Into the Second Century: ASPB 2024
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
63Rd Annual Maize Genetics Meeting Program and Abstracts
63rd Annual Maize Genetics Meeting Program and Abstracts March 8 – March 12, 2021 2nd Virtual Maize Meeting Facilitated in partnership with This conference received financial support from: National Science Foundation Corteva Agriscience, Agriculture Division of DowDuPont Bayer BASF Syngenta NCGA KWS We thank these sponsors for their generosity! A special thank you for the in-kind support from the USDA-ARS. ii Table of Contents Cover Page ................................................................................................................... i Contributors ................................................................................................................. ii Table of Contents ......................................................................................................... iii General Information ..................................................................................................... iv From the Maize Genetics Cooperation............................................................................ vi Introducing the Committee on Outreach, Diversity, Inclusion & Education (CODIE)...viii Financial Aid Awards ......................................................................................................viii Data Management Made Simple...................................................................................... xi Program ........................................................................................................................ 1 List of Posters ............................................................................................................. -
Delta-Notch Signaling: the Long and the Short of a Neuron’S Influence on Progenitor Fates
Journal of Developmental Biology Review Delta-Notch Signaling: The Long and the Short of a Neuron’s Influence on Progenitor Fates Rachel Moore 1,* and Paula Alexandre 2,* 1 Centre for Developmental Neurobiology, King’s College London, London SE1 1UL, UK 2 Developmental Biology and Cancer, University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London WC1N 1EH, UK * Correspondence: [email protected] (R.M.); [email protected] (P.A.) Received: 18 February 2020; Accepted: 24 March 2020; Published: 26 March 2020 Abstract: Maintenance of the neural progenitor pool during embryonic development is essential to promote growth of the central nervous system (CNS). The CNS is initially formed by tightly compacted proliferative neuroepithelial cells that later acquire radial glial characteristics and continue to divide at the ventricular (apical) and pial (basal) surface of the neuroepithelium to generate neurons. While neural progenitors such as neuroepithelial cells and apical radial glia form strong connections with their neighbours at the apical and basal surfaces of the neuroepithelium, neurons usually form the mantle layer at the basal surface. This review will discuss the existing evidence that supports a role for neurons, from early stages of differentiation, in promoting progenitor cell fates in the vertebrates CNS, maintaining tissue homeostasis and regulating spatiotemporal patterning of neuronal differentiation through Delta-Notch signalling. Keywords: neuron; neurogenesis; neuronal apical detachment; asymmetric division; notch; delta; long and short range lateral inhibition 1. Introduction During the development of the central nervous system (CNS), neurons derive from neural progenitors and the Delta-Notch signaling pathway plays a major role in these cell fate decisions [1–4]. -
Downloaded Manually1
The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a Comparative Analysis Philippe Mongeon and Adèle Paul-Hus [email protected]; [email protected] Université de Montréal, École de bibliothéconomie et des sciences de l'information, C.P. 6128, Succ. Centre-Ville, H3C 3J7 Montréal, Qc, Canada Abstract Bibliometric methods are used in multiple fields for a variety of purposes, namely for research evaluation. Most bibliometric analyses have in common their data sources: Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science (WoS) and Elsevier’s Scopus. This research compares the journal coverage of both databases in terms of fields, countries and languages, using Ulrich’s extensive periodical directory as a base for comparison. Results indicate that the use of either WoS or Scopus for research evaluation may introduce biases that favor Natural Sciences and Engineering as well as Biomedical Research to the detriment of Social Sciences and Arts and Humanities. Similarly, English-language journals are overrepresented to the detriment of other languages. While both databases share these biases, their coverage differs substantially. As a consequence, the results of bibliometric analyses may vary depending on the database used. Keywords Bibliometrics, citations indexes, Scopus, Web of Science, research evaluation Introduction Bibliometric and scientometric methods have multiple and varied application realms, that goes from information science, sociology and history of science to research evaluation and scientific policy (Gingras, 2014). Large scale bibliometric research was made possible by the creation and development of the Science Citation Index (SCI) in 1963, which is now part of Web of Science (WoS) alongside two other indexes: the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and the Arts and Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI) (Wouters, 2006). -
