segunda-feira, 31 de outubro de 2011

Vencedores do Concurso Minuto Científico

Visto no site da Red POP (aqui)

Universidade Autônoma do México (UNAM) recebe quatro dos seis prêmios do Concurso latinoamericano e caribenho de vídeo Minuto Científico, na noite desta quarta-feira (1), no Centro de Convenções da Universidade Estadual de Campinas.
Mi nombre es Daniel e El aire, de Rogelio Carballido, do Museu de Ciências Universum, La llave de La saud, de Ivan Pacheco, e Dosis de Ciência Artérias, de Pedro Romero, da Direção Geral de Divulgação Científica (DGDC), órgão vinculados a UNAM, foram premiados nas categorias Jovem e Adulta, nas modalidades ciências humanas e sociais e ciências biológicas.
100 nanosegundos, da Corporação Maloka, no México, recebeu o prêmio da categoria Jovem, modalidade Ciências Exatas e Tecnológicas. O vídeo The Naked Flame, da Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, foi a única vencedora brasileira, premiada na modalidade Ciências Exatas e Tecnológicas, Categoria Adulta.
As produções Vídeo de Costa Rica desde lãs cercanias Del espacio, da Asociación Centroamericana de Aeronáutica y El Espacio y Project Aether, das Costa Rica, e 15 baratas se transformando em uma vespa, do Instituto de Bioquímica da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, receberam Menções de Honra.

Vejam os filmes vencedores da área biológica:
Categoria jovem

501 – El aire, Universum, México
Autor: Rogelio Gabriel Carballido Cruz

Categoria adulta
540 - Dosis de Ciencia Artérias, Dirección General de Divulgación de la Ciencia, México
Autor: Pedro Sierra Romero
Dirección General de Divulgación de la Ciencia, México

sábado, 29 de outubro de 2011

Sugestões de temas da Semana Nacional de CT 2012

Prezados colaboradores da Semana Nacional de CT,
Solicito que discutam em seus estados e municípios sugestões de temas para a Semana Nacional de CT de 2012 e nos enviem as propostas até o dia 20 de novembro (de preferência com justificativa breve). Recebermos também sugestões da secretarias e unidades do MCTI. Após recebermos todas sugestões, faremos uma síntese e será levada ao Ministro da CTI, para decisão definitiva, uma lista com as 3 propostas com maior destaque.
Um abraço a todos e obrigado
Ildeu de Castro Moreira
Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação

sexta-feira, 28 de outubro de 2011

Como alcançar seu próprio "lugar" na ciência? Um comentário divertido e oportuno no Sciencemag de hoje.

A crônica inteligente e divertida de Adam Ruben fala de uma preocupação cada vez mais inquietante entre os jovens cientistas: como conseguir a sonhada carreira científica devidamente empregado em uma instituição com  direito aos benefícios trabalhistas "como todo mundo..." Texto reproduzido abaixo, Confira!

