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.

Ex Input:
Context: Histologic evidence of the comparative neurotoxicity of lidocaine, mepivacaine, and prilocaine is incomplete. We compared the intrathecal neurotoxicity in rats among these 3 drugs based on morphologic and neurofunctional findings.', 'Rats (n=169) randomly received 0.12 microL/g of 0%, 2%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, or 20% lidocaine, mepivacaine, or prilocaine or 25% glucose dissolved in distilled water via a chronically implanted intrathecal catheter. The effect of the agents on neurofunction was evaluated by movement of the hind limb (behavior test) and by sensory threshold (paw-stimulation test). The L1 spinal cord, the posterior and anterior roots, and the cauda equina were removed en bloc 5 days later and examined by light and electron microscopy.', 'A significant decrease in sensory threshold or irreversible hind-limb limitation was observed only in rats receiving 20% lidocaine. Morphologic abnormalities characterized by axonal degeneration were observed in rats receiving > or =7.5% lidocaine, 20% mepivacaine, and 20% prilocaine, at the posterior white matter and the proximal portion of the posterior root just at the entrance into the spinal cord. The incidence of lesions was significantly higher in rats receiving lidocaine than mepivacaine and prilocaine.
Answer: It is suggested that intrathecal mepivacaine and prilocaine are less neurotoxic than highly concentrated lidocaine in a rat intrathecal model.

Ex Output:
Are intrathecal mepivacaine and prilocaine less neurotoxic than lidocaine in a rat intrathecal model?


Ex Input:
Context: The orphan G protein-coupled receptor (GPR) 39 was originally identified as the receptor of obestatin. In this study, the effects and mechanisms of GPR39 on cell proliferation and differentiation were investigated in cultured porcine intramuscular preadipocytes.', 'Morphology of preadipocytes and accumulated lipid droplets within cells were identified by an inverted microscope. After transfected with constructed pCMV-GPR39 plasmid, cell proliferation was measured by using methyl thiazolyl tetrazolium method, mRNA expression of GPR39, CCAAT/enhancer binding protein-α (C/EBPα), peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ (PPARγ), Caspase-9 and adipocyte determination and differentiation factor-1 (ADD1) was determined by RNA preparation and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, protein expression of phosphoinositide-3 kinase (PI3K), 3-phosphoinositide-dependent protein kinase 1, phosphorylated glycogen synthase kinase 3 (pGSK3), total Akt and phosphorylated Akt (pAkt) was analyzed by Western blot.', 'It found that GPR39 mRNA and protein were expressed in porcine intramuscular preadipocytes and its expression was significantly up-regulated after treatment with Zn(2+) whose function is found to be mediated by GPR39. Furthermore, over-expression of GPR39 further promoted the optical density value of cells, enhanced mRNA expression of PPARγ, C/EBPα and ADD1, and inhibited mRNA expression of Caspase-9. Protein expression of pGSK3 and pAkt was also increased by GPR39 stimulation. In addition, GPR39-induced proliferation and differentiation of porcine intramuscular preadipocytes was partially blocked by the Akt inhibitor (PDTC) and the PI3K inhibitor (LY294002).
Answer: It indicated that GPR39 was a transducer of Zn(2+), and enhanced proliferation and differentiation of porcine intramuscular preadipocytes through activation of the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway.

Ex Output:
Does gPR39 activate proliferation and differentiation of porcine intramuscular preadipocytes through targeting the PI3K/AKT cell signaling pathway?


Ex Input:
Context: Recently, a novel clade Botrytis cinerea group S was found to be common in B. cinerea populations from Germany and New Zealand. Fenhexamid, an effective antibotrytis fungicide, has not been registered in China, but our preliminary study detected fenhexamid-resistant (HydR) isolates from strawberry in Zhejiang Province.', 'Genetic identification of 639 B. cinerea isolates from strawberry found that 331 (62.9%) belonged to B. cinerea group S. The frequency of HydR isolates ranged from 0 to 37.5% among the nine locations. Of the 74 HydR isolates, 71 were B. cinerea group S and moderately resistant to fenhexamid (HydR). Seven new mutations S9G, P57A, P269L, V365A, E368D, E375K and A378T in the target gene erg27 were reported for the first time. Sixty-two (83.8%) HydR isolates simultaneously carried P57A and A378T mutations, and further transformation assays showed that integration of one copy of erg27(P57A) (,) (A378T) into a wild-type strain led to partial resistance. Detached fruit studies showed that fenhexamid at the recommended field rate could control the disease incited by moderately resistant isolates but not by highly resistant isolates.
Answer: B. cinerea group S isolates are widespread in all strawberry-growing locations in Zhejiang Province. The natural HydR populations from strawberry are dominated by B. cinerea group S. © 2015 Society of Chemical Industry.

Ex Output:

Are the natural fenhexamid-resistant grey mould populations from strawberry in Zhejiang Province dominated by Botrytis cinerea group S?