<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:ynews="http://news.yahoo.com/rss/">
    <channel>
        <title>Nova Reader - Subject</title>
        <link>https://www.novareader.co</link>
        <description>Default RSS Feed</description>
        <language>en-us</language>
        <copyright>Newgen KnowledgeWorks</copyright>
        <item>
            <title><![CDATA[Immune response to SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in patients receiving kidney replacement therapy]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1766033474106-c35165f3-9e45-4cbf-9071-8ed503b3341d/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1016/j.kint.2021.04.007</link>
            <description><![CDATA[<p class="para" id="N65540">In this issue of <i>Kidney International</i>, the initial experience regarding the immunogenicity of prior coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection and the response to the COVID-19 vaccines among patients on maintenance dialysis and kidney transplant recipients is summarized. Preliminary data suggest that there is durability of immune response after COVID-19 infection. Although immune response to the first dose of vaccine is less in infection-naïve patients than healthy individuals in both groups, after the second vaccine dose a significant portion of patients receiving maintenance dialysis develop robust antibody titers, whereas kidney transplant recipients show a less-strong immune response.</p>]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-04-20T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Why does passion matter more in individualistic cultures?]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1766030510168-a146074d-28a4-49f9-9dd9-a65d1fe8a405/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1073/pnas.2102055118</link>
            <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-03-16T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[DUB esterase activity further decodes ubiquitin’s enigma]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765996361226-8b96a248-08dc-4b8d-a18d-062ae408fffa/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1073/pnas.2026389118</link>
            <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-01-25T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Cyanobacteria provide a new paradigm in the regulation of cofactor dependence]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765903262073-8522d39a-7553-4d65-9eca-154e2c26b97d/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1073/pnas.2100281118</link>
            <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-02-05T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Handy water: Chiral superstructures around peptide β-sheets]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765854603892-d5c31ee9-dbe2-4cb9-b8a7-49c691c043e4/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1073/pnas.2024376118</link>
            <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-01-08T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Reproducible image handling and analysis]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765835400467-2f150a9b-38f0-4887-ab5e-5fd493e676f6/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.15252/embj.2020105889</link>
            <description><![CDATA[<p class="para" id="N65540">Image data are universal in life sciences research. Their proper handling is not. A significant proportion of image data in research papers show signs of mishandling that undermine their interpretation. We propose that a precise description of the image processing and analysis applied is required to address this problem. A new norm for reporting reproducible image analyses will diminish mishandling, as it will alert co‐authors, referees, and journals to aberrant image data processing or, if published nonetheless, it will document it to the reader. To promote this norm, we discuss the effectiveness of this approach and give some step‐by‐step instructions for publishing reproducible image data processing and analysis workflows.</p><p class="para" id="N65541">Leading experts describe how systematic description of processing and analysis applied to microscopy data is crucial for the proper interpretation of published image data and helps support reproducibility and data integrity.
<div class="section"><div class="box" id="N65543"><div class="imageVideo"><img src="/dataresources/secured/content-1765835400467-2f150a9b-38f0-4887-ab5e-5fd493e676f6/assets/EMBJ-40-e105889-g010.jpg" alt=""/></div></div></div>
</p>]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-01-22T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Reproducible image handling and analysis]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765835400467-2f150a9b-38f0-4887-ab5e-5fd493e676f6/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.15252/embj.2020105889</link>
            <description><![CDATA[<p class="para" id="N65540">Image data are universal in life sciences research. Their proper handling is not. A significant proportion of image data in research papers show signs of mishandling that undermine their interpretation. We propose that a precise description of the image processing and analysis applied is required to address this problem. A new norm for reporting reproducible image analyses will diminish mishandling, as it will alert co‐authors, referees, and journals to aberrant image data processing or, if published nonetheless, it will document it to the reader. To promote this norm, we discuss the effectiveness of this approach and give some step‐by‐step instructions for publishing reproducible image data processing and analysis workflows.</p><p class="para" id="N65541">Leading experts describe how systematic description of processing and analysis applied to microscopy data is crucial for the proper interpretation of published image data and helps support reproducibility and data integrity.
