The Natural Orifice Surgery Consortium for Assessment and Research™ (NOSCAR™), a joint effort of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), announce the 2008 NOSCAR™ Research Award winners. The funds, granted through Olympus Medical Systems' Olympus Research Fund and by KARL STORZ Endoscopy-America, Inc., will be distributed among 14 grant recipients supporting 16 research projects in the emerging transdisciplinary therapy known as Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery™ (NOTES™), an approach that could ultimately represent a major paradigm shift in minimally invasive therapy and patient care. NOSCAR™ received 32 grant applications for the $750,000 in research funds.
"We received an outstanding response for research funding reflecting the momentum this revolutionary technique has created," said Michael L. Kochman, MD, FASGE, NOSCAR™ Research Subcommittee co-chair. "These grant recipients are conducting research that is pointing us to the next phase in the evolution of the NOTES™ procedure, which is multicenter human studies."
The first NOSCAR™ Research Awards were announced in 2006. Since that time, 56 grants have been awarded. Recipients of the 2008 awards are conducting research in both animal models and humans. Past NOSCAR™ Research Award winners recently presented data from their projects at the 3rd International Conference on NOTES™ held in San Francisco, Calif., July 10-12, 2008. Presentations included research on improving patient safety and multidisciplinary team efficiency, the physiologic and immunologic impact of NOTES™, drainage of abdominal abscess, and gastric leak testing, among others.
"NOSCAR™ is grateful to Olympus Medical Systems and KARL STORZ Endoscopy-America for supporting NOTES™ research and helping to advance this minimally invasive technique," said Steven Schwaitzberg, MD, NOSCAR™ Research Subcommittee co-chair.
Awards Supported by Olympus Medical Systems
Juliane Bingener-Casey, MD, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Randomized Double-Blinded Trial Comparing Laparoscopy and Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery Procedures in a Porcine Model
B. Joseph Elmunzer, MD, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Endoscopic Full Thickness Resection of Gastric Lesions Using a Novel Grasp-and-Snare Technique: Evaluation in a Porcine Survival Model
Jeffrey Hazey, MD, Ohio State University Hospital, Columbus, OH
Feasibility of Diagnostic Translumenal Endoscopic Peritoneoscopy for Abdominal Insufflation, Adhesiolysis and Trocar Placement in Patients Who Require Laparoscopic Access
Michael Marohn, DO, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
Immune & Baseline Alterations on the Physiologic Response to Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES™): A Comparison Between Human Transvaginal and Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Erica Moran, MD, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN пїЅпїЅ" 2 Awards
1) Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating NOTES™ Repair of Hollow Viscus Perforation
2) Assessment of Methodology and Extended Outcome of Submucosal Endoscopy with Mucosal Flap (SEMF) Myotomy for Treatment of Achalasia
Kiyokazu Nakajima, MD, PhD, Osaka University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
Comprehension of Current Limitations in Endoscopic Automatic CO2 Insufflation: Towards Pure NOTES™
Brant K. Oelschlager, MD, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
Assessment of a Simple, Novel Endoluminal Method for Gastrotomy Closure in NOTES™
Adrian Park, MD, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD
Quantitative Ergonomic Assessment of NOTES™ Techniques: A Study of Physical and Mental Workload, Body Movement and Posture
Richard Rothstein, MD, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH
Patient Quality of Life and Utility for Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery
Awards Supported by KARL STORZ Endoscopy-America
Erica Moran, MD, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
NOTES™ Retroperitoneal Access Using Prone Positioning in Humans
Mark Sawyer, MD, Case University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, OH
Transgastric Extravesical Partial Cystectomy: Acute and Chronic Porcine Study with Histopathologic Evaluation of Cystotomy Healing
Georg O. Spaun, MD, Legacy Health System, Clackamas, OR
The Role of Flexible Endoscopy in Mediastinal Dissection for Esophageal Surgery
Thadeus Trus, MD, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
The NOSCAR™ Delphi Project: Towards a Research Agenda in Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery
Mark Whiteford, MD, Legacy Health System, Portland, OR
An Incisionless Approach for Radical Sigmoid Resection and Primary Anastomosis
Oliver J. Wagner, MD, University Hospital Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
NOTES™ Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: An Experimental Surgical Study in Pigs
NOTES™ Course Information
ASGE Masters Series Course
Insight into NOTES™: A Hands-on Course for Human Applications
November 7-8, 2008
Phoenix, AZ
Course Directors:
Brian J. Dunkin, MD, FACS, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX
Anthony N. Kalloo, MD, FASGE, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD
For more information on this course, visit asge/.
About NOSCAR
Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery™ (NOTES™) might represent the next major advancement in minimally invasive therapy. To address this emerging technology, a working group consisting of expert laparoscopic surgeons from SAGES and a group of expert interventional endoscopists representing ASGE have joined together as the Natural Orifice Surgery Consortium for Assessment and Research™ (NOSCAR™) Working Group on NOTES™. The growing capabilities of therapeutic flexible endoscopy have ushered in a new era in treatment of gastrointestinal conditions. Refinements in laparoscopic surgery have progressed to the point that complex surgical procedures, such as gastric bypass, can now be performed in a minimally invasive fashion. These trends have set the stage for the development of even less invasive methods to treat conditions in both the gut lumen and in the peritoneal cavity. It seems feasible that major intraperitoneal surgery may one day be performed without skin incisions. The natural orifices may provide the entry point for surgical interventions in the peritoneal cavity thereby avoiding abdominal wall incisions. For more information, visit wnoscar/.
About the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons
The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) was founded in 1981 to foster, promote, support and encourage academic, clinical and research achievement in gastrointestinal endoscopic surgery. Our members are general and colorectal surgeons who perform endoscopy and laparoscopy as part of their practice as well as surgical residents, fellows, and other allied health personnel. The Society has grown from fewer than 50 original members to more than 5,500 from every state and over 80 countries. Visit sages/ for more information.
