Keeping harmful protein fibres at bay

Misfolded proteins are not just useless — they can be toxic. Some of them form linear aggregates known as amyloid fibres that can lead to disorders such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases. Writing in PLoS Biology, James Shorter and colleagues describe a protein machinery that inhibits the formation and helps to dissolve such fibres.

Heat shock proteins (HSPs) assist other proteins in folding. The authors set out to study whether two small HSPs from baker’s yeast (Hsp26 and Hsp42) could affect the generation of amyloid fibres by a misfolded protein of the same organism (Sup35). Using purified proteins, the researchers showed that Hsp26 and Hsp42 inhibited amyloid formation. Moreover, they determined exactly which steps of the process were affected: Hsp42 slowed down an early structural reorganization of small aggregates before the fibres were formed, whereas Hsp26 inhibited fibre growth.

Yeast cells have a protein called Hsp104 that rapidly dissolves amyloid. However, humans and other animals lack such an enzyme, and so it was unclear how our cells can get rid of amyloid fibres. The authors report that Sup35 fibres can be dissolved by a combination of several yeast HSPs (Hsp40, Hsp70 and Hsp110) in the absence of Hsp104, especially if the fibres are pretreated with Hsp26 and Hsp42. What’s more, they obtained similar results when using the equivalent human HSPs to disaggregate α-synuclein amyloid fibres, which are involved in Parkinson's disease. Although amyloid disassembly took many days, the researchers propose that such system could be functional in long-lasting cells such as neurons.

Shorter and colleagues’ findings suggest that enhancing the activity of certain HSPs in affected cells — and/or introducing yeast Hsp104 — could help to dissolve the amyloid in disorders such as Parkinson’s disease. However, additional research would be needed to assess the efficacy and safety of such potential treatments before these could be tested in people.

Reference (and source of the image):

Duennwald ML, Echeverria A, Shorter J (2012). Small Heat Shock Proteins Potentiate Amyloid Dissolution by Protein Disaggregases from Yeast and Humans. PLoS Biol, 10(6): e1001346. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001346

Read the rest of the article >>>

Social media tools and academic publishing, a presentation by Alan Cann

The following video is a presentation by Alan J. Cann for Editing in the Digital World, 11th EASE General Assembly and Conference Tallinn, Estonia, 8-10 June 2012.

Abstract of the presentation as published in the conference programme:

Social media tools and academic publishing

Alan J. Cann, Internet Consulting Editor, Annals of Botany; Department of Biology, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

As publishing moves from print-focused (slow, inflexible, expensive) to content-focused (digital delivery, article-level metrics/discussion), there is an increasing need for publishers to communicate with their audiences in ‘adjacent spaces’ beyond the traditional medium of the journal or book. Social technologies will continue to evolve rapidly for the foreseeable future, so publishers need to acquire sufficient expertise to remain agile in this area in the face of future developments. I will describe the Annals of Botany low-cost online social media strategy, which is extending the reach of the journal to new audiences and new demographic groups. This includees blogs as distribution hubs for content via RSS, Twitter and Facebook, and emerging tools such as Flipboard which allow content discovery on new platforms such as tablet computers.

And here you have a link to the AoB Blog.

Read the rest of the article >>>

Microbiology blogs: a list of 20 great blogs for microbe lovers

Bertalan Meskó (@Berci) has compiled a list of microbiology blogs that you may find useful: Microbiology in the Blogosphere.

Envious, I decided to make my own list of microbiology blogs. After checking my Google Reader, I came up with a collection of 20 great blogs. I know there are many more out there, so please feel free to add a comment and suggest any microbiology blogs that may be missing from my list.

So, here they come, in strict alphabetical order:

1 - Aetiology by Tara C. Smith (@aetiology): "Discussing causes, origins, evolution, and implications of disease and other phenomena."



2 - Bactérioblog [in French] by Benjamin (@bacterioblog):"Le blog des bactéries et de l'évolution".



3 - BacterioFiles by Jesse Noar (@BacterioFiles): "The podcast for microbe lovers: reporting on exciting news about bacteria, archaea, and sometimes even eukaryotic microbes and viruses".



4 - Cornell Mushroom Blog by a collective of faculty, staff and students from Cornell University: "Even in the fullness of their horrific evilness, fungi are cool. That’s what we’re all about here."



