Variable extent of dehydration of clinopyroxene megacrysts from Gezi volcano of Inner Mongolia

SummaryMacIntyre et al. showed that over 1 mM dithiothreitol (DTT) aggregates blood platelets in the presence of fibrinogen; aggregation is not inhibited by prostaglandin E1. We confirmed their data and found that 70 mM 2-mercaptoethanol was also active. DTT- induced aggregation was not associated with platelet shape change or secretion of dense granule contents, was not inhibited by tetracaine or metabolic inhibitors, was prevented at pH 6.5, and prevented, reversed, or arrested by EDTA, depending on when the EDTA was added. DTT did not cause aggregation of thrombasthenic, EDTA-treated, or cold (0° C) platelets, which also failed to aggregate with ADP. Platelets stimulated with DTT bound 125I-labeled fibrinogen. Thus DTT appears to “expose” the fibrinogen receptors. SDS gel electrophoresis of platelet fractions prepared by use of Triton X-114 showed that aggregating concentrations of DTT reduced proteins of apparent Mr 69,000 and 52,000 (probably platelet albumin) and, to a variable extent, glycoproteins Ib, IIb and III. Exposure of unlabeled or 125I- labeled platelets to ADP had no discernible effect on the electrophoretic patterns.

Download Full-text

Diagnosing and Debunking Korean Pseudohistory

European Journal of Korean Studies ◽

10.33526/ejks.20191802.37 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 37-80

Author(s):

Andrew Logie

Keyword(s):

South Korea ◽

East Asia ◽

20Th Century ◽

Inner Mongolia ◽

Political Influence ◽

The Core ◽

Early State

In current day South Korea pseudohistory pertaining to early Korea and northern East Asia has reached epidemic proportions. Its advocates argue the early state of Chosŏn to have been an expansive empire centered on mainland geographical Manchuria. Through rationalizing interpretations of the traditional Hwan’ung- Tan’gun myth, they project back the supposed antiquity and pristine nature of this charter empire to the archaeological Hongshan Culture of the Neolithic straddling Inner Mongolia and Liaoning provinces of China. Despite these blatant spatial and temporal exaggerations, all but specialists of early Korea typically remain hesitant to explicitly label this conceptualization as “pseudohistory.” This is because advocates of ancient empire cast themselves as rationalist scholars and claim to have evidential arguments drawn from multiple textual sources and archaeology. They further wield an emotive polemic defaming the domestic academic establishment as being composed of national traitors bent only on maintaining a “colonial view of history.” The canon of counterevidence relied on by empire advocates is the accumulated product of 20th century revisionist and pseudo historiography, but to willing believers and non-experts, it can easily appear convincing and overwhelming. Combined with a postcolonial nationalist framing and situated against the ongoing historiography dispute with China, their conceptualization of a grand antiquity has gained bipartisan political influence with concrete ramifications for professional scholarship. This paper seeks to introduce and debunk the core, seemingly evidential, canon of arguments put forward by purveyors of Korean pseudohistory and to expose their polemics, situating the phenomenon in a broader diagnostic context of global pseudohistory and archaeology.

Download Full-text