About the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Founded in 1941, the mission of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy is to be the leader in advancing patient care and digestive health by promoting excellence in gastrointestinal endoscopy. ASGE, with 10,000 physician members worldwide, promotes the highest standards for endoscopic training and practice, fosters endoscopic research, recognizes distinguished contributions to endoscopy, and is the foremost resource for endoscopic education. Visit asge/ and screen4coloncancer/ for more information.
About Olympus Medical Systems Corporation
Olympus developed the first gastrocamera in 1950, and has since developed a wide range of fiberscopes and videoscopes for direct internal observation of the human body. Today, we are expanding our minimally invasive treatment business to offer a wide range of instruments and peripheral devices for medical treatment and clinical diagnoses, including endoscopic surgery. We are improving medical and healthcare services by developing "more patient-friendly medical care" technology for early detection and treatment of diseases, even "greater reliability" in our unsurpassed devices and "high efficiency" in our products and services to better serve our customers' needs. More information on the company can be found at olympus.co.jp/en/.
About KARL STORZ
Karl Storz Endoscopy-America, Inc. is an affiliate of Karl Storz GmbH & Co. KG, an international leader for over 60 years in reusable endoscope technology, encompassing all endoscopic specialties. Based in Tuttlingen, Germany, Karl Storz GmbH & Co. KG is a family-owned company that designs, engineers, manufactures and markets all its products with an emphasis on visionary design, precision craftsmanship and clinical effectiveness. For more information visit the company's Web site at karlstorz/.
Source: Anne Brownsey
American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
понедельник, 6 июня 2011 г.
'Ballooning' Spiders Grounded By Infection
Money spiders infected with Rickettsia bacteria are less likely to 'balloon' - that is, to use their silk as sails to catch gusts of wind and travel long distances. Researchers writing in the open access journal BMC Biology suggest that it may be in the bacteria's interests to ground the spiders and that this reduction in dispersal could reduce gene flow and impact on reproductive isolation within the meta-population.
While working at the University of East Anglia, Sara Goodacre led an international team of researchers who investigated the microbes' effect on the spiders' ballooning behavior. She said, "Because we found no reduction in fitness associated with Rickettsia infection, the reduced long-distance dispersal seems unlikely to be simply due to decreased body condition caused by illness. Rather, we believe that reducing long-distance dispersal could be an evolved adaptive modification by bacterial infections to promote their own transmission".
The researchers treated the spiders with antibiotics to reduce the bacterial infection and showed that this increased their ballooning frequency. They also observed that Rickettsia-infected spiders reared in the laboratory had reduced long-distance (but not short-distance) dispersal. This parasite-induced change in a non-reproductive trait has never been shown before and, according to Goodacre, "Clearly shows that the dynamics of ecosystem services such as a spider's pest-controlling function may be altered as a consequence of bacterial infection".
Notes:
Microbial modification of host long-distance dispersal capacity
Sara L Goodacre, Oliver Y Martin, Dries Bonte, Linda Hutchings, Chris Woolley, Kamal Ibrahim, C.F. George Thomas and Godfrey M Hewitt
BMC Biology (in press)
Article
All articles are available free of charge, according to BioMed Central's open access policy.
Source:
Graeme Baldwin
BioMed Central
While working at the University of East Anglia, Sara Goodacre led an international team of researchers who investigated the microbes' effect on the spiders' ballooning behavior. She said, "Because we found no reduction in fitness associated with Rickettsia infection, the reduced long-distance dispersal seems unlikely to be simply due to decreased body condition caused by illness. Rather, we believe that reducing long-distance dispersal could be an evolved adaptive modification by bacterial infections to promote their own transmission".
The researchers treated the spiders with antibiotics to reduce the bacterial infection and showed that this increased their ballooning frequency. They also observed that Rickettsia-infected spiders reared in the laboratory had reduced long-distance (but not short-distance) dispersal. This parasite-induced change in a non-reproductive trait has never been shown before and, according to Goodacre, "Clearly shows that the dynamics of ecosystem services such as a spider's pest-controlling function may be altered as a consequence of bacterial infection".
Notes:
Microbial modification of host long-distance dispersal capacity
Sara L Goodacre, Oliver Y Martin, Dries Bonte, Linda Hutchings, Chris Woolley, Kamal Ibrahim, C.F. George Thomas and Godfrey M Hewitt
BMC Biology (in press)
Article
All articles are available free of charge, according to BioMed Central's open access policy.
Source:
Graeme Baldwin
BioMed Central
Discovering What Lies Beneath Unlearned Behavioral Response
Try this at home: If fruit flies are buzzing around your kitchen, switch on your hairdryer and aim it at the flies. A gentle stream of air will stop them in their tracks, putting them in prime position for swatting.
The reaction of fruit flies to wind was something that had intrigued biologist David J. Anderson for some time. When the flies sensed the wind, they went into a defensive, hunkering-down position until the feel of the wind ceased, then resumed flying around.
With an interest in animals' defensive behavior and its evolutionary ties to emotion, Anderson became interested in the neural connections underlying the flies' response to wind. In a study described in the March 12 issue of the journal Nature, Anderson and his team zeroed in on how the flies process the feel of the wind and respond by freezing in place. They found that that the flies' wind-sensitive neurons exist in the same sensory organ in the flies' antennae as the neurons that process the sound of the song of a potential mate.
The next challenge was determining how the same organ processed two distinct stimuli, leading to two distinct behavioral responses. Anderson and his team, including graduate student Suzuko Yorozu, were able to dissect the neural circuits that underlie this defensive behavior and see a different set of neurons "light up" in response to wind versus the sound of courtship song.