5 - Curiosidades de la Microbiología [in Spanish] by Manuel Sánchez (@Manuel_SanchezA) (no relation!): "Este blog está dedicado a la Microbiología pero en general cualquier tema científico de interés tambien puede aparecer".



6 - Life of a Lab Rat ("occasional insights into the life of a lab rat") and Lab Rat ("Exploring the life and times of bacteria") by S. E. Gould (@labratting).



7 - Memoirs of a Defective Brain by The Defective Brain: "Science as told by malfunctioning neurones. A blog of Life, labs and bacteria."



8 - Microbichitos [in Spanish] by Miguel Vicente: "Los microbios no los vemos, pero sus efectos, para bien o para mal nos afectan a diario." Previously, Miguel used to blog at Esos pequeños bichitos.



9 - MicrobiologyBytes by Alan Cann (@MicroBytes): "The latest news about microbiology".



10 - MIKROB(io)LOG [in Slovenian] by Franc Nekrep (@fvnek): "srečevali se bomo mikrobiologi: študenti, učitelji, kolegi iz stroke pa seveda VSI LJUDJE DOBRE VOLJE..."



11 - MycoRant by Philip McIntosh (@MycoRant): "Philip has been writing, researching, publishing and doing other things in the realm of fungi since 1993".



12 - Mystery Rays from Outer Space by Ian York (@iayork): "This blog is intended to be a place for commentary on immunology, virology, and random other stuff that catches my eye."



13 - Skeptic Wonder ("protists, memes and random musings") and The Ocelloid ("Through the eye of a microbe") by Psi Wavefunction (@PsiWavefunction).



14 - Small Things Considered by Elio Schaechter, Merry Youle and collaborators: "The purpose of this blog is to share my appreciation for the width and depth of the microbial activities on this planet".



15 - The Artful Amoeba by Jennifer Frazer (@JenniferFrazer): "a blog about the weird wonderfulness of life on Earth". Older posts can be found here.



16 - The Febrile Muse by CMDoran (@TheFebrileMuse): "Portrayal of Infectious Diseases in Literature and the Arts".



17 - The Gene Gym by Jim Caryl (@mentalindigest): "Bad bugs, drugs and antibiotic resistance, all in a day's work at The Gene Gym, brought to you from the gym floor by a researcher (fitness instructor) in bacterial evolution".



18 - The Tree of Life by Jonathan Eisen (@phylogenomics), "evolutionary biologist, microbiologist and genomics researcher, Open Access and Open Science advocate".



19 - ViroBlogy by Ed Rybicki (@edrybicki): "Up-to-date Virology-related posts, mainly for students at the University of Cape Town".



20 - Virology blog by Vincent Racaniello (@profvrr): "about viruses and viral disease".




Note: I don't speak French or Slovenian, but that's what Google Translate is for, isn't it?

Read the rest of the article >>>

Cornering multiple sclerosis -- still a long way to go

Multiple sclerosis is an autoimmune disease of the central nervous system that causes neurological disability in young adults. Several environmental and genetic factors have been linked to the disease, but the precise mechanisms involved, and whether neurological damage precedes inflammation or vice versa, remain unclear.

In a recent article published in Nature, an international consortium of researchers report the identification of 29 new susceptibility loci, most of which are related to immune system function and, in particular, to T-helper-cell differentiation.

Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) that analysed relatively modest numbers of multiple sclerosis patients identified more than 20 risk loci, especially some that encode components of the major histocompatibility complex (MHC). To identify a more complete set of susceptibility loci and obtain new insights into disease mechanisms, an international team of researchers carried out a large GWAS in which they analyzed over 465,000 autosomal single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from about 9,800 patients and 17,400 controls (that is, people not affected by multiple sclerosis) from 15 countries.

This analysis confirmed 23 loci that had previously been linked to the disease, and revealed another 29 new loci. Most of the risk attributable to the MHC could be accounted by four mutations, one in class-I locus HLA-A and three in class-II locus HLA-DRB1.

A statistical analysis of the functions of the 52 loci (as annotated in the Gene Ontology database) showed that they are enriched for lymphocyte functions. In particular, many genes encoding cell surface receptors (such as CXCR5 and IL7R) with roles in T-helper-cell differentiation showed strong association with multiple sclerosis. In addition, the researchers identified two susceptibility loci with a role in vitamin D synthesis (CYP27B1 and CYP24A1) and others that encode known targets of therapies for multiple sclerosis such as natalizumab (VCAM1) and daclizumab (IL2RA). By contrast, very few genes with known roles in inflammation-independent neurodegeneration were identified.