<div class="section"><div class="box" id="N65543"><div class="imageVideo"><img src="/dataresources/secured/content-1765835400467-2f150a9b-38f0-4887-ab5e-5fd493e676f6/assets/EMBJ-40-e105889-g010.jpg" alt=""/></div></div></div>
</p>]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-01-22T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[A philosophical perspective on the prenatal in utero microbiome debate]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765767593792-74aeb3d7-7782-47b8-9243-066e743a4add/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1186/s40168-020-00979-7</link>
            <description><![CDATA[<p class="para" id="Par1">Within the last 6 years, a research field has emerged that focuses on the characterization of microbial communities in the prenatal intrauterine environment of humans and their putative role in human health. However, there is considerable controversy around the existence of such microbial populations. The often contentious debate is primarily focused on technical aspects of the research, such as difficulties to assure aseptic sampling and to differentiate legitimate signals in the data from contamination. Although such discussions are clearly important, we feel that the problems with the prenatal microbiome field go deeper. In this commentary, we apply a philosophical framework to evaluate the foundations, experimental approaches, and interpretations used by scientists on both sides of the debate. We argue that the evidence for a “sterile womb” is based on a scientific approach that aligns well with important principles of the philosophy of science as genuine tests of the hypothesis and multiple angles of explanatory considerations were applied. In contrast, research in support of the “in utero colonization hypothesis” is solely based on descriptive verifications that do not provide explanatory insight, which weakens the evidence for a prenatal intrauterine microbiome. We propose that a reflection on philosophical principles can inform not only the debate on the prenatal intrauterine microbiome but also other disciplines that attempt to study low-biomass microbial communities.</p>]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-01-12T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Group therapy on in utero colonization: seeking common truths and a way forward]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765767220649-29d71b66-952b-4b00-b7b6-ea4b97e8c4a4/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1186/s40168-020-00968-w</link>
            <description><![CDATA[<p class="para" id="Par1">The human microbiome refers to the genetic composition of microorganisms in a particular location in the human body. Emerging evidence over the past many years suggests that the microbiome constitute drivers of human fate almost at par with our genome and epigenome. It is now well accepted after decades of disbelief that a broad understanding of human development, health, physiology, and disease requires understanding of the microbiome along with the genome and epigenome. We are learning daily of the interdependent relationships between microbiome/microbiota and immune responses, mood, cancer progression, response to therapies, aging, obesity, antibiotic usage, and overusage and much more. The next frontier in microbiome field is understanding when does this influence begin? Does the human microbiome initiate at the time of birth or are developing human fetuses already primed with microbes and their products in utero. In this commentary, we reflect on evidence gathered thus far on this question and identify the unknown common truths. We present a way forward to continue understanding our microbial colleagues and our interwoven fates.</p>]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-01-12T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Lessons learned from the prenatal microbiome controversy]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765766851697-617629fe-7fa4-4eec-8095-fad33ef79b9d/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1186/s40168-020-00946-2</link>
            <description><![CDATA[<p class="para" id="Par1">For more than a century, the prenatal environment was considered sterile. Over the last few years, findings obtained with next-generation sequencing approaches from samples of the placenta, the amniotic fluid, meconium, and even fetal tissues have challenged the dogma of a sterile womb, and additional reports have emerged that used culture, microscopy, and quantitative PCR to support the presence of a low-biomass microbial community at prenatal sites. Given the substantial implications of prenatal exposure to microbes for the development and health of the host, the findings have gathered substantial interest from academics, high impact journals, the public press, and funding agencies. However, an increasing number of studies have challenged the prenatal microbiome identifying contamination as a major issue, and scientists that remained skeptical have pointed to inconsistencies with in utero colonization, the impact of c-sections on early microbiome assembly, and the ability to generate germ-free mammals. A lively academic controversy has emerged on the existence of the wider importance of prenatal microbial communities. <i>Microbiome</i> has asked experts to discuss these issues and provide their thoughts on the implications. To allow for a broader perspective of this discussion, we have specifically selected scientists, who have a long-standing expertise in microbiome sciences but who have not directly been involved in the debate so far.</p>]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2021-01-12T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Commentary]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765746843914-a0b2b41c-b0c4-4f7e-8aff-5a5bed845597/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1016/j.redox.2020.101831</link>
            <description><![CDATA[]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2020-12-13T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item><item>
            <title><![CDATA[Response to: The mitochondria-targeted antioxidant MitoQ attenuates exercise-induced mitochondrial DNA damage (Williamson et al., available online 6 August 2020, 101,673)]]></title>
            <media:thumbnail url="https://storage.googleapis.com/nova-demo-unsecured-files/unsecured/content-1765746824537-bcfce077-8821-4e83-a1a3-f5053ff7e5e9/cover.png"></media:thumbnail>
            <link>https://www.novareader.co/book/isbn/10.1016/j.redox.2020.101732</link>
            <description><![CDATA[<p class="para" id="N65540">Williamson and colleagues present important data on the effects of MitoQ - an antioxidant compound targeted to mitochondria - on mtDNA damage following exercise. Future studies are needed to elucidate, whether or not the observed prevention of MitoQ on DNA damage is beneficial with regard to functional outcomes in healthy, exercising humans in dependence of the exercise stimulus and individual characteristics of the person.</p>]]></description>
            <pubDate><![CDATA[2020-09-17T00:00]]></pubDate>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>