Connecting To The Server To Fetch The WebPage Elements!!....
MXPlank.com MXMail Submit Research Thesis Electronics - MicroControllers Contact us QuantumDDX.com




Search The Site







MXPlank News Letter - 2021-11-29







Hubble image of ESO 381-12






The ghostly shells of galaxy ESO 381-12 are captured here in a new image from the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, set against a backdrop of distant galaxies. The strikingly uneven structure and the clusters of stars that orbit around the galaxy suggest that ESO 381-12 may have been part of a dramatic collision sometime in its relatively recent past.




Credit:
NASA/ESA and The Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)




Injecting nanoparticles in the blood curbed brain swelling in mice

After a head injury, the tiny particles diverted inflammation-causing cells from the brain

Nanoparticles cruising through blood vessels (illustrated) may distract immune cells from harming the brain after an injury, a study in mice suggests. Inok/iStock/Getty Images Plus


Injecting a swarm of nanoparticles into the blood of someone who has suffered a brain injury may one day help to limit the damage - if experimental results in mice can be translated to humans. In mice, these nanoparticles seemed to reduce dangerous swelling by distracting immune cells from rushing to an injured brain.

The results, described online January 10 in the Annals of Neurology, hint that the inflammation-fighting nanoparticles might someday make powerful medicine, says John Kessler, a neurologist at Northwestern Medicine in Chicago. "All the data we have now suggest that they're going to be safe, and they're likely to work" for people, Kessler says. "But we don't know that yet."

After an injury, tissue often swells as immune cells flock to the damage. Swelling of the brain can be dangerous because the brain is contained within the skull and "there's no place to go," Kessler says. The resulting pressure can be deadly.

But nanoparticles might serve as an immune-cell distraction, the results in mice suggest.

Two to three hours after a head injury, mice received injections of tiny biodegradable particles made of an FDA-approved polymer - the same sort that's used in some dissolving sutures. Instead of rushing toward the brain, a certain type of immune cell called monocytes began turning their sights on these invaders. These monocytes engulfed the nanoparticles, and the cells and their cargo got packed off to the spleen for elimination, the researchers found. Because these nanoparticles are quickly taken out of circulation, the researchers injected the mice again one and two days later, in an effort to ease inflammation that might crop back up in the days after the injury.

Mice that received the nanoparticles fared better after their brain injuries than mice that didn't get the nanoparticles. Ten weeks after the injury, the damaged spots themselves were about half as big as the spots in mice that didn't receive the treatment, suggesting the damage was stalled in the mice that got nanoparticles.

Other tests showed that both brain swelling and scarring were less severe in mice that had received nanoparticles. Mice's vision cells performed better in response to light. And behavior improved, too. Mice were able to walk better across a ladder if they had received the nanoparticle decoys. The scope of the animals' improvements was "a much bigger effect than you actually expected or hoped for," Kessler says.

Other potential nanoparticle therapies rely on tethering drugs or other cargo to the nanoparticles themselves (SN: 3/7/19). But in this study, the nanoparticles were bare. That's "different from what we typically think of as a nanoparticle treatment," says Forrest Kievit, a biomedical engineer at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. That simplicity might make the manufacturing of these particles more straightforward than other, more complicated nanoparticles, a benefit for potential clinical trials.

Kievit cautions, however, that there are many differences between mice and human brain injuries: the type and severity of the injuries and the timelines for recovery are different, for instance. And the ways that the brain suffers after a hard hit involves more than just a harmful immune response. Toxic substances can accumulate and spread to unaffected areas, for instance.

Still, Kessler is optimistic that these nanoparticles hold promise not just for treating brain injuries, but also for a wide range of ailments that involve a potentially damaging immune response. In 2014, researchers found that nanoparticles distracted monocytes from causing inflammation in other circumstances in mice. Similar nanoparticles seemed to improve mice's heart health after undergoing a blockage that mimics a heart attack. Nanoparticles also seemed to ease signs of inflammatory bowel disease, and boosted survival of mice infected with West Nile virus.

There are few ways to treat traumatic brain injuries, Kessler says. "There's nothing that's really been able to make a dent in this disease. That's why it would be so exciting if it really works."





Spiral Snapshot





Image credit: ESA

The luminous heart of the galaxy M61 dominates this image, framed by its winding spiral arms threaded with dark tendrils of dust. As well as the usual bright bands of stars, the spiral arms of M61 are studded with ruby-red patches of light. Tell-tale signs of recent star formation, these glowing regions lead to M61’s classification as a starburst galaxy.




Though the gleaming spiral of this galaxy makes for a spectacular sight, one of the most interesting features of M61 lurks unseen at the centre of this image. As well as widespread pockets of star formation, M61 hosts a supermassive black hole more than 5 million times as massive as the Sun.




