PubMedCrossRef 4. Enright MC, Spratt BG: Multilocus Pinometostat cell line sequence typing. Trends Microbiol 1999,7(12):482–7.PubMedCrossRef 5. Coenye T, Gevers D, Van de Peer Y, Vandamme P, Swings J: Towards a prokaryotic genomic taxonomy. FEMS Microbiol Rev 2005,29(2):147–167.PubMed 6. Karlin S, Burge C: Dinucleotide relative abundance extremes: a genomic signature. Trends Genet 1995,11(7):283–290.PubMedCrossRef 7. Vandamme P, Pot B, Gillis M, de Vos P, Kersters K, Swings J: Polyphasic taxonomy, a consensus approach

to bacterial systematics. Microbiol Rev 1996,60(2):407–438.PubMed 8. Wright F: The ‘effective number of codons’ used in a gene. Gene 1990, 87:23–29.PubMedCrossRef 9. Coenye T, Vandamme P: Extracting phylogenetic information from whole-genome sequencing projects: the lactic acid MLN2238 bacteria as a test case. Microbiology 2003,149(12):3507–3517.PubMedCrossRef 10. Suyama M, Bork P: Evolution of prokaryotic gene order: genome rearrangements in closely related Cyclopamine purchase species. Trends Genet 2001, 17:10–13.PubMedCrossRef

11. Qi J, Wang B, Hao BI: Whole proteome prokaryote phylogeny without sequence alignment: a K-string composition approach. J Mol Evol 2004, 58:1–11.PubMedCrossRef 12. Qi J, Luo H, Hao B: CVTree: a phylogenetic tree reconstruction tool based on whole genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2004, (32 Web Server):W45–7. 13. Snel B, Bork P, Huynen MA: Genome phylogeny based on gene content.

Nat Genet 1999, 21:108–110.PubMedCrossRef 14. House CH, Fitz-Gibbon ST: Using homolog groups to create a whole-genomic tree of free-living organisms: an update. J Mol Evol 2002,54(4):539–547.PubMedCrossRef 15. Henz SR, Huson DH, Auch AF, Nieselt-Struwe K, Schuster SC: Whole-genome prokaryotic phylogeny. Bioinformatics 2005,21(10):2329–2335.PubMedCrossRef 16. Gogarten Pazopanib in vitro JP, Townsend JP: Horizontal gene transfer, genome innovation and evolution. Nat Rev Microbiol 2005,3(9):679–87.PubMedCrossRef 17. Tettelin H, Masignani V, Cieslewicz MJ, Donati C, Medini D, Ward NL, Angiuoli SV, Crabtree J, Jones AL, Durkin AS, Deboy RT, Davidsen TM, Mora M, Scarselli M, Margarity Ros I, Peterson JD, Hauser CR, Sundaram JP, Nelson WC, Madupu R, Brinkac LM, Dodson RJ, Rosovitz MJ, Sullivan SA, Daugherty SC, Haft DH, Selengut J, Gwinn ML, Zhou L, Zafar N, Khouri H, Radune D, Dimitrov G, Watkins K, O’Connor KJB, Smith S, Utterback TR, White O, Rubens CE, Grandi G, Madooff LC, Kasper DL, Telford JL, Wessels MR, Rappuoli R, Fraser CM: Genome analysis of multiple pathogenic isolates of Streptococcus agalactiae: implications for the microbial “”pan-genome”". Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005,102(39):13950–5.PubMedCrossRef 18. Thompson CC, Vicente ACP, Souza RC, Vasconcelos ATR, Vesth T, Alves N Jr, Ussery DW, Iida T, Thompson FL: Genomic taxonomy of Vibrios. BMC Evol Biol 2009, 9:258.PubMedCrossRef 19.

Preserving GSH/GSSG ratio can happen by either increasing GSH biosynthesis or activating GSH-recycle enzyme (GR) activity [22]. In this study, increased GR activity in Rg1-treated exercised rats may contribute to the preservation of GSH/GSSG ratio. Red ginseng extract has been shown to elevate CCI-779 mouse the rate-limiting enzyme of GSH-biosynthesis and protect the cells from oxidative cell death [23]. Furthermore, pretreatment of protopanaxatriol containing Rg1 has been reported to boost the GR activity and maintain the stable GSH/GSSG ratio against H2O2-induced oxidative stress in endothelial cells [24]. Therefore, Rg1 may be the active

component of protopanaxatriol that accounts for stabilization of GSH/GSSG ratio against various types of external challenges. Furthermore, GST acts to conjugate peroxidized lipids to GSH [22]. In our study, muscle GST activity was not affected by exhaustive exercise, which agreed with the results reported by Malaguti et al. [25]. Yet, muscle GST activity was increased in Rg1 pre-treatment rats which may partly contribute to the attenuated lipid

peroxidation after exercise. Endogenous free radicals are removed by a set of antioxidant enzymes, including SOD, CAT, and GPx. Previous studies have shown increased [26], decreased [27] or no change [28] in SOD activity after exhaustive exercise. Our data showed LY2606368 research buy marginally decreased SOD activity after exhaustive exercise in control group. Furthermore, CAT and GPx works in decomposing the toxic H2O2 to water and oxygen. Here, both CAT and GPx activities showed similar response after long-term Rg1 supplementation and acute exercise. Increases in CAT and GPx in exercised rats are noted as a compensatory response against excessive H2O2 levels [29, 30]. However, Taysi et al. [31] reported decreased liver CAT activity after exhaustive treadmill running. This discrepancy might be due to tissue specific response or mode of exercise.

Increased GPx activity was similar with the findings by Metabolism inhibitor Caillaud et al. [28], who reported increased muscle GPx activity after exercise. Ginseng saponins have been Interleukin-3 receptor shown to increase CAT gene expression and protect the liver from thioacetamide-induced injury [32]. Voces et al. [33] reported improved liver antioxidant status along with GPx activity by ginseng extracts. Rg1 supplementation also increased CAT and GPx activities in non-exercise rats, which may explain, in part, the enhanced antioxidant defense system by ginseng. Conclusion The results of the study provide strong evidence that long-term Rg1 supplementation can effectively attenuate the exhaustive exercise-induced increased lipid peroxidation and decreased GSH/GSSG ratio in rat skeletal muscle. The beneficial effect of Rg1 is also explained, in part, by the steady state maintenance of antioxidant defense system in the skeletal muscle.

PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef 40. Wall DP, Torin 1 concentration Hirsh AE, Fraser HB, Kumm J, Giaever G, Eisen MB,

Feldman MW: Functional genomic analysis of the rates of protein evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2005, 102:5483–5488.PubMedCrossRef 41. Drummond DA, Raval A, Wilke CO: A single determinant dominates the rate of yeast protein evolution. Mol Biol Evol 2006, 23:327–337.PubMedCrossRef 42. Tatusov RL, Galperin MY, Natale DA, Koonin EV: The COG database: a tool for genome-scale analysis of protein functions and evolution. Nucleic Acids Res 2000, 28:33–36.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef 43. Shi T, Falkowski PG: Genome evolution in cyanobacteria: the stable core and the variable shell. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:2510–2515.PubMedCrossRef 44. Banerjee T, Ghosh TC: Gene expression level shapes the amino acid usages in Prochlorococcus marinus MED4. J Biomol Struct Dyn 2006, 23:547–553.PubMedCrossRef 45. Mulkidjanian AY, Koonin EV, Makarova KS, Mekhedov SL, Sorokin A, Wolf YI, Dufresne A, Partensky F, Burd H, Kaznadzey D, et al.: The cyanobacterial genome core and the origin of photosynthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006, 103:13126–13131.PubMedCrossRef 46. Zinser ER, Lindell

D, Johnson ZI, Futschik ME, Steglich C, Coleman ML, Wright MA, Rector T, Steen R, McNulty N, et al.: Choreography of the transcriptome, photophysiology, and cell cycle of a Tozasertib in vitro minimal photoautotroph, prochlorococcus. PLoS One 2009, 4:e5135.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef CYC202 in vivo 47. Moore LR, Ostrowski M, Scanlan DJ, Feren K, Sweetsir T: Ecotypic variation in phosphorus-acquisition mechanisms within

marine picocyanobacteria. Aquat Microb Ecol 2005, 39:257–269.CrossRef 48. Avrani S, Wurtzel O, Sharon I, Sorek R, Lindell D: Genomic island variability facilitates Prochlorococcus -virus coexistence. Nature 2011, 474:604–608.PubMedCrossRef 49. He QF, Dolganov N, Bjorkman O, Grossman AR: The high light-inducible polypeptides in Synechocystis PCC6803 – expression and function in high light. J Biol Chem 2001, 276:306–314.PubMedCrossRef 50. Pál C, Hurst LD: Evidence Liothyronine Sodium against the selfish operon theory. Trends Genet 2004, 20:232–234.PubMedCrossRef 51. Price MN, Huang KH, Arkin AP, Alm EJ: Operon formation is driven by co-regulation and not by horizontal gene transfer. Genome Res 2005, 15:809–819.PubMedCrossRef 52. Deana A, Belasco JG: Lost in translation: the influence of ribosomes on bacterial mRNA decay. Genes Dev 2005, 19:2526–2533.PubMedCrossRef 53. Thompson AW, Huang K, Saito MA, Chisholm SW: Transcriptome response of high- and low-light-adapted Prochlorococcus strains to changing iron availability. ISME J 2011, 5:1580–1594.PubMedCrossRef 54. Pál C, Papp B, Lercher MJ: An integrated view of protein evolution. Nat Rev Genet 2006, 7:337–348.PubMedCrossRef 55. Drummond DA, Wilke CO: The evolutionary consequences of erroneous protein synthesis. Nat Rev Genet 2009, 10:715–724.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef 56.

, MBA4, has been isolated for its ability to grow on monobromoacetate (MBA) [8]. This bacterium produces Ivacaftor manufacturer a haloacid OICR-9429 purchase dehalogenase that allows the cell to grow on MBA. Since MBA is a more potent mutagen than ethylmethane sulfonate [9] one would not expect an uptake mechanism for this kind of compound. We have, however, identified a haloacids-transporter protein gene downstream of the dehalogenase gene. This haloacid permease, Deh4p, was expressed, together with the dehalogenase, to enhance the uptake of haloacetates [10]. The gene encoding for Deh4p has been cloned and expressed in E. coli which

facilitated the specific uptake of haloacetates [11]. Deh4p is 552 residues long and has a putative molecular weight of 59,414 and an isoelectric point of 9.14. With the blooming of the sequencing data and the development of bioinformatics, software that predicts the structure of a protein has become more and more readily available [12–21]. Topology prediction programs that use different algorithms are easily accessible from the Internet

and their predictions are becoming find more more and more accurate. Comparative analysis of the primary structure of Deh4p with proteins in the Pfam database [22] has designated it as a member of the Major Facilitator Superfamily [23] (MFS, TC 2.A.1). MFS is a major class of membrane transporter with more than a thousand known proteins [24]. It is also described Cytidine deaminase as the uniporter-symporter-antiporter family. Although there are many members in this family, only four of them have well defined structure or topology. These proteins are EmrD [25], LacY [26] and GlpT [27], all from Escherichia coli and OxlT from Oxalobacter formigenes [28, 29]. They have been shown to possess twelve transmembrane segments (TMS) with a 2-fold symmetry roughly dividing the first and the second 6-TMS. The termini of these proteins were found to reside within the cytoplasm. Though MFS transporters with 14 and 24 TMS are known [30, 31], they are relatively few in number [32]. Hence the presence of twelve TMS was believed to be the standard characteristic of the MFS proteins. Notwithstanding

