20 research outputs found
Association of ACTN3 R577X Polymorphism with Elite Basketball Player Status and Training Responses
The α-actinin-3 (ACTN3) gene rs1815739 (C/T, R577X) polymorphism is a variant frequently associated with athletic performance among different populations. However, there is limited research on the impact of this variant on athlete status and physical performance in basketball players. Therefore, the aim of this study was twofold: (1) to determine the association of ACTN3 rs1815739 polymorphism with changes in physical performance in response to six weeks of training in elite basketball players using 30 m sprint and Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2 (IR 2) tests, and (2) to compare ACTN3 genotype and allelic frequencies between elite basketball players and controls. The study included a total of 363 individuals, comprising 101 elite basketball players and 262 sedentary individuals. Genomic DNA was isolated from oral epithelial cells or leukocytes, and genotyping was performed by real-time PCR using KASP genotyping method or by microarray analysis. We found that the frequency of the ACTN3 rs1815739 XX genotype was significantly lower in basketball players compared to controls (10.9 vs. 21.4%, p = 0.023), suggesting that RR/RX genotypes were more favorable for playing basketball. Statistically significant (p = 0.045) changes were observed in Yo-Yo IRT 2 performance measurement tests in basketball players with the RR genotype only. In conclusion, our findings suggest that the carriage of the ACTN3 rs1815739 R allele may confer an advantage in basketball
Phylogeny of Parasitic Parabasalia and Free-Living Relatives Inferred from Conventional Markers vs. Rpb1, a Single-Copy Gene
Parabasalia are single-celled eukaryotes (protists) that are mainly comprised of endosymbionts of termites and wood roaches, intestinal commensals, human or veterinary parasites, and free-living species. Phylogenetic comparisons of parabasalids are typically based upon morphological characters and 18S ribosomal RNA gene sequence data (rDNA), while biochemical or molecular studies of parabasalids are limited to a few axenically cultivable parasites. These previous analyses and other studies based on PCR amplification of duplicated protein-coding genes are unable to fully resolve the evolutionary relationships of parabasalids. As a result, genetic studies of Parabasalia lag behind other organisms.Comparing parabasalid EF1α, α-tubulin, enolase and MDH protein-coding genes with information from the Trichomonas vaginalis genome reveals difficulty in resolving the history of species or isolates apart from duplicated genes. A conserved single-copy gene encodes the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II (Rpb1) in T. vaginalis and other eukaryotes. Here we directly sequenced Rpb1 degenerate PCR products from 10 parabasalid genera, including several T. vaginalis isolates and avian isolates, and compared these data by phylogenetic analyses. Rpb1 genes from parabasalids, diplomonads, Parabodo, Diplonema and Percolomonas were all intronless, unlike intron-rich homologs in Naegleria, Jakoba and Malawimonas.The phylogeny of Rpb1 from parasitic and free-living parabasalids, and conserved Rpb1 insertions, support Trichomonadea, Tritrichomonadea, and Hypotrichomonadea as monophyletic groups. These results are consistent with prior analyses of rDNA and GAPDH sequences and ultrastructural data. The Rpb1 phylogenetic tree also resolves species- and isolate-level relationships. These findings, together with the relative ease of Rpb1 isolation, make it an attractive tool for evaluating more extensive relationships within Parabasalia
Revisions to the Classification, Nomenclature, and Diversity of Eukaryotes
This revision of the classification of eukaryotes follows that of Adl et al., 2012 [J. Euk. Microbiol. 59(5)] and retains an emphasis on protists. Changes since have improved the resolution of many nodes in phylogenetic analyses. For some clades even families are being clearly resolved. As we had predicted, environmental sampling in the intervening years has massively increased the genetic information at hand. Consequently, we have discovered novel clades, exciting new genera, and uncovered a massive species level diversity beyond the morphological species descriptions. Several clades known from environmental samples only have found their home. Sampling soils, deeper marine waters, and the deep sea will continue to fill us with surprises. The main changes in this revision are the confirmation that eukaryotes form at least two domains, the loss of monophyly in the Exavata, robust support for the Haptista and Cryptista. We provide suggested primer sets for DNA sequences from environmental samples that are effective for each clade. We have provided a guide to trophic functional guilds in an appendix, to facilitate the interpretation of environmental samples. This revision of the classification of eukaryotes updates that of the International Society of Protistologists (Adl et al., 2012). Since then, there has been a massive increase in DNA sequence information of phylogenetic relevance from environmental samples. We now have a much better sense of the undescribed biodiversity in our environment (Pawlowski et al., 2012; de Vargas et al., 2015). While significant, it still remains a partial estimation as several continents and soils in general are poorly sampled, and the deeper ocean is hard to reach. This new data clarified phylogenetic relationships and the new information is incorporated in this revision
Assessing ball-handling skill in children using the rasch analysis
Etude effectuée avec des enfants des deux sexes âgés de 9 à 11 ans
P9.10 Auditory event related potentials in children with developmental coordination disorder
Sergeia podlipaevi gen. nov., sp. nov. (Trypanosomatidae, Kinetoplastida), a parasite of biting midges (Ceratopogonidae, Diptera)
ESR/ERS statement paper on lung cancer screening
