Cube, cylinder, core and pull-off strength relationships

This limited experimental investigation examined the relationships between the compressive strengths of cubes, cylinders, cores and the estimated compressive strengths derived from pull-off tests for a relatively low-strength structural-grade concrete (<35 N/mm2). Test specimens were cast and tested at 7, 14, 28, 56 and 84 days. The relationships of the trends of the test results to the trends of results of standard cube specimens and standard cylinder specimens were compared. It was found that the mean strength of each type of specimen tended to increase as a function of the natural logarithm of the specimen age. The mean strength of cylinders of length/diameter ratio 2.0 was found to be slightly greater (by about 7.5%) than the generally accepted value of 80% of the mean cube strength. Core results were corrected using correction factors defined in BS 6089 and the UK national annex to BS EN 12504-1. The mean corrected cube strength of cores taken from cubes was approximately 12% greater than the mean companion cube strength. The mean corrected cylinder strength of cores taken from cubes was approximately 5% greater than the mean companion cylinder strength. The potential cube and cylinder strengths of cores taken from slabs cured under different environmental conditions correlated well with companion cube and cylinder strengths respectively at 28 days. The pull-off test results gave a variable but, on average, slightly conservative estimate of the cube compressive strength of the relatively low-strength structural-grade concrete, using a simple general linear estimated compressive cube strength to tensile strength correlation factor of 10.

Rice-arsenate interactions in hydroponics:whole genome transcriptional analysis

Rice (Oryza sativa) varieties that are arsenate-tolerant (Bala) and -sensitive (Azucena) were used to conduct a transcriptome analysis of the response of rice seedlings to sodium arsenate (AsV) in hydroponic solution. RNA extracted from the roots of three replicate experiments of plants grown for 1 week in phosphate-free nutrient with or without 13.3 muM AsV was used to challenge the Affymetrix (52K) GeneChip Rice Genome array. A total of 576 probe sets were significantly up-regulated at least 2-fold in both varieties, whereas 622 were down-regulated. Ontological classification is presented. As expected, a large number of transcription factors, stress proteins, and transporters demonstrated differential expression. Striking is the lack of response of classic oxidative stress-responsive genes or phytochelatin synthases/synthatases. However, the large number of responses from genes involved in glutathione synthesis, metabolism, and transport suggests that glutathione conjugation and arsenate methylation may be important biochemical responses to arsenate challenge. In this report, no attempt is made to dissect differences in the response of the tolerant and sensitive variety, but analysis in a companion article will link gene expression to the known tolerance loci available in the BalaxAzucena mapping population.

Welfare risk assessment:The benefits and common pitfalls

Risk is defined as a situation involving exposure to danger. Risk assessment by nature characterises the probability of a negative event occurring and quantifies the consequences of such an event. Risk assessment is increasingly being used in the field of animal welfare as a means of drawing comparisons between multiple welfare problems within and between species and identifying those that should be prioritised by policy-makers, either because they affect a large proportion of the population or because they have particularly severe consequences for those affected. The assessment of risk is typically based on three fundamental factors: intensity of consequences, duration affected by consequences and prevalence. However, it has been recognised that these factors alone do not give a complete picture of a hazard and its associated consequences. Rather, to get a complete picture, it is important to also consider information about the hazard itself: probability of exposure to the hazard and duration of exposure to the hazard. The method has been applied to a variety of farmed species (eg poultry, dairy cows, farmed fish), investigating housing, husbandry and slaughter procedures, as well as companion animals, where it has been used to compare inherited defects in pedigree dogs and horses. To what extent can we trust current risk assessment methods to get the priorities straight? How should we interpret the results produced by such assessments? Here, the potential difficulties and pitfalls of the welfare risk assessment method will be discussed: (i) the assumption that welfare hazards are independent; (ii) the problem of quantifying the model parameters; and (iii) assessing and incorporating variability and uncertainty into welfare risk assessments. © 2012 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare.