governance.China''s involvement in synthetic biology was largely promoted by the participation of students in the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition, an international contest for undergraduates initiated by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the USA. Before the iGEM training workshop that was hosted by Tianjin University in the Spring of 2007, there were no research records and only two literature reviews on synthetic biology in Chinese scientific databases (Zhao & Wang, 2007). According to Chunting Zhang of Tianjin University—a leading figure in the promotion of synthetic biology in China—it was during these workshops that Chinese research institutions joined their efforts for the first time (Zhang, 2008). From the outset, the organization of the workshop had a national focus, while it engaged with international networks. Synthetic biologists, including Drew Endy from MIT and Christina Smolke from Stanford University, USA, were invited. Later that year, another training camp designed for iGEM tutors was organized in Tianjin and included delegates from Australia and Japan (Zhang, 2008).Through years of organizing iGEM-related conferences and workshops, Chinese universities have strengthened their presence at this international competition; in 2007, four teams from China participated. During the 2010 competition, 11 teams from nine universities in six provinces/municipalities took part. Meanwhile, recruiting, training and supervising iGEM teams has become an important institutional programme at an increasing number of universities.…training for iGEM has grown beyond winning the student awards and become a key component of exchanges between Chinese researchers and the international communityIt might be easy to interpret the enthusiasm for the iGEM as a passion for winning gold medals, as is conventionally the case with other international scientific competitions. This could be one motive for participating. Yet, training for iGEM has grown beyond winning the student awards and has become a key component of exchanges between Chinese researchers and the international community (Ding, 2010). Many of the Chinese scientists interviewed recounted the way in which their initial involvement in synthetic biology overlapped with their tutoring of iGEM teams. One associate professor at Tianjin University, who wrote the first undergraduate textbook on synthetic biology in China, half-jokingly said, “I mainly learnt [synthetic biology] through tutoring new iGEM teams every year.”Participation in such contests has not only helped to popularize synthetic biology in China, but has also influenced local research culture. One example of this is that the iGEM competition uses standard biological parts (BioBricks), and new BioBricks are submitted to an open registry for future sharing. A corresponding celebration of open-source can also be traced to within the Chinese synthetic-biology community. In contrast to the conventional perception that the Chinese scientific sector consists of a “very large number of ‘innovative islands''” (OECD, 2007; Zhang, 2010), communication between domestic teams is quite active. In addition to the formally organized national training camps and conferences, students themselves organize a nationwide, student-only workshop at which to informally test their ideas.More interestingly, when the author asked one team whether there are any plans to set up a ‘national bank'' for hosting designs from Chinese iGEM teams, in order to benefit domestic teams, both the tutor and team members thought this proposal a bit “strange”. The team leader responded, “But why? There is no need. With BioBricks, we can get any parts we want quite easily. Plus, it directly connects us with all the data produced by iGEM teams around the world, let alone in China. A national bank would just be a small-scale duplicate.”From the beginning, interest in the development of synthetic biology in China has been focused on collective efforts within and across national borders. In contrast to conventional critiques on the Chinese scientific community''s “inclination toward competition and secrecy, rather than openness” (Solo & Pressberg, 2007; OECD, 2007; Zhang, 2010), there seems to be a new outlook emerging from the participation of Chinese universities in the iGEM contest. Of course, that is not to say that the BioBricks model is without problems (Rai & Boyle, 2007), or to exclude inputs from other institutional channels. Yet, continuous grass-roots exchanges, such as the undergraduate-level competition, might be as instrumental as formal protocols in shaping research culture. The indifference of Chinese scientists to a ‘national bank'' seems to suggest that the distinction between the ‘national'' and ‘international'' scientific communities has become blurred, if not insignificant.However, frequent cross-institutional exchanges and the domestic organization of iGEM workshops seem to have nurtured the development of a national synthetic-biology community in China, in which grass-roots scientists are comfortable relying on institutions with a cosmopolitan character—such as the BioBricks Foundation—to facilitate local research. To some extent, one could argue that in the eyes of Chinese scientists, national and international resources are one accessible global pool. This grass-roots interest in incorporating local and global advantages is not limited to student training and education, but also exhibited in evolving funding and regulatory debates.In the development of research funding for synthetic biology, a similar bottom-up consolidation of national and global resources can also be observed. As noted earlier, synthetic-biology research in China is in its infancy. A popular view is that China has the potential to lead this field, as it has strong support from related disciplines. In terms of genome sequencing, DNA synthesis, genetic engineering, systems biology and bioinformatics, China is “almost at the same level as developed countries” (Pan, 2008), but synthetic-biology research has only been carried out “sporadically” (Pan, 