Jennifer Regala Managing Editor, the Plant Cell and Plant Physiology OPEN PEER REVIEW: IS IT for US? IS OPEN PEER REVIEW for US? There Are Many Questions to Ask… 1
ASPB and Open Peer Review Jennifer Regala Managing Editor, The Plant Cell and Plant Physiology OPEN PEER REVIEW: IS IT FOR US? IS OPEN PEER REVIEW FOR US? There Are Many Questions To Ask… 1. What are the costs involved? 2. What is required of your journal staff? 3. What does your journal’s editorial board think? 4. How will your organization define “open peer review”? 5. Will you seek permission to publish peer review reports from reviewers and authors, or will sharing of these reports be a condition of publishing in your journal? 6. What are your competitors doing? 7. What do your authors, readers, and members of your community at large want? • Plant Physiology is a monthly journal • ASPB’s largest publication (volume) • Most frequently cited plant biology journal • Plant Physiology does not offer open peer review as of April 2019 • The editorial board of Plant Physiology keeps open peer review as a standing item on its agenda (to be discussed June of 2019) WHY Doesn’t Plant Physiology Currently Support Open Peer Review? • The editorial board of Plant Physiology has the general feeling that publishing reviews might cause reviewers to avoid more critical (and more useful) analysis of submissions, particularly early career reviewers, even if anonymous • Per Mike Blatt, the Editor-in-Chief of Plant Physiology: “The most meaningful review content would not be included for a substantial percentage of papers (roughly 50-60% of accepted papers): manuscripts that are given a ‘decline with encouragement to resubmit’ will be likely to include reviews that refer to earlier reviews of previous submissions; without the context of these earlier reviews (and note that these will be of different manuscript submissions and therefore almost impossible to cross-reference and reconstruct for any reader), the published reviews will often be uninformative.” WHY Doesn’t Plant Physiology Currently Support Open Peer Review (continued)? • Plant Physiology submissions have much discussion via confidential consultations after review. -
The Value of Our ASPB Community by JUDY CALLIS UPDATE ASPB President, University of California, Davis
March/April 2020 • Volume 47, Number 2 p. 7 p. 8 p. 12 Journal Flexibility Zachary Lippman NEW COLUMN in the Troubling Wins 2020 National Times of COVID-19 Academy of Unsung Heroes: Sciences Prize Samantha Link THE NEWSLETTER OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PLANT BIOLOGISTS President’s Letter The Value of Our ASPB Community BY JUDY CALLIS UPDATE ASPB President, University of California, Davis As the impacts of the coronavirus his is an unprecedented resources on Plantae pandemic become ever more serious, and extraordinary support profession- ASPB’s Plant Biology 2020 contin- Ttime. The fabric of our als and students gency planning efforts have gathered personal and professional worldwide without pace. Among other possibilities, as lives is changing daily, and charge and provide of early April we are exploring the it will be different as you communities with feasibility of options for online access read this message than it was a forum for discus- to meeting content—including the when I wrote it a few weeks sion and resource networking and other peer-to-peer ago. Now more than ever, we sharing. Join Twitter connections that are such a vital should value our ASPB com- if you haven’t component of Plant Biology confer- munity. Indeed, none of us is already and follow ences. Decisions are still pending; alone. ASBP (@ASPB); we will share more detailed informa- The goals of this letter are post ideas, ask for tion as soon as we are able to do so. to point you toward resourc- suggestions, and In the meantime, we thank you for es that might be particularly list resource URLs. -
Trace Metal Utilization in Chloroplasts
Chapter 10 Trace Metal Utilization in Chloroplasts SSabeehaabeeha S. Merchant Merchant*∗ Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, U.S.A. Summary ............................................................................................................................ 200 I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 200 A. Transition Metals Function as Redox Catalysts ........................................................... 200 B. Trace Metal Deficiency Impacts the Chloroplast ......................................................... 201 C. Metalloprotein Assembly—Thermodynamics vs. Kinetics ............................................. 201 D. Fe, Cu and Mn ................................................................................................... 201 II. Fe ................................................................................................................................ 202 A. Ferritin .............................................................................................................. 202 B. Heme, FeS and Fe Cofactor Synthesis ..................................................................... 203 1. Heme ....................................................................................................... 203 2. FeS .......................................................................................................... 204 a. Discovery and Function of Prototypical -
Resolution of the Position of Restorer-Of-Fertility Gene