the abundance and improved accuracy of those computer analysis methods, experimental determination is still necessary. The use of reporter fusion analyses is by far the most convenient method and the use of dual-reporters is no doubt a better choice than the use of a single indicator [33, 34]. Here we report the experimental determination of the topology of Deh4p using a PhoA-LacZ dual-reporters system [33] and the verification using a comparative approach. Results Hydropathy analysis of Deh4p Computational analysis of Deh4p has categorized it as a MFS protein. This classification was based on the following grounds. First, Pfam [22] analysis (accessed on 29 May, 2009) indicated that Deh4p is a member of the clan MFS and has a signature of PF00083 sugar (and other) transporter family.

9 ml of L10 broth to grow a culture for PCR-DGGE bacterial profiles, respectively. Sixty eight single colonies from SIC and 128 colonies from LIC were screened for their ability to transform DON to DOM-1. Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge Anne-Marie Hill for her assistance in screening bacterial isolates. XS was a selleck compound visiting scholar to the Guelph Food Research Centre, Agriculture

MK-1775 nmr and Agi-Food Canada. This research was supported by Ontario Pork (Grant 02/22 to T.Z. and J.G.) and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada through both A-base and MII programs. US Patent Application was filed on August 1, 2007. PCT Patent Application was filed on August 1, 2008. References 1. Betina V: Structure-activity relationships SN-38 among mycotoxins. Chem Biol Interact 1989, 71:105–146.PubMedCrossRef 2. Eriksen

GS, Pettersson H, Lundh T: Comparative cytotoxicity of deoxynivalenol, nivalenol, their acetylated derivatives and de-epoxy metabolites. Food Chem Toxicol 2004, 42:619–624.CrossRef 3. Desjardins AE: Fusarium Mycotoxins: Chemistry, Genetics, and Biology. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul 2006. 4. Morgavi DP, Riley RT: Fusarium and their toxins: Mycology, occurrence, toxicity, control and economic impact. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2007, 137:199–200.CrossRef 5. Zhou T, He J, Gong J: Microbial transformation of trichothecene mycotoxins. World Mycotoxin J 2008, 1:23–30.CrossRef 6. Wu F, Munkvold GP: Mycotoxins in ethanol co-products: Modeling economic impacts on the livestock industry and management strategies. J Agri and Food Chem 2008, 56:3900–3911.CrossRef 7. He J, Zhou T, Young JC, Boland GJ, Scott PM: Chemical and biological transformations for detoxification of trichothecene Mannose-binding protein-associated serine protease mycotoxins in

human and animal food chains: A review. Trends Food Sci Tech 2009, 21:67–76.CrossRef 8. Yoshizawa T, Hiroaki T, Ohi T: Structure of a novel metabolite from deoxynivalenol, a trichothecene mycotoxin, in animals. Agric Biol Chem 1983, 47:2133–2135. 9. He P, Young LG, Forsberg C: Microbially detoxified vomitoxin-contaminated corn for young pigs. J Anim Sci 1993, 71:963–967.PubMed 10. Kollarczik B, Gareis M, Hanelt M: In vitro transformation of the Fusarium mycotoxins deoxynivalenol and zearalenone by the normal gut microflora of pigs. Natural Toxins 1994, 2:105–110.PubMedCrossRef 11. Binder J, Horvath EM, Schatzmayr G, Ellend N, Danner H, Krska R, Braun R: Screening for deoxynivalenol-detoxifying anaerobic rumen microorganisms. Cereal Res Commun 1997, 25:343–346. 12. He P, Young LG, Forsberg C: Microbial transformation of deoxynivalenol (vomitoxin). Appl Environ Microbiol 1992, 58:3857–3863.PubMed 13. Völkl A, Vogler B, Schollenberger M, Karlovsky P: Microbial detoxification of mycotoxin deoxynivalenol. J Basic Microbiol 2004, 44:147–156.PubMedCrossRef 14.

