Studies of tetrahedral haloboron cations of pyridines and aliphatic tertiary amines

The preparation of the haloboron cations D2BF2 + and DD'BF 2+, where D=R3N or a pyridine, has been systematically . 19 11 studied uS1ng F and B n.m.r. Both types of amines form numerous difluoroboron cations by heavy halogen displacement from D.BF 2X (X=CI,Br) adducts. Previously, D.BFX2 (X=CI,Br) adducts of aliphatic tertiary amines were unreactive towards cation formation. However, with the more-reactive pyridines, D.BFX 2 adducts formed new monofluoroboron cations D2BFX+ In non-fluorinated D.BX Y3 systems for n -n both pyridines and R3N, haloboron cations of type D2BX2 + and D2BXY+ can be similarly prepared. FAB-MS studies of ionic salts of our haloboron cations resulted in m/z peaks characteristic of D2 BX2 + and its f ragmentation products. These results s upport our n.m.r. solution s t u d ies. Pairwise interaction n . m.r . parameters for tetrahedral boron halide species were def i ned, then used to assist confirmation of our haloboron cations.

Honey proteins and their interaction with polyphenols

This project aimed to determine the protein prof i les and concent rat ion in honeys, ef fect of storage condi t ions on the protein content and the interact ion between proteins and polyphenols. Thi r teen honeys f rom di f ferent botanical or igins were analyzed for thei r protein prof i les using SDS-PAGE, protein concent rat ion and phenol ic content , using the Pierce Protein Assay and Fol in-Ciocal teau methods, respectively. Protein-polyphenol interact ions were analyzed by a combinat ion of the ext ract ion of honeys wi th solvents of di f ferent polar i t ies fol lowed by LCjMS analysis of the obtained f ract ions. Results demonst rated a di f ferent protein content in the tested honeys, wi th buckwheat honey possessing the highest protein concent rat ion. We have shown that the reduct ion of proteins dur ing honey storage was caused, partially, by the protein complexat ion wi th phenolics. The LCjMS analysis of the peak elut ing at retent ion t ime of 10 to 14 min demonst rated that these phenolics included f lavonoids such as Pinobanksin, Pinobanksin acetate, Apigenin, Kaemferol and Myricetin and also cinnamic acid.

Psychopathy and Aggression: Examining the Role of Empathy

Empirical research has consistently demonstrated a positive association between psychopathic traits and physical aggression (Campbell, Porter, & Santor, 2004; Gretton, Hare, & Catchpole, 2004; Raine et aI., 2006; Spain, Douglas, Poythress, & Epstein, 2004). Moreover, research has also found that the emotional/interpersonal (Factor 1) psychopathy traits tend to be more closely associated with goal oriented, proactive aggression, whereas the social deviance (Factor 2) psychopathy characteristics have been more closely linked to reactive aggression, which is perpetrated in response to threat or provocation (Flight & Forth, 2007). Blair (2004; 2005; 2006) has recently proposed the Integrated Emotions Systems Model (lES), which posits that the association between Factor 1 psychopathy traits and proactive aggression is due to amygdala dysfunction leading to failed moral socialization. Consequently, individuals who exhibit Factor 1 psychopathy traits do not experience affective empathy in response to distress cues exhibited by others, thus, preventing the inhibition of proactive aggression. The current investigation sought to test this model by examining the associations among the emotional/interpersonal (Factor 1) psychopathy traits, proactive aggression, and affective empathy. After accounting for head injury, Factor 2 psychopathy traits, reactive aggression, and cognitive empathy, it was hypothesized that 1) Factor 1 psychopathy traits would predict proactive aggression, and 2) that affective empathy is a common cause of Factor 1 psychopathy traits, proactive aggression, and of the relationship between these two constructs. This hypothesis assumed that (a) affective empathy would uniquely predict Factor 1 psychopathy traits, (b) that affective empathy would uniquely predict proactive aggression, and (c) that affective empathy would account for the relationship between Factor I psychopathy traits and proactive aggression. The total sample consisted of 137 male undergraduate students. Participants completed measures of psychopathy (SRP III; Paulhus, Hemphill, & Hare, in press), aggression (PCS; Marsee, Kimonis, & Frick, 2004; RPQ; Raine et at, 2006), dispositional cognitive and affective empathy (BES; Jolliffe & Farrington, 2006; TES; Spreng, McKinnon, Mar, & Levine, 2009), and situational cognitive and affective empathy in response to neutral and empathy eliciting video clips. Physiological indices (heart rate & electrodermal activity) of affective empathy were also obtained while participants viewed the neutral and empathy eliciting videos. Findings indicated that Factor I psychopathy traits predicted proactive aggression. In addition, results demonstrated that affective empathy predicted both Factor I psychopathy traits and proactive aggression. However, the association between affective empathy and proactive aggression appeared to be dependent on the conceptualization and measurement of affective empathy. Conversely, affective empathy did not appear to account for the relationship between Factor I psychopathy traits and proactive aggression. Overall, results demonstrated partial support for the IES model. Implications of the results, limitations of the study and future research directions are discussed.