LOCALIZATION OF THE RF3 RESTORER-OF-FERTILITY GENE FOR MAIZE S-TYPE CYTOPLASMIC MALE STERILITY A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the Graduate School At the University of Missouri In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy By TIFFANY LANGEWISCH Dr. Kathleen Newton, Dissertation Supervisor December 2012 © Copyright by Tiffany Langewisch 2012 All Rights Reserved The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the Dissertation entitled LOCATION OF THE RF3 RESTORER-OF-FERTILITY GENE FOR MAIZE S-TYPE CYTOPLASMIC MALE STERILTY Presented by TIFFANY LANGEWISCH A candidate for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy And hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Kathleen Newton James Birchler Sherry Flint-Garcia Chris Pires ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would first like to acknowledge members of my committee, past and present, including Drs. Kathleen Newton, James Birchler, Sherry Flint-Garcia, Michael McMullen, Christopher Pires, and Karen Cone. My committee has provided helpful input and guidance throughout my dissertation research. I would like to thank them for their invaluable advice in all aspects of my graduate studies. As my advisor, Kathleen Newton has particularly provided advice, guidance, and support. This research would not have been possible without the development of Rf3 near-isogenic lines by Dr. Susan Gabay-Laughnan. She has been a crucial resource for seed and feedback throughout the years. Barbara Sonderman is thanked for her tireless effort of keeping my “babies” happy and healthy in the greenhouse. I thankfully acknowledge everyone in the Newton lab for discussions, field assistance, and help in my everyday research. -
Web of Science V. Scopus: Presentation for the URI Deans' Council Peter Larsen University of Rhode Island, [email protected]
University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Technical Services Faculty Presentations Technical Services 2017 Web of Science v. Scopus: Presentation for the URI Deans' Council Peter Larsen University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Andrée Rathemacher University of Rhode Island, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lib_ts_presentations Part of the Collection Development and Management Commons, Higher Education Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Recommended Citation Larsen, Peter and Rathemacher, Andrée, "Web of Science v. Scopus: Presentation for the URI Deans' Council" (2017). Technical Services Faculty Presentations. Paper 49. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lib_ts_presentations/49http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/lib_ts_presentations/49 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Technical Services at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Technical Services Faculty Presentations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Web of Science v. Scopus Presentation for the URI Deans’ Council April 19, 2017 Peter Larsen • Andrée Rathemacher UConn Study 2014 ● Used 200+ hours of staff time ● Scopus had more journal records (183%), fewer book (72%) and proceedings records (89%) ● Use of Scopus increased, while Web of Science decreased (~3%/year each) ● Scopus is preferred by Undergraduates and Graduate Students ● Cost of Scopus is roughly half the cost of Web of Science ● UConn -
Alternative Ac/Ds Transposition Induces Major Chromosomal Rearrangements in Maize
Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on October 6, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Alternative Ac/Ds transposition induces major chromosomal rearrangements in maize Jianbo Zhang,1 Chuanhe Yu,1 Vinay Pulletikurti,2,4 Jonathan Lamb,3,5 Tatiana Danilova,3 David F. Weber,2 James Birchler,3 and Thomas Peterson1,6 1Department of Genetics, Development and Cell Biology, and Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA; 2School of Biological Sciences, Illinois State University, Normal, Illinois 61790, USA; 3Division of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211, USA Barbara McClintock reported that the Ac/Ds transposable element system can generate major chromosomal rearrangements (MCRs), but the underlying mechanism has not been determined. Here, we identified a series of chromosome rearrangements derived from maize lines containing pairs of closely linked Ac transposable element termini. Molecular and cytogenetic analyses showed that the MCRs in these lines comprised 17 reciprocal translocations and two large inversions. The breakpoints of all 19 MCRs are delineated by Ac termini and characteristic 8-base-pair target site duplications, indicating that the MCRs were generated by precise trans- position reactions involving the Ac termini of two closely linked elements. This alternative transposition mechanism may have contributed to chromosome evolution and may also occur during V(D)J recombination resulting in oncogenic translocations. [Keywords: V(D)J recombination; chromosome rearrangements; hAT elements; transposition] Supplemental material is available at http://www.genesdev.org. Received December 30, 2008; revised version accepted February 11, 2009. In the 1940s, Barbara McClintock reported that the maize aberrant Ds transposition that results in fusion of sister Activator (Ac) element could induce transposition of the chromatids, chromosome breakage, and formation of nonautonomous Dissociation (Ds) element, which she deletions has been described (English et al. -
Homoeologous Shuffling and Chromosome Compensation
