Contribution of AT-, GC-, and methylated cytidine-rich DNA to chromatin composition in Malpighian tubule cell nuclei of Panstrongylus megistus (Hemiptera, Reduviidae)

The Malpighian tubule cell nuclei of male Panstrongylus megistus, a vector of Chagas disease, contain one chromocenter, which is composed solely of the Y chromosome. Considering that different chromosomes contribute to the composition of chromocenters in different triatomini species, the aim of this study was to determine the contribution of AT-, GC-, and methylated cytidine-rich DNA in the chromocenter as well as in euchromatin of Malpighian tubule cell nuclei of P. megistus in comparison with published data for Triatoma infestans. Staining with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole/actinomycin D and chromomycin A(3)/distamycin, immunodetection of 5-methylcytidine and AgNOR test were used. The results revealed AT-rich/GC-poor DNA in the male chromocenter, but equally distributed AT and GC DNA sequences in male and female euchromatin, like in T. infestans. Accumulation of argyrophilic proteins encircling the chromocenter did not always correlate with that of GC-rich DNA. Methylated DNA identified by immunodetection was found sparsely distributed in the euchromatin of both sexes and at some points around the chromocenter edge, but it could not be considered responsible for chromatin condensation in the chromocenter, like in T. infestans. However, unlike in T. infestans, no correlation between the chromocenter AT-rich DNA and nucleolus organizing region (NOR) DNA was found in P. megistus. (c) 2011 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Staining of the Internal Limiting Membrane with the Use of Heavy Brilliant Blue G

Background: Brilliant blue G (BBG) is frequently used in chromovitrectomy to facilitate internal limiting membrane (ILM) peeling. A study was initiated to evaluate if heavy BBG is safe and effective in staining the ILM. Methods: We studied 30 eyes, 23 with idiopathic macular holes and 7 of patients with diabetic macular edema. Removal of the ILMs was assisted by heavy BBG staining. In cases with histopathological correlation the ILMs were evaluated with hematoxylin and eosin, Masson's trichrome, periodic acid-Schiff and glial fibrillary acidic protein staining. In addition, immunohistochemistry was also performed using specific antibodies for vimentin, neuron-specific enolase, factor VIII and CD68. Using the Image-Pro Plus software of Media Cybernetics Co. we found an average thickness in ILMs. Results: Of the ILM specimens sent, 19/30(63.33%) could not be processed properly because of the limited sample material, recognizing only fragments of dispersed fibrillar material. In macular hole ILMs we found an average thickness of 1.3 +/- 0.65 mu m, and in diabetic macular edema ILMs an average thickness of 6.2 +/- 1.4 mu m. Conclusions: In heavy BBG-assisted ILM peeling we observed no intraoperative or postoperative complications after a mean follow-up of 12 months. Heavy BBG could be an effective and safe vehicle for staining the ILM. Copyright (C) 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel