scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Stony Brook University

EducationStony Brook, New York, United States
About: Stony Brook University is a education organization based out in Stony Brook, New York, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 32534 authors who have published 68218 publications receiving 3035131 citations. The organization is also known as: State University of New York at Stony Brook & SUNY Stony Brook.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: These guidelines are presented 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.
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. 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 vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased 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. 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. 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 autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

4,316 citations

Book
01 Jan 1995
TL;DR: The fourth edition of The Cognitive Neurosciences continues to chart new directions in the study of the biologic underpinnings of complex cognition -the relationship between the structural and physiological mechanisms of the nervous system and the psychological reality of the mind as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Each edition of this classic reference has proved to be a benchmark in the developing field of cognitive neuroscience. The fourth edition of The Cognitive Neurosciences continues to chart new directions in the study of the biologic underpinnings of complex cognition -- the relationship between the structural and physiological mechanisms of the nervous system and the psychological reality of the mind. The material in this edition is entirely new, with all chapters written specifically for it. Since the publication of the third edition, the field of cognitive neuroscience has made rapid and dramatic advances; fundamental stances are changing and new ideas are emerging. This edition reflects the vibrancy of the field, with research in development and evolution that finds a dynamic growth pattern becoming specific and fixed, and research in plasticity that sees the neuronal systems always changing; exciting new empirical evidence on attention that also verifies many central tenets of longstanding theories; work that shows the boundaries of the motor system pushed further into cognition; memory research that, paradoxically, provides insight into how humans imagine future events; pioneering theoretical and methodological work in vision; new findings on how genes and experience shape the language faculty; new ideas about how the emotional brain develops and operates; and research on consciousness that ranges from a novel mechanism for how the brain generates the baseline activity necessary to sustain conscious experience to a bold theoretical attempt to make the problem of qualia more tractable.

4,285 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, published in 2004.
Abstract: Objective To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, “Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock,” published in 2004.

3,928 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this relatively brief study, the apparently increased comparative risk of agranulocytosis requires that the use of clozapine be limited to selected treatment-resistant patients.
Abstract: • The treatment of schizophrenic patients who fail to respond to adequate trials of neuroleptics is a major challenge. Clozapine, an atypical antipsychotic drug, has long been of scientific interest, but its clinical development has been delayed because of an associated risk of agranulocytosis. This report describes a multicenter clinical trial to assess clozapine's efficacy in the treatment of patients who are refractory to neuroleptics.DSM-IIIschizophrenics who had failed to respond to at least three different neuroleptics underwent a prospective, single-blind trial of haloperidol (mean dosage, 61 ±14 mg/d) for six weeks. Patients whose condition remained unimproved were then randomly assigned, in a double-blind manner, to clozapine (up to 900 mg/d) or chlorpromazine (up to 1800 mg/d) for six weeks. Two hundred sixty-eight patients were entered in the doubleblind comparison. When a priori criteria were used, 30% of the clozapine-treated patients were categorized as responders compared with 4% of chlorpromazine-treated patients. Clozapine produced significantly greater improvement on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impression Scale, and Nurses' Observation Scale for Inpatient Evaluation; this improvement included "negative" as well as positive symptom areas. Although no cases of agranulocytosis occurred during this relatively brief study, in our view, the apparently increased comparative risk requires that the use of clozapine be limited to selected treatment-resistant patients.

