3 resultados para Judge
em eResearch Archive - Queensland Department of Agriculture
Resumo:
Background: Plotless density estimators are those that are based on distance measures rather than counts per unit area (quadrats or plots) to estimate the density of some usually stationary event, e.g. burrow openings, damage to plant stems, etc. These estimators typically use distance measures between events and from random points to events to derive an estimate of density. The error and bias of these estimators for the various spatial patterns found in nature have been examined using simulated populations only. In this study we investigated eight plotless density estimators to determine which were robust across a wide range of data sets from fully mapped field sites. They covered a wide range of situations including animal damage to rice and corn, nest locations, active rodent burrows and distribution of plants. Monte Carlo simulations were applied to sample the data sets, and in all cases the error of the estimate (measured as relative root mean square error) was reduced with increasing sample size. The method of calculation and ease of use in the field were also used to judge the usefulness of the estimator. Estimators were evaluated in their original published forms, although the variable area transect (VAT) and ordered distance methods have been the subjects of optimization studies. Results: An estimator that was a compound of three basic distance estimators was found to be robust across all spatial patterns for sample sizes of 25 or greater. The same field methodology can be used either with the basic distance formula or the formula used with the Kendall-Moran estimator in which case a reduction in error may be gained for sample sizes less than 25, however, there is no improvement for larger sample sizes. The variable area transect (VAT) method performed moderately well, is easy to use in the field, and its calculations easy to undertake. Conclusion: Plotless density estimators can provide an estimate of density in situations where it would not be practical to layout a plot or quadrat and can in many cases reduce the workload in the field.
Resumo:
The prioritisation of potential agents on the basis of likely efficacy is an important step in biological control because it can increase the probability of a successful biocontrol program, and reduce risks and costs. In this introductory paper we define success in biological control, review how agent selection has been approached historically, and outline the approach to agent selection that underpins the structure of this special issue on agent selection. Developing criteria by which to judge the success of a biocontrol agent (or program) provides the basis for agent selection decisions. Criteria will depend on the weed, on the ecological and management context in which that weed occurs, and on the negative impacts that biocontrol is seeking to redress. Predicting which potential agents are most likely to be successful poses enormous scientific challenges. 'Rules of thumb', 'scoring systems' and various conceptual and quantitative modelling approaches have been proposed to aid agent selection. However, most attempts have met with limited success due to the diversity and complexity of the systems in question. This special issue presents a series of papers that deconstruct the question of agent choice with the aim of progressively improving the success rate of biological control. Specifically they ask: (i) what potential agents are available and what should we know about them? (ii) what type, timing and degree of damage is required to achieve success? and (iii) which potential agent will reach the necessary density, at the right time, to exert the required damage in the target environment?
Resumo:
The parasitic protists in the genus Tritrichomonas cause significant disease in domestic cattle and cats. To assess the genetic diversity of feline and bovine isolates of Tritrichomonas foetus (Riedmuller, 1928) Wenrich and Emmerson, 1933, we used 10 different genetic regions, namely the protein coding genes of cysteine proteases 1,2 and 4-9 (CP1, 2, 4-9) involved in the pathogenesis of the disease caused by the parasite. The cytosolic malate dehydrogenase 1 (MDH1) and internal transcribed spacer region 2 of the rDNA unit (ITS2) were included as additional markers. The gene sequences were compared with those of Tritrichomonas suis (Davaine. 1875) Morgan and Hawkins, 1948 and Tritrichomonas mobilensis Culberson et al., 1986. The study revealed 100% identity for all 10 genes among all feline isolates (=T. foetus cat genotype), 100% identity among all bovine isolates (=T. foetus cattle genotype) and a genetic distinctness of 1% between the cat and cattle genotypes of T. foetus. The cattle genotype of T. foetus was 100% identical to T. suis at nine loci (CP1, 2,4-8, ITS2, MDH1). At CP9, three out of four T. suis isolates were identical to the T. foetus cattle genotype, while the T. suis isolate SUI-H3B sequence contained a single unique nucleotide substitution. Tritrichomonas mobilensis was 0.4% and 0.7% distinct from the cat and cattle genotypes of T. foetus, respectively. The genetic differences resulted in amino acid changes in the CP genes, most pronouncedly in CP2, potentially providing a platform for elucidation of genotype-specific host-pathogen interactions of T. foetus. On the basis of this data we judge T. suis and T. foetus to be subjective synonyms. For the first time, on objective nomenclatural grounds, the authority of T. suis is given to Davaine, 1875, rather than the commonly cited Gruby and Delafond, 1843. To maintain prevailing usage of T. foetus, we are suppressing the senior synomym T. suis Davaine, 1875 according to Article 23.9, because it has never been used as a valid name after 1899 and T. foetus is widely discussed as the cause of bovine trichomonosis. Thus bovine, feline and porcine isolates should all be given the name T. foetus. This promotes the stability of T. foetus for the veterinary and economically significant venereal parasite causing bovine trichomonosis. (C) 2012 Australian Society for Parasitology Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.