The free-living nematode Pristionchus pacificus is one of several species that have recently been developed as a satellite system for comparative functional studies in evolutionary developmental biology. Comparisons of developmental processes between P. pacificus and the well established model organism Caenorhabditis elegans at the cellular and genetic levels provide detailed insight into the molecular changes that shape evolutionary transitions. To facilitate genetic analysis and cloning of mutations in P. pacificus, we previously generated a BAC-based genetic linkage map for this organism. Here, we describe the construction of a physical map of the P. pacificus genome based on AFLP fingerprint analysis of 7747 BAC clones. Most of the SSCP markers used to generate the genetic linkage map were derived from BAC ends, so that the physical genome map and the genetic map can be integrated. The contigs that make up the physical map are evenly distributed over the genetic linkage map and no clustering is observed, indicating that the physical map provides a valid representation of the P. pacificus genome. The integrated genome map thus provides a framework for positional cloning and the study of genome evolution in nematodes.
Background
The extent to which people implement government-issued protective measures is critical in preventing further spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Our study aimed to describe the public belief in the effectiveness of protective measures, the reported implementation of these measures, and to identify communication channels used to acquire information on COVID-19 in European countries during the early stage of the pandemic.
Methods and findings
An online survey available in multiple languages was disseminated starting on March 19th, 2020. After five days, we computed descriptive statistics for countries with more than 500 respondents. Each day, we assessed enacted community containment measures by stage of stringency (I-IV). In total, 9,796 adults responded, of whom 8,611 resided in the Netherlands (stage III), 604 in Germany (stage III), and 581 in Italy (stage IV). To explore possible dynamics as containment strategies intensified, we also included 1,365 responses submitted during the following week. Participants indicated support for governmental measures related to avoiding social gatherings, selective closure of public places, and hand hygiene and respiratory measures (range for all measures: 95.0%-99.7%). Respondents from the Netherlands less frequently considered a complete social lockdown effective (59.2%), compared to respondents in Germany (76.6%) or Italy (87.2%). Italian residents applied enforced social distancing measures more frequently (range: 90.2%-99.3%, German and Dutch residents: 67.5%-97.0%) and self-initiated hygienic and social distancing behaviors (range: 36.3%-96.6%, German and Dutch residents: 28.3%-95.7%). Respondents reported being sufficiently informed about the outbreak and behaviors to avoid infection (range: 90.2%-91.1%). Information channels most commonly reported included television newspapers, official health websites, and social media. One week later, we observed no major differences in submitted responses.
Conclusions
During the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, belief in the effectiveness of protective measures among survey respondents from three European countries was high and participants reported feeling sufficiently informed. In March 2020, implementation of measures differed between countries and were highest among respondents from Italy, who were subjected to the most stringent lockdown measures and greatest COVID-19 burden in Europe during this period.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.