The overrepresentation of susceptibility genes with roles in T-cell maturation suggests that multiple sclerosis is primarily caused by immune dysfunction, which is followed by neurological damage. However, the 52 variants can explain only ~20% of the heritability of the disease, and therefore a myriad of other susceptibility loci, each adding a tiny percentage to the overall risk of developing multiple sclerosis, remain to be identified.


Original article:
The International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium & The Wellcome Trust Case Control Consortium 2 (2011). Genetic risk and a primary role for cell-mediated immune mechanisms in multiple sclerosis Nature, 476 (7359), 214-219 DOI: 10.1038/nature10251


The same story in the news:
- Study identifies 57 genes linked with MS, Multiple Sclerosis Society, UK (10 Aug 2011).
- Multiple sclerosis genes identified in largest-ever study of the disease by Alok Jha, The Guardian (10 Aug 2011).
- Scientists unravel genetic clues to multiple sclerosis by Kate Kelland, Reuters (10 Aug 2011).


Note:
During the last 10 months, I have written 18 Research Highlights (short pieces of 300-400 words that summarize recent scientific articles) for Nature Reviews Microbiology. This blog post is based on my first attempt to write a similar piece about a non-microbiological article. However, to make the post more 'blog-friendly', I have embedded some links to definitions of key terms. You can read the definitions by rolling your mouse over the highlighted terms, or you can click on the term to visit a website with more information. Also, I have added a couple of links to news articles that covered the same story.

Read the rest of the article >>>

Year of Biodiversity: only for cute animals and plants?

The United Nations declared 2010 to be the International Year of Biodiversity. This sounds great, let's celebrate and protect the variety of life on Earth! We must learn more about current (and past) biodiversity and the impact that human activities have on the distribution and abundance of organisms. Also, we should explore any effective ways to protect biodiversity, if only because it benefits us.

However, it strikes me as short-sighted that most biodiversity advocates seem to care only about "the cute organisms" (cute by most human standards, I guess); that is, a few particular animals and plants. But... for Pete's sake, life on Earth goes well beyond a few vertebrates, trees and corals! Surprisingly, the true diversity of life is not obvious at all in the writings of most biologists, conservationists or environmental scientists when discussing biodiversity and its protection.

I know, I know -- when a clear message is to be delivered to the general public, you cannot be comprehensive. If you can mention only a couple of examples for endangered species, you better go for the much-like-us mammal, or the colourful bird, or the pretty tree or flower. Most of us can easily sympathize with a chimpanzee (that is, really, almost one of us) or with many animals: they have faces, with two eyes and a mouth, and it's hard not to see part of our own reflection there. We often show emotional responses also to trees, flowers or grasses (even mushrooms). So, when explaining the importance of biodiversity to a general audience, sticking to the cute guys might be the wise choice.

But how is this topic treated inside the scientific community? Well, in general, I don't see much difference. When biodiversity is discussed -- in general terms -- in scientific articles, editorials or websites, the focus is again on certain plants and animals that can be seen by the unaided human eye (that is, macro-organisms). By contrast, microbes are hardly ever referenced, if at all.

Why are microbes not even mentioned most of the times? Why are some particular organisms (let's call them "the cuties" for short) the focus of research and protectionist efforts? I can think of a few possible answers:

1 - The cuties, among all the living beings, might suffer the highest risk of extinction.
2 - Although there are other organisms at higher risk, the cuties are perhaps more important (in some way) either for the preservation of particular ecosystems or for human well-being.
3 - Our current knowledge of life diversity might be very limited, and is focused on particular organisms because of historical and technical reasons.

I guess that most scientists and many learned people would agree with me that answer number 3 seems about right (but if you think otherwise, please leave a comment). Actually, it seems that we know very little on the matter. Scientists are starting to agree -- I think -- on a broad definition of biodiversity. But the field faces (at least) two huge challenges. First, there are many organisms living on (and inside) this planet that we haven't met yet, and our estimates of how many species are awaiting discovery are little more than educated guesses. Second, although biodiversity can be measured at various levels, it's often understood as referring to the number and relative abundance of different species. And deciding if two organisms belong to a single species, or to two different ones, can be really hard. Moreover, the difficulty in agreeing on species definition depends greatly on the type of organism it applies to: whereas this issue causes some serious troubles when studying cuties, it appears almost insurmountable when trying to define microbial species. Why is this so? Well, I'm not getting into this here, but let's say that the species concept was originally created and crafted for the cuties, and microorganisms just don't fit into such clothes.