2008; Huang, 2009). There are few nationally funded projects and there is no discernible industrial involvement (Yang, 2010). Most existing synthetic-biology research is led by universities or institutions that are affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS). As one CAS academic commented, “there are many Chinese scientists who are keen on conducting synthetic-biology research. But no substantial research has been launched nor has long-term investment been committed.”The initial undertaking of academic research on synthetic biology in China has therefore benefited from transnational initiatives. The first synthetic-biology project in China, launched in October 2006, was part of the ‘Programmable Bacteria Catalyzing Research'' (PROBACTYS) project, funded by the Sixth Framework Programme of the European Union (Yang, 2010). A year later, another cross-border collaborative effort led to the establishment of the first synthetic-biology centre in China: the Edinburgh University–Tianjing University Joint Research Centre for Systems Biology and Synthetic Biology (Zhang, 2008).There is also a comparable commitment to national research coordination. A year after China''s first participation in iGEM, the 2008 Xiangshan conference focused on domestic progress. From 2007 to 2009, only five projects in China received national funding, all of which came from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC). This funding totalled ¥1,330,000 (approximately £133,000; www.nsfc.org), which is low in comparison to the £891,000 funding that was given in the UK for seven Networks in Synthetic Biology in 2007 alone (www.bbsrc.ac.uk).One of the primary challenges in obtaining funding identified by the interviewees is that, as an emerging science, synthetic biology is not yet appreciated by Chinese funding agencies. After the Xiangshan conference, the CAS invited scientists to a series of conferences in late 2009. According to the interviewees, one of the main outcomes was the founding of a ‘China Synthetic Biology Coordination Group''; an informal association of around 30 conference delegates from various research institutions. This group formulated a ‘regulatory suggestion'' that they submitted to MOST, which stated the necessity and implications of supporting synthetic-biology research. In addition, leading scientists such as Chunting Zhang and Huanming Yang—President of the Beijing Genomic Institute (BGI), who co-chaired the Beijing Institutes of Life Science (BILS) conferences—have been active in communicating with government institutions. The initial results of this can be seen in the MOST 2010 Application Guidelines for the National Basic Research Program, in which synthetic biology was included for the first time, among ‘key supporting areas'' (MOST, 2010). Meanwhile, in 2010, NSFC allocated ¥1,500,000 (approximately £150,000) to synthetic-biology research, which is more than the total funding the area had received in the past three years.The search for funding further demonstrates the dynamics between national and transnational resources. Chinese R&D initiatives have to deal with the fact that scientific venture-capital and non-governmental research charities are underdeveloped in China. In contrast to the EU or the USA, government institutions in China, such as the NSFC and MOST, are the main and sometimes only domestic sources of funding. Yet, transnational funding opportunities facilitate the development of synthetic biology by alleviating local structural and financial constraints, and further integrate the Chinese scientific community into international research.This is not a linear ‘going-global'' process; it is important for Chinese scientists to secure and promote national and regional support. In addition, this alignment of national funding schemes with global research progress is similar to the iGEM experience, as it is being initiated through informal bottom-up associations between scientists, rather than by top-down institutional channels.As more institutions have joined iGEM training camps and participated in related conferences, a shared interest among the Chinese scientific community in developing synthetic biology has become visible. In late 2009, at the conference that founded the informal ‘coordination group'', the proposition of integrating national expertise through a big-question approach emerged. According to one professor in Beijing—who was a key participant in the discussion at the time—this proposition of a nationwide synergy was not so much about ‘national pride'' or an aim to develop a ‘Chinese'' synthetic biology, it was about research practicality. She explained, “synthetic biology is at the convergence of many disciplines, computer modelling, nano-technology, bioengineering, genomic research etc. Individual researchers like me can only operate on part of the production chain. But I myself would like to see where my findings would fit in a bigger picture as well. It just makes sense for a country the size of China to set up some collective and coordinated framework so as to seek scientific breakthrough.”From the first participation in the iGEM contest to the later exploration of funding opportunities and collective research plans, scientists have been keen to invite and incorporate domestic and international resources, to keep up with global research. Yet, there are still regulatory challenges to be met.…with little social discontent and no imminent public threat, synthetic biology in China could be carried out in a ‘research-as-usual'' mannerThe reputation of “the ‘wild East'' of biology” (Dennis, 2002) is associated with China'' previous inattention to ethical concerns about the life sciences, especially in embryonic-stem-cell research. Similarly, synthetic biology creates few social concerns in China. Public debate is minimal and most media coverage has been positive. Synthetic biology is depicted as “a core in the fourth wave of scientific development” (Pan, 2008) or “another scientific revolution” (Huang, 2009). Whilst recognizing its possible risks, mainstream media believe that “more people would be attracted to doing good while making a profit than doing evil” (Fang & He, 2010). In addition, biosecurity and biosafety training in China are at an early stage, with few mandatory courses for students (Barr & Zhang, 2010). The four leading synthetic-biology teams I visited regarded the general biosafety regulations that apply to microbiology laboratories as sufficient for synthetic biology. In short, with little social discontent and no imminent public threat, synthetic biology in China could be carried out in a ‘research-as-usual'' manner.Yet, fieldwork suggests that, in contrast to this previous insensitivity to global ethical concerns, the synthetic-biology community in China has taken a more proactive approach to engaging with international debates. It is important to note that there are still no synthetic-biology-specific administrative guidelines or professional codes of conduct in China. However, Chinese stakeholders participate in building a ‘mutual inclusiveness'' between global and domestic discussions.One of the most recent examples of this is a national conference about the ethical and biosafety implications of synthetic biology, which was jointly hosted by the China Association for Science and Technology, the Chinese Society of Biotechnology and the Beijing Institutes of Life Science CAS, in Suzhou in June 2010. The discussion was open to the mainstream media. The debate was not simply a recapitulation of Western worries, such as playing god, potential dual-use or ecological containment. It also focused on the particular concerns of developing countries about how to avoid further widening the developmental gap with advanced countries (Liu, 2010).In addition to general discussions, there are also sustained transnational communications. For example, one of the first three projects funded by the NSFC was a three-year collaboration on biosafety and risk-assessment frameworks between the Institute of Botany at CAS and the Austrian Organization for International Dialogue and Conflict Management (IDC).Chinese scientists are also keen to increase their involvement in the formulation of international regulations. The CAS and the Chinese Academy of Engineering are engaged with their peer institutions in the UK and the USA to “design more robust frameworks for oversight, intellectual property and international cooperation” (Royal Society, 2009). It is too early to tell what influence China will achieve in this field. Yet, the changing image of the country from an unconcerned wild East to a partner in lively discussions signals a new dynamic in the global development of synthetic biology.Student contests, funding programmes, joint research centres and coordination groups are only a few of the means by which scientists can drive synthetic biology forward in ChinaFrom self-organized participation in iGEM to bottom-up funding and governance initiatives, two features are repeatedly exhibited in the emergence of synthetic biology in China: global resources and international perspectives complement national interests; and the national and cosmopolitan research strengths are mostly instigated at the grass-roots level. During the process of introducing, developing and reflecting on synthetic biology, many formal or informal, provisional or long-term alliances have been established from the bottom up. Student contests, funding programmes, joint research centres and coordination groups are only a few of the means by which scientists can drive synthetic biology forward in China.However, the inputs of different social actors has not led to disintegration of the field into an array of individualized pursuits, but has transformed it into collective synergies, or the big-question approach. Underlying the diverse efforts of Chinese scientists is a sense of ‘inclusiveness'', or the idea of bringing together previously detached research expertise. Thus, the big-question strategy cannot be interpreted as just another nationally organized agenda in response to global scientific advancements. Instead, it represents a more intricate development path corresponding to how contemporary research evolves on the ground.In comparison to the increasingly visible grass-roots efforts, the role of the Chinese government seems relatively small at this stageIn comparison to the increasingly visible grass-roots efforts, the role of the Chinese government seems relatively small at this stage. Government input—such as the potential stewardship of the MOST in directing a big-question approach or long-term funding—remain important; the scientists who were interviewed expend a great deal of effort to attract governmental participation. Yet, China'' experience highlights that the key to comprehending regional scientific capacity lies not so much in what the government can do, but rather in what is taking place in laboratories. It is important to remember that Chinese iGEM victories, collaborative synthetic-biology projects and ethical discussions all took place before the government became involved. Thus, to appreciate fully the dynamics of an emerging science, it might be necessary to focus on what is formulated from the bottom up.The experience of China in synthetic biology demonstrates the power of grass-roots, cross-border engagement to promote contemporary researchThe experience of China in synthetic biology demonstrates the power of grass-roots, cross-border engagement to promote contemporary research. More specifically, it is a result of the commitment of Chinese scientists to incorporating national and international resources, actors and social concerns. For practical reasons, the national organization of research, such as through the big-question approach, might still have an important role. However, synthetic biology might be not only a mosaic of national agendas, but also shaped by transnational activities and scientific resources. What Chinese scientists will collectively achieve remains to be seen. Yet, the emergence of synthetic biology in China might be indicative of a new paradigm for how research practices can be introduced, normalized and regulated.     

