The Evolution of Chimpanzee Sanctuaries in the United States

Chimpanzees are native only to the jungles of equatorial Africa, but for the last hundred years, they have also lived in captivity in the United States, most commonly in biomedical research laboratories, but also at Air Force bases for experiments for the space program, at accredited and unaccredited zoos, at circuses, as performers in Hollywood and even in private homes and backyards as pets. But that has been gradually evolving over the last few decades, as more and more chimpanzees move to newly-established chimpanzee sanctuaries. That transition was already underway even before the announcement by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) last year that it will retire all of its remaining chimpanzees from labs to sanctuaries. By thoroughly examining the evolution of these sanctuaries leading up to that seminal decision, along with the many challenges they face, including money, medical care, conflicting philosophies on the treatment of animals and the pitfalls that have led other sanctuaries to the brink of ruin, we can take away a better understanding of why chimpanzee sanctuaries are needed and why caretakers of other animal species are now looking to the chimpanzee sanctuary movement as a model to show how animals can be cared for in retirement.

Different stimuli, different spatial codes: a visual map and an auditory rate code for oculomotor space in the primate superior colliculus.

Maps are a mainstay of visual, somatosensory, and motor coding in many species. However, auditory maps of space have not been reported in the primate brain. Instead, recent studies have suggested that sound location may be encoded via broadly responsive neurons whose firing rates vary roughly proportionately with sound azimuth. Within frontal space, maps and such rate codes involve different response patterns at the level of individual neurons. Maps consist of neurons exhibiting circumscribed receptive fields, whereas rate codes involve open-ended response patterns that peak in the periphery. This coding format discrepancy therefore poses a potential problem for brain regions responsible for representing both visual and auditory information. Here, we investigated the coding of auditory space in the primate superior colliculus(SC), a structure known to contain visual and oculomotor maps for guiding saccades. We report that, for visual stimuli, neurons showed circumscribed receptive fields consistent with a map, but for auditory stimuli, they had open-ended response patterns consistent with a rate or level-of-activity code for location. The discrepant response patterns were not segregated into different neural populations but occurred in the same neurons. We show that a read-out algorithm in which the site and level of SC activity both contribute to the computation of stimulus location is successful at evaluating the discrepant visual and auditory codes, and can account for subtle but systematic differences in the accuracy of auditory compared to visual saccades. This suggests that a given population of neurons can use different codes to support appropriate multimodal behavior.

Sticky central limit theorems on open books

Given a probability distribution on an open book (a metric space obtained by gluing a disjoint union of copies of a half-space along their boundary hyperplanes), we define a precise concept of when the Fréchet mean (barycenter) is sticky. This nonclassical phenomenon is quantified by a law of large numbers (LLN) stating that the empirical mean eventually almost surely lies on the (codimension 1 and hence measure 0) spine that is the glued hyperplane, and a central limit theorem (CLT) stating that the limiting distribution is Gaussian and supported on the spine.We also state versions of the LLN and CLT for the cases where the mean is nonsticky (i.e., not lying on the spine) and partly sticky (i.e., is, on the spine but not sticky). © Institute of Mathematical Statistics, 2013.

The 2015 Bioinformatics Open Source Conference (BOSC 2015).

The Bioinformatics Open Source Conference (BOSC) is organized by the Open Bioinformatics Foundation (OBF), a nonprofit group dedicated to promoting the practice and philosophy of open source software development and open science within the biological research community. Since its inception in 2000, BOSC has provided bioinformatics developers with a forum for communicating the results of their latest efforts to the wider research community. BOSC offers a focused environment for developers and users to interact and share ideas about standards; software development practices; practical techniques for solving bioinformatics problems; and approaches that promote open science and sharing of data, results, and software. BOSC is run as a two-day special interest group (SIG) before the annual Intelligent Systems in Molecular Biology (ISMB) conference. BOSC 2015 took place in Dublin, Ireland, and was attended by over 125 people, about half of whom were first-time attendees. Session topics included "Data Science;" "Standards and Interoperability;" "Open Science and Reproducibility;" "Translational Bioinformatics;" "Visualization;" and "Bioinformatics Open Source Project Updates". In addition to two keynote talks and dozens of shorter talks chosen from submitted abstracts, BOSC 2015 included a panel, titled "Open Source, Open Door: Increasing Diversity in the Bioinformatics Open Source Community," that provided an opportunity for open discussion about ways to increase the diversity of participants in BOSC in particular, and in open source bioinformatics in general. The complete program of BOSC 2015 is available online at http://www.open-bio.org/wiki/BOSC_2015_Schedule.

Bayesian Model Averaging in the M-Open Framework

This chapter presents a model averaging approach in the M-open setting using sample re-use methods to approximate the predictive distribution of future observations. It first reviews the standard M-closed Bayesian Model Averaging approach and decision-theoretic methods for producing inferences and decisions. It then reviews model selection from the M-complete and M-open perspectives, before formulating a Bayesian solution to model averaging in the M-open perspective. It constructs optimal weights for MOMA:M-open Model Averaging using a decision-theoretic framework, where models are treated as part of the ‘action space’ rather than unknown states of nature. Using ‘incompatible’ retrospective and prospective models for data from a case-control study, the chapter demonstrates that MOMA gives better predictive accuracy than the proxy models. It concludes with open questions and future directions.

Utility of a molecular prescreening program in advanced colorectal cancer for enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Incorporation of multiple enrichment biomarkers into prospective clinical trials is an active area of investigation, but the factors that determine clinical trial enrollment following a molecular prescreening program have not been assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with 5-fluorouracil-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer at the MD Anderson Cancer Center were offered screening in the Assessment of Targeted Therapies Against Colorectal Cancer (ATTACC) program to identify eligibility for companion phase I or II clinical trials with a therapy targeted to an aberration detected in the patient, based on testing by immunohistochemistry, targeted gene sequencing panels, and CpG island methylation phenotype assays. RESULTS: Between August 2010 and December 2013, 484 patients were enrolled, 458 (95%) had a biomarker result, and 157 (32%) were enrolled on a clinical trial (92 on biomarker-selected and 65 on nonbiomarker selected). Of the 458 patients with a biomarker result, enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials was ninefold higher for predefined ATTACC-companion clinical trials as opposed to nonpredefined biomarker-selected clinical trials, 17.9% versus 2%, P < 0.001. Factors that correlated positively with trial enrollment in multivariate analysis were higher performance status, older age, lack of standard of care therapy, established patient at MD Anderson, and the presence of an eligible biomarker for an ATTACC-companion study. Early molecular screening did result in a higher rate of patients with remaining standard of care therapy enrolling on ATTACC-companion clinical trials, 45.1%, in contrast to nonpredefined clinical trials, 22.7%; odds ratio 3.1, P = 0.002. CONCLUSIONS: Though early molecular prescreening for predefined clinical trials resulted in an increase rate of trial enrollment of nonrefractory patients, the majority of patients enrolled on clinical trials were refractory to standard of care therapy. Within molecular prescreening programs, tailoring screening for preidentified and open clinical trials, temporally linking screening to treatment and optimizing both patient and physician engagement are efforts likely to improve enrollment on biomarker-selected clinical trials. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: The study NCT number is NCT01196130.