Homoeologous shuffling and chromosome compensation maintain genome balance in resynthesized allopolyploid Brassica napus Zhiyong Xiong, Robert T. Gaeta, and J. Chris Pires1 Division of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211 Edited by Susan R. Wessler, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, and approved March 31, 2011 (received for review September 22, 2010) Polyploidy has contributed to the evolution of eukaryotes, partic- B. napus affords an excellent opportunity for conducting cy- ularly flowering plants. The genomic consequences of polyploidy togenetic investigations of evolution in a resynthesized allo- have been extensively studied, but the mechanisms for chromo- polyploid. Natural B. napus (AACC; 2n = 38) is thought to have some stability and diploidization in polyploids remain largely un- formed 5,000 to 10,000 y ago by the hybridization of ancestors of known. By using new cytogenetic tools to identify all of the Brassica rapa (AA; 2n = 20) and Brassica oleracea (CC; 2n = 18) homoeologous chromosomes, we conducted a cytological investi- (28, 29, 30). B. rapa and B. oleracea are also ancient polyploids, gation of 50 resynthesized Brassica napus allopolyploids across gen- and large-scale chromosome rearrangements occurred in the A erations S0:1 to S5:6 and in the S10:11 generation. Changes in copy and C genomes following divergence from a common ancestor number of individual chromosomes were detected in the S0:1 gen- (31). Several studies have demonstrated that genetic changes eration and increased in subsequent generations, despite the fact caused by homoeologous chromosome rearrangement are com- that the mean chromosome number among lines was approxi- mon in newly resynthesized B. -
The Differential Expression Patterns of Paralogs in Response to Stresses Indicate Expression and Sequence Divergences
The differential expression patterns of paralogs in response to stresses indicate expression and sequence divergences Shuaibin Lian ( [email protected] ) Xinyang Normal University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0211-1842 Yongjie Zhou Xinyang Normal University Zixiao Liu Xinyang Normal University Andong Gong Xinyang Normal University Lin Cheng Xinyang Normal University Research article Keywords: Posted Date: October 14th, 2019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.16022/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Version of Record: A version of this preprint was published on June 16th, 2020. See the published version at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-020-02460-x. Page 1/31 Abstract Background Theoretically, paralogous genes generated through whole genome duplications should share identical expression levels due to their identical sequences and chromatin environments. However, functional divergences and expression differences have arisen due to selective pressures and evolutional stresses. A comprehensive investigation of the expression patterns of paralogous gene pairs in response to various stresses and a study of correlations between the expression levels and sequence divergences of the paralogs are needed.Results In this study, we analyzed the expression patterns of paralogous genes under different types of stress and investigated the correlations between the expression levels and sequence divergences of the paralogs. Firstly, we analyzed the differential expression patterns of the paralogs under four different types of stress (drought, cold, infection, and herbivory) and classied them into three types according to their expression patterns. Secondly, we further analyzed the differential expression patterns under various degrees of stress and constructed the corresponding co-expression networks of differentially expressed paralogs and transcription factors. -
The MADS-Box Transcription Factor PHERES1 Controls
SHORT REPORT The MADS-box transcription factor PHERES1 controls imprinting in the endosperm by binding to domesticated transposons Rita A Batista1,2, Jordi Moreno-Romero1,2†, Yichun Qiu1,2, Joram van Boven1,2, Juan Santos-Gonza´ lez1,2, Duarte D Figueiredo1,2‡, Claudia Ko¨ hler1,2* 1Department of Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden; 2Linnean Centre for Plant Biology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden Abstract MADS-box transcription factors (TFs) are ubiquitous in eukaryotic organisms and play major roles during plant development. Nevertheless, their function in seed development remains largely unknown. Here, we show that the imprinted Arabidopsis thaliana MADS-box TF PHERES1 (PHE1) is a master regulator of paternally expressed imprinted genes, as well as of non-imprinted key regulators of endosperm development. PHE1 binding sites show distinct epigenetic modifications on maternal and paternal alleles, correlating with parental-specific transcriptional *For correspondence: activity. Importantly, we show that the CArG-box-like DNA-binding motifs that are bound by PHE1 [email protected] have been distributed by RC/Helitron transposable elements. Our data provide an example of the Present address: †Centre for molecular domestication of these elements which, by distributing PHE1 binding sites throughout Research in Agricultural the genome, have facilitated the recruitment of crucial endosperm regulators into a single Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA- transcriptional network. UAB-UB, Campus UAB, Barcelona, Spain; ‡Institute for Biochemistry and Biology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany Introduction MADS-box transcription factors (TFs) are present in most eukaryotes, and are classified into two Competing interests: The groups: type I or SRF (Serum Response Factor)-like, and type II or MEF2 (Myocyte Enhancing Fac- authors declare that no tor2)-like (Gramzow and Theissen, 2010).