35S rRNA transcripts include a 5′-external transcribed spacer followed by rRNAs of the small and large ribosomal subunits. Their processing yields massive precursors that include dozens of assembly factor proteins. In Saccharomycescerevisiae, nucleolar assembly factors form 2 coaxial layers/volumes around ribosomal DNA. Most of these factors are cyclically recruited from a latent state to an operative state, and are extensively conserved. The layers match, at least approximately, known subcompartments found in higher eukaryotic cells. ∼80% of assembly factors are essential. The number of copies of these assembly factors is comparable to the number of nascent transcripts. Moreover, they exhibit “isoelectric balance,” with RNA-binding candidate “nucleator” assembly factors being notably basic. The physical properties of pre-small subunit and pre-large subunit assembly factors are similar, as are their 19 motif signatures detected by hierarchical clustering, unlike motif signatures of the 5′-external transcribed spacer rRNP. Additionally, many assembly factors lack shared motifs. Taken together with the progression of rRNP composition during subunit maturation, and the realization that the ribosomal DNA cable is initially bathed in a subunit-nonspecific assembly factor reservoir/microenvironment, we propose a “3-step subdomain assembly model”: Step (1): predominantly basic assembly factors sequentially nucleate sites along nascent rRNA; Step (2): the resulting rRNPs recruit numerous less basic assembly factors along with notably basic ribosomal proteins; Step (3): rRNPs in nearby subdomains consolidate. Cleavages of rRNA then promote release of rRNPs to the nucleoplasm, likely facilitated by the persistence of assembly factors that were already associated with nucleolar precursors.
Humans and elephants have shared social, historical and ecological relations for ages. However, their interactions have not been as pleasant as one would like that to be. Although the problems associated with human‐elephant conflict (HEC) are widely known, the increasing rate and extent of conflicts suggest that improved strategies are required to promote their co‐existence. Several measures such as compensation for loss of lives and livelihood, deployment of deterrents, erection of fences to restrict the movements, promotion of conservation education to reduce antagonism, preservation of forests and habitation, etc. have been adopted extensively to mitigate human‐elephant conflict and foster coexistence. Despite persistent efforts, the problem refuses to wither away. Stakeholders' perceptions and attitudes also vary widely across the categories. Many studies show that the impacts of human‐elephant conflict penetrate far deeper than the immediate threats from each other. This paper attempts to understand the plurality of stakeholders' connect with elephants, their perceptions, effectiveness of existing mitigation strategies and future of their coexistence, drawing from empirical data. On the basis of inputs from key informants, focus group discussions among community members and Forest Department officials and field observations from one of the migratory elephant corridors of India, we locate mixed perspectives from various stakeholders and their experiences and responses to human‐elephant conflict which, as we envisage, will go a long way in designing participatory and community‐based mitigation strategies.
<p>The
study was conducted among young children from the villages near the migratory
corridor of the elephants, by employing draw and write method which is a subjective
yet effective method in understanding the perception of the young stakeholders
on complex issues like HEC, coexistence and conservation. The young respondents
expressed negative interaction between humans and elephants, and also the
vulnerability indicators. The discontent among young children was evident and
it could further erode the future stakeholders’ traditional and cultural
connect that contributes to safeguard future of wildlife. Content analysis of the
drawn sketches complemented by subsequent discussion in the context of their
production provided profound and in-depth insights into the complex situation.</p>
Climate change is happening, and we have been forewarned of the consequences. Since it is caused largely by human action, a lot can be done to avert the detrimental consequences. But getting political support for action is difficult because the hardest‐hit people are marginalized groups that have little political power, including indigenous communities. Greta Thunberg and groups that agree with her view are emerging worldwide to promote action; nevertheless, the magnitude of public response and action is inadequate. This article highlights the adversities caused by the climate emergency in India and the efforts of indigenous communities to take effective action. In its conclusion, this article makes suggestions about ways to respond appropriately to the climate emergency.
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.