Institution
Stony Brook University
Education•Stony 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 published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Fábio Camargo Abdalla2, Hagai Abeliovich3, Robert T. Abraham4 +1284 more•Institutions (463)
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
•
01 Jan 1995TL;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
••
Cooper University Hospital1, Rhode Island Hospital2, University of Birmingham3, Stony Brook University4, McMaster University5, University of Jena6, University of Pittsburgh7, St Thomas' Hospital8, University Hospital of Lausanne9, University of Minnesota10, St. Michael's Hospital11, University of Turin12, University of Hertfordshire13, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine14, Harvard University15, NorthShore University HealthSystem16, Houston Methodist Hospital17
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
••
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
••
University of Tokyo1, Boston University2, Brookhaven National Laboratory3, University of California, Irvine4, California State University5, George Mason University6, Gifu University7, University of Hawaii at Manoa8, Kobe University9, Los Alamos National Laboratory10, Louisiana State University11, University of Maryland, College Park12, University of Chicago13, Stony Brook University14, Niigata University15, Osaka University16, Seoul National University17, Tohoku University18, Tokai University19, Tokyo Institute of Technology20, University of Warsaw21, University of Washington22, Stanford University23
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
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Zhong Lin Wang | 245 | 2529 | 259003 |
Dennis W. Dickson | 191 | 1243 | 148488 |
Hyun-Chul Kim | 176 | 4076 | 183227 |
David Baker | 173 | 1226 | 109377 |
J. N. Butler | 172 | 2525 | 175561 |
Roderick T. Bronson | 169 | 679 | 107702 |
Nora D. Volkow | 165 | 958 | 107463 |
Jovan Milosevic | 152 | 1433 | 106802 |
Thomas E. Starzl | 150 | 1625 | 91704 |
Paolo Boffetta | 148 | 1455 | 93876 |
Jacques Banchereau | 143 | 634 | 99261 |
Larry R. Squire | 143 | 472 | 85306 |
John D. E. Gabrieli | 142 | 480 | 68254 |
Alexander Milov | 142 | 1143 | 93374 |
Meenakshi Narain | 142 | 1805 | 147741 |