The team mounted a fly upside down under a very powerful two-photon microscope. Cutting a hole in the cuticle--the shell that covers the fly's brain--the team had a detailed view into the fly's brain. Having used sophisticated techniques to selectively visualize the activity of particular genes in the fly, the researchers could see when any neurons in the fly's brain were activated by a particular stimulus.
"So we positioned a loudspeaker in front of the fly, and we delivered courtship sound recordings and wind, and as we did that we could watch in real time the neurons that were lighting up in the brain," said Anderson. "And it was absolutely obvious that neurons in different regions of the brain were being activated by the sound or activated by the wind, and these regions were different, even if we applied the two stimuli simultaneously."
This kind of detailed understanding of the neurons involved in defensive behavior has potential application to treatment of mental illnesses in humans, though Anderson admits this is a long way off. But knowing more about neural circuits could provide the means to target medications to precisely where they are needed, as opposed to treating the brain globally and prompting many unpleasant side-effects.
"To be able to pinpoint the parts of the brain that process behavior responses, including emotional responses would be very useful," said Anderson. "So that someday we'll be able to hone in in a more laser-like manner and be able to have drugs that are targeted to specific circuits in the brain."
Source:
Maria C. Zacharias
National Science Foundation
The reaction of fruit flies to wind was something that had intrigued biologist David J. Anderson for some time. When the flies sensed the wind, they went into a defensive, hunkering-down position until the feel of the wind ceased, then resumed flying around.
With an interest in animals' defensive behavior and its evolutionary ties to emotion, Anderson became interested in the neural connections underlying the flies' response to wind. In a study described in the March 12 issue of the journal Nature, Anderson and his team zeroed in on how the flies process the feel of the wind and respond by freezing in place. They found that that the flies' wind-sensitive neurons exist in the same sensory organ in the flies' antennae as the neurons that process the sound of the song of a potential mate.
The next challenge was determining how the same organ processed two distinct stimuli, leading to two distinct behavioral responses. Anderson and his team, including graduate student Suzuko Yorozu, were able to dissect the neural circuits that underlie this defensive behavior and see a different set of neurons "light up" in response to wind versus the sound of courtship song.
The team mounted a fly upside down under a very powerful two-photon microscope. Cutting a hole in the cuticle--the shell that covers the fly's brain--the team had a detailed view into the fly's brain. Having used sophisticated techniques to selectively visualize the activity of particular genes in the fly, the researchers could see when any neurons in the fly's brain were activated by a particular stimulus.
"So we positioned a loudspeaker in front of the fly, and we delivered courtship sound recordings and wind, and as we did that we could watch in real time the neurons that were lighting up in the brain," said Anderson. "And it was absolutely obvious that neurons in different regions of the brain were being activated by the sound or activated by the wind, and these regions were different, even if we applied the two stimuli simultaneously."
This kind of detailed understanding of the neurons involved in defensive behavior has potential application to treatment of mental illnesses in humans, though Anderson admits this is a long way off. But knowing more about neural circuits could provide the means to target medications to precisely where they are needed, as opposed to treating the brain globally and prompting many unpleasant side-effects.
"To be able to pinpoint the parts of the brain that process behavior responses, including emotional responses would be very useful," said Anderson. "So that someday we'll be able to hone in in a more laser-like manner and be able to have drugs that are targeted to specific circuits in the brain."
Source:
Maria C. Zacharias
National Science Foundation
How running made us human
Endurance running let us evolve to look the way we do -
Humans evolved from ape-like ancestors because they needed to run long distances - perhaps to hunt animals or scavenge carcasses on Africa's vast savannah - and the ability to run shaped our anatomy, making us look like we do today.
That is the conclusion of a study published in the Nov. 18 issue of the journal Nature by University of Utah biologist Dennis Bramble and Harvard University anthropologist Daniel Lieberman. The study is featured on Nature's cover.
Bramble and Lieberman argue that our genus, Homo, evolved from more ape-like human ancestors, Australopithecus, 2 million or more years ago because natural selection favored the survival of australopithecines that could run and, over time, favored the perpetuation of human anatomical features that made long-distance running possible.
"We are very confident that strong selection for running - which came at the expense of the historical ability to live in trees - was instrumental in the origin of the modern human body form," says Bramble, a professor of biology. "Running has substantially shaped human evolution. Running made us human - at least in an anatomical sense. We think running is one of the most transforming events in human history. We are arguing the emergence of humans is tied to the evolution of running."
That conclusion is contrary to the conventional theory that running simply was a byproduct of the human ability to walk. Bipedalism - the ability to walk upright on two legs - evolved in the ape-like Australopithecus at least 4.5 million years ago while they also retained the ability to travel through the trees. Yet Homo with its "radically transformed body" did not evolve for another 3 million or more years - Homo habilis, Homo erectus and, finally, our species, Homo sapiens - so the ability to walk cannot explain anatomy of the modern human body, Bramble says.
"There were 2.5 million to 3 million years of bipedal walking [by australopithecines] without ever looking like a human, so is walking going to be what suddenly transforms the hominid body?" he asks. "We're saying, no, walking won't do that, but running will."
Walking cannot explain most of the changes in body form that distinguish Homo from Australopithecus, which - when compared with Homo - had short legs, long forearms, high permanently "shrugged" shoulders, ankles that were not visibly apparent and more muscles connecting the shoulders to the head and neck, Bramble says. If natural selection had not favored running, "we would still look a lot like apes," he adds.
I Run, Therefore I Am
Bramble and Lieberman examined 26 traits of the human body - many also seen in fossils of Homo erectus and some in Homo habilis - that enhanced the ability to run. Only some of them were needed for walking. Traits that aided running include leg and foot tendons and ligaments that act like springs, foot and toe structure that allows efficient use of the feet to push off, shoulders that rotate independently of the head and neck to allow better balance, and skeletal and muscle features that make the human body stronger, more stable and able to run more efficiently without overheating.
"We explain the simultaneous emergence of a whole bunch of anatomical features, literally from head to toe," Bramble says. "We have a hypothesis that gives a functional explanation for how these features are linked to the unique mechanical demands of running, how they work together and why they emerged at the same time."
Humans are poor sprinters compared with other running animals, which is partly why many scientists have dismissed running as a factor in human evolution. Human endurance running ability has been inadequately appreciated because of a failure to recognize that "high speed is not always important," Bramble says. "What is important is combining reasonable speed with exceptional endurance."
Another reason is that "scientists are in developed societies that are highly dependent on technology and artificial means of transport," he adds. "But if those scientists had been embedded in a hunter-gatherer society, they'd have a different view of human locomotor abilities, including running."
Why Did Humans Start Running?
The researchers do not know why natural selection favored human ancestors who could run long distances. For one possibility, they cite previous research by University of Utah biologist David Carrier, who hypothesized that endurance running evolved in human ancestors so they could pursue predators long before the development of bows, arrows, nets and spear-throwers reduced the need to run long distances.
Another possibility is that early humans and their immediate ancestors ran to scavenge carcasses of dead animals - maybe so they could beat hyenas or other scavengers to dinner, or maybe to "get to the leftovers soon enough," Bramble says.
Scavenging "is a more reliable source of food" than hunting, he adds. "If you are out in the African savannah and see a column of vultures on the horizon, the chance of there being a fresh carcass underneath the vultures is about 100 percent. If you are going to hunt down something in the heat, that's a lot more work and the payoffs are less reliable" because the animal you are hunting often is "faster than you are."
Anatomical Features that Help Humans Run
Here are anatomical characteristics that are unique to humans and that play a role in helping people run, according to the study:
• Skull features that help prevent overheating during running. As sweat evaporates from the scalp, forehead and face, the evaporation cools blood draining from the head. Veins carrying that cooled blood pass near the carotid arteries, thus helping cool blood flowing through the carotids to the brain.
• A more balanced head with a flatter face, smaller teeth and short snout, compared with australopithecines. That "shifts the center of mass back so it's easier to balance your head when you are bobbing up and down running," Bramble says.
• A ligament that runs from the back of the skull and neck down to the thoracic vertebrae, and acts as a shock absorber and helps the arms and shoulders counterbalance the head during running.
• Unlike apes and australopithecines, the shoulders in early humans were "decoupled" from the head and neck, allowing the body to rotate while the head aims forward during running.
• The tall human body - with a narrow trunk, waist and pelvis - creates more skin surface for our size, permitting greater cooling during running. It also lets the upper and lower body move independently, "which allows you to use your upper body to counteract the twisting forces from your swinging legs," Bramble says.
• Shorter forearms in humans make it easier for the upper body to counterbalance the lower body during running. They also reduce the amount of muscle power needed to keep the arms flexed when running.
• Human vertebrae and disks are larger in diameter relative to body mass than are those in apes or australopithecines. "This is related to shock absorption," says Bramble. "It allows the back to take bigger loads when human runners hit the ground."
• The connection between the pelvis and spine is stronger and larger relative to body size in humans than in their ancestors, providing more stability and shock absorption during running.
• Human buttocks "are huge," says Bramble. "Have you ever looked at an ape? They have no buns." He says human buttocks "are muscles critical for stabilization in running" because they connect the femur - the large bone in each upper leg - to the trunk. Because people lean forward at the hip during running, the buttocks "keep you from pitching over on your nose each time a foot hits the ground."
• Long legs, which chimps and australopithecines lack, let humans to take huge strides when running, Bramble says. So do ligaments and tendons - including the long Achilles tendon - which act like springs that store and release mechanical energy during running. The tendons and ligaments also mean human lower legs that are less muscular and lighter, requiring less energy to move them during running.
• Larger surface areas in the hip, knee and ankle joints, for improved shock absorption during running by spreading out the forces.
• The arrangement of bones in the human foot creates a stable or stiff arch that makes the whole foot more rigid, so the human runner can push off the ground more efficiently and utilize ligaments on the bottom of the feet as springs.
• Humans also evolved with an enlarged heel bone for better shock absorption, as well as shorter toes and a big toe that is fully drawn in toward the other toes for better pushing off during running.
The study by Bramble and Lieberman concludes: "Today, endurance running is primarily a form of exercise and recreation, but its roots may be as ancient as the origin of the human genus, and its demands a major contributing factor to the human body form."
University of Utah Public Relations
201 S Presidents Circle, Room 308
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9017
(801) 581-6773 fax: 585-3350
Contact: Dennis Bramble, professor of biology
bramblebioscience.utah
801-581-3549 (office)
University of Utah
Lee Siegel, science news specialist
leesiegelucomm.utah
801-581-8993 (office) / 801-244-5399 (cellular)
University of Utah Public Relations
To contact Dan Lieberman, call Steve Bradt
steve_bradtharvard
617-496-8070
Harvard University Communications
University of Utah
Humans evolved from ape-like ancestors because they needed to run long distances - perhaps to hunt animals or scavenge carcasses on Africa's vast savannah - and the ability to run shaped our anatomy, making us look like we do today.
That is the conclusion of a study published in the Nov. 18 issue of the journal Nature by University of Utah biologist Dennis Bramble and Harvard University anthropologist Daniel Lieberman. The study is featured on Nature's cover.
Bramble and Lieberman argue that our genus, Homo, evolved from more ape-like human ancestors, Australopithecus, 2 million or more years ago because natural selection favored the survival of australopithecines that could run and, over time, favored the perpetuation of human anatomical features that made long-distance running possible.