Nature 2005, 438:1157–1161.CrossRefPubMed 43. Raper KB, Alexander DR, Coghill RD: Penicillin. II. Natural variation and penicillin production in Penicillium notatum and allied species.

J Bacteriol 1944, 48:639–659.PubMed 44. Casqueiro J, Bañuelos O, Gutiérrez S, Hijarrubia MJ, Martín JF: Intrachromosomal recombination between direct repeats in Penicillium chrysogenum : gene conversion and deletion events. Mol Gen Genet 1999, 261:994–1000.CrossRefPubMed 45. De Laat WTAM, Preusting JCG, Koekman BP: Fermentative production of valuable compounds on an industrial scale using selleckchem chemically defined media. US patent 2002. 2002/0039758 46. van den Berg MA, Bovenberg RAL, Raamsdonk LML, Sutherland JD, de Vroom E, Vollinga RCR: Cephem compound. 2007. 47. Fierro F, Kosalková K, Gutiérrez S, Martín JF: Autonomously replicating plasmids carrying the AMA1 region in Penicillium chrysogenum. Curr Genet 1996, 29:482–489.CrossRefPubMed 48. Cardoza RE, Moralejo FJ, Gutiérrez S, Casqueiro J, Fierro F, Martín JF: Characterization and nitrogen-source find more regulation at the transcriptional level of the gdhA gene of Aspergillus awamori encoding an NADP-dependent glutamate dehydrogenase. Curr Genet 1998, 34:50–59.CrossRefPubMed 49. Cantoral JM, Díez B, Barredo JL, Álvarez E, Martín JF: High frequency transformation of Penicillium chrysogenum.

Bio/Technology 1987, 5:494–497.CrossRef Quinapyramine 50. Díez B, Álvarez E, Cantoral JM, Barredo JL, Martín JF: Isolation and characterization of pyrG mutants of Penicillium chrysogenum by resistance to 5′-fluorotic acid. Curr Genet 1987, 12:277–282.CrossRef 51. Swinkels BW, Selten GCM, Bakhuis JG, Bovenberg RAL, Vollebregt AW: The use of homologous amds genes as selectable markers. International Patent

Application 1997. Authors’ contributions CGE and JFM conceived the study and participated in its design. CGE performed the characterization and overexpression experiments. IV made the HPLC analysis of samples. RVU performed the ial transcriptional analysis. MAV and RALB carried out the ial null mutant experiments. All authors drafted the manuscript and JMF revised the article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.”
“Background In order to evaluate antimicrobial susceptibility of microorganisms, a variety of methods is available for clinical laboratories [1, 2]. The most commonly used are disc diffusion tests or broth dilution tests. For both methods, https://www.selleckchem.com/products/ly2606368.html automated systems exist for determination of the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of an antibiotic for a microorganism and are in use in clinical laboratories [1]. For broth dilution, the automated systems use different methods for detection. They either detect growth or non-growth photometrically, fluorometrically or turbidometrically [1].

Diabetes Care 2010, 33:969–976.Tipifarnib PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef 29. Morenga LT, Williams S, Brown R, Mann J: Effect of a relatively high-protein, high-fiber diet on body composition and metabolic risk factors in overweight women. Eur J Clin Nutr 2010, 64:1323–1331.PubMedCrossRef 30. Krebs NF, Gao D, Gralla J, Collins JS, Johnson SL: Efficacy and safety

of a high protein, low carbohydrate diet for weight loss in severely obese adolescents. J Pediatr 2010, 157:252–258.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef 31. Tchoukalova YD, Votruba SB, Tchkonia T, Giorgadze N, Kirkland JL, Jensen MD: Regional differences in cellular mechanisms PLX4032 of adipose tissue gain with overfeeding. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010, 107:18226–18231.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef 32. Minehira K, Bettschart V, Vidal H, Vega N, Di Vetta V, Rey V, Schneiter P, Tappy L: Effect of carbohydrate overfeeding on whole body and adipose tissue metabolism in humans. Obes Res 2003, 11:1096–1103.PubMedCrossRef 33. Norgan NG, Durnin JV: The effect of 6 weeks of overfeeding on the body weight, body composition, and energy metabolism of young