Metabolite target analysis of isoprenoid pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae in response to genetic modification by GC-SIM-MS coupled with chemometrics

A highly selective, sensitive and nonradioactive analytical method for identification and quantification of intracellular metabolites involved in isoprenoid pathway has been developed by means of gas chromatography-selected ion-monitoring mass spectrometry (GC-SIM-MS). These metabolites are classified into two groups: sterols (squalene, ergosterol, lanosterol) and phosphorylated compounds (geranyl diphosphate, farnesyl pyrophosphate, geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate) based on their physicochemical properties. To quantify both groups in a single analytical run, GPP, FPP and GGPP were cleaved to the parent alcohols, geraniol, farnesol, geranylgeraniol by pyrophosphatase followed by alkaline phosphatase before extraction, separation and detection. This study evaluated several extraction procedures and determined the effects of the type of extraction solvent, times used for extraction. Under optimized GC/EI-MS conditions, six compounds were separated with high efficiency in the selected-ion monitoring (SIM) mode. Linearity of the method was good with correlation coefficients (r ²) in the range of 0.9953–0.9999 and detection limits were 1.53–151.88 ng/ml. The intra-day and inter-day precision of the method, as RSD, were less than 5.31 and 6.04%, respectively. The accuracy of six compounds varied between 87.7 and 110.8%. This assay was successfully applied to the determination of six major metabolites in the pathway for isoprenoid biosynthesis in S. cerevisiae and is sensitive to detect changes following genetic modification. By isolating statistically significant differences among metabolite levels from four biological conditions, we observed discriminatory metabolic features that hinted that the role of erg9 and coq1gene was involved in isoprenoid pathway. Integrating this analytical approach with statistical strategies, we can determine the influence of erg9 and coq1gene on isoprenoid levels of S. cerevisiae, thus leading to improved understanding of the pathway in a multitude of biological systems.     