"We are very confident that strong selection for running - which came at the expense of the historical ability to live in trees - was instrumental in the origin of the modern human body form," says Bramble, a professor of biology. "Running has substantially shaped human evolution. Running made us human - at least in an anatomical sense. We think running is one of the most transforming events in human history. We are arguing the emergence of humans is tied to the evolution of running."
That conclusion is contrary to the conventional theory that running simply was a byproduct of the human ability to walk. Bipedalism - the ability to walk upright on two legs - evolved in the ape-like Australopithecus at least 4.5 million years ago while they also retained the ability to travel through the trees. Yet Homo with its "radically transformed body" did not evolve for another 3 million or more years - Homo habilis, Homo erectus and, finally, our species, Homo sapiens - so the ability to walk cannot explain anatomy of the modern human body, Bramble says.
"There were 2.5 million to 3 million years of bipedal walking [by australopithecines] without ever looking like a human, so is walking going to be what suddenly transforms the hominid body?" he asks. "We're saying, no, walking won't do that, but running will."
Walking cannot explain most of the changes in body form that distinguish Homo from Australopithecus, which - when compared with Homo - had short legs, long forearms, high permanently "shrugged" shoulders, ankles that were not visibly apparent and more muscles connecting the shoulders to the head and neck, Bramble says. If natural selection had not favored running, "we would still look a lot like apes," he adds.
I Run, Therefore I Am
Bramble and Lieberman examined 26 traits of the human body - many also seen in fossils of Homo erectus and some in Homo habilis - that enhanced the ability to run. Only some of them were needed for walking. Traits that aided running include leg and foot tendons and ligaments that act like springs, foot and toe structure that allows efficient use of the feet to push off, shoulders that rotate independently of the head and neck to allow better balance, and skeletal and muscle features that make the human body stronger, more stable and able to run more efficiently without overheating.
"We explain the simultaneous emergence of a whole bunch of anatomical features, literally from head to toe," Bramble says. "We have a hypothesis that gives a functional explanation for how these features are linked to the unique mechanical demands of running, how they work together and why they emerged at the same time."
Humans are poor sprinters compared with other running animals, which is partly why many scientists have dismissed running as a factor in human evolution. Human endurance running ability has been inadequately appreciated because of a failure to recognize that "high speed is not always important," Bramble says. "What is important is combining reasonable speed with exceptional endurance."
Another reason is that "scientists are in developed societies that are highly dependent on technology and artificial means of transport," he adds. "But if those scientists had been embedded in a hunter-gatherer society, they'd have a different view of human locomotor abilities, including running."
Why Did Humans Start Running?
The researchers do not know why natural selection favored human ancestors who could run long distances. For one possibility, they cite previous research by University of Utah biologist David Carrier, who hypothesized that endurance running evolved in human ancestors so they could pursue predators long before the development of bows, arrows, nets and spear-throwers reduced the need to run long distances.
Another possibility is that early humans and their immediate ancestors ran to scavenge carcasses of dead animals - maybe so they could beat hyenas or other scavengers to dinner, or maybe to "get to the leftovers soon enough," Bramble says.
Scavenging "is a more reliable source of food" than hunting, he adds. "If you are out in the African savannah and see a column of vultures on the horizon, the chance of there being a fresh carcass underneath the vultures is about 100 percent. If you are going to hunt down something in the heat, that's a lot more work and the payoffs are less reliable" because the animal you are hunting often is "faster than you are."
Anatomical Features that Help Humans Run
Here are anatomical characteristics that are unique to humans and that play a role in helping people run, according to the study:
• Skull features that help prevent overheating during running. As sweat evaporates from the scalp, forehead and face, the evaporation cools blood draining from the head. Veins carrying that cooled blood pass near the carotid arteries, thus helping cool blood flowing through the carotids to the brain.
• A more balanced head with a flatter face, smaller teeth and short snout, compared with australopithecines. That "shifts the center of mass back so it's easier to balance your head when you are bobbing up and down running," Bramble says.
• A ligament that runs from the back of the skull and neck down to the thoracic vertebrae, and acts as a shock absorber and helps the arms and shoulders counterbalance the head during running.
• Unlike apes and australopithecines, the shoulders in early humans were "decoupled" from the head and neck, allowing the body to rotate while the head aims forward during running.
• The tall human body - with a narrow trunk, waist and pelvis - creates more skin surface for our size, permitting greater cooling during running. It also lets the upper and lower body move independently, "which allows you to use your upper body to counteract the twisting forces from your swinging legs," Bramble says.
• Shorter forearms in humans make it easier for the upper body to counterbalance the lower body during running. They also reduce the amount of muscle power needed to keep the arms flexed when running.
• Human vertebrae and disks are larger in diameter relative to body mass than are those in apes or australopithecines. "This is related to shock absorption," says Bramble. "It allows the back to take bigger loads when human runners hit the ground."
• The connection between the pelvis and spine is stronger and larger relative to body size in humans than in their ancestors, providing more stability and shock absorption during running.
• Human buttocks "are huge," says Bramble. "Have you ever looked at an ape? They have no buns." He says human buttocks "are muscles critical for stabilization in running" because they connect the femur - the large bone in each upper leg - to the trunk. Because people lean forward at the hip during running, the buttocks "keep you from pitching over on your nose each time a foot hits the ground."
• Long legs, which chimps and australopithecines lack, let humans to take huge strides when running, Bramble says. So do ligaments and tendons - including the long Achilles tendon - which act like springs that store and release mechanical energy during running. The tendons and ligaments also mean human lower legs that are less muscular and lighter, requiring less energy to move them during running.
• Larger surface areas in the hip, knee and ankle joints, for improved shock absorption during running by spreading out the forces.
• The arrangement of bones in the human foot creates a stable or stiff arch that makes the whole foot more rigid, so the human runner can push off the ground more efficiently and utilize ligaments on the bottom of the feet as springs.