However, even lacking a suitable species definition (to the embarrassment of microbiologists), we can confidently say that the microbes are much more diverse than the cuties. This diversity is shown at different levels: genetics, biochemistry, ecology... You can find microbes almost everywhere, and often in amazingly high numbers. No matter if you count individuals or you measure biomass: microbes are the (silent?) majority. Some microorganisms are essential not just for the preservation of particular ecosystems but for the continuity of life on Earth as we know it (and when I write "life" I mean "life", not just "cuties"). Under any non-human-centred point of view, life is microbial -- with a few exceptions, yes.

So, just to recapitulate... Some animals and plants appear to be on the brink of extinction because of human actions, and it doesn't seem a good idea to let them go. However, we don't know how many types of organisms are out there, or how many of them are endangered by our activities, and we don't understand the long-term effects of the extinction of any particular life form. Yes, more research is definitely needed.

But we do know that life is incredibly diverse and mostly invisible to the human eye, and that the cuties are not even the tip of the iceberg. So, any serious research or scientific communication on the diversity of life should include (in my opinion) some mention to microbes, the main actors on this movie -- at least we should acknowledge our ignorance! Microbes play key roles in nature: shouldn't we worry about the preservation of microbial diversity?

Don't get me wrong: I don't want any cuties to become extinct. But I think that scientists can do a much better job when discussing biodiversity.



Further reading:

If you find the topic of this post interesting, you must read the following excellent articles written by Sean Nee, University of Edinburgh, UK (articles can be downloaded from the author's website):

- The great chain of being. Nature (2005) 435: 429.

"Our persistence in placing ourselves at the top of the Great Chain of Being suggests we have some deep psychological need to see ourselves as the culmination of creation."

- Extinction, slime and bottoms. PLoS Biology (2005) 2(8): e272.

"There is an old Chinese curse: ‘May you live in interesting times.’ According to those who know about such things, we live in a momentous time, the time of the Sixth Mass Extinction! But most of us do not feel at all cursed. Because, in fact, the Sixth is quite different to the previous Big Five—no-one would notice this one if we were not repeatedly reminded of it by ecologists."

- More than meets the eye: Earth's real biodiversity is invisible. Nature (2004) 429: 804-805.

"We are still at the very beginning of a golden age of biodiversity discovery, driven largely by the advances in molecular biology and a new open-mindedness about where life might be found. But for this golden age to be as widely appreciated as it should, our view of the natural world must change — as radically as did our view of the cosmos when we began looking at it with technologies that allowed us to see more than can be seen with the naked eye."

- Beyond the tangled bank (pdf). This manuscript seems a slightly longer version of More than meets the eye: Earth's real biodiversity is invisible. Interestingly, it includes many references that were not incorporated into the published article.


I also recommend a thought-provoking article by Maureen A. O’Malley & John Dupré, University of Exeter, UK:

- Size doesn’t matter: towards a more inclusive philosophy of biology. Biology and Philosophy (2007) 22, 155-191.


NOTE added on April 17, 2010:
A Letter has just been published by Andrew Beattie and Paul Ehrlich in Science, highlighting what The Missing Link in Biodiversity Conservation is:

"the many millions of species within the numerous phyla of microbes and invertebrates, which represent perhaps 95% of total species and genetic biodiversity."

The authors propose to deliver a new message to the public:

"a new message, one we would like to label "production biodiversity": By protecting microbes and invertebrates, we also protect the primary industries upon which we all depend."

I agree!


Related links:
- (Added April 20, 2010) A commentary on the same subject has been published by Mercè Piqueras in her blog, La lectora corrent (in Catalan): La biodiversitat invisible.

- (Added June 23, 2010) See Dear New Scientist by Ed Rybicki, who reminds us that "the greatest part of the biodiversity on this (and probably any other) planet is viruses."

- (Added August 19, 2010) Preserving endangered species – of gut microbes, by Grant Jacobs. Or the need to preserve the human gut microbes found in ancient rural populations.

