Evidence suggests that G alpha(q/11) is more sensitive to the effects of aging relative to other G alpha-subunits, including G alpha(o). To test this hypothesis, the functionality of G alpha(q/11) and G alpha(o) were compared in the hippocampus of young (6 months) and aged (24 months) F344 x BNF1 hybrid rats assessed for spatial learning ability. Basal GTP gamma S-binding
to G alpha(q/11) was significantly elevated in aged rats relative to young and but not reliably associated with spatial learning. find more mAChR stimulation of G alpha(q/11) with oxotremorine-M produced equivocal GTP gamma S-binding between age groups although values tended to be lower in the aged hippocampus and were inversely related to basal activity. Downstream G alpha(q/11) function was measured in hippocampal subregion CA1 by determining changes in [Ca2+](i) after mAChR and mGluR (DHPG) stimulation. mAChR-stimulated peak
change in [Ca2+](i); was lower in aged CA1 relative to young while mGluR-mediated integrated [Ca2+](i) responses tended to be larger in aged. GPCR modulation of [Ca2+](i); was observed to depend on intracellular selleck products stores to a greater degree in aged than young. In contrast, measures of G alpha(o)-mediated GTP gamma S-binding were stable across age, including basal, mAChR-, GABA(B)R (baclofen)-stimulated levels. Overall, the data indicate that aging selectively selleck screening library modulates the activity of G alpha(q/11) within the hippocampus leading to deficient modulation of [Ca2+](i) following stimulation of mAChRs but these changes are not related to spatial learning. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.”
“Vector-borne diseases are common in nature and can have a large impact on humans, livestock and crops. Biological control of vectors using natural enemies or competitors can reduce
vector density and hence disease transmission. However, the indirect interactions inherent in host-vector disease systems make it difficult to use traditional pest control theory to guide biological control of disease vectors. This necessitates a conceptual framework that explicitly considers a range of indirect interactions between the host-vector disease system and the vector’s biological control agent. Here we conduct a comparative analysis of the efficacy of different types of biological control agents in controlling vector-borne diseases. We report three key findings. First, highly efficient predators and parasitoids of the vector prove to be effective biological control agents, but highly virulent pathogens of the vector also require a high transmission rate to be effective. Second, biocontrol agents can successfully reduce long-term host disease incidence even though they may fail to reduce long-term vector densities.