Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.
--------
Question: Context: Bacteria often form multicellular, organized communities known as biofilms, which protect cells from a variety of environmental stresses. During biofilm formation, bacteria secrete a species-specific matrix; in Bacillus subtilis biofilms, the matrix consists of protein polymers and exopolysaccharide. Many domesticated strains of B. subtilis have a reduced ability to form biofilms, and we conducted a two-month evolution experiment to test whether laboratory culturing provides selective pressure against biofilm formation in B. subtilis.', 'Bacteria grown in two-month-long batch culture rapidly diversified their biofilm-forming characteristics, exhibiting highly diverse colony morphologies on LB plates in the initial ten days of culture. Generally, this diversity decreased over time; however, multiple types of colony morphology remained in our final two-month-old populations, both under shaking and static conditions. Notably, while our final populations featured cells that produce less biofilm matrix than did the ancestor, cells overproducing biofilm matrix were present as well. We took a candidate-gene approach to identify mutations in the strains that overproduced matrix and found point mutations in the biofilm-regulatory gene sinR. Introducing these mutations into the ancestral strain phenocopied or partially phenocopied the evolved biofilm phenotypes.
Answer: Our data suggest that standard laboratory culturing conditions do not rapidly select against biofilm formation. Although biofilm matrix production is often reduced in domesticated bacterial strains, we found that matrix production may still have a fitness benefit in the laboratory. We suggest that adaptive specialization of biofilm-forming species can occur through mutations that modulate biofilm formation as in B. subtilis.

Answer: Is sinR a mutational target for fine-tuning biofilm formation in laboratory-evolved strains of Bacillus subtilis?


Question: Context: Impaired endothelial function, as assessed by brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD), is an established risk factor for cardiovascular events. FMD is impaired in heart failure (HF) patients, but less is known about hyperemic brachial artery flow. We investigated the relationship between FMD and hyperemic flow with adverse clinical outcomes in HF patients.', 'Brachial artery FMD and hyperemic flow were assessed in 156 patients (70.5 % Male; 45.5% Caucasian; mean age (± SD) = 56.2 (±12.4) years) with HF and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the potential explanatory association of FMD and hyperemic flow with the composite outcome of death or cardiovascular hospitalization over a median 5-year follow-up period.', 'Both FMD and hyperemic flow were negatively correlated with age, but unrelated to sex, race, body mass index, LVEF or N-terminal pro-B-Type natriuretic peptide (NT-ProBNP). Reduced hyperemic flow, but not FMD, was associated with an increased risk of death or cardiac hospitalization after controlling for traditional risk factors.
Answer: The association of reduced hyperemic flow with increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes suggests that micro-vascular function may be an important prognostic marker in patients with HF.

Answer: Is reactive hyperemia associated with adverse clinical outcomes in heart failure?


Question: Context: Serum elevations of interleukin-6 (IL-6) correlate with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and mortality in critically injured trauma patients. Data from rodent models of controlled hemorrhage suggest that recombinant IL-6 (rIL-6) infusion protects tissue at risk for ischemia-reperfusion injury. Exogenous rIL-6 administered during shock appears to abrogate inflammation, providing a protective rather than a deleterious influence. In an examination of this paradox, the current study aimed to determine whether rIL-6 decreases inflammation in a clinically relevant large animal model of uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock, (UHS), and to investigate the mechanism of protection.', 'Swine were randomized to four groups (8 animals in each): (1) sacrifice, (2) sham (splenectomy followed by hemodilution and cooling to 33 degrees C), (3) rIL-6 infusion (sham plus UHS using grade 5 liver injury with packing and resuscitation plus blinded infusion of rIL-6 [10 mcg/kg]), and (4) placebo (UHS plus blinded vehicle). After 4 hours, blood was sampled, estimated blood loss determined, animals sacrificed, and lung harvested for RNA isolation. Quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction was used to assess granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), IL-6, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFalpha) messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) levels. Serum levels of IL-6 and TNFalpha were measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA).', 'As compared with placebo, IL-6 infusion in UHS did not increase estimated blood loss or white blood cell counts, nor decrease hematocrit or platelet levels. As compared with the sham condition, lung G-CSF mRNA production in UHS plus placebo increased eightfold (*p < 0.05). In contrast, rIL-6 infusion plus UHS blunted G-CSF mRNA levels, which were not significantly higher than sham levels (p = 0.1). Infusion of rIL-6 did not significantly affect endogenous production of either lung IL-6 or mRNA. As determined by ELISA, rIL-6 infusion did not increase final serum levels of IL-6 or TNFalpha over those of sham and placebo conditions.
Answer: Exogenous rIL-6 blunts lung mRNA levels of the proinflammatory cytokine G-CSF. The administration of rIL-6 does not increase the local expression of IL-6 nor TNFalpha mRNA in the lung. Additionally, rIL-6 infusion does not appear to cause systemic toxicity.

Answer:
Does interleukin-6 infusion blunt proinflammatory cytokine production without causing systematic toxicity in a swine model of uncontrolled hemorrhagic shock?