Is GDF11 the key protein in young blood that rejuvenates older animals?

Research over the past few years have pointed toward a protein known as GDF11 as the key protein that is responsible for rejuvenating older mice when they are transfused with younger mice blood. However, research studies by the pharmaceutical company, Novartis challenge this idea and suggest GDF11 may not play such an important role in this effect as previously thought. 

As stated in an editorial by Jocelyn Kaiser at Science magazine:

"The Novartis group does not question that young blood renews old mice. But they say the Harvard group’s explanation is wrong. Their paper, published today in Cell Metabolism, casts doubt on the assays used in the earlier research and suggests that GDF11 actually inhibits muscle regeneration. “The whole premise is incorrect,” says stem cell researcher Michael Rudnicki of the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, who co-wrote a commentary accompanying the paper. Others are more cautious, but agree that the new work undermines part of the original GDF11 claim. “GDF11 does not go down with age,” says Thomas Rando, a biologist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California.

Harvard stem cell biologist Amy Wagers, who led much of the original work, says the Novartis data on GDF11 levels are not persuasive. And although they “appear to conflict with” her group’s, “we are actually very excited to see the Novartis data,” she says. “We remain convinced that at least one form of GDF11 declines in blood with age and that maintaining GDF11 levels in an appropriate physiological range is essential for muscle health.”


So the jury may still be out on this particular issue, but one thing remains clear--transferring blood from young mice has a rejuvenating effect on older mice. As such, something must be mediating such effects. I am sure the details will eventually be ironed out with so much effort being put into this research topic by academia and pharmaceutical companies. I am eager to see how this all plays out.


Jocelyn Kaiser. Doubts cast on 'rejuvenating' protein. Science. 19 May 2015 
http://news.sciencemag.org/biology/2015/05/doubts-cast-rejuvenating-protein

#science   #research   #rejuvenation   #aging  #anti-aging 
#biology   #GDF11   #harvard  #novartis  

Top 5 Reasons I Like Being a Scientist

I have often been asked, and perhaps asked myself even more often, why did I become a scientist? What drove me to get a Ph.D. in biomedical research? What keeps me motivated to continue pushing onward when experiments and other aspects of the work seem to actively be working against me? Despite the difficulties I face in research, and my arena is academic research for those who do not know, there is really no other job I would rather do...plain and simple. But to really break this down into key reasons why I love what I do, I put together this Top 5 list (and because lists are awesome). I hope this is helpful for those who are thinking about pursuing a similar path, and is enjoyable for those interested or who just like to read lists.



Reason #1: My particular area of research, neurological injury and disease, needs advancements in the understanding of pathology and in therapeutic development and experimentation and my work could one day improve people's lives.
There are still so many things to learn about how injury and disease progresses in the nervous system, and understanding these aspects is critical to developing appropriate and effective treatments. People live with neural injuries and degeneration every day, and even small steps forward are big steps for those holding out hope.


Reason #2: Being a scientist keeps my brain active and helps quench my never-ending thirst for knowledge.
Working as a researcher means I have to stay very current with the relevant scientific publications and advancements in my field, and even related fields. This pushes me to identify what are the next critical questions to be answered or how a certain type of research could be expanded. Designing experiments to address these problems and considerations is a highly creative and pivotal step in the research process. Mastering the art of interpreting what others have done, and what you need to do next is one of the most important parts of my job, and this must occur regularly and often long before any experiments actually get started.


Reason #3: Writing and publishing my research is incredibly exciting and rewarding to me.
Working as an academic researcher, publishing your work is essential for advancement in your career, and to effectively contribute new knowledge that pushes your field of study forward. I love to write, and I greatly enjoy telling the story of my research and interpreting what my findings mean in the context of the study and field of research in general. This requires practice, diligence, acceptance of criticism from you peers, and rejection as your papers often get rejected from several publications before being accepted. If I did not love to write, this process could be an extremely difficult part of my job, and I know many good researchers who have left science or went into industry or another sector to avoid having to write and publish as a key part of their career. 