Experimental Error: OMG, So Many Science Careers

Sometimes it seems that grad school mentors convince their young science students that they have only two career options: They can become academics, or they can become disappointments.
Last month, I spoke on two different career panels to roomfuls of young scientists. Every time a student raised a hand to speak, I noticed they all had the same question about jobs in science: “May I have one, please?”
As general as the panelists tried to keep their advice, the questions had a predictable undercurrent: Those aspiring young scientists didn’t just want to find out what it was like to work in science. They wanted us to say, “Okay. You win. I’ve got 50 open positions, and I’ll offer them to all of you today. Who wants health insurance?”
For example, there was the classic (and, in my experience, largely useless) question about how we each found our current jobs. I could tell that the students really wanted to hear stories about how we noticed a posting onScience Careers or, answered an ad, and survived competition with 200 random applicants -- because that’s their own best idea for how to land a position. Instead, each of the panel members talked about how we found our own careers through serendipitous meetings, friends-of-friends, and good old blatant nepotism.
And so we lectured to disappointed students -- some of whom had actually come equipped with stacks of resumes -- telling them how great our lives are, what a typical day at work entails (which was the opportunity for each person to say, “At my company, there is no typical day!”), and how they might find themselves in similar careers, most likely by killing us and taking our jobs.
What did impress me, though, was the breadth of careers available to scientists. Even though none of the panelists showed up looking to find new employees, apparently our science training prepares us for a number of semi-related careers beyond the usual few. For example:
Academic scientist
If you like grant writing, writing grants, and obtaining grants via writing, you may enjoy life as an academic scientist. You’ll also experience the thrill of teaching overly broad, university-mandated survey courses (“Introduction to Biology, Chemistry, and Physics Without Algebra”), flexible work hours (You work 22 hours a day, but you pick the 22 hours!), and doing the Tenure Tango (“You put your left foot in, you take your left foot out, you put your left foot in the grave.”).
Industry scientist, large biotech/pharma
Academics often say disdainfully that you need a certain quality to work at a large biotech or pharmaceutical company, and that quality is evil. Apparently only evil people apply their skills to solve real-world problems, and only evil people are paid well.
Industry scientist, small biotech/pharma
That’s me! As an employee at a startup biotech company, I face the daily excitement of knowing that my job is so cutting-edge that it might not exist in a year. Now that’s cutting-edge!
CREDIT: Hal Mayforth
A consultant’s job is to tell other people what they’re doing wrong. (In this way, my wife is a consultant. Zing!) A lot of consulting firms have been hiring scientists lately because of our problem-solving skills, our ability to analyze large datasets, and because they’re slowly realizing that all the MBAs they hired are just morons with nice hair.
Government scientist
Working as a government scientist is a great idea, because the government is really popular right now. Read any newspaper and you’ll see stories about how much people love and trust the government.
Every scientist has that friend from graduate school who graduated and then announced, “I’m going to law school!” and we all wept a little inside. Why would someone who worked in science find anything exciting aboutlaw? Why would someone who spent 7 years earning a Ph.D. want to go back to school? Did he or she wake up one day and say, “I don’t think I’m carrying enough debt! Is there a way I can fix this while still delaying adulthood for a few years?”
Military science
Okay, here’s what drives me nuts. Several times, I’ve visited my scientific collaborators in the Army or Navy, and they’re always wearing camouflage in the lab. Desert camouflage. Beige, with little squares of off-beige. But the lab is, you know, indoors, and white. And they have all kinds of weird rules about when they are and aren’t supposed to wear their hats.
Adjunct teaching
Ah, the free life of an adjunct instructor! Adjuncting offers freedom from the tenure struggle, freedom from the stifling responsibilities of a full-time professor, and freedom from the burden of income. As an adjunct, you’ll bounce among the local colleges, teaching classes on six different campuses a day, but you’ll know that you no longer have to worry about pointless things like research -- all that matters is whether you can convince a classroom of 18-year-olds not to plagiarize their take-home exams. (You can’t.)
Science advocacy
Let’s face it: Scientists aren’t great at expressing themselves. We end up saying things like, “Hepatitis kills over 1 million people every year. THEREFORE GIVE ME MONEY TO BUILD A MECHANIZED KANGAROO WITH LASERS.” That’s why there are science advocates, people who explain to nonscientists why we matter. And if I have to explain why that’s important, I guess that makes me a science advocate advocate.
Science policy
Unlike a consulting firm, which overpays you to advise wealthy companies to rely too heavily on your minimally informed advice, a job in science policy will pay you to advise lawmakers who’ll ignore you. “We value your advice!” they’ll tell you, then go vote against the laws of thermodynamics.
Found your own startup
Finally, if you don’t like the science jobs out there, make your own! First, give your company a slick name that says nothing about what you do, like “Slick Technologies” or “Digital Goose Inc.” Next, come up with a meaningless slogan, such as, “Managing your outflow from within,” or “Where technology and people meet the 21st century … with deliverables.” Then sit back and wait for a large company to buy yours -- because your startup may not actually do anything, but what you don’t do is so confusing that they’d rather buy you than risk letting you do things.
* * *
Sometimes it seems that grad school mentors convince their young science students that they have only two career options: They can become academics, or they can become disappointments.
When we reach the end of our training, why are so many of us unaware of the array of potential careers available to us? I certainly never knew about many of these until I sat on the career panels last month. (Could I have vanquished my ignorance by reading Science Careers? Why yes, I could have! Let’s click on more wonderful articles!)
Perhaps it’s because the very people training us are the ones who’ve found their niche in the academic world. They’re happy in their professorial jobs, and they want to remake their students in their own image.
There’s nothing wrong with that, but make sure you don’t end your search at the university lab bench. If you’re looking for a career in science, consider all of the nontraditional possibilities as well. You may just find a job you never thought you’d love.
Or at least a spot on a career panel.

