Way of scoring by Spanish First Division volleyball teams in relation to winning/losing, home/away, final classification, and type of confrontation

The aim of this study was to assess the way volleyball teams score with regard to: whether or not they won the game, whether they were the home or away team, the level of the opposing teams, and the type of confrontation. The sample was composed of 118,083 plays from 794 men’s volleyball matches and 125,751 plays from 719 women’s matches of Spain’s first division clubs (from the 2002-2003 season to the 2006-2007 season). The variables studied were: the way points were obtained in each play, being the home or away team, the level of the teams, the result of the match, and the type of confrontation between the teams with regard to their level. The results demonstrate that for both men’s and women’s teams, the majority of the points were obtained in attack and by opponent errors. Differences were found with regard to the way points were obtained when winning or losing the match was taken into account as well as when considering the level of the teams. This paper discusses the differences found with regard to whether the team is home or visiting and the type of confrontation.

Muscle-Type Nicotinic Receptor Blockade by Diethylamine, the Hydrophilic Moiety of Lidocaine

Lidocaine bears in its structure both an aromatic ring and a terminal amine, which can be protonated at physiological pH, linked by an amide group. Since lidocaine causes multiple inhibitory actions on nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), this work was aimed to determine the inhibitory effects of diethylamine (DEA), a small molecule resembling the hydrophilic moiety of lidocaine, on Torpedo marmorata nAChRs microtransplanted to Xenopus oocytes. Similarly to lidocaine, DEA reversibly blocked acetylcholine-elicited currents (IACh) in a dose-dependent manner (IC50 close to 70 μM), but unlike lidocaine, DEA did not affect IACh desensitization. IACh inhibition by DEA was more pronounced at negative potentials, suggesting an open-channel blockade of nAChRs, although roughly 30% inhibition persisted at positive potentials, indicating additional binding sites outside the pore. DEA block of nAChRs in the resting state (closed channel) was confirmed by the enhanced IACh inhibition when pre-applying DEA before its co-application with ACh, as compared with solely DEA and ACh co-application. Virtual docking assays provide a plausible explanation to the experimental observations in terms of the involvement of different sets of drug binding sites. So, at the nAChR transmembrane (TM) domain, DEA and lidocaine shared binding sites within the channel pore, giving support to their open-channel blockade; besides, lidocaine, but not DEA, interacted with residues at cavities among the M1, M2, M3, and M4 segments of each subunit and also at intersubunit crevices. At the extracellular (EC) domain, DEA and lidocaine binding sites were broadly distributed, which aids to explain the closed channel blockade observed. Interestingly, some DEA clusters were located at the α-γ interphase of the EC domain, in a cavity near the orthosteric binding site pocket; by contrast, lidocaine contacted with all α-subunit loops conforming the ACh binding site, both in α-γ and α-δ and interphases, likely because of its larger size. Together, these results indicate that DEA mimics some, but not all, inhibitory actions of lidocaine on nAChRs and that even this small polar molecule acts by different mechanisms on this receptor. The presented results contribute to a better understanding of the structural determinants of nAChR modulation.