In Europe, lung cancer ranks third among the most common cancers, remaining the biggest killer. Since the publication of the first European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society joint white paper on lung cancer screening (LCS) in 2015, many new findings have been published and discussions have increased considerably. Thus, this updated expert opinion represents a narrative, non-systematic review of the evidence from LCS trials and description of the current practice of LCS as well as aspects that have not received adequate attention until now. Reaching out to the potential participants (persons at high risk), optimal communication and shared decision-making will be key starting points. Furthermore, standards for infrastructure, pathways and quality assurance are pivotal, including promoting tobacco cessation, benefits and harms, overdiagnosis, quality, minimum radiation exposure, definition of management of positive screen results and incidental findings linked to respective actions as well as cost-effectiveness. This requires a multidisciplinary team with experts from pulmonology and radiology as well as thoracic oncologists, thoracic surgeons, pathologists, family doctors, patient representatives and others. The ESR and ERS agree that Europe’s health systems need to adapt to allow citizens to benefit from organised pathways, rather than unsupervised initiatives, to allow early diagnosis of lung cancer and reduce the mortality rate. Now is the time to set up and conduct demonstration programmes focusing, among other points, on methodology, standardisation, tobacco cessation, education on healthy lifestyle, cost-effectiveness and a central registry
ESR/ERS statement paper on lung cancer screening
In Europe, lung cancer ranks third among the most common cancers, remaining the biggest killer. Since the publication of the first European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society joint white paper on lung cancer screening (LCS) in 2015, many new findings have been published and discussions have increased considerably. Thus, this updated expert opinion represents a narrative, non-systematic review of the evidence from LCS trials and description of the current practice of LCS as well as aspects that have not received adequate attention until now. Reaching out to the potential participants (persons at high risk), optimal communication and shared decision-making will be key starting points. Furthermore, standards for infrastructure, pathways and quality assurance are pivotal, including promoting tobacco cessation, benefits and harms, overdiagnosis, quality, minimum radiation exposure, definition of management of positive screen results and incidental findings linked to respective actions as well as cost-effectiveness. This requires a multidisciplinary team with experts from pulmonology and radiology as well as thoracic oncologists, thoracic surgeons, pathologists, family doctors, patient representatives and others. The ESR and ERS agree that Europe’s health systems need to adapt to allow citizens to benefit from organised pathways, rather than unsupervised initiatives, to allow early diagnosis of lung cancer and reduce the mortality rate. Now is the time to set up and conduct demonstration programmes focusing, among other points, on methodology, standardisation, tobacco cessation, education on healthy lifestyle, cost-effectiveness and a central registry. Key Points • Pulmonologists and radiologists both have key roles in the set up of multidisciplinary LCS teams with experts from many other fields. • Pulmonologists identify people eligible for LCS, reach out to family doctors, share the decision-making process and promote tobacco cessation. • Radiologists ensure appropriate image quality, minimum dose and a standardised reading/reporting algorithm, together with a clear definition of a “positive screen”. • Strict algorithms define the exact management of screen-detected nodules and incidental findings. • For LCS to be (cost-)effective, it has to target a population defined by risk prediction models
ESR/ERS statement paper on lung cancer screening
In Europe, lung cancer ranks third among the most common cancers, remaining the biggest killer. Since the publication of the first European Society of Radiology and European Respiratory Society joint white paper on lung cancer screening (LCS) in 2015, many new findings have been published and discussions have increased considerably. Thus, this updated expert opinion represents a narrative, non-systematic review of the evidence from LCS trials and description of the current practice of LCS as well as aspects that have not received adequate attention until now. Reaching out to the potential participants (persons at high risk), optimal communication and shared decision-making will be key starting points. Furthermore, standards for infrastructure, pathways and quality assurance are pivotal, including promoting tobacco cessation, benefits and harms, overdiagnosis, quality, minimum radiation exposure, definition of management of positive screen results and incidental findings linked to respective actions as well as cost-effectiveness. This requires a multidisciplinary team with experts from pulmonology and radiology as well as thoracic oncologists, thoracic surgeons, pathologists, family doctors, patient representatives and others. The ESR and ERS agree that Europe’s health systems need to adapt to allow citizens to benefit from organised pathways, rather than unsupervised initiatives, to allow early diagnosis of lung cancer and reduce the mortality rate. Now is the time to set up and conduct demonstration programmes focusing, among other points, on methodology, standardisation, tobacco cessation, education on healthy lifestyle, cost-effectiveness and a central registry. Key Points • Pulmonologists and radiologists both have key roles in the set up of multidisciplinary LCS teams with experts from many other fields. • Pulmonologists identify people eligible for LCS, reach out to family doctors, share the decision-making process and promote tobacco cessation. • Radiologists ensure appropriate image quality, minimum dose and a standardised reading/reporting algorithm, together with a clear definition of a “positive screen”. • Strict algorithms define the exact management of screen-detected nodules and incidental findings. • For LCS to be (cost-)effective, it has to target a population defined by risk prediction models
