Genomic imprinting is an inherited epigenetic phenomenon that results in parental ± origin ± speci®c gene expression in somatic cells. Relaxation or loss of this feature in certain genes has been demonstrated in several pediatric and adult neoplasms, suggesting an association with tumorigenesis. We analysed 64 primary untreated head and neck squamous carcinoma for the loss of imprinting in the IGF2 and H19 genes to determine the implications of this alteration in the development and progression of these tumors. Forty-nine (77%) of the 64 tumors were informative for imprinting analyses of these genes. IGF2 and H19 were imprinted in all normal squamous epithelium examined. Twelve (37.5%) of 32 tumors informative for H19 and 11 (40.7%) of 27 tumors informative for IGF2 manifested loss of imprinting. Ten tumors were informative for both genes, of which four maintained the constitutional imprinting and six showed loss of imprinting at either H19 or IGF2. These data suggest that loss of imprinting at the IGF2 and H19 loci play a role in the oncogenesis of head and neck carcinoma.
The philosophy/theory of dialectical pluralism (DP) is first summarized. Ontologically, DP views reality as plural and changing. Epistemologically, DP follows a dialectical, dialogical, hermeneutical approach which includes listening, interacting, and learning from “the other.” Theoretically, DP is inspired by and integrates multiple theoretical concepts especially from the works of John Rawls, John Dewey, and Jürgen Habermas (Johnson, 2012, 2011a). From empirical research, the authors of this chapter draw on concepts and findings from social psychological literatures such as conflict management, negotiation, small group psychology, group counseling, group dynamics, political diplomacy, deliberative democracy, and workplace justice. DP recommends purposeful construction of teams that include multiple/different values and perspectives and stakeholders from the most disadvantaged affected groups. The group process operates from the position of equal power, the use of social psychological strategies (discussed in depth in this chapter), and working toward win-win solutions.
Two replicates of each of 4 light patterns were imposed on 4 breeds of laying hen. The light patterns were designed to induce sexual maturity, defined as 50% production, at a range of ages. Within-room treatments were ad libitum or rationed feeding during rearing and 4 breeds, namely ISA Brown, Hisex Brown, Ross G-Link Brown and Shaver Brown. A total of 6144 birds were used to test the 32 treatments. 2. Age at 50% production was significantly affected by both lighting treatment and rearing regimen. 3. The light pattern treatments had no significant effect on any cumulative performance variable measured from 20 to 80 weeks of age. 4. Breed had a significant effect on eggs/hen housed, rate of lay, egg weight, egg output and food intake.
Five trials were conducted in which six methods of picking end of lay hens from battery cages were compared with three people performing the picking. Pulling the birds over a breast support slide, which created a smooth surface over the feeding trough, did not affect the prevalence of broken bones. In one trial, picking birds by one leg resulted in about three times more fractured bones than picking by two legs. This effect, however, was not evident in three other trials, suggesting that the advantage from two leg picking would only exist with some pickers or some flocks. Pulling more than one bird at a time by one leg through the cage entrance was associated with more skeletal damage than pulling birds individually by two legs. Picking the birds by one leg was easier to perform than picking by two legs.
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.