More Like this

1. Plasmodesmata in phloem: different gateways for different cargoes

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbi.2018.04.014  

   Lee, Jung-Youn; Frank, Margaret (June 2018, Current Opinion in Plant Biology)
2. Different evolution acceptance instruments lead to different research findings

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s12052-019-0096-z  

   Barnes, M. Elizabeth; Dunlop, Hayley M.; Holt, Emily A.; Zheng, Yi; Brownell, Sara E. (December 2019, Evolution: Education and Outreach)
3. Thinking you're different matters more for belonging than being different

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-58252-y  

   Chadha, Sareena; Ha, Tiffany; Wood, Adrienne (December 2024, Scientific Reports)

   Belonging to a community is essential for wellbeing, but potentially unattainable for those dissimilar from a group. In the present work, we ask whether belongingness is better predicted by acting and thinking like peers or believing you act and think like peers. Students (N = 1181) reported their belonging and how much they, their friends, and an “average student” endorsed local behavioral norms and general values. We calculated difference scores for behaviors and values capturing perceived similarity to the average, actual similarity to the average, and accuracy around the norm. Key results indicate that perceived behavioral similarity to the average, when controlling for other differences, predicts belonging and most robustly mediates between identity and belonging. Using social network analysis, we find behavioral differences from friends are meaningfully linked to network density and racial homophily. Efficient interventions for enhanced belonging could highlight similarities between students and their peers. 

   more » « less
4. Mitochondrial genomes revisited: why do different lineages retain different genes?

   https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-024-01824-1  

   Butenko, Anzhelika; Lukeš, Julius; Speijer, Dave; Wideman, Jeremy G. (January 2024, BMC Biology)

   Abstract The mitochondria contain their own genome derived from an alphaproteobacterial endosymbiont. From thousands of protein-coding genes originally encoded by their ancestor, only between 1 and about 70 are encoded on extant mitochondrial genomes (mitogenomes). Thanks to a dramatically increasing number of sequenced and annotated mitogenomes a coherent picture of why some genes were lost, or relocated to the nucleus, is emerging. In this review, we describe the characteristics of mitochondria-to-nucleus gene transfer and the resulting varied content of mitogenomes across eukaryotes. We introduce a ‘burst-upon-drift’ model to best explain nuclear-mitochondrial population genetics with flares of transfer due to genetic drift. 

   more » « less
5. Variation in spatial concepts: Different frames of reference on different axes.

   Pitt, B.; Carstensen, A.; Gibson, E.; Piantadosi, S. (July 2021, Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society)

   T. Fitch; C. Lamm; H. Leder; K. Tessmar (Ed.)

   The physical properties of space may be universal, but the way people conceptualize space is not. In some groups, people tend to use egocentric space (e.g. left, right) to encode the loca- tions of objects, while in other groups, people encode the same spatial scene using allocentric space (e.g. upriver, downriver). These different spatial Frames of Reference (FoRs) character- ize the way people talk about spatial relations and the way they think about them, even when they are not using language. Al- though spatial language and spatial thinking tend to covary, the root causes of this variation are unclear. Here we propose that this variation in FoR use reflects the spatial discriminability of the relevant spatial continua. In an initial test of this proposal in a group of indigenous Bolivians, we compared FoR use across spatial axes that are known to differ in discriminabil- ity. In two non-verbal tests, participants spontaneously used different FoRs on different spatial axes: On the lateral axis, where egocentric (left-right) discrimination is difficult, their behavior was predominantly allocentric; on the sagittal axis, where egocentric (front-back) discrimination is relatively easy, their behavior was predominantly egocentric. These findings support the spatial discriminability hypothesis, which may ex- plain variation in spatial concepts not only across axes, but also across groups, between individuals, and over development. 

   more » « less