Identification of Putative Artemisia annua ABCG Transporter Unigenes Related to Artemisinin Yield Following Expression Analysis in Different Plant Tissues and in Response to Methyl Jasmonate and Abscisic Acid Treatments

Artemisinin has attracted interest due to its medicinal value in treating malaria and its potential for use against certain cancers and viral diseases. Trichome density and capacity determine artemisinin content in Artemisia annua plants. Thus, the ATP-binding cassette transporter G (ABCG) subfamily involved in trichome cuticle development may also influence artemisinin accumulation. In this study, putative A. annua ABC transporter unigenes were identified and classified from the unigene sequences up to date in the National Center for Biotechnology Information database, and nine putative A. annua ABCG transporter unigenes that may be involved in cuticle development were selected for expression analyses. Two of them, AaABCG6 and AaABCG7, showed parallel expression pattern as two artemisinin biosynthesis-specific genes (amorpha-4, 11-diene synthase and a cytochrome P450-dependent hydroxylase, CYP71AV1) in different tissues and different leaf development stages and also showed similar induction in the plants after methyl jasmonate or abscisic acid treatments. Identification of these putative A. annua ABCG transporter unigenes could provide the basis for cloning of the full-length genes and further functional investigation to find the artemisinin relevant transporters, which could be used for improving artemisinin yield in both A. annua plants and heterologous systems using transgenic technology.     

Meta-analysis of the effect of KCNQ1 gene polymorphism on the risk of type 2 diabetes

The potassium voltage-gated channel, KQT-like subfamily member 1 (KCNQ1) is a member of 11 mammalian Kv channel families that plays a key role for the repolarization of the cardiac action potential as well as water and salt transport. Genome-wide association studies have identified KCNQ1 as a type 2 diabetes (T2D) susceptibility gene in populations of Asian descent. After that, a number of studies reported that the rs2237892, rs2237895, rs2237897, rs2283228, and rs231362 polymorphism in KCNQ1 has been implicated in T2D risk. However, studies on the association between these polymorphism and T2D remain conflicting. To derive a more precise estimation of the relationship, a meta-analysis of 114,140 patients and 167,322 controls from 30 published case–control studies was performed. Overall, significantly elevated T2D risk was associated with rs2237892, rs2237895, rs2237897, rs2283228, and rs231362 risk allele when all studies were pooled into the meta-analysis. In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, sample size, and Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium status of controls, significantly increased risks were found for these polymorphisms. In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests that rs2237892, rs2237895, rs2237897, rs2283228, and rs231362 polymorphisms in KCNQ1 are associated with elevated T2D risk.     

基于OWA的低丘缓坡建设开发适宜性评价——以云南大理白族自治州为例

山区城市在城镇化、粮食安全、生态保护的多重要求下,有必要探索将基本农田以外的低丘缓坡山地开发为建设用地的可行性和限制性。研究选取涵盖景观风险和灾害风险的共12个空间化指标,基于有序加权平均(ordered weighted averaging,OWA)方法,以大理白族自治州为例进行低丘缓坡区域建设开发适宜性评价。通过设置不同位序权重表征评价者偏好,结果表明:在指标风险程度的可信度较高的情况下,农用地、城镇、断裂带、河流等高风险指标权重被加大,空间特征明显;在指标风险程度的可信度较低的情况下,评价结果的空间均质性增强。通过模拟城镇建设导向、维持现有政策、风险控制导向3种适宜性分区情景,得出在城镇建设导向下应优先开发中小城镇,在风险控制导向下应优先保证大城市合理扩展。评价结果可以描述在城市的不同发展阶段如何构建政策权衡后的城镇化空间格局,满足了不同决策思路下的建设用地开发布局需求。     

不同地貌条件下景观对河流水质的影响差异

景观对河流水质的影响在不同地区、不同空间尺度上存在差异。以赤水河流域为研究对象,根据地貌特征将研究区分为喀斯特地貌和非喀斯特地貌,在划分的29个子流域内采集测试水质数据,所选用的水质指标有溶解氧(DO)、电导率(EC)、总氮(TN)和总磷(TP),运用空间分析及数理统计方法,分析流域内不同地貌区景观之间的差异,探究不同空间尺度上景观与水质指标之间的关系。结果表明:(1)流域内景观组成以林地和灌草为主,建设用地和耕地次之,景观组成在不同地貌区各空间尺度上存在差异。建设用地和耕地对水质具有负面影响,且在碳酸盐岩地区更显著;林地对水质具有正面影响;灌草对水质的影响相对复杂。(2)流域内水质表现为碳酸盐岩地区优于碎屑岩地区。景观破碎化指数与总氮(TN)、总磷(TP)呈正相关,是水质变化的重要影响因素;景观聚集度指数与溶解氧(DO)呈正相关;景观破碎化指数和景观聚集度指数与电导率(EC)的关系在两个地区呈相反的结果。(3)不同地貌区景观对河流水质具有不同程度的影响。在两个地区,景观组成对河流水质解释能力最大空间尺度均为河岸带尺度,解释率分别为53.4%和59.1%;景观格局对河流水质解释能力最大的空间尺度在碳酸盐岩地区为河岸带尺度,解释率为62.9%,在碎屑岩地区为圆形缓冲区尺度,解释率为82.4%。因此,在不同地貌区应采取不同的景观优化措施以减少对流域水质的污染。     