Reason #4: When I design and perform experiments and obtain results, I am often the first person to have discovered that set of information on that given topic.
This truly a great part of science. When you do work to push your field of study further, you develop an area of expertise, and ask questions that have either never been asked or attempted to be answered in the same way you plan to do so. As such, you end up collecting data and results that reveal information that has never been revealed before. Even if some results you obtain replicate a previous study's findings, your interpretation may be entirely different based on the context of your particular study. It is kind of like digging in a big field, and you have a tiny plot of land that's yours and yours alone. The deeper you dig, the more and more things you dig up that no one else has ever excavated.
I am always fascinated by obtaining data, as you never really know what you will find; even if you have some predictions, those may be wrong and you end up with something totally unexpected. I often say that I end up with even more questions when I do experiments than answers to the questions I originally had.


Reason #5: I get to go to conferences and meet others with like (or different) interests and share ideas.
In my opinion, science is an extremely social occupation. People sometimes have the misconception that scientists and researchers are non-social geeks who spend all day in the lab. Though it is often true we spend long hours in the lab working, I find that I have had the opportunity to give dozens of talks on my work, present at local, regional, national, and international conferences, and meet other researchers at these events who have amazing ideas and love to discuss them with others that are interested. I can think of few other, if any, careers that would have afforded me such unique opportunities for networking and collaboration. I greatly look forward to attending conferences and symposia and giving and listening to scientific talks. It is an important part of what I do, I take it seriously, and I enjoy it immensely.



This was my short list of reasons why I became and enjoy working as a scientist. However, there are many other things I enjoy about what I do. The process of becoming a researcher has been transformative and has changed my perspective of myself and how I think about the world around me. It is not perfect, but no job truly is. I hope this little slice of my life is educational and informational, and I am always happy to take emails from anyone who has questions on what it's like going to graduate school, being in research, or that wants to further discuss my research.

#top5   #science   #research   #researchers   #academia  #biomedical   #medicine   #neuroscience  

Smart phone-microscope and app aids researchers in diagnosing parasites in the field

"Low-tech" would be the term for the level of equipment doctors and health care workers often prefer or have available in working in remote or highly-underserved areas. In many ways, this classic medical equipment serves them well, and allows them to provide care when otherwise the residents in these regions may receive little if any at all. However, in some instances, low-tech equipment cannot help doctors identify certain pathogens which may affect their ability to rapidly diagnose and provide the correct treatment. Enter, the smart phone enabled microscope. With this handy bit of high-tech, doctors and the health care team can now go where it has been generally not possible to go concerning diagnosis of certain disease and investigation of certain tissue and organs in the human body.

Daniel Fletcher of the University of California, Berkeley, and his colleagues report in a recent article in Science Translational Medicine a camera-phone microscope and app that permits rapid identification of the African eye worm parasite Loa loa in blood samples. Loa loa develops into a worm that wiggles into eye tissue, and becomes an even bigger proble if is acquired with two other parasitic nematodes, Onchocerca volvulus (causes river blindness) and Wuchereria bancrofti (causes severe limb swelling). This compounded problem results from the existence of one drug, called ivermectin, used treat the two other parasites can cause induce unintended brain swelling if a person also has L. loa infection.


How does the smart phone/microscope help in this regard? Well, camera-based microscopes have been used for several years in the field, but a major limitation was that once you prepared a specimen, by blood collection and smearing blood on a slide, all the phone-based scope could do was magnify and provided no real way to improve up what a typical microscope could do. This new device, developed by Fletcher and associates allows someone to insert blood in a capillary tube into 3D-printed plastic case with a magnifying lens. The plastic case then can be placed around an iPhone, putting the lens and sample directly over the camera.


The app that corresponds to this device "records video of the magnified blood sample and uses an algorithm to look for movements in the fluid that match up with characteristics of L. loa. Based on this, the app accurately counts how many parasites are present. It has to be used around midday, during the brief period when L. loa typically are active but the other two nematodes are not."


