The senescence accelerated mouse-prone 8 (SAMP8) strain of mice is an experimental model of accelerated senescence that has also been proposed as a model of Alzheimer's disease as it shares several features with this dementia. We have recently reported amyloid-β (Aβ) granules in the hippocampus of SAMP8 mice, which contain Aβ42 and Aβ40 peptides and other amyloid-β protein precursor fragments. These granules appear clustered mainly in the stratum radiatum of the CA1 region and increase in number and size with age. Here we performed several studies to examine whether the Aβ granules in the hippocampus of SAMP8 mice contain other proteins characteristic of neuropathological aggregates, such as tau, MAP2, and α-synuclein. Moreover, we examined whether the Aβ granules in the hippocampus correspond to heparan sulphate proteoglycan (HSPG) positive granules previously described in this animal model. The results showed that Aβ granules correspond to the HSPG granular structures, being syndecan-2, a protein involved in the remodeling of dendritic spines, the type of HSPG found. Tau and MAP2, but not α-synuclein depositions, were also found in Aβ aggregates. Granules do not appear to have an astrocytic origin, since although some Aβ clusters are associated with astrocyte processes, most clusters are not. On the other hand, the presence of tau, MAP2, and NeuN in Aβ granules suggests a neuronal origin. As the components identified in Aβ granules are characteristic of the aggregates present in some neurodegenerative diseases, the SAMP8 model seems to be appropriate for the study of the processes involved in these pathologies.
Background Active travel to and from a transit station may provide significant amounts of physical activity and improve health. The ease with which people can traverse the distance to the transit station may impede or support active travel. Therefore, transit stations that have features that are supportive of utilitarian physical activity would be desirable. This study aimed to characterize the built environment surrounding new light rail transit (LRT) stations in the City of Houston, Texas. Methods In 2014, we used a series of systematic protocols and a standardized environmental audit instrument, the Analytic Audit Tool, to collect data on segments (streets) that surround 22 LRT stations that were being newly built. Using Geographic Information System (GIS), we assembled all the segments that intersect a 0.25-mile circular buffer around each station for the audit exercise. Several 3- to 4-member teams of trained auditors completed the audit exercise on a subset of these identified segments. Our analysis were descriptive in nature. We provided the frequency distributions of audited features across the study area. We also followed an original algorithm to produce several composite index scores for our study area. The composite index score is indicative of the prevalence of physical activity friendly/unfriendly features in the study area. Results In all, we audited a total of 590 segments covering a total of 218 US Census blocks, and eight City of Houston super neighborhoods. Findings suggest the environment around the new LRT stations may not be supportive of physical activity. In general, the audited segments lacked land use integration; had abandoned buildings, had uneven sidewalks; were not bike-friendly, had minimal presence of public-recreational facilities that would support physical activity; and had significant physical disorder. Notably, certain attractive and comfort features were frequently to usually available. Conclusions Current findings, which will be compared to follow-up audit data, can be useful for future researchers and practitioners interested in the built environment around LRT stations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12889-019-6560-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Latino day laborers (LDLs) are at a high risk for injury and accidents at work and have limited socioeconomic resources to deal with their consequences. While little is known about LDLs’ perceptions of their own vulnerability at the workplace, less is known about the strategies they adopt to confront these risks. The purpose of this qualitative study was to assess LDLs’ perceptions of their workplace dangers and to document the strategies they adopt and endorse to confront them. Guided by a participatory research approach, four focus groups stratified by age were conducted with 34 LDLs in Houston, Texas. Main focus group themes were identified using a combination of qualitative analysis methods involving a thematic analysis conducted by the interview team, LDL advisors, and bilingual Latino researchers. All participants were Latino males (mean age = 40), the majority reported having completed sixth grade or less (64.2%) and having lived in the United States for an average of 12.7 years. We described three categories of strategies to reduce risk for workplace injury generated by local LDLs (practical knowledge and job experience, interpersonal, and personal). These strategies should be explored and encouraged to assist in planning risk-reduction programs, presented in the voice and language of Latino “inside experts” with firsthand experience. The findings of the focus group suggest that LDLs already possess a broad repertoire of strategies to cope with risks at work that can be incorporated in safety programs for LDLs and other immigrant Latino workers.
Articles reporting research may be full length or brief reports. These should report original research findings within the journal's scope. Papers should generally be a maximum of 4000 words in length, excluding tables, references, and abstract and key points of the article, whilst it is recommended that the number of references should not exceed 30. Review PapersComprehensive, authoritative, reviews within the journal's scope. There are two types of review papers:-systematic review papers: respond to a specific research question, accrue from criterion-based selection of sources, include a quantitative synthesis and a statistical method (meta-analysis), and should adhere to PRISMA guidelines. Guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity should be noted in methods section. -narrative review papers: the research question may be broad, and the scope of this review is to discuss a specific topic and keep the readers up-to-date about it. This type of review does not necessarily include a methodological approach and its synthesis is usually qualitative. Narrative reviews should include in a developments section, with details regarding data sources used, keywords applied, time restrictions and study types selected. Developments should be based on actual review articles. All review papers should be generally less than 6000 words, excluding abstract, tables, figures and references. References should not exceed 50. Conclusion of the reviews should be specific and stem from the findings. Short ReportsBrief reports of data from original research. Short reports are shorter versions of original articles, may include one table or figure, should not exceed 1500 words, and it is recommended that the number of references should not exceed 15. Short reports are suitable for the presentation of research that extends previously published research, including the reporting of additional controls and confirmatory results in other settings, as well as negative results. Authors must clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building, both published and unpublished.
Articles reporting research may be full length or brief reports. These should report original research findings within the journal's scope. Papers should generally be a maximum of 4000 words in length, excluding tables, references, and abstract and key points of the article, whilst it is recommended that the number of references should not exceed 30. Review PapersComprehensive, authoritative, reviews within the journal's scope. There are two types of review papers:-systematic review papers: respond to a specific research question, accrue from criterion-based selection of sources, include a quantitative synthesis and a statistical method (meta-analysis), and should adhere to PRISMA guidelines. Guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity should be noted in methods section. -narrative review papers: the research question may be broad, and the scope of this review is to discuss a specific topic and keep the readers up-to-date about it. This type of review does not necessarily include a methodological approach and its synthesis is usually qualitative. Narrative reviews should include in a developments section, with details regarding data sources used, keywords applied, time restrictions and study types selected. Developments should be based on actual review articles. All review papers should be generally less than 6000 words, excluding abstract, tables, figures and references. References should not exceed 50. Conclusion of the reviews should be specific and stem from the findings. Short ReportsBrief reports of data from original research. Short reports are shorter versions of original articles, may include one table or figure, should not exceed 1500 words, and it is recommended that the number of references should not exceed 15. Short reports are suitable for the presentation of research that extends previously published research, including the reporting of additional controls and confirmatory results in other settings, as well as negative results. Authors must clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building, both published and unpublished.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.