- (Added September 11, 2011) Bacteria & archaea don't get no respect from interesting but flawed #PLoSBio paper on # of species on the planet, by Jonathan Eisen.

- (Added September 11, 2011) Don’t forget to count microbes, by David Hooper & Bonnie Bassler.

Read the rest of the article >>>

Purple balloons and the secret of life: Génome at Genève

Lucky me, I am enjoying a few weeks with my partner in Geneva, Switzerland. During one of our first walks around the city, we noticed a big purple balloon on a small island in the Rhone river. Once we got closer (there is a bridge, no need to swim), we realized that this was no balloon --but a giant cell nucleus.

The bright purple dome, 14 meters in diameter, hosts an exhibition entitled Génome: voyage au coeur du vivant (Genome: a journey to the centre of life), or The secret of life (this subtitle appears on the English-version booklet).

Inside the dome --the cell nucleus-- we enjoyed a multifaceted, imaginative and colourful (even psychedelic?) introduction to genetics and the human genome: from Rosalind Franklin to genome sequencing, from DNA replication to dimples. But let me quote from the first page of the booklet, where the purpose of the exhibition is clearly described:

Dear VISITOR

We would like to take a minute
of your time to explain that

AN EXHIBITION IS FICTION

The wonderful world of the genome, which you will discover here, is an interpretation of reality. A purely scientific explanation could be difficult to understand. On the other hand an over-simplified one would not do justice to the astonishing ingenuity of nature.

You are about to enter a complex universe which is invisible to the naked eye. By using comparison and metaphor, a touch of poetry and humour, we hope that you will be both entertained and informed.


Please remember this message because it is true of all exhibitions; they are all interpretations of reality to a greater or lesser degree.

What an excellent description of what science communication to the general public should be! A delicate balance between (boring?) scientific information and (useless?) entertaining.

Did the Génome organizers accomplished their purpose? Well, they did it for us. You still have till February 28th to judge for yourself but, if you cannot make it to Geneva in time, the following video may give you a vague indication of what's going on inside the purple nucleus:



Génome: voyage au coeur du vivant has something for everyone. Science geeks may especially enjoy the awesome animations created by Drew Berry (including the one projected on the 360-degree screen over our heads!). Perhaps the name of this biologist and animator from the Walter & Eliza Hall Institute of Biomedical Research, Australia, does not ring a bell with you. But I'm almost certain that you have seen some of his award-winning films. See, for instance, the following selection:



The Génome booklet ends with some interesting "food for thought":

Perhaps we should take a philosophical view and agree that, in order to live life to the full, we humans will always need uncertainty!

Well put. And this goes far beyond genetics and evolution...



Links:
- Génome: voyage au coeur du vivant, exhibition webpage (in French), Université de Genève. It contains videos, photos and additional information.
- Genome: a journey to the centre of life, Swiss National Science Foundation.
- WEHI-TV, where you can watch and download several animations created at the Walter & Eliza Hall Institute of Biomedical Research, Australia. Titles include: Body Code, Immunology, Malaria Lifecycle.
- YouTube channel of the Walter & Eliza Hall Institute.
- Drew Berry, biomedical animator, CGSociety (Society of Digital Artists).
- An interview with Drew Berry at SeedMagazine.com

Image credits:
Festival Arbres & Lumières Geneva 2009. Île Rousseau with the Genome exhibition dome. Photo by Alejandro Pérez.

Read the rest of the article >>>

Science cookies, courtesy of Not So Humble Pie

I would never advise you to eat an agarose gel after electrophoresis, or a Petri dish with live microbes growing on it. Well, actually, don't eat any of them even before electrophoresis or before seeding any microorganisms! Unless...


Well, unless the agarose gels and the Petri dishes are beautiful, edible cookies made by Ms. Humble from Not So Humble Pie!

Yummy!


Can science be... delicious??

(Found via FriendFeed)

Read the rest of the article >>>

Encyclopedia of Life Sciences

The Encyclopedia of Life Sciences (Wiley) contains more than 4,300 articles. At the time of writing this, over 50 articles were freely available as sample content.

A few examples of freebies:

• Antibiotic resistance plasmids in bacteria
• Bacterial transcription regulation
• Bioinformatics
• Dideoxy sequencing of DNA
• DNA chips and microarrays
• DNA cloning
• Electrophoresis and blotting of DNA
• Escherichia coli lactose operon
• Experimental organisms used in genetics
• Microorganisms: applications in molecular biology
• Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR)

Read the rest of the article >>>

Too many techniques, too little time

Are you overwhelmed by the progress in biological techniques?