quinta-feira, 27 de outubro de 2011

Best Places to Work is Back

Do site do The Scientist (aqui)
After The Scientist announced earlier this month that it would be closing down production, LabX Media Group swooped in to the rescue. The magazine’s sale was finalized on Friday (October 21), and the Best Places to Work surveys are now back on track.
If you are working in life science in an academic, industry, private, or government institution, nominate your institution by taking the survey. Tell us what you like—or don’t like—about your workplace, and what parts of your job are most important to you.
An analysis of the results will be published in three issues in 2012. All those who respond to our survey by November 24, 2011 can enter in a drawing for a $100 gift certificate from (Gift certificates will be provided in equivalent local currency if winner is outside the United States.)
Please tell your coworkers about this survey! The more responses we receive the more valuable the results will be. Your answers will be kept completely confidential.
Take the postdoc survey now!Take the academia survey now!Take the industry survey now!

Veja a metodologia:

Survey Methodology

Survey Form: A Web-based survey form was posted at from September 8 to November 29, 2010. Results were collected and collated automatically.
Invitations: E-mail invitations were sent to readers of The Scientist and registrants on The Scientist Web site who identified themselves as nontenured life scientists working in academia, industry or noncommercial research institutions. The survey was also publicized on The Scientist Web site and through news stories.
Responses: 2,881 useable and qualified responses were received. Responses were rejected if the respondent did not identify him or herself as a nontenured scientist working in a noncommercial organization, if the respondent’s institution was not identified or identifiable, or if the response was a duplicate, based on e-mail address or other criteria.
Analysis: Respondents were asked to assess their working environment according to 38 criteria in 9 different areas by posing positive statements with which the respondent was asked to agree or disagree. Answers were scored on a scale of 1?5, with 5 = “Strongly agree”; 1 = “Strongly disagree”; and 3 = “Neither agree nor disagree”. Respondents were also asked to assess the importance to them of each factor on a 0 to 5 scale, with 0 indicating that a factor was “Not relevant” to them.
Identification of Institutions: As much as possible, institutions were identified and names were standardized. Responses from institutions with branches or campuses in multiple locations were lumped together.
Thresholds: 76 US institutions and 17 non-US institutions that received 5 or more responses were included in the rankings.
Scoring: Scores for each statement were averaged by institution and country.
Ranking: In order to calculate the overall rankings of institutions, we first weighted each factor based on the average importance score. Because several factors that are ranked as important in the United States are ranked as less important outside the U.S. and vice versa, we used different factor weightings in our ranking of US and non-US institutions. The overall rankings were based on the average score per institution on all factors, weighted as described.
In addition, we ranked institutions based on unweighted average scores for the 9 major topic categories covered by the statements included in the survey. These categories are:
    1. Quality of Training and Mentoring
    2. Career Development Opportunities and Networking
    3. Quality of Communication
    4. Value of the Postdoc Experience
    5. Quality of Facilities and Infrastructure
    6. Funding
    7. Equity
    8. Pay and Benefits
    9. Family and Personal Life
Results: Results are published in The Scientist, March 2011 issue, and are available on The Scientist Web site
  • The sample of respondents, while large, was self-selected, which may introduce some bias into the results.
  • The scoring of results is not standardized, and standards may fluctuate between individuals, institutions, and countries.
  • In some cases, small sample responses may have led to bias in the results.
  • No attempt has been made to measure the statistical significance of the results. The difference between, say a 10th-ranked and a 15th-ranked institution may be insignificant.
The survey was developed and responses were analyzed by The Scientist staff.

quarta-feira, 26 de outubro de 2011

Falecimento de Frank Neva

Foi com grande pesar que soubemos hoje do falecimento do Dr. Frank Neva. Frank era o Chefe do LPD durante o nosso pós-doutorado e tivemos muita oportunidade de convívio desde esta época. Tanto na Bahia, onde esteve diversas vezes, quanto em Bethesda, quando sempre nos recebia para jantar.
Além dos elogios ao pesquisador e chefe do laboratório que o NIH divulgou (transcritos abaixo) devemos acrescentar que Frank era uma excelente pessoa, um grande amigo sempre atento ao que poderia fazer para ajudar os outros a ter um bom desempenho científico.
Perdemos os que o conheceram um grande amigo, perdeu a humanidade uma grande figura humana.

Wednesday, Oct. 26, 2011 Media Contact: NIAID  Office of Communications
(301) 402-1663 NIH Remembers Dr.  Franklin A. Neva Franklin A. Neva, M.D., a  renowned virologist, parasitologist, clinician and former chief of the  Laboratory of Parasitic Diseases at the National Institute of Allergy and  Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health,  died on Oct. 15, 2011. He was 89 years old.

Dr. Franklin A. Neva   <>

"Frank Neva was an  exceptional scientist and clinician who established a pioneering  biomedical research program focused on the interactions between humans and  parasites," said NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. "He built the NIAID  Laboratory of Parasitic Diseases into a world-class team, hiring and  training future leaders in clinical parasitology for more than 30 years.  He was widely admired as a person, mentor, clinician and scientist, and he  will be greatly missed."

After medical school and  an internship, Dr. Neva began his research career in 1947, studying  typhoid fever and schistosomiasis at Naval Medical Research Unit-3 in  Cairo. He then spent three years at Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.,  where he first described Boston exanthem disease, an echovirus infection  in children characterized by mild fever and widespread rash. After an academic appointment in the laboratory of Dr. Jonas Salk at the University  of Pittsburgh, Dr. Neva returned to Harvard to work in the newly created  Department of Tropical Public Health. In 1962 he and Dr. Thomas Weller  co-discovered rubella virus, the cause of German measles. An independent  group at the Walter Reed Army Institute for Research, Washington, D.C.,  also isolated the virus around the same time.

Dr. Neva was recruited to  NIAID in 1969 to become chief of the NIAID Laboratory of Parasitic  Diseases (LPD). He helped coalesce LPD research sections scattered from  Hawaii to Georgia to Bethesda, Md., and from the beginning, he emphasized  research on the biology of parasites as well as on the human immune  responses to parasitic infections. In 1971, he hired Dr. Louis Miller, who established a highly productive malaria research laboratory and later  succeeded Dr. Neva as chief of LPD.

"Frank was brought to NIH  to revitalize the Laboratory of Parasitic Diseases, and he did just that,"  said Dr. Miller, who currently is a section chief in the NIAID Laboratory  of Malaria and Vector Research. "He knew how to bring out the best in his  staff and was deeply respected by all of us."

Dr. Neva hired many future  NIH leaders of tropical disease research, such as Drs. Tom Wellems, Tom  Nutman, David Sacks, Ted Nash and Alan Sher. In doing so he shepherded the  growth of parasitology research at NIH from a small area of focus to a program that is now spread among four different NIAID laboratory groups  and involves about 400 NIAID scientific staff at laboratories in Bethesda  and overseas.

Dr. Neva also established  a clinical service for parasitic infections at NIH, which treats patients  from developing countries as well as U.S. citizens whose cases are of  scientific interest. He mentored many LPD trainees who subsequently rose  to leadership positions in universities, government agencies and  international health organizations.

"Frank made major  contributions to the study of malaria, leishmaniasis, Chagas disease and  strongyloidiasis," said Dr. Nash, an LPD section chief and Dr. Neva's  first research fellow. "His great love was clinical parasitology," Dr.  Nash said. "There was no one better clinically. I most appreciated his  integrity, humility and unselfishness-traits he used to make considered  decisions for the benefit of his staff."

Among his many honors, Dr.  Neva was the first member of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and  Hygiene (ASTMH) to receive its Ben Kean Medal, an award that recognized  his dedication to clinical tropical medicine and his impact on the  training of students, fellows and practitioners of tropical medicine. He  also received the ASTMH Donald Mackay Medal, a highly selective recognition for outstanding work in tropical health relating to  improvements in the health of rural or urban workers in the tropics; the ASTMH Bailey K. Ashford Medal for distinguished work in tropical medicine  early in his career; the Joseph E. Smadel Lectureship from the Infectious  Diseases Society of America; and the Presidential Meritorious Executive  Rank Award for his exemplary leadership and public  service.

terça-feira, 25 de outubro de 2011


Brazil as the organizer for WL5 in 2013

Congratulations ! This outcome results mainly from the choice by the majority of the Scientific Committee members and, in part, from default (see point 2). The applicants are requested to provide a detailed plan to address all points of the concerns raised by the Scientific Committee members and kindly provided by other leishmaniacs (see List provided). Their comments and suggestions are posted for your reference. The organizers’ response to the issues raised by the evaluators will be announced on November 1st, 2011.

