Communication Discovery Research Articles

Abstract 2391: Flow cytometric sorting of subpopulations followed by RNASeq reveals distinct phenotypes in PDX model of basal breast cancer

Abstract The recognition of tumor tissue as an interactive ecosystem of distinct cell types has recently emerged as a very promising basis for more successful treatment of cancer patients. While intratumor heterogeneity (ITH) as a phenomenon has been known for decades it is only recent that its functional significance can be investigated with effective tools. Starting with a correlation of cellular heterogeneity with aggressiveness, metastatic potential and drug susceptibility of a cancerous lesion the current focus on functional differences between various tumor cell compartments is revealing a number of distinct functions and interactions. The discovery of communication between various tumor cells through soluble factors as well as differences in implantation of homogeneous vs. heterogeneous cell populations into immune compromised mouse models suggest a “division of labor” among cell types within many tumor tissues. We have investigated the surface marker distribution of more than 8 different PDX tumor models by flow cytometry and detected extensive immunophenotypic heterogeneity. Using a range of markers associated with cancer stem cells, EMT and invasiveness (e.g. CD 24, 44, 133, 184, 326 (EpCAM), and CD45) we find heterogeneity with respect to many surface markers as well as individual immunophenotypic signatures for each model. Building on this characterization we chose several markers for sorting of subpopulations and performed gene expression analysis. Transcriptome analysis of a breast cancer model revealed two phenotypic signatures which suggest a strong proliferative population alongside a second population which is far less proliferative but much more active in angiogenesis, ECM organization and secretion of various soluble factors. This observation suggests a very clear example of distinct roles of multiple cell types to form a tumor tissue. Our findings could have implications for therapeutic strategies directed at more than one cell type as well as development of better diagnostic tools which take into account the presence of various phenotypically distinct cell populations. Citation Format: Warren Porter, Friedrich Hahn, Eileen Snowden, Mitchell Ferguson, Frances Tong, Shannon Dillmore, Joel S. Parker, Aaron Middlebrook, Smita Ghanekar, Rainer Blaesius. Flow cytometric sorting of subpopulations followed by RNASeq reveals distinct phenotypes in PDX model of basal breast cancer. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 107th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2016 Apr 16-20; New Orleans, LA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(14 Suppl):Abstract nr 2391.

Becoming More Reflective about the Role of Design in Communication

Robert Craig's constitutive meta-model of communication reminds us that while communication scholarship may feel like discovery of communication's natural properties, it is also often (if not always) on a path to invention of new possibilities and reconstitution. The constitutive meta-model suggests that every theory of communication is also a design language for communication, and that design itself may be a path to theory development. Design inquiry can be conducted in all subdisciplines of communication, incorporating and contributing to widely disparate communication theories. Design work itself takes many forms, producing artifacts as diverse as individual messages, persuasive campaigns, interaction protocols, large-scale participation frameworks for public decision-making, and more. This special issue explores design scholarship in the field of communication, with five original essays representing different subfields and different theoretical approaches. In this introduction, we argue that design work is more than application of theory; design itself is a theory-building enterprise. It is a distinct form of inquiry that builds new knowledge, complementary to, but different in kind from, empirical and critical scholarship.

Inhibition of exoprotease production in Aeromonas hydrophila by rhizome extract of temu lawak (Curcuma xanthorrhiza (Roxb.)

Conventional treatment of infectious diseases is based on compounds that kill or inhibit the growth of bacteria. A major concern with this approach is the frequent development of resistance to antimicrobial compounds. The discovery of communication (quorum sensing system) regulating bacterial virulence opens up ways to control certain bacterial infectious without interfering the growth. The fish pathogen Aeromonas hydrophila produces quorum sensing signal, NButanoyl-L-Homoserine Lactone (C4-HSL). C4-HSL regulates exoprotease synthesis, a virulence factor of A. hydrophila. Expression of exoprotease can be blocked by using quorum sensing inhibitor. The purpose of this study was to investigate the inhibiting effect of Curcuma xanthorrhiza (Roxb.) extract to exoprotease production of A. hydrophila. Extraction was conducted by using n-hexane, ethyl acetate and ethanol. The qualitative exoprotease assay result showed that n-hexane extract of C. xanthorrhiza had not effect on growth and exoprotease production of A. hydrophila. Meanwhile, 4% of ethyl acetate and ethanol extract of C. xanthorrhiza can inhibit exoprotease production without affecting A. hydrophilla growth. The quantitative exoprotease assay result showed that 4% of ethyl acetate and ethanol extract can inhibit the exoprotease production by 93,9% and 95,6%. The growth of A. hydrophila was not affected by this extract.

