In this task, you are given a passage which has a question and the context. You have to generate an answer to the question based on the information present in the context.

[EX Q]: Context: Microalbuminuria and impaired endothelium-dependent vasodilation are both predictors for cardiac events in patients with type 2 diabetes. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether microalbuminuria correlated with coronary endothelium-dependent vasodilation.', 'We evaluated 84 patients (47 men, mean age 50.5 +/- 5.9 years) with type 2 diabetes for 9.4 +/- 3.4 years, without angiographic coronary stenosis and without major cardiovascular risk factors or other confounding factors, for endothelium investigation. Quantitative coronary angiography was used to assess coronary artery response to cold pressor testing, used to assess endothelium-dependent vasodilation, and to isosorbide dinitrate (endothelium-independent vasodilation).', 'Endothelium-dependent vasodilation differed in the patients with and without microalbuminuria (changes in coronary artery diameter during cold pressor testing: -15.0 +/- 1.9% vs. -10.2 +/- 1.3%, respectively, P < 0.05) and correlated with urinary albumin excretion rate (r = -0.39, P = 0.003), diastolic blood pressure (r = 0.29, P < 0.01), and left ventricular mass index (r = -0.24, P < 0.05). Independent predictors for endothelium-dependent vasodilation were urinary albumin excretion rate (beta -0.04 [95% CI -0.07 to -0.01], P < 0.005) and left ventricular mass index (-0.26 [-0.49 to -0.05], P < 0.05). Endothelium-independent vasodilation was similar in both groups.\Question: Is impaired coronary endothelium-dependent vasodilation associated with microalbuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes and angiographically normal coronary arteries?
[EX A]: Type 2 diabetic patients with microalbuminuria have a more severely impaired coronary endothelium-dependent vasodilation than those with normoalbuminuria. These data suggest a common pathophysiological process for both coronary vasomotor abnormalities and microalbuminuria.

[EX Q]: Context: Poultry remains a major source of foodborne bacterial infections. A variety of additives with presumed anti-microbial and/or growth-promoting effects are commonly added to poultry feed during commercial grow-out, yet the effects of these additives on the gastrointestinal microbial community (the GI microbiome) as the bird matures remain largely unknown. Here we compared temporal changes in the cecal microbiome to the effects of formic acid, propionic acid, and medium-chain fatty acids (MCFA) added to feed and/or drinking water.', 'Cecal bacterial communities at day of hatch (n=5 birds), 7d (n=32), 21d (n=27), and 42d (n=36) post-hatch were surveyed using direct 454 sequencing of 16S rRNA gene amplicons from each bird in combination with cultivation-based recovery of a Salmonella Typhimurium marker strain and quantitative-PCR targeting Clostridium perfringens. Treatment effects on specific pathogens were generally non-significant. S. Typhimurium introduced by oral gavage at day of hatch was recovered by cultivation from nearly all birds sampled across treatments at 7d and 21d, but by 42d, S. Typhimurium was only recovered from ca. 25% of birds, regardless of treatment. Sequencing data also revealed non-significant treatment effects on genera containing known pathogens and on the cecal microbiome as a whole. In contrast, temporal changes in the cecal microbiome were dramatic, highly significant, and consistent across treatments. At 7d, the cecal community was dominated by three genera (Flavonifractor, Pseudoflavonifractor, and a Lachnospiracea sequence type) that accounted for more than half of sequences. By 21d post-hatch, a single genus (Faecalibacterium) accounted for 23-55% of sequences, and the number of Clostridium 16S rRNA gene copies detected by quantitative-PCR reached a maximum.\Question: Are successional changes in the chicken cecal microbiome during 42 days of growth independent of organic acid feed additives?
[EX A]: Over the 42 d experiment, the cecal bacterial community changed significantly as measured by a variety of ecological metrics and increases in the complexity of co-occurrence networks. Management of poultry to improve animal health, nutrition, or food safety may need to consider the interactive effects of any treatments with the dramatic temporal shifts in the taxonomic composition of the cecal microbiome as described here.

[EX Q]: Context: Stem cells within the intestinal epithelium generate daughter cells that undergo lineage commitment and maturation through the combined action of the Wnt and Notch signaling cascades. Both pathways, in turn, regulate transcription factor networks that further define differentiation toward either enterocytes or 1 of 3 secretory cell lineages (Paneth, goblet, or enteroendocrine cells). In this study, we investigated the role of the Wnt-responsive, Ets-domain transcription factor Spdef in the differentiation of goblet and Paneth cells.', 'The in vivo function of Spdef was examined by disrupting the Spdef gene in mice (Spdef(-/-) mice) and analyzing the intestinal phenotype using a range of histologic techniques and DNA microarray profiling.', 'In accordance with expression data, we found that loss of Spdef severely impaired the maturation of goblet and Paneth cells and, conversely, led to an accumulation of immature secretory progenitors. Spdef appears to positively and negatively regulate a specific subset of goblet and Paneth cell genes, including Cryptdins, Mmp7, Ang4, Kallikreins, and Muc2.\Question: Does the ets-domain transcription factor Spdef promote maturation of goblet and paneth cells in the intestinal epithelium?
[EX A]:
Spdef acts downstream of Math1 to promote terminal differentiation of a secretory progenitor pool into Paneth and goblet cells.