Leishmaníacos, atenção! Em 2013, teremos o congresso mundial em nossas maravilhosas paisagens!!! Este é O evento para quem trabalha na área e quer conhecer os experts e ter uma boa visão do que anda se fazendo por aí.

sexta-feira, 21 de outubro de 2011

'Dance Your Ph.D.' Winner Announced

A Science promoveu o concurso Dance Your Ph.D (aqui).

"The rules of the contest were simple: Each dance had to be based on a scientist's Ph.D. research, and that scientist had to be part of the dance. A record 55 dances were submitted to this year's contest, covering everything from psychology to astrophysics. Last week, 16 finalists were chosen by six previous winners of the contest. The finalists were then scored by a panel of judges that included scientists from Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Boston University, as well as choreographers from Pilobolusand the entire dance cast of Shadowland."

Coloquei abaixo o vídeo mais relacionado com o trabalho do laboratório.

Dance your PhD 2011: Smell mediated response to relatedness of potential mates from Cedric Kai Wei Tan on Vimeo.

Blog do LIMI e LIP com mais acessos no Rio que em Salvador

Para mim, foi uma surpresa. Havia visto isto há alguns dias e pensei ser algo temporário. Constato agora que permanece e, ademais, São Paulo está tão próximo que Salvador pode vir a ser a terceira cidade em acesso em pouco tempo.

A tabela abaixo indica os acessos de 20 de setembro a 20 de outubro.

Em relação aos 30 dias anteriores, os acessos do Rio cresceram de 250 para os quase trezentos atuais. Nesta mesma comparação, os acessos oriundos de Salvador passaram de 405 para 267.

Excelente que outras cidades estejam interessadas no conteúdo do blog, mas por que o público-alvo direto   perdeu interesse?

quarta-feira, 19 de outubro de 2011

RAIC 2011 - Alunos do ensino médio apresentam seus projetos

Hoje ocorreu a primeira bateria de apresentações de alunos de Iniciação Científica Júnior, na FIOCRUZ BA. O programa de vocação científica (PROVOC) ocorre em parceria com a FAPESB e contempla alunos matriculados no ensino médio e público, interessados em ciência. Os alunos selecionados devem dedicar dois períodos semanais a atividades realizadas no laboratório, conduzindo experimentos com alunos de pós graduação. A bolsa, com duração de um ano, permite a estes alunos uma maior aproximação com a ciência, com a rotina do laboratório e com assuntos que, muitas vezes, não são abordados nas aulas. Este ano, o LIP tem três alunos matriculados no programa, Luiz Henrique, Eliane e Lucas. Os três, que têm entre 15 e 17 anos de idade, estão no laboratório há dois meses e, pela primeira vez, estiveram na frente de seus respectivos pôsteres, apresentando seu trabalho para uma banca examinadora. Os três são alunos do ensino médio da Escola Estadual Luis Viana, situada a 500m da FIOCRUZ BA. Apesar do nervosismo e tensão, os três se saíram muito bem! Parabéns!

Leia abaixo o depoimento dos alunos sobre a experiência de ser bolsista PROVOC:

Luiz Henrique: Estou gostando muito do PROVOC porque me despertou um interesse por biologia e química, e é muito legal estudar diretamente em laboratório,no dia a dia, e quero seguir minha carreira nesse rumo,recomendo o PROVOC porque é uma rara oportunidade única para estudar numa das melhores instituições do país !

Lucas: Estou gostando bastante do PROVOC, pois estou aprendendo diversas coisas que, na escola eu iria demorar bastante para aprender na pratica ou não iria aprender . Gostei de ter sido escolhido para fazer parte da Fiocruz e recomendo a todos os jovens a se dedicar na área da ciência e principalmente na área da pesquisa.Obrigado a todos que me incentivam e agradeço principalmente a o meu co-orientador que usa do seu tempo precioso para me ensinar .