Review and Criticism: Research Pioneer Tribute—William Stephenson: Traveling an Unorthodox Path to Mass Communication Discovery

William Stephenson came to the University of Missouri School of Journalism as a distinguished professor in 1958. But at first glance, some mass communication researchers might have asked, why? Physicist and psychologist, methodologist and theorist, Stephenson was a brilliant researcher with incredible energy that drove him onward to new endeavors. His academic interests were as varied as his scholarly activity and the homes for his work. Yet, although Stephenson's early body of work clearly reflects the intellectual perspectives and disciplines that he embraced, the connections to mass communication are not so readily apparent. Indeed, Stephenson was not trained in communication, and his early work largely ignored our field of study. Still, this brief biographical sketch suggests that a researcher trained in classical sciences was relevant in journalism some 50 years ago and, further, that his work warrants a reexamination today. Why exactly did Stephenson attract the attention of the Missouri School of Journalism, and what can we today, as mass communication researchers, take from his work? Connecting Quantum Physics and Mass Communication William Stephenson was born in England in 1902 (Brown, 1991). His initial academic interests focused on the field of physics. Stephenson received an M.A. from Oxford and then a Ph.D. in physics from Durham University in 1926 at the height of the quantum theory debate. Some initial roots of his eventual interest in mass communication can be found here in Stephenson's writings about a concept he termed complimentarity (Logan, 1991). Quantum physics largely relied on a series of assumptions; scientists could not directly see or touch subatomic particles, yet they theorized about them. Likewise, Stephenson reasoned that researchers could not see the inner workings of the human mind or directly experience what a research participant was experiencing. Accordingly, Stephenson believed the uncertainty of this relationship, or complimentarity, dictated to researchers that complex occurrences should not be reduced into a single hypothesis or theory but instead, a range of possibilities needed to be considered. Later applying the concept of complimentarity to mass communication, Stephenson urged researchers to view the impact of media in a multidimensional manner and push for hypothesis production, using a collective approach that draws on multidisciplines. Stephenson used the knowledge he gained in physics to further his interest in behavioral science. He refocused his efforts, moving to the University College in London to study psychology with the father of factor analysis, Charles Spearman (Barchak, 1991). Stephenson received his Ph.D. in psychology in 1929 and served as a research assistant to both Spearman and his successor, Sir Cyril Burt. During this period, Stephenson worked on some of the earliest research into psychometric testing of human characteristics such as intelligence. Stephenson applied his perspective on principles from quantum physics to measure the human mind, in sharp contrast to Burt's work during the time period. That foundation provides yet another intersection between Stephenson and mass communication (Logan, 1991). In contrast to Burt's reliance on a single operational definition of intelligence, Stephenson argued for a broader interpretation. In accordance with his definition of complimentarity, Stephenson thought intelligence could be operationalized in a multiplicity of manners and that the predominate group of psychometric researchers of the era were ignoring the range of possibilities that they, and even their very own research participants, had to offer. As he studied psychology, Stephenson embraced the concept of self as fundamental to understanding human behavior, that is, the unique core of every human mind that serves as the foundation for an individual's thoughts, feelings, and drives. Given what he saw as the centrality of self, Stephenson argued that researchers had a responsibility to account for subjectivity and self-reference if they were to truly gauge human behavior (Brown, 1996; Logan, 1991). …

Multidisciplinarity or Encroachment

Multidisciplinarity or Encroachment

On Cynicism, Evil, and the Discovery of Communication in the 1940s

L'A. porte son attention sur l'analyse de la communication politique pendant les annees 1940 aux Etats-Unis. Il souligne l'importance de la reception de la sociologie weberienne et de la perspective durkheimienne. Il montre que, pendant les annees 1930, les chercheurs ont plus particulierement porte leur attention sur l'analyse des mecanismes de propagande. Il souligne l'influence de l'analyse du mal par Arendt et la perspective d'E. Levinas concernant l'apprehension des differences. Il affirme que c'est la confrontation avec l'horreur nazie qui a stimule l'etude de la communication

Laurence Sterne: Tristram Shandy.

Part I. Subjectivity revealed through textual fields of reference: 1. Does Tristram Shandy have a beginning? 2. Subjectivity discovered through Locke's philosophy 3. Locke's philosophy as a pattern of communication 4. Manic subjectivity 5. Melancholic subjectivity 6. Decentred subjectivity 7. Wit and judgment 8. The discovery of communication by verbalising subjectivity 9. The body semiotics of subjectivity as discovery of man's natural morality 10. Eighteenth-century anthropology Part II. Writing strategies: 11. The first-person narrator 12. Interruption 13. Digression 14.Equivocation Part III. The Play of the Text: 15. The imaginary scene 16. The games played 17. The humour.