Cardiac Neural Crest Cells and Their Role in Murine Purkinje Fiber Development

The heart beat is regulated by the cardiac conduction system (CCS), a specialized group of cells that transmit electrical impulses around the heart chambers. During development, ventricular CCS cells originate from embryonic cardiomyocytes and not from the neural crest. Nonetheless, discoveries in chick implied that the cardiac neural crest (CNC) cells contribute to proper development of the ventricular CCS. In this report, the Splotch mouse mutant (Pax3sp), in which the CNC cells do not migrate to the heart, was used to investigate whether these cells also affect proper CCS development in mammals. Homozygote mutants (Pax3Sp!Sp) are lethal on 111 Embryonic Day 13 (E13), and can be phenotyped by spina bifida and exencephaly. Pax3Spi+ mice were crossed to obtain wild type, Pax3 Spi+ and Pax3 Sp!Sp embryos. Comparison of hematoxylin and eosin stained histological sections showed less trabeculation in El2.5 cardiac ventricles of Pax3Sp!Sp. Furthermore, immunofluorescence analysis with the Purkinje fiber marker Cx40 showed a qualitative difference between wild type and mutant hearts. Quantitative analysis indicated that Pax3 Sp!Sp ventricles had fewer Cx40 expressing cells, as well as less Cx40 being expressed per cell when compared to wild type ventricles. Immunofluorescence with the H3 histome mitosis antibody showed fewer proliferating cells in the ventricles of mutant embryos when compared to controls. These results suggest that CNCC affect the morphogenesis of cardiac ventricles and the development of the ventricular CCS by contributing cellular proliferation.

Public perception of carbon capture and storage in relation to hydraulic fracturing: content analyses, survey results, and policy proposals

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) can contribute significantly to addressing the global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions problem. Despite widespread political support, CCS remains unknown to the general public. Public perception researchers have found that, when asked, the public is relatively unfamiliar with CCS yet many individuals voice specific safety concerns regarding the technology. We believe this leads many stakeholders conflate CCS with the better-known and more visible technology hydraulic fracturing (fracking). We support this with content analysis of media coverage, web analytics, and public lobbying records. Furthermore, we present results from a survey of United States residents. This first-of-its-kind survey assessed participants’ knowledge, opinions and support of CCS and fracking technologies. The survey showed that participants had more knowledge of fracking than CCS, and that knowledge of fracking made participants less willing to support CCS projects. Additionally, it showed that participants viewed the two technologies as having similar risks and similar risk intensities. In the CCS stakeholder literature, judgment and decision-making (JDM) frameworks are noticeably absent, and public perception is not discussed using any cognitive biases as a way of understanding or explaining irrational decisions, yet these survey results show evidence of both anchoring bias and the ambiguity effect. Public acceptance of CCS is essential for a national low-carbon future plan. In conclusion, we propose changes in communications and incentives as programs to increase support of CCS.