• Humans also evolved with an enlarged heel bone for better shock absorption, as well as shorter toes and a big toe that is fully drawn in toward the other toes for better pushing off during running.
The study by Bramble and Lieberman concludes: "Today, endurance running is primarily a form of exercise and recreation, but its roots may be as ancient as the origin of the human genus, and its demands a major contributing factor to the human body form."
University of Utah Public Relations
201 S Presidents Circle, Room 308
Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-9017
(801) 581-6773 fax: 585-3350
Contact: Dennis Bramble, professor of biology
bramblebioscience.utah
801-581-3549 (office)
University of Utah
Lee Siegel, science news specialist
leesiegelucomm.utah
801-581-8993 (office) / 801-244-5399 (cellular)
University of Utah Public Relations
To contact Dan Lieberman, call Steve Bradt
steve_bradtharvard
617-496-8070
Harvard University Communications
University of Utah
Study Of Tumor Growth And Tissue Disruption Identifies Key Components In The Immune Response To Cancers
Knee scrapes and tumor growth might have more in common than you think.
The idea that tumor growth triggers the same immune response as a cut or wound was once a highly controversial notion. However, increasing evidence supports the idea that the same cellular mechanisms which heal a skinned knee might also have a role in preventing the growth of tumors. A report published in Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM), dmm.biologists/, now reveals more details about the common links between tumor growth and tissue damage in flies.
Tian Xu and colleagues at the Yale University School of Medicine examined the activity of hemocytes, a type of immune cell, in response to genetically-induced tumor growth in the fruit fly Drosophila. They found that tumors caused circulating hemocytes to replicate and adhere to the tumor surface, thereby limiting tumor growth. They compared this hemocyte response to cell activity in normal flies which were wounded and had tissue damage. Hemocyte profileration in these flies occurred just as in the tumor-producing fly. Furthermore, by examining the molecular signals triggered in the immune response, Xu's team discovered that the tumor's physical disruption and damage of nearby tissues at least in part triggered the hemocyte response.
This study not only supports previously reported links between immune responses and cancer, but also identifies key pathways in the fly's immune response to tumor growth and tissue disruption. These pathways are likewise shared in humans, demonstrating that the fly can be used to study potential drug targets which could enhance the body's natural immune response against cancer.
Commentary on this work by researcher Tian Xu will be featured in the DMM Podcast for issue 2/3 of DMM. Podcasts are available via the DMM website at: dmm.biologists/.
The report was written by JosГ© Carlos Pastor-Pareja, Ming Wu, and Tian Xu of the Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT. The report was published in the September/October issue of a new research journal, Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM), published by The Company of Biologists, a non-profit based in Cambridge, UK.
About Disease Models & Mechanisms:
Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM) is a new research journal publishing both primary scientific research, as well as review articles, editorials, and research highlights. The journal's mission is to provide a forum for clinicians and scientists to discuss basic science and clinical research related to human disease, disease detection and novel therapies. DMM is published by the Company of Biologists, a non-profit organization based in Cambridge, UK.
The Company also publishes the international biology research journals Development, Journal of Cell Science, and The Journal of Experimental Biology. In addition to financing these journals, the Company provides grants to scientific societies and supports other activities including travelling fellowships for junior scientists, workshops and conferences. The world's poorest nations receive free and unrestricted access to the Company's journals.
Source: Nick Birch
The Company of Biologists
The idea that tumor growth triggers the same immune response as a cut or wound was once a highly controversial notion. However, increasing evidence supports the idea that the same cellular mechanisms which heal a skinned knee might also have a role in preventing the growth of tumors. A report published in Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM), dmm.biologists/, now reveals more details about the common links between tumor growth and tissue damage in flies.
Tian Xu and colleagues at the Yale University School of Medicine examined the activity of hemocytes, a type of immune cell, in response to genetically-induced tumor growth in the fruit fly Drosophila. They found that tumors caused circulating hemocytes to replicate and adhere to the tumor surface, thereby limiting tumor growth. They compared this hemocyte response to cell activity in normal flies which were wounded and had tissue damage. Hemocyte profileration in these flies occurred just as in the tumor-producing fly. Furthermore, by examining the molecular signals triggered in the immune response, Xu's team discovered that the tumor's physical disruption and damage of nearby tissues at least in part triggered the hemocyte response.
This study not only supports previously reported links between immune responses and cancer, but also identifies key pathways in the fly's immune response to tumor growth and tissue disruption. These pathways are likewise shared in humans, demonstrating that the fly can be used to study potential drug targets which could enhance the body's natural immune response against cancer.
Commentary on this work by researcher Tian Xu will be featured in the DMM Podcast for issue 2/3 of DMM. Podcasts are available via the DMM website at: dmm.biologists/.
The report was written by JosГ© Carlos Pastor-Pareja, Ming Wu, and Tian Xu of the Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT. The report was published in the September/October issue of a new research journal, Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM), published by The Company of Biologists, a non-profit based in Cambridge, UK.
About Disease Models & Mechanisms:
Disease Models & Mechanisms (DMM) is a new research journal publishing both primary scientific research, as well as review articles, editorials, and research highlights. The journal's mission is to provide a forum for clinicians and scientists to discuss basic science and clinical research related to human disease, disease detection and novel therapies. DMM is published by the Company of Biologists, a non-profit organization based in Cambridge, UK.
The Company also publishes the international biology research journals Development, Journal of Cell Science, and The Journal of Experimental Biology. In addition to financing these journals, the Company provides grants to scientific societies and supports other activities including travelling fellowships for junior scientists, workshops and conferences. The world's poorest nations receive free and unrestricted access to the Company's journals.
Source: Nick Birch
The Company of Biologists
What's 'Up' With A Class Of Retinal Cells In Mice?
Harvard University researchers have discovered a new type of retinal cell that plays an exclusive and unusual role in mice: detecting upward motion. The cells reflect their function in the physical arrangement of their dendrites, branch-like structures on neuronal cells that form a communicative network with other dendrites and neurons in the brain.