M61 appears almost face-on, making it a popular subject for astronomical images, even though the galaxy lies more than 52 million light-years from Earth. This particular astronomical image incorporates data from not only Hubble, but also the FORS camera at the European Southern Observatory Very Large Telescope, together revealing M61 in unprecedented detail. This striking image is one of many examples of telescope teamwork — astronomers frequently combine data from ground-based and space-based telescopes to learn more about the Universe.







Credit:
NASA/ESA and The Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)








Most detailed image of the Crab Nebula







This Hubble image gives the most detailed view of the entire Crab Nebula ever. The Crab is among the most interesting and well studied objects in astronomy.


This image is the largest image ever taken with Hubble's WFPC2 camera. It was assembled from 24 individual exposures taken with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope and is the highest resolution image of the entire Crab Nebula ever made.


The Crab Nebula (catalogue designations M1, NGC 1952, Taurus A) is a supernova remnant and pulsar wind nebula in the constellation of Taurus. The common name comes from William Parsons, 3rd Earl of Rosse, who observed the object in 1842 using a 36-inch (91 cm) telescope and produced a drawing that looked somewhat like a crab. The nebula was discovered by English astronomer John Bevis in 1731, and it corresponds with a bright supernova recorded by Chinese astronomers in 1054. The nebula was the first astronomical object identified that corresponds with a historical supernova explosion.


At an apparent magnitude of 8.4, comparable to that of Saturn's moon Titan, it is not visible to the naked eye but can be made out using binoculars under favourable conditions. The nebula lies in the Perseus Arm of the Milky Way galaxy, at a distance of about 2.0 kiloparsecs (6,500 ly) from Earth. It has a diameter of 3.4 parsecs (11 ly), corresponding to an apparent diameter of some 7 arcminutes, and is expanding at a rate of about 1,500 kilometres per second (930 mi/s), or 0.5% of the speed of light.


At the center of the nebula lies the Crab Pulsar, a neutron star 28-30 kilometres (17-19 mi) across with a spin rate of 30.2 times per second, which emits pulses of radiation from gamma rays to radio waves. At X-ray and gamma ray energies above 30 keV, the Crab Nebula is generally the brightest persistent gamma-ray source in the sky, with measured flux extending to above 10 TeV. The nebula's radiation allows detailed study of celestial bodies that occult it. In the 1950s and 1960s, the Sun's corona was mapped from observations of the Crab Nebula's radio waves passing through it, and in 2003, the thickness of the atmosphere of Saturn's moon Titan was measured as it blocked out X-rays from the nebula.


Modern understanding that the Crab Nebula was created by a supernova traces back to 1921, when Carl Otto Lampland announced he had seen changes in the nebula's structure. This eventually led to the conclusion that the creation of the Crab Nebula corresponds to the bright SN 1054 supernova recorded by ancient astronomers in AD 1054.


First identification

The Crab Nebula was first identified in 1731 by John Bevis.The nebula was independently rediscovered in 1758 by Charles Messier as he was observing a bright comet.Messier catalogued it as the first entry in his catalogue of comet-like objects; in 1757, Alexis Clairaut reexamined the calculations of Edmund Halley and predicted the return of Halley's Comet in late 1758. The exact time of the comet's return required the consideration of perturbations to its orbit caused by planets in the Solar System such as Jupiter, which Clairaut and his two colleagues Jerome Lalande and Nicole-Reine Lepaute carried out more precisely than Halley, finding that the comet should appear in the constellation of Taurus. It was in searching in vain for the comet that Charles Messier found the Crab Nebula, which he at first thought to be Halley's comet. After some observation, noticing that the object that he was observing was not moving across the sky, Messier concluded that the object was not a comet. Messier then realised the usefulness of compiling a catalogue of celestial objects of a cloudy nature, but fixed in the sky, to avoid incorrectly cataloguing them as comets. This realization led him to compile the "Messier catalogue".


William Herschel observed the Crab Nebula numerous times between 1783 and 1809, but it is not known whether he was aware of its existence in 1783, or if he discovered it independently of Messier and Bevis. After several observations, he concluded that it was composed of a group of stars.William Parsons, 3rd Earl of Rosse observed the nebula at Birr Castle in 1844 using a 36-inch (0.9 m) telescope, and referred to the object as the "Crab Nebula" because a drawing he made of it looked like a crab. He observed it again later, in 1848, using a 72-inch (1.8 m) telescope but could not confirm the supposed resemblance, but the name stuck nevertheless.



Credit:
NASA, ESA and Allison Loll/Jeff Hester (Arizona State University).

Acknowledgement:
Davide De Martin (ESA/Hubble)