Institution
University of Utah
Education•Salt Lake City, Utah, United States•
About: University of Utah is a education organization based out in Salt Lake City, Utah, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Medicine. The organization has 52894 authors who have published 124076 publications receiving 5265834 citations. The organization is also known as: The U & The University of Utah.
Topics: Population, Medicine, Poison control, Health care, Cancer
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: The principles and major subtechniques of the FFF family along with application of its measurement and separative capabilities are described.
Abstract: Field-flow fractionation (FFF) is a family of flexible elution techniques capable of simultaneous separation and measurement. Its sample domain extends across a broad macromolecular-colloidal-particulate continuum from about 1 nanometer to more than 100 micrometers and incorporates both simple and complex macromaterials of biological, biomedical, industrial, and environmental relevance. Complex materials are separated into components to simplify measurement. Component properties measurable by FFF include mass, size, density, charge, diffusivity, and thickness of adsorbed layers. When characterization by these properties is inadequate, other measurement tools can be readily coupled to FFF, either off-line or on-line, by virtue of its flow-elution operation. This article describes the principles and major subtechniques of the FFF family along with application of its measurement and separative capabilities.
1,135 citations
••
Broad Institute1, Harvard University2, Howard Hughes Medical Institute3, University of California, Berkeley4, University of California, Los Angeles5, Chinese Academy of Sciences6, Max Planck Society7, Columbia University8, Massachusetts Institute of Technology9, Cayetano Heredia University10, University of Pennsylvania11, University College London12, University of Bern13, Leiden University14, Nanyang Technological University15, University of Chicago16, Estonian Biocentre17, National University of La Plata18, University of Oxford19, University of Bergen20, Novosibirsk State University21, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology22, Sofia Medical University23, Armenian National Academy of Sciences24, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute25, Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Saleha Hospital26, Case Western Reserve University27, University of Tartu28, Estonian Academy of Sciences29, Stony Brook University30, Illumina31, Gladstone Institutes32, University of Helsinki33, University of Washington34, Bashkir State University35, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology36, Pompeu Fabra University37, University of Arizona38, University of Cambridge39, Leidos40, Université de Montréal41, University of Utah42, Altai State University43, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research44
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that indigenous Australians, New Guineans and Andamanese do not derive substantial ancestry from an early dispersal of modern humans; instead, their modern human ancestry is consistent with coming from the same source as that of other non-Africans.
Abstract: Here we report the Simons Genome Diversity Project data set: high quality genomes from 300 individuals from 142 diverse populations. These genomes include at least 5.8 million base pairs that are not present in the human reference genome. Our analysis reveals key features of the landscape of human genome variation, including that the rate of accumulation of mutations has accelerated by about 5% in non-Africans compared to Africans since divergence. We show that the ancestors of some pairs of present-day human populations were substantially separated by 100,000 years ago, well before the archaeologically attested onset of behavioural modernity. We also demonstrate that indigenous Australians, New Guineans and Andamanese do not derive substantial ancestry from an early dispersal of modern humans; instead, their modern human ancestry is consistent with coming from the same source as that of other non-Africans.
1,133 citations
••
TL;DR: In this article, it is shown that many of these attractive features of zirconia, especially fracture toughness and strength, are compromised after prolonged exposure to water vapor at intermediate temperatures (∼30°-300°C).
Abstract: Zirconia ceramics have found broad applications in a variety of energy and biomedical applications because of their unusual combination of strength, fracture toughness, ionic conductivity, and low thermal conductivity. These attractive characteristics are largely associated with the stabilization of the tetragonal and cubic phases through alloying with aliovalent ions. The large concentration of vacancies introduced to charge compensate of the aliovalent alloying is responsible for both the exceptionally high ionic conductivity and the unusually low, and temperature independent, thermal conductivity. The high fracture toughness exhibited by many of zirconia ceramics is attributed to the constraint of the tetragonal-to-monoclinic phase transformation and its release during crack propagation. In other zirconia ceramics containing the tetragonal phase, the high fracture toughness is associated with ferroelastic domain switching. However, many of these attractive features of zirconia, especially fracture toughness and strength, are compromised after prolonged exposure to water vapor at intermediate temperatures (∼30°–300°C) in a process referred to as low-temperature degradation (LTD), and initially identified over two decades ago. This is particularly so for zirconia in biomedical applications, such as hip implants and dental restorations. Less well substantiated is the possibility that the same process can also occur in zirconia used in other applications, for instance, zirconia thermal barrier coatings after long exposure at high temperature. Based on experience with the failure of zirconia femoral heads, as well as studies of LTD, it is shown that many of the problems of LTD can be mitigated by the appropriate choice of alloying and/or process control.
1,132 citations
••
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Amal Kamal Abdel-Aziz2, Sara Abdelfatah3, Mahmoud Abdellatif4 +2980 more•Institutions (777)
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes.
Abstract: In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.
1,129 citations
••
TL;DR: The meaning and significance of the empowerment concept and problems associated with the proliferation of interest in empowerment are reviewed and synopses of each article are presented along with some of the themes and lessons cutting across the frameworks, studies, and applications.
Abstract: This introduction to the special issue briefly reviews the meaning and significance of the empowerment concept and problems associated with the proliferation of interest in empowerment. We identify some of the topics not included in this issue and relate those to the many broad and diverse areas of psychological empowerment theory and community-based research and intervention that are covered. We present synopses of each article along with some of the themes and lessons cutting across the frameworks, studies, and applications. These include a wide diversity of settings, fairly representative of empowerment interventions, and, at the same time, improved clarity (if not unanimity) of definitions and measurement, which has been a problem in much empowerment research and intervention.
1,128 citations
Authors
Showing all 53431 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Bert Vogelstein | 247 | 757 | 332094 |
George M. Whitesides | 240 | 1739 | 269833 |
Hongjie Dai | 197 | 570 | 182579 |
Robert M. Califf | 196 | 1561 | 167961 |
Frank E. Speizer | 193 | 636 | 135891 |
Yusuke Nakamura | 179 | 2076 | 160313 |
David L. Kaplan | 177 | 1944 | 146082 |
Marc G. Caron | 173 | 674 | 99802 |
George M. Church | 172 | 900 | 120514 |
Steven P. Gygi | 172 | 704 | 129173 |
Lily Yeh Jan | 162 | 467 | 73655 |
Tobin J. Marks | 159 | 1621 | 111604 |
David W. Bates | 159 | 1239 | 116698 |
Alfred L. Goldberg | 156 | 474 | 88296 |
Charles M. Perou | 156 | 573 | 202951 |