The work, led by neuroscientists Joshua R. Sanes and Markus Meister, is described this week in the journal Nature.
"The structure of these cells resembles the photos you see in the aftermath of a hurricane, where all the trees have fallen down in the same direction," says Meister, the Jeff C. Tarr Professor of Molecular and Cellular Biology in Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences. "When you look at these neurons in the microscope, they all point the same way. There's no other cell type in the retina that has that degree of directionality."
The cells, like other retinal neurons, are composed of a round cell body surrounded by a tangle of dendrites. Most retinal neurons distribute their dendrites evenly around the cell body, but the upward motion-detecting cells arrange almost 90 percent of their dendrite tangle exclusively on one side of the cell body.
"This lopsided arrangement literally directs the cell's function, orienting the dendrites downward like roots of great trees," says Sanes, professor of molecular and cellular biology and Paul J. Finnegan Family Director of Harvard's Center for Brain Science. "Because the eye's lens acts as a camera, reversing incoming light rays as they strike the retinal tissue, an object moving up will result in a downward-moving image at the back of the eye -- the exact orientation of the cells' dendrites."
The research builds on efforts by Meister to understand neural processing in the retina, as well as work in Sanes's laboratory to identify and mark neurons in the retina using molecular tags. Recently, they tracked down a family of molecules expressed exclusively by small subsets of retinal cells in mice. One in particular, called JAM-B, was present in cells that had a peculiar distribution and orientation.
According to Sanes, developmental neurologists have long tried to identify different types of neural cells based on their function and anatomy -- how they appeared on the outside.
"But it's a huge limitation because it's essentially a qualitative assessment," he says. "We really need some way to reliably identify and track these cells if we ever hope to study their development. So the emergence of cell-specific molecular markers is a very big deal, because it will do just that. Already we've seen that it helps us identify new kinds of cells we didn't know existed before. Once we have a promising molecule, we can track down the cells that it corresponds to."
"The other important result," continues Sanes, "is that we're actually mimicking how the brain itself identifies its cells. The brain has to be able to reliably recognize and tell apart different kinds of cells, and that's going to happen on a molecular basis. In fact, it's possible that some of the molecules we've identified are, in fact, the same molecules the brain uses to distinguish cell types."
By identifying molecules that are solely expressed by specific types of neurons, scientists hope to gain insights into how nerve cells form synapses, or connections, with other nerve cells -- in short, how the brain controls its development on a molecular basis.
For the moment, however, researchers are busy puzzling over the results of the JAM-B mouse retinal cells.
"Why in the world would mice need to develop cells to detect upward motion?" Sanes wonders. "It's a great mystery."
Sanes and Meister's co-authors on the Nature paper are In-Jung Kim, Yifeng Zhang, and Masahito Yamagata, all of Harvard's Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology. In a separate Nature paper published earlier this year, Yamagata and Sanes demonstrated a type of target recognition not previously shown anywhere in the brain: They identified four recognition molecules, each of which marks and specifies a circuit in the retina, and showed the role of each for specific connectivity in that circuit.
The current research was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
Source: Steve Bradt
Harvard University
The work, led by neuroscientists Joshua R. Sanes and Markus Meister, is described this week in the journal Nature.
"The structure of these cells resembles the photos you see in the aftermath of a hurricane, where all the trees have fallen down in the same direction," says Meister, the Jeff C. Tarr Professor of Molecular and Cellular Biology in Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences. "When you look at these neurons in the microscope, they all point the same way. There's no other cell type in the retina that has that degree of directionality."
The cells, like other retinal neurons, are composed of a round cell body surrounded by a tangle of dendrites. Most retinal neurons distribute their dendrites evenly around the cell body, but the upward motion-detecting cells arrange almost 90 percent of their dendrite tangle exclusively on one side of the cell body.
"This lopsided arrangement literally directs the cell's function, orienting the dendrites downward like roots of great trees," says Sanes, professor of molecular and cellular biology and Paul J. Finnegan Family Director of Harvard's Center for Brain Science. "Because the eye's lens acts as a camera, reversing incoming light rays as they strike the retinal tissue, an object moving up will result in a downward-moving image at the back of the eye -- the exact orientation of the cells' dendrites."
The research builds on efforts by Meister to understand neural processing in the retina, as well as work in Sanes's laboratory to identify and mark neurons in the retina using molecular tags. Recently, they tracked down a family of molecules expressed exclusively by small subsets of retinal cells in mice. One in particular, called JAM-B, was present in cells that had a peculiar distribution and orientation.
According to Sanes, developmental neurologists have long tried to identify different types of neural cells based on their function and anatomy -- how they appeared on the outside.
"But it's a huge limitation because it's essentially a qualitative assessment," he says. "We really need some way to reliably identify and track these cells if we ever hope to study their development. So the emergence of cell-specific molecular markers is a very big deal, because it will do just that. Already we've seen that it helps us identify new kinds of cells we didn't know existed before. Once we have a promising molecule, we can track down the cells that it corresponds to."
"The other important result," continues Sanes, "is that we're actually mimicking how the brain itself identifies its cells. The brain has to be able to reliably recognize and tell apart different kinds of cells, and that's going to happen on a molecular basis. In fact, it's possible that some of the molecules we've identified are, in fact, the same molecules the brain uses to distinguish cell types."
By identifying molecules that are solely expressed by specific types of neurons, scientists hope to gain insights into how nerve cells form synapses, or connections, with other nerve cells -- in short, how the brain controls its development on a molecular basis.
For the moment, however, researchers are busy puzzling over the results of the JAM-B mouse retinal cells.
"Why in the world would mice need to develop cells to detect upward motion?" Sanes wonders. "It's a great mystery."