Have you recently read about some interesting research but could not follow the basic details of a technical procedure?

Are you breathing?

In case you do want to understand a little bit more about those ... techniques, you can try this collection of articles:

Evaluating Techniques in Biomedical Research (Dec. 2007)

(All articles are freely available)

Topics: 3D structure determination by electron microscopy, X-ray crystal structures, proteomics, two-hybrid experiments, DNA microarrays, chromatin immunoprecipitation, RNA interference, fluorescence microscopy, FRET, and biostatistics.

Read the rest of the article >>>

This gun shoots golden bullets (and genes)

The first time I read the term biolistic, I thought it was a misprint. Then I found out it was a chimera-like word, with a "biological" head and a "ballistic" body. The term describes a method for introducing DNA into cells by literally shooting them with microscopic bullets, which have been previously coated with the desired DNA. Although the technique is mainly used for the genetic engineering of plants, sometimes it is also employed for animal cells and tissues, fungi or bacteria. I have never used a gene gun, not even been close to one, so I greatly enjoyed the following video from JoVE (Journal of Visualized Experiments, a video journal for biological research, see note*):

Georgia Woods, Karen Zito. Preparation of Gene Gun Bullets and Biolistic Transfection of Neurons in Slice Culture. Journal of Visualized Experiments (02/13/2008).

The 17-min video is a detailed description of the whole procedure, so it gives you the impression to be there. A written protocol completes the article.



*Note:
The guys at JoVE are working hard to improve their site. Recently, I was informed by Anna Kushnir (JoVE blog) about new and future developments: they have now a convenient RSS feed, signed agreements with a few science publishing companies for joint protocol publication (see example) and they are awaiting for approval to become soon the first video journal to be reviewed by PubMed. Good luck, folks!


Link collection:

• Gene Guns, Davidson College.
• Gene Gun, Wikipedia.
• Development of the "Gene Gun" at Cornell, Cornell University.
• Biolistics, or “Maybe We Could Just Shoot It?”, 90% True.

Read the rest of the article >>>

The Bio-Art Case: The End?

Fresh news on the bio-art case, as read on The Scientist:

"A geneticist was sentenced to one year of unsupervised release (no jail time) and a $500 fine for supplying bacteria to an artist, according to the Buffalo News, bringing to an end a well-publicized case that began more than three years ago."

Further reading:

• Geneticist sentenced in art case, The Scientist (11-Feb-2008).
  
• Researcher in Kurtz case fined $500, avoids jail, The Buffalo News (11-Feb-2008).
• Outburst follows fining of figure in Kurtz case, The Buffalo News (12-Feb-2008).
• Prof sent bacteria to artist; no jail, The Buffalo News (12-Feb-2008).

Read the rest of the article >>>

The Bio-Art Case

The news came out on Oct. 11, 2007 (by Carolyn Thompson, AP, as seen at Examiner.com)*:

“A college researcher has admitted to illegally mailing bacteria to an avant-garde artist friend in a federal case that arts supporters see as an attack on artistic expression.
Dr. Robert Ferrell's attorney, who characterized the mailed material as "high school science bacteria," said the University of Pittsburgh genetics professor agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor count of "mailing an injurious article" because of his poor health.”

This is a sad story, you may know the case. Steven Kurtz, artist and professor at the State University of New York in Buffalo, asked for some inoffensive bacterial cultures to Dr. Ferrell, who saw no problem in sending them. The artist used the bacteria as part of an art exhibit. However, in June 2004, both men were investigated for possible involvement in “bio-terrorism,” although finally charges were only for “felony mail and wire fraud.” For details, please follow the links:

- Professor pleads guilty in bio-arts case (phillyBurbs.com)
- Geneticist pleads guilty to misdemeanor in "art bioterror" case (The Scientist)
- Mail harmless bacteria, go to jail (Aetiology)
- CAE (Critical Art Ensemble) Defense Fund

(*) It seems that the original link to the article at Examiner.com does not work anymore, but here it goes: Professor pleads guilty in bio-arts case. Ah, this is the temporary nature of the internet...

Read the rest of the article >>>