Eliane: Para mim esta bolsa proporcionou a oportunidade de ampliar meus conhecimentos sobre a biologia sobre resposta imunológica e tantos outros conhecimentos , despertando nosso censo crítico em relação a ciência de aprender coisas novas nos concedendo a oportunidade de nos realizarmos tanto pessoalmente como intelectualmente. Por isto eu estou muito feliz com essa bolsa que foi a mim concedida.

Workshop CAT/CEPID "Cell Cycle mechanisms and Cell Survival

24/10 das 08h45 às 18h
Auditório do Museu Biológico
São Paulo - SP

Cell Cycle mechanisms and Cell Survival

8:45 – 9:30: M Carolina Elias
(Laboratório Especial de Ciclo Celular, Centro Aplicado de Toxinologia, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brasil)
Opening Section
Searching for the control of DNA replication in Trypanosomas

9:30 – 10:20: Rafael Linden
(Instituto de Biofísica, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil)
Control of the cell cycle: a lesson from retinal progenitor cells

10:20 - 10:40: Coffe Break

10:40 - 11:30: Luc Pellerin
(Department of Cell Biology and Morphology, /university of Lausanne, Switzerland)
Cerebral metabolic plasticity: adjusting energetic supply via regulation of monocarboxylate transporters

11:30 - 11:45: Miryam Paola Alvarez Flores
(Laboratório de Bioquímica,Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brasil)
A cell adhesion molecule from Lonomia obliqua caterpillar trigger cell viability through the activation of survival pathways and gene expression

12:00 - 14:00: Lunch

14:00 - 14:50: Bruno Robbs
(Instituto Nacional do Câncer, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil)
NFAT transcription factors in the regulation of cell cycle and deat

14:50 - 15:40: Yi-Jun Sheu
(Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, NY, USA)
Control of chromosomal DNA replication by kinase signaling pathway in eukaryotic cells

15:40 - 16:00: Coffe Break

16:00 - 16:30: Bruno Dallagiovanna
(Instituto Carlos Chagas, FIOCRUZ, Curitiba)
Posttranscriptional gene networks in the control of adult stem cell proliferation

16:30 - 17:00: Matheus Henrique dos Santos Dias
(Laboratório Especial de Ciclo Celular, Centro Aplicado de Toxinologia, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brasil)
FGF2 targets an Achilles' heel of ras-driven mouse malignant cells.

terça-feira, 18 de outubro de 2011

The Cell: An Image Library™ é um repositório público, facilmente acessível (e muito fácil de usar) de imagens, vídeos e animações de células. O banco tem imagens de diferentes organismos, mostrando a arquitetura celular, organelas e também processos "anormais". O objetivo deste banco de imagens é avançar na pesquisa, educação e treinamento de estudantes. Objetivo maior: melhorar a saúde humana, sempre.

Nota pessoal: o site é realmente muito rico, tem muita informação e está super bem organizado e dinâmico. Uma imagem vale mil palavras!

segunda-feira, 17 de outubro de 2011

II Workshop da Rede TB no Rio de Janeiro: inscrições abertas até 20 de outubro

O II Workshop da Rede TB está se aproximando. Em breve teremos o site do evento, entretanto segue em anexo o programa preliminar e os critérios de aceitação de resumos assim como abaixo as informações sobre data, local e inscrição.

Data: 21, 22, 23 de novembro de 2011

Local: Universidade Gama Filho, campus Downtown -  Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro


até 20 de outubro - data limite para enviar trabalhos
Profissional não sócio - R$280,00  - Profissional sócio da Rede TB - R$200,00
Estudantes de PG e Graduação  não sócio - R$150,00 - Estudante  Sócio R$70,00

após 20 de outubro
Profissional não sócio - R$380,00  - Profissional sócio da Rede TB - R$300,00
Estudantes de PG e Graduação  não sócio - R$230,00 - Estudante  Sócio R$150,00
Dados para déposito:
Banco Itaú
Rede Brasleira de Pesquisas em Tuberculose - CNPJ 05.844.523/0001-38
Agência: 0370
Conta corrente: 63130-1

Favor escanear o recibo da inscrição e enviar para Leila Fonseca,

Em caso de dúvidas e/ou para mais informações favor escrever para 

quarta-feira, 12 de outubro de 2011

Gene Network Analysis of Bone Marrow Mononuclear Cells Reveals Activation of Multiple Kinase Pathways in Human Systemic Lupus Erythematosus