Sanes and Meister's co-authors on the Nature paper are In-Jung Kim, Yifeng Zhang, and Masahito Yamagata, all of Harvard's Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology. In a separate Nature paper published earlier this year, Yamagata and Sanes demonstrated a type of target recognition not previously shown anywhere in the brain: They identified four recognition molecules, each of which marks and specifies a circuit in the retina, and showed the role of each for specific connectivity in that circuit.
The current research was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
Source: Steve Bradt
Harvard University
Glenn Foundation For Medical Research Commits $5 Million To Study Aging
The Glenn Foundation for Medical Research, founded by philanthropist Paul F. Glenn, has announced a $5 million commitment to the American Federation for Aging Research (AFAR) to provide grants to scientists studying the biology of aging and age-related diseases. This grant provides timely support as current cutbacks in federal funding jeopardize the careers of hundreds of promising investigators who are working to understand how aging influences disease.
The Glenn Foundation funds will go toward the AFAR Research Grant Program and the Glenn/AFAR Breakthroughs in Gerontology (BIG) Awards. AFAR Research Grants provide start-up funding to scientists in the early phases of their careers, enabling them to study the basic mechanisms of aging, age-related diseases and processes underlying common geriatric functional disorders. The Glenn/AFAR Breakthroughs in Gerontology Awards support innovative higher-risk research that may offer significant promise of yielding transforming discoveries in the fundamental biology of aging that could lead to major new insights into the factors that regulate aging.
"As the number of older adults in the United States continues to grow, there is a greater need not only to provide high-quality medical care but also to develop new scientific knowledge about aging processes and age-related diseases and disorders that will allow more people to live healthier longer, free of disability. Aging research is about studying the young, before the body breaks down. Scientists search for clues about why we develop diseases later in life," said Stephanie Lederman, executive director, AFAR. "The forward-thinking vision of Paul Glenn and the Glenn Foundation will allow greater distribution of resources to novel research that will benefit all of us as we age," she added.
"We are proud to support the work of AFAR," said Mark R. Collins, president of the Glenn Foundation for Medical Research. "Longer life brings with it vulnerability to diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, osteoporosis, diabetes and others. Funding of aging research is an important path to the alleviation of suffering and reduced healthcare costs. This research forms the backbone of scientific advances in our understanding of aging. AFAR is a key organization in assuring that the best research remains supported."
Nearly 2,500 researchers have been recipients of AFAR-supported grant awards, many of whom have gone on to distinguish themselves as leaders in the field of aging research, chairing departments and running laboratories at major academic institutions. Many of the nation's leaders in biogerontology have been beneficiaries of AFAR grant programs.
The Glenn Foundation for Medical Research was founded in 1965 to extend the healthy productive years of life through research on the mechanisms of biological aging. For more information, visit glennfoundation/.
The American Federation for Aging Research is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to support biomedical research on aging. It is devoted to creating the knowledge that all of us need to live healthy, productive, and independent lives. Since 1981, AFAR has awarded more than $100 million to nearly 2,500 talented scientists as part of its broad-based series of grant programs. Its work has led to significant advances in our understanding of the aging process, age-related diseases, and healthy aging practices. AFAR communicates news of these innovations through its organizational web site afar/ and educational web sites Infoaging (infoaging) and Health Compass (healthcompass/).
Source: Stacey Harris
American Federation for Aging Research
The Glenn Foundation funds will go toward the AFAR Research Grant Program and the Glenn/AFAR Breakthroughs in Gerontology (BIG) Awards. AFAR Research Grants provide start-up funding to scientists in the early phases of their careers, enabling them to study the basic mechanisms of aging, age-related diseases and processes underlying common geriatric functional disorders. The Glenn/AFAR Breakthroughs in Gerontology Awards support innovative higher-risk research that may offer significant promise of yielding transforming discoveries in the fundamental biology of aging that could lead to major new insights into the factors that regulate aging.
"As the number of older adults in the United States continues to grow, there is a greater need not only to provide high-quality medical care but also to develop new scientific knowledge about aging processes and age-related diseases and disorders that will allow more people to live healthier longer, free of disability. Aging research is about studying the young, before the body breaks down. Scientists search for clues about why we develop diseases later in life," said Stephanie Lederman, executive director, AFAR. "The forward-thinking vision of Paul Glenn and the Glenn Foundation will allow greater distribution of resources to novel research that will benefit all of us as we age," she added.
"We are proud to support the work of AFAR," said Mark R. Collins, president of the Glenn Foundation for Medical Research. "Longer life brings with it vulnerability to diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, osteoporosis, diabetes and others. Funding of aging research is an important path to the alleviation of suffering and reduced healthcare costs. This research forms the backbone of scientific advances in our understanding of aging. AFAR is a key organization in assuring that the best research remains supported."
Nearly 2,500 researchers have been recipients of AFAR-supported grant awards, many of whom have gone on to distinguish themselves as leaders in the field of aging research, chairing departments and running laboratories at major academic institutions. Many of the nation's leaders in biogerontology have been beneficiaries of AFAR grant programs.
The Glenn Foundation for Medical Research was founded in 1965 to extend the healthy productive years of life through research on the mechanisms of biological aging. For more information, visit glennfoundation/.
The American Federation for Aging Research is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to support biomedical research on aging. It is devoted to creating the knowledge that all of us need to live healthy, productive, and independent lives. Since 1981, AFAR has awarded more than $100 million to nearly 2,500 talented scientists as part of its broad-based series of grant programs. Its work has led to significant advances in our understanding of the aging process, age-related diseases, and healthy aging practices. AFAR communicates news of these innovations through its organizational web site afar/ and educational web sites Infoaging (infoaging) and Health Compass (healthcompass/).
Source: Stacey Harris
American Federation for Aging Research
Подписаться на:
Сообщения (Atom)