3种菊科入侵植物不同生长时期的土壤酶活性和养分变化

【目的】黄顶菊、三叶鬼针草和豚草是我国危害较严重的3种菊科入侵植物。了解3种菊科植物生长过程中土壤养分和酶活性的变化,可以为研究其入侵机制提供依据。【方法】在中国农业科学院植物保护研究所廊坊中试基地开展同质园实验,比较分析了黄顶菊、三叶鬼针草和豚草3种菊科入侵植物在幼苗期、旺盛生长期和生殖生长期根际土壤养分和酶活性的变化。【结果】3种外来菊科植物的生长时期对土壤养分和酶活性存在显著影响。3种外来植物入侵域的土壤速效磷、硝态氮含量以及磷酸酶活性随生长时期变化都表现出先升高后降低的趋势,均在旺盛生长期达到最大值。入侵域土壤速效磷和硝态氮含量的变化趋势与狗尾草明显不同。3种外来植物入侵降低了土壤速效钾含量,提高了土壤脲酶、磷酸酶活性。【结论】3种外来菊科植物的入侵改变了土壤养分和酶活性,创造出更有利于自身生长和繁殖的条件,以利于其进一步扩张。     

TRIB2 modulates proteasome function to reduce ubiquitin stability and protect liver cancer cells against oxidative stress

The regulation of homeostasis in the Ubiquitin (Ub) proteasome system (UPS) is likely to be important for the development of liver cancer. Tribbles homolog 2 (TRIB2) is known to affect Ub E3 ligases (E3s) in liver cancer. However, whether TRIB2 regulates the UPS in other ways and the relevant mechanisms are still unknown. Here, we reveal that TRIB2 decreased Ub levels largely by stimulating proteasome degradation of Ub. In the proteasome, proteasome 20S subunit beta 5 (PSMB5) was critical for the function of TRIB2, although it did not directly interact with TRIB2. However, poly (rC) binding protein 2 (PCBP2), which was identified by mass spectrometry, directly interacted with both TRIB2 and PSMB5. PCBP2 was a prerequisite for the TRIB2 induction of PSMB5 activity and decreased Ub levels. A significant correlation between TRIB2 and PCBP2 was revealed in liver cancer specimens. Interestingly, TRIB2 suppressed the K48-ubiquitination of PCBP2 to increase its level. Therefore, a model showing that TRIB2 cooperates and stimulates PCBP2 to reduce Ub levels was established. Additionally, the reduction in Ub levels induced by TRIB2 and PCBP2 was dependent on K48-ubiquitination. PCBP2 was one of the possible downstream factors of TRIB2 and their interaction relied on the DQLVPD element of TRIB2 and the KH3 domain of PCBP2. This interaction was necessary to maintain the viability of the liver cancer cells and promote tumor growth. Mechanistically, glutathione peroxidase 4 functioned as one of the terminal effectors of TRIB2 and PCBP2 to protect liver cancer cells from oxidative damage. Taken together, the data indicate that, in addition to affecting E3s, TRIB2 plays a critical role in regulating UPS by modulating PSMB5 activity in proteasome to reduce Ub flux, and that targeting TRIB2 might be helpful in liver cancer treatments by enhancing the oxidative damage induced by therapeutic agents.Subject terms: Oncogenes, Cancer