Post de Marcia Weber Carneiro (LIP-CPqGM/FIOCRUZ)

ResearchBlogging.orgO estudo do perfil genético fornece informações importantes sobre moléculas chaves relevantes para doenças, porém não são muito informativos sobre as interações entre proteínas, sobre modificações pós-traducionais e sobre a regulação de alvos subcelulares. Assim, a integração de dados genônimos e a construção de teias funcionais de genes fornece uma hipóteses para doenças complexas como o lúpus sistêmico eritematoso (SLE). O SLE é uma doença que afeta múltiplos órgãos e se caracteriza por períodos de remissão e de extensão. Apesar de sua etiologia não estar bem definida, muitos caminhos patogênicos contribuem para injúria tecidual.

Para este estudo, os autores avaliaram a expressão gênica em células mononucleares da medula óssea de pacientes com SLE ativa, inativa e de indivíduos controle utilizando a técnica de microarranjos. Para a construção das redes, foi utilizada a ferramenta de bioinformática Análise de Rede de Genes Ingenuity.

A análise comparativa de pacientes com SLE e controles revelou uma rede com 19 moléculas centrais como principais reguladoras incluindo ERK, JNK, e p38 MAP quinases, insulina, Ca2+ e STAT3. Já a comparação de pacientes com SLE ativa e inativa identificou 30 moléculas centrais associadas com resposta imune, síntese de proteínas e modificação pós-traducional. Um alto grau de identidade entre pacientes com SLE ativa e com linfoma de Hodgkin’s foi encontrado, com moléculas centrais sobrepostas incluindo quinases (MAPK, ERK, JNK, PKC), fatores de transcrição (NF-kappaB, STAT3), e insulina. Para a validação dos achados foi realizada a análise por Western Blot de células B do baço de camundongos com lúpus. Estes animais apresentaram ativação de STAT3, ITGB2, HSPB1, ERK, JNK, p38, e p32 kinases, e inibição de FOXO3 e VDR quando comparados com animais controle.

Com isso, autores concluem que a rede de análise de genes expressos em pacientescom lúpus foi capaz de identificar genes centrais na regulação da patogênese que podem representar alvos para novas terapias na SLE humana. A alta similaridade entre SLE ativa e linfoma de Hogdkin fornece uma base molecular para a associação encontrada da mesma com malignidades linfóides. Deste modo, a análise de redes de genes baseada em dados de expressão gênica é um método poderoso para prever reguladores gênicos chaves e para identificar redes compartilhadas entre categorias distintas de doenças complexas.

Nakou M, Bertsias G, Stagakis I, Centola M, Tassiulas I, Hatziapostolou M, Kritikos I, Goulielmos G, Boumpas DT, & Iliopoulos D (2010). Gene network analysis of bone marrow mononuclear cells reveals activation of multiple kinase pathways in human systemic lupus erythematosus. PloS one, 5 (10) PMID: 20976278

terça-feira, 11 de outubro de 2011

Contagion - Hollywood e a ciência

Uma tosse inocente inicia uma pandemia fatal no filme Contagion (o novo thriller dirigido por Steven Soderbergh). Críticos e cientistas dizem que este filme é mais real no que diz respeito a epidemias, não há artistas virando zumbis e a doença em questão não mata todos os infectados. No entanto, os cientistas dizem que ainda há partes da trama bastante fantasiosas.

Sem querem estragar o prazer de assistir o filme, segue a sinopse. Uma executiva cai doente após uma visita de negócios a Hong Kong. Obviamente ela infecta inocentes em dois continentes e, logo, diversas cidades são destruídas pelo vírus MEV-1. O caos se instala mas o mundo, é claro, é salvo por cientistas intrépidos que criam uma vacine em menos de seis meses!! Ficção científica de verdade.

O vírus do filme é baseado no vírus Nipah que causa sintomas respiratórios, encefalite, convulsões e que mata 45 a 90% das vítimas. No filme, o vírus MEV-1 é bem realista, segundo os cientistas consultados. No entanto, o filme dá algumas derrapadas e parece que a principal delas é que os cientistas conseguem cultivar o vírus (até então desconhecido de todos) em 12 dias e conseguem disponibilizar a vacina em 4 meses. Ainda temos algum tempo antes que esta seja a realidade, não? That's Hollywood.