men. Am J Clin Nutr 1980, 33:978–988.PubMed 34. Belko AZ, Barbieri TF, Wong EC: Effect of energy and protein intake and exercise intensity on the thermic effect of food. Am J Clin Nutr 1986, 43:863–869.PubMed 35. Fukagawa NK, Bandini LG, Lim PH, Roingeard F, Lee MA, Young JB: Protein-induced changes in energy expenditure in Dibutyryl-cAMP mouse young and old individuals. Am J Physiol 1991, 260:E345-E352.PubMed 36. Swaminathan R, King RF, Holmfield J, Siwek RA, Baker M, Wales JK: Thermic effect 4-Aminobutyrate aminotransferase of feeding carbohydrate, fat, protein and mixed meal in lean and obese subjects. Am J Clin Nutr 1985, 42:177–181.PubMed 37. Segal KR, Gutin B, Nyman AM, Pi-Sunyer FX: Thermic

effect of food at rest, during exercise, and after exercise in lean and obese men of similar body weight. J Clin Invest 1985, 76:1107–1112.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef 38. Green KK, Shea JL, Vasdev S, Randell E, Gulliver W, Sun G: Higher dietary protein intake is associated with lower body fat in the Newfoundland Population. Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes 2010, 3:25–35.PubMedCentralPubMed 39. Acheson KJ, Blondel-Lubrano A, Oguey-Araymon S, Beaumont M, Emady-Azar S, Ammon-Zufferey C, Monnard I, Pinaud S, Nielsen-Moennoz C, Bovetto L: Protein choices targeting thermogenesis and metabolism. Am J Clin Nutr 2011, 93:525–534.PubMedCrossRef 40. Volek JS, Volk BM, Gomez AL, Kunces LJ, Kupchak BR, Freidenreich DJ, Aristizabal JC, Saenz C, Dunn-Lewis C, Ballard KD, Quann EE, Kawiecki DL, Flanagan SD, Comstock BA, Fragala MS, Earp JE, Fernandez ML, Bruno RS, Ptolemy AS, Kellogg MD, Maresh CM, Kramer WJ: Whey protein supplementation during resistance training augments lean body mass. J Am Coll Nutr 2013, 32:122–135.PubMedCrossRef 41.

Nature 2008, 452:230–233.CrossRefPubMed 12. Steinberg P, Weisse G, Eigenbrodt E, Oesch F: Expression of L- and M2-pyruvate kinases in proliferating oval cells and cholangiocellular lesions developing in the livers of rats fed a methyl-deficient diet. Carcinogenesis 1994, 15:125–127.CrossRefPubMed 13. Tee LB, Kirilak Y, Huang WH, Morgan RH, Yeoh GC: Differentiation of oval cells into duct-like cells in preneoplastic liver of rats placed on a choline-deficient diet supplemented with BYL719 cell line ethionine. Carcinogenesis 1994, 15:2747–2756.CrossRefPubMed 14.

Jelnes P, Santoni-Rugiu E, Rasmussen M, Friis SL, Nielsen JH, Tygstrup N, Bisgaard HC: Remarkable heterogeneity displayed by oval cells in rat and mouse models of stem cell-mediated liver regeneration. Hepatology 2007, 45:1462–1470.CrossRefPubMed 15. Knight B, Lim R, PD 332991 Yeoh GC, Olynyk JK: Interferon-gamma exacerbates liver damage, the hepatic progenitor cell response and fibrosis in a mouse model of chronic liver injury. J Hepatol 2007, 47:826–833.CrossRefPubMed 16. Ueberham E, Aigner Selleck Quisinostat T, Ueberham U, Gebhardt R: E-cadherin as a reliable cell surface marker for the identification of liver specific stem cells. J Mol Histol 2007, 38:359–368.CrossRefPubMed 17. Kofman AV, Morgan G, Kirschenbaum A, Osbeck J, Hussain M, Swenson S, Theise ND: Dose- and time-dependent oval cell reaction in acetaminophen-induced murine liver injury. Hepatology

2005, 41:1252–1261.CrossRefPubMed 18. Motomura W, Inoue M, Ohtake T, Takahashi N, Nagamine M, Tanno S, Kohgo Y, Okumura T: Up-regulation of ADRP in fatty liver in human and liver steatosis in mice fed with high fat diet. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2006, 340:1111–1118.CrossRefPubMed 19. Yang L, Jung Y, Omenetti A, Witek RP, Choi S, VanDongen HM, Huang J, Alpini GD, Diehl AM: Fate-mapping evidence that hepatic stellate cells are epithelial progenitors in adult mouse livers. Stem Cells 2008, 26:2104–2113.CrossRefPubMed 20. Ueberham E, Lindner Adenosine R, Kamprad M, Hiemann R, Hilger N, Woithe B, Mahn D, Cross M, Sack U, Gebhardt

R, Arendt T, Ueberham U: Oval cell proliferation in p16(INK4a) expressing mouse liver is triggered by chronic growth stimuli. J Cell Mol Med 2008, 12:622–638.CrossRefPubMed 21. Proell V, Mikula M, Fuchs E, Mikulits W: The plasticity of p19 ARF null hepatic stellate cells and the dynamics of activation. Biochim Biophys Acta 2005, 1744:76–87.CrossRefPubMed 22. Gard AL, White FP, Dutton GR: Extra-neural glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) immunoreactivity in perisinusoidal stellate cells of rat liver. J Neuroimmunol 1985, 8:359–375.CrossRefPubMed 23. Wang P, Liu T, Cong M, Wu X, Bai Y, Yin C, An W, Wang B, Jia J, You H: Expression of extracellular matrix genes in cultured hepatic oval cells: an origin of hepatic stellate cells through transforming growth factor beta? Liver Int 2009, 29:575–584.CrossRefPubMed 24.

: Adjuvant chemotherapy and timing of tamoxifen in postmenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive, node-positive breast cancer: a phase 3, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2009, 374:2055–2063.PubMedCrossRef 16. Pico C, Martin M, Jara C, Barnadas A, Pelegri A, Balil A, Camps C, Frau A, Rodriguez-Lescure A, Lopez-Vega JM, et al.: Epirubicin-cyclophosphamide adjuvant chemotherapy plus tamoxifen administered concurrently versus sequentially: randomized phase III trial in postmenopausal node-positive breast cancer patients. A GEICAM 9401

study. Ann Oncol 2004, 15:79–87.PubMedCrossRef 17. Rivkin SE, Green S, Metch B, Cruz AB, Abeloff MD, Jewell WR, Costanzi JJ, Farrar WB, Minton JP, Selleckchem Compound C Osborne CK: Adjuvant CMFVP versus tamoxifen versus concurrent CMFVP and tamoxifen for postmenopausal, node-positive, and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients: a Southwest Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 1994, 12:2078–2085.PubMed 18. Penault-Llorca F, Andre F, Sagan

C, Lacroix-Triki M, Denoux Y, Verriele V, Jacquemier J, Baranzelli MC, Bibeau F, Antoine M, et al.: Ki67 expression and docetaxel efficacy in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:2809–2815.PubMedCrossRef 19. Vincent-Salomon A, Rousseau A, Jouve M, Beuzeboc P, high throughput screening assay Sigal-Zafrani B, Freneaux P, Rosty C, Nos C, Campana F, Klijanienko J, et al.: Proliferation markers predictive LY2606368 manufacturer of the pathological response Protirelin and disease outcome of patients with breast carcinomas treated by anthracycline-based preoperative chemotherapy. Eur J Cancer 2004, 40:1502–1508.PubMedCrossRef