The potential for modifying this device and application for use in detecting other parasites is clearly there. Other researchers are already hot on the trail in developing phone software to detect soil-based parasites like hookworm and whipworm. So, as smart phones become more pervasive in society and, and we find them in use in the far reaches of the world, we can be sure someone is thinking about not just how to get the best signal or download rates. There are scientists and doctors out there really putting these devices into practice in helping treating those that likely would go untreated. Technology and medicine is a great combination.

#science   #medicine   #biomedicaltechnology   #smartphone  #microscope   #diagnosis   #parasites   #bloodborne   #Africa   #app  #research  

Happy Mother's Day! It turns out you share more than just genes with Mom

As we all thank our Mothers today for the love and sacrifices (not the least of which was carrying you inside her for the better part of a year) made throughout the years on our behalf, research suggests we share a bit more that genes and memories with our mothers. During pregnancy, a process called fetal-mother microchimerism facilitates an exchange of cells between mother and baby and at birth both have a little piece of the other as a little memento, if you will, of the nine month journey.


Research has shown that cells from developing fetuses can be found throughout a mother's brain, bones, in circulating blood and within her heart. In fact, if the heart is damaged, fetal cells that migrate toward the heart may be involved in some repair processes. According to Laura Sanders from Science News, this fetal contribution of cells to the mother maybe a form of payback for all the baby takes from the mother during gestation.


"Growing fetuses slurp nutrients and energy out of a mother’s body during pregnancy (not to mention the morning sickness, heartburn and body aches). In return, fetuses offer up these young, potentially helpful cells. Perhaps these fetal cells, which may possess the ability to turn into lots of different kinds of cells, can help repair a damaged heart, liver or thyroid, as some studies have hinted."


However, this is not a one-way cel sharing process, as the mother will also have cells migrate into the fetus which means cells contributed by older siblings to your mom during their gestation could end up in you along with those specifically from your mother during yours. Some evidence suggests microchimerism may influence detrimental processes such as miscarriages, but much more research is needed to better understand this process overall.


So, this Mother's Day, remember there really is a part of you in her and her in you, in addition the the genetics that bind us as family. Just another reason to appreciate all she has done for you, and how you have been important in her life.


Gammill and Nelson (2010) Naturally acquired microchimerism. Int J Dev Biol. 2010; 54(2-3): 531–543.://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2887685/

#mothersday   #mothersday2015   #happymothersday   #cells  #biology   #research   #science   #sciencenews   #pregnancy  #baby   #mother  

Silver-tainted "zombie" bacteria kill other bacteria

Silver has long been known to possess potent anti-bacterial properties. Silver damages bacterial membranes, penetrate the cells, bind DNA and inhibit essential functions for bacterial survival. This proves deadly to bacteria. New research suggests that silver-treated bacteria retain silver particles in their bodies after death, and the dead bacteria remain as a toxic vehicle for other surrounding bacteria. According to Emily Conover at AAAS, the researchers:

"First killed a sample of the bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosausing a solution of silver nitrate. Then, they carefully separated the dead bacteria from the silver solution. When they exposed living bacteria to the dead, they witnessed a microscopic massacre-Up to 99.99% of the living bacteria met their doom."

Microscope images of P. aeruginosa before (a and d) and after (b, c and e) silver treatment; the black (b) and white (e) granules are silver deposits that trigger the "zombies" biocidal activity. Copyright 2015, Wakshlak et al. doi:10.1038/srep09555.

What is interesting about this finding is that silver solutions have long been used for its anti-septic and anti-germicidal properties. This new research suggests that bacteria exposed to silver take it up, die, and act like bacterial "zombies" when exposed to other healthy bacteria. So, rather than creating devices or engineered materials to release silver over a time-course for sustained silver release and thus, anti-bacterial efficacy of a silver treatment, recirculating silver-"infected" bacteria could also generate an extended temporal ability to promote bacterial death. Mostly, I think it is interesting that a simple experiment changed the perspective and potential use of a long utilized chemical for medically-related purposes. There are still basic experiments and simple ideas out there can that can make an impact if you know where to look and have an idea what you are looking for.

Racheli Ben-Knaz Wakshlak, 

Rami Pedahzur

& David Avnir

 (2015) Antibacterial activity of silver-killed bacteria: the "zombies" effect. 

Scientific Reports

 

5,

 

Article number:

 

9555

 

doi:10.1038/srep09555.

http://www.nature.com/srep/2015/150330/srep09555/full/srep09555.html

#science   #bacteria   #antibacterial   #medicine   #research  

The truth behind bars: Representations and misrepresentations of data sets in research articles

Figure 1. Multiple data sets can be presented as the same bar graph.
(Weissgerber et al. 2015).

One of the most common graphical representations of data in research papers is the bar graph. If you read my recent post, you saw that I represented percentages of respondents in different groups in a survey in such a graph. However, it is not the most accurate way to display all types of data collected and analyzed in experimental studies. For a simple number, like a percentage, a bar graph is sufficient; however, when you have multiple data points from individuals within a group, representing continuous data, showing the height or length of a bar as the average, plus and minus an error bar that represents a measure of the variation, is likely hiding the true nature of the data. What I mean by this is that bar graphs hide the spread of the data points, which can result in altogether different interpretations of the data. It is generally recommended that authors use scatter plots to show every data point, especially in studies with small sample sizes. Various sets can be represented by the exact same bar graph (see Figure 1 from the linked paper) The open-access article published last week in PLOS Biology by Weissgerber et al. gives several informational examples as to why this is the case.

In this study, the authors performed a systematic review of approximately 700 research articles published in top tier physiology journals and assessed the use of different types of graphs to represent various kinds of data. The authors state in the abstract:


"Papers rarely included scatterplots, box plots, and histograms that allow readers to critically evaluate continuous data. Most papers presented continuous data in bar and line graphs. This is problematic, as many different data distributions can lead to the same bar or line graph. The full data may suggest different conclusions from the summary statistics."


This should be taken as a nudge for scientists to think about displaying their data with more appropriate graphical representations. Most scientists are culpable for using bar graphs in this sense. Perhaps not only will this improve the interpretation and discussion of the data by the researchers, but also the readers as it improves the transparency of the collected data by pulling the curtain off and exposing it as it should.


Weissgerber TL, Milic NM, Winham SJ, Garovic VD (2015) Beyond Bar and Line Graphs: Time for a New Data Presentation Paradigm. PLoS Biol 13(4): e1002128. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002128.http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002128

Conservative Republicans stand alone in views toward climate change

A recent Gallup survey revealed that most conservative Republicans believe that climate change will not occur or will not take place during their lifetime. According to Jake Miller from CBS News:

"Forty percent of self-identified conservative Republicans believe global warming will never happen, according to the data, while 17 percent believe it will affect future generations. Only 37 percent of GOP conservatives believe the current generation will have to deal with the effects of a changing climate."

All other ideological groups surveyed responded quite differently than the Conservative Republicans concerning climate change occurrence during their lifetime.

• Liberal Democrats: 89%
• Moderate Democrats: 78%
• Independents: 66%
• Moderate Republicans: 64%
• Conservative Republicans: 37%

I find these responses quite interesting. As you move from one end of the political spectrum, you see a decreasing trend that really drops off when you reach the Conservative Republican category. The accompanying graph I created from the above numbers visually drives home this point. Climate change is and will be a hot topic of discussion among politicians and non-politicians alike. If a majority of most political groups feel climate change is something that is or will be an issue for the current generation, and Conservative Republicans feel the opposite, I will be watching with great interest to see how this issue is handled in upcoming elections. A link to the recently released Gallup survey results is provided below.This webpage also provide some other insightful tidbits of data you can read more about.

Andrew Dugan.
Conservative Republicans Alone on Global Warming's Timing. 4/22/2015.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/182807/conservative-republicans-alone-global-warming-timing.aspx?utm_source=Politics&utm_medium=newsfeed&utm_campaign=tiles