ABSTRACT
The majority of the transcribed genome does not have coding potential but these non-coding transcripts play crucial roles in transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulation of protein-coding genes. Regulation of gene expression is important in shaping an organism's response to environmental changes, ultimately impacting their survival and persistence as population or species face global change. However, the roles of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), when confronted with environmental changes, remain largely unclear. To explore the potential role of lncRNAs in fish exposed to ocean acidification (OA), we analyzed publicly available brain RNA-seq data from a coral reef fish Acanthochromis polyacanthus. We annotated the lncRNAs in its genome and examined the expression changes of intergenic lncRNAs (lincRNAs) between A. polyacanthus samples from a natural CO2 seep and a nearby control site. We identified 4728 lncRNAs, including 3272 lincRNAs in this species. Remarkably, 93.03% of these lincRNAs were species-specific. Among the 125 highly expressed lincRNAs and 403 differentially expressed lincRNAs in response to elevated CO2, we observed that lincRNAs were either neighboring or potentially trans-regulating differentially expressed coding genes associated with pH regulation, neural signal transduction, and ion transport, which are known to be important in the response to OA in fish. In summary, lncRNAs may facilitate fish acclimation and mediate the responses of fish to OA by modulating the expression of crucial coding genes, which offers insight into the regulatory mechanisms underlying fish responses to environmental changes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Sending faecal occult blood tests (FOBT) by mail has been proposed both as a method to increase participation and a way to reduce staff costs in colorectal cancer screening. METHODS: Two multicentre randomized controlled trials (ISRCTN10351276) were performed: one randomly assigned 3196 individuals who had previously participated in colorectal screening to receive a FOBT kit at home or a standard invitation; in the second, 4219 people aged 50-69 years who did not respond to a screening invitation were either sent a FOBT or a standard recall letter. The cost per returned kit was calculated in each arm. RESULTS: Participation was higher with direct FOBT mailing in both trials: relative risk 1.11 (95% CI 1.06-1.17) and 1.36 (95% CI 1.16-1.60) for previous responders and non-responders, respectively. The cost per returned kit for previous responders ranged from 4.24 to 16.10, and from 3.29 to 7.36 with FOBT mailing and standard invitation, respectively, not including staff costs; for non-responders it ranged from 17.13 to 46.80, and from 7.36 to 18.30 with FOBT mailing and standard recall, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The FOBT mailing strategy modestly increased participation. This method can be used on a population of previous responders to reduce personnel costs and workload. When used as a reminder to non-responders, this method increases costs.