20. Xu L, Liu YH, Ye JM, Zhao JX, Duan XN, Zhang LB, Zhang H, Wang YH: Relationship between Ki67 expression and tumor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with anthracyclines plus taxanes in breast cancer. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 2010, 48:450–453.PubMed 21. Hori M, Furusato M, Nikaidoh T, Aizawa S: Immunohistochemical demonstration of cell proliferation and estrogen receptor status in human breast cancer. Analysis of 45 cases. Acta Pathol Jpn 1990, 40:902–907.PubMed 22. Bhargava V, Kell DL, van de Rijn M, Warnke RA: Bcl-2 immunoreactivity in breast carcinoma correlates with hormone receptor positivity. Am J Pathol 1994, 145:535–540.PubMed 23. Leek RD, Kaklamanis L, Pezzella F, Gatter KC, Harris AL: bcl-2 in normal human breast and carcinoma, association with oestrogen receptor-positive, epidermal growth factor receptor-negative tumours and in situ cancer. Br J Cancer 1994, 69:135–139.PubMedCrossRef 24. van Meerloo J, Kaspers GJ, Cloos J: Cell sensitivity assays: the MTT assay. Methods Mol Biol 2011, 731:237–245.PubMedCrossRef 25. Chao DT, Korsmeyer SJ: BCL-2 family: regulators of cell death. Annu Rev Immunol 1998, 16:395–419.PubMedCrossRef 26. Miyashita T, Reed JC: Bcl-2 oncoprotein blocks chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in a human leukemia cell line. Blood 1993, 81:151–157.PubMed 27.

None of the “no greater benefits” studies were outside of normal distribution. selleck kinase inhibitor However, three studies [22, 24, 25] had spreads that were higher than three studies [6, 8, 10] of the “muscular benefits” grouping. These seemed likely explained, however, by the fact that changes to habitual protein intake were much larger in the latter [6, 8, 10] than the former [22, 24, 25]. Protein change theory Only twelve studies

included in this LY2109761 cost review reported baseline dietary intakes. Among studies showing muscular benefits of increased protein intake, the three with the smallest increases from habitual protein intake (19.5-28.6%) were conducted on untrained participants [6, 8, 10]. Most studies were on trained participants and larger increases in protein intake. However the ~4 kcal/kg greater energy intake in one of these studies [10] or perhaps the longer duration of another study [8] may have made it easier for a smaller change to yield significant results. That said, total energy intake was higher in some higher protein groups than control and lower than control in selleck chemicals other studies (Table 1) making it hard to use energy intake as a clear predictor of results. Further supporting higher habitual protein intake during resistance training, Ratamess et al.’s strength/power athletes consuming 2.3 g/kg/day were significantly

leaner than those consuming 1.45 or 0.95 g/kg/day [28]. While monitored for 10 wk, the 2.3 g/kg/day group consumed

~400-700 kcal or ~6-10.5 kcal/kg/day more than the other tertiles, yet remained significantly leaner by ~5-8% bodyfat. Strong correlations have been shown between increased habitual protein intake [29], regular ingestion of quality protein [30], and muscle mass. In contrast, Thalacker-Mercer et al., found no association between habitual protein intakes of 0.97-1.07 g/kg/day and muscular gains [31]. However, since Ratamess et al. showed no differences between 0.95 and 1.45 g/kg/day [28], it seems unlikely that 0.97 versus 1.07 g/kg/day was enough difference to see a protein effect [31]. Variability in resistance training volume (1–5 sets/exercise), intensity (3–20 RM), and frequency very (3-5- day/wk) across studies in this review may also have interacted with response to protein supplementation. However, most studies used resistance training variables in the middle of these ranges and there was no pattern of a greater frequency of training programs employing certain variables within the benefits or no greater benefits groupings. Since protein benefits muscle mass in lieu of resistance training [32, 33], even if a training program was suboptimal, a higher protein intake should still offer a statistically significant benefit over a lower intake. The findings of Ratamess et al. and Thalacker-Mercer et al.