3,842 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Y. Fukuda1, T. Hayakawa1, E. Ichihara1, Kunio Inoue1, K. Ishihara1, H. Ishino1, Yoshitaka Itow1, Takaaki Kajita1, J. Kameda1, S. Kasuga1, Ken-ichiro Kobayashi1, Yohei Kobayashi1, Yusuke Koshio1, M. Miura1, Masayuki Nakahata1, S. Nakayama1, A. Okada1, Ko Okumura1, N. Sakurai1, Masato Shiozawa1, Yoshihiro Suzuki1, Y. Takeuchi1, Y. Totsuka1, Shinya Yamada1, M. Earl2, Alec Habig2, E. Kearns2, M. D. Messier2, Kate Scholberg2, J. L. Stone2, Lawrence Sulak2, C. W. Walter2, M. Goldhaber3, T. Barszczxak4, D. Casper4, W. Gajewski4, P. G. Halverson4, J. Hsu4, W. R. Kropp4, L. R. Price4, Frederick Reines4, Michael B. Smy4, Henry W. Sobel4, Mark R. Vagins4, K. S. Ganezer5, W. E. Keig5, R. W. Ellsworth6, S. Tasaka7, J. W. Flanagan8, A. Kibayashi8, John G. Learned8, S. Matsuno8, V. J. Stenger8, D. Takemori8, T. Ishii, Junichi Kanzaki, T. Kobayashi, S. Mine, K. Nakamura, K. Nishikawa, Yuichi Oyama, A. Sakai, Makoto Sakuda, Osamu Sasaki, S. Echigo9, M. Kohama9, A. T. Suzuki9, Todd Haines10, Todd Haines4, E. Blaufuss11, B. K. Kim11, R. Sanford11, R. Svoboda11, M. L. Chen12, Z. Conner13, Z. Conner12, J. A. Goodman12, G. W. Sullivan12, J. Hill14, C. K. Jung14, K. Martens14, C. Mauger14, C. McGrew14, E. Sharkey14, B. Viren14, C. Yanagisawa14, W. Doki15, Kazumasa Miyano15, H. Okazawa15, C. Saji15, M. Takahata15, Y. Nagashima16, M. Takita16, Takashi Yamaguchi16, Minoru Yoshida16, Soo-Bong Kim17, M. Etoh18, K. Fujita18, Akira Hasegawa18, Takehisa Hasegawa18, S. Hatakeyama18, T. Iwamoto18, M. Koga18, Tomoyuki Maruyama18, Hiroshi Ogawa18, J. Shirai18, A. Suzuki18, F. Tsushima18, Masatoshi Koshiba1, M. Nemoto19, Kyoshi Nishijima19, T. Futagami20, Y. Hayato20, Y. Kanaya20, K. Kaneyuki20, Y. Watanabe20, D. Kielczewska21, D. Kielczewska4, R. A. Doyle22, J. S. George22, A. L. Stachyra22, L. Wai22, L. Wai23, R. J. Wilkes22, K. K. Young22 
Abstract: We present an analysis of atmospheric neutrino data from a 33.0 kton yr (535-day) exposure of the Super-Kamiokande detector. The data exhibit a zenith angle dependent deficit of muon neutrinos which is inconsistent with expectations based on calculations of the atmospheric neutrino flux. Experimental biases and uncertainties in the prediction of neutrino fluxes and cross sections are unable to explain our observation. The data are consistent, however, with two-flavor ${\ensuremath{ u}}_{\ensuremath{\mu}}\ensuremath{\leftrightarrow}{\ensuremath{ u}}_{\ensuremath{\tau}}$ oscillations with ${sin}^{2}2\ensuremath{\theta}g0.82$ and $5\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}4}l\ensuremath{\Delta}{m}^{2}l6\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}1{0}^{\ensuremath{-}3}\mathrm{eV}{}^{2}$ at 90% confidence level.

3,784 citations


Authors

Showing all 32829 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Zhong Lin Wang2452529259003
Dennis W. Dickson1911243148488
Hyun-Chul Kim1764076183227
David Baker1731226109377
J. N. Butler1722525175561
Roderick T. Bronson169679107702
Nora D. Volkow165958107463
Jovan Milosevic1521433106802
Thomas E. Starzl150162591704
Paolo Boffetta148145593876
Jacques Banchereau14363499261
Larry R. Squire14347285306
John D. E. Gabrieli14248068254
Alexander Milov142114393374
Meenakshi Narain1421805147741
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Washington
305.5K papers, 17.7M citations

97% related

Stanford University
320.3K papers, 21.8M citations

96% related

Columbia University
224K papers, 12.8M citations

96% related

University of California, Los Angeles
282.4K papers, 15.7M citations

96% related

University of Pennsylvania
257.6K papers, 14.1M citations

95% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023124
2022453
20213,609
20203,747
20193,426
20183,127