scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Central Michigan University

EducationMount Pleasant, Michigan, United States
About: Central Michigan University is a education organization based out in Mount Pleasant, Michigan, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 4904 authors who have published 9453 publications receiving 197478 citations. The organization is also known as: CMU.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a test of the null hypothesis that an observable series is stationary around a deterministic trend is proposed, where the series is expressed as the sum of deterministic trends, random walks, and stationary error.

10,068 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL) as mentioned in this paper includes five scales that provide information on cognitive and motor ability, including Gross Motor (0-33 months only), Visual Reception, Fine Motor, Expressive Language and Receptive Language.
Abstract: Short Description of Instrument: Description: The Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL) includes five scales that provide information on cognitive and motor ability. The five scales include: Gross Motor (0–33 months only), Visual Reception, Fine Motor, Expressive Language and Receptive Language. In addition to assessing a child’s strength and weaknesses, this measure is used to assess school readiness. Included in the questionnaire are three different forms depending on the age of the child; 15 minute test for a 1-year old, 25– 35 minute test for 3 year olds and 40–60 minutes for 5 year olds. The report generated from this measure includes a list of tasks that parents can help their child learn at home (based on age).

2,320 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children associated with SARS-CoV-2 led to serious and life-threatening illness in previously healthy children and adolescents.
Abstract: Background Understanding the epidemiology and clinical course of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) and its temporal association with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19)...

1,887 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
22 Oct 2017-Foods
TL;DR: The purpose of this review is to provide a brief overview of the plethora of research regarding the health benefits ofCurcumin combined with enhancing agents provides multiple health benefits.
Abstract: Turmeric, a spice that has long been recognized for its medicinal properties, has received interest from both the medical/scientific world and from culinary enthusiasts, as it is the major source of the polyphenol curcumin. It aids in the management of oxidative and inflammatory conditions, metabolic syndrome, arthritis, anxiety, and hyperlipidemia. It may also help in the management of exercise-induced inflammation and muscle soreness, thus enhancing recovery and performance in active people. In addition, a relatively low dose of the complex can provide health benefits for people that do not have diagnosed health conditions. Most of these benefits can be attributed to its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects. Ingesting curcumin by itself does not lead to the associated health benefits due to its poor bioavailability, which appears to be primarily due to poor absorption, rapid metabolism, and rapid elimination. There are several components that can increase bioavailability. For example, piperine is the major active component of black pepper and, when combined in a complex with curcumin, has been shown to increase bioavailability by 2000%. Curcumin combined with enhancing agents provides multiple health benefits. The purpose of this review is to provide a brief overview of the plethora of research regarding the health benefits of curcumin.

1,314 citations


Authors

Showing all 4959 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Nicholas J. Turro104113153827
Richard A. Friesner9736752729
Nicholas W. Lukacs9136734057
Donald A. Tomalia8126632422
David W. Christianson7226417215
Warren E. Pickett7249919516
Julie M. Fritz7125219319
Anthony J. Senagore6621114286
Adam H. Sobel6522515030
Kevin E. O'Grady6431613770
Terry A. Beehr6217916724
Kun Wang6064914951
Robert B. Petersen5915113574
Shu Yin5945712199
Steffen Jockusch5727111350
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Arizona State University
109.6K papers, 4.4M citations

92% related

University of South Florida
72.6K papers, 2.5M citations

92% related

University of Tennessee
87K papers, 2.8M citations

92% related

University of Missouri
83.5K papers, 2.9M citations

91% related

State University of New York System
78K papers, 2.9M citations

91% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202319
202269
2021719
2020744
2019551
2018535