Setting boundaries: brain dynamics of modal and amodal illusory shape completion in humans.

Normal visual perception requires differentiating foreground from background objects. Differences in physical attributes sometimes determine this relationship. Often such differences must instead be inferred, as when two objects or their parts have the same luminance. Modal completion refers to such perceptual "filling-in" of object borders that are accompanied by concurrent brightness enhancement, in turn termed illusory contours (ICs). Amodal completion is filling-in without concurrent brightness enhancement. Presently there are controversies regarding whether both completion processes use a common neural mechanism and whether perceptual filling-in is a bottom-up, feedforward process initiating at the lowest levels of the cortical visual pathway or commences at higher-tier regions. We previously examined modal completion (Murray et al., 2002) and provided evidence that the earliest modal IC sensitivity occurs within higher-tier object recognition areas of the lateral occipital complex (LOC). We further proposed that previous observations of IC sensitivity in lower-tier regions likely reflect feedback modulation from the LOC. The present study tested these proposals, examining the commonality between modal and amodal completion mechanisms with high-density electrical mapping, spatiotemporal topographic analyses, and the local autoregressive average distributed linear inverse source estimation. A common initial mechanism for both types of completion processes (140 msec) that manifested as a modulation in response strength within higher-tier visual areas, including the LOC and parietal structures, is demonstrated, whereas differential mechanisms were evident only at a subsequent time period (240 msec), with amodal completion relying on continued strong responses in these structures.

Late removal of retrievable caval filters.

The advent of retrievable caval filters was a game changer in the sense, that the previously irreversible act of implanting a medical device into the main venous blood stream of the body requiring careful evaluation of the pros and cons prior to execution suddenly became a "reversible" procedure where potential hazards in the late future of the patient lost most of their weight at the time of decision making. This review was designed to assess the rate of success with late retrieval of so called retrievable caval filters in order to get some indication about reasonable implant duration with respect to relatively "easy" implant removal with conventional means, i.e., catheters, hooks and lassos. A PubMed search (www.pubmed.gov) was performed with the search term "cava filter retrieval after 30 days clinical", and 20 reports between 1994 and 2013 dealing with late retrieval of caval filters were identified, covering approximately 7,000 devices with 600 removed filters. The maximal duration of implant reported is 2,599 days and the maximal implant duration of removed filters is also 2,599 days. The maximal duration reported with standard retrieval techniques, i.e., catheter, hook and/or lasso, is 475 days, whereas for the retrievals after this period more sophisticated techniques including lasers, etc. were required. The maximal implant duration for series with 100% retrieval accounts for 84 days, which is equivalent to 12 weeks or almost 3 months. We conclude that retrievable caval filters often become permanent despite the initial decision of temporary use. However, such "forgotten" retrievable devices can still be removed with a great chance of success up to three months after implantation. Conventional percutaneous removal techniques may be sufficient up to sixteen months after implantation whereas more sophisticated catheter techniques have been shown to be successful up to 83 months or more than seven years of implant duration. Tilting, migrating, or misplaced devices should be removed early on, and replaced if indicated with a device which is both, efficient and retrievable.

Exploring the relative DNA contribution of first and second object's users on mock touch DNA mixtures

Contact stains recovered at break-in crime scenes are frequently characterized by mixtures of DNA from several persons. Broad knowledge on the relative contribution of DNA left behind by different users overtime is of paramount importance. Such information might help crime investigators to robustly evaluate the possibility of detecting a specific (or known) individual's DNA profile based on the type and history of an object. To address this issue, a contact stain simulation-based protocol was designed. Fourteen volunteers either acting as first or second object's users were recruited. The first user was required to regularly handle/wear 9 different items during an 8-10-day period, whilst the second user for 5, 30 and 120 min, in three independent simulation sessions producing a total of 231 stains. Subsequently, the relative DNA profile contribution of each individual pair was investigated. Preliminary results showed a progressive increase of the percentage contribution of the second user compared to the first. Interestingly, the second user generally became the major DNA contributor when most objects were handled/worn for 120 min, Furthermore, the observation of unexpected additional alleles will then prompt the investigation of indirect DNA transfer events.

Most and Least Preferred Colours Differ According to Object Context : New Insights from an Unrestricted Colour Range

Humans like some colours and dislike others, but which particular colours and why remains to be understood. Empirical studies on colour preferences generally targeted most preferred colours, but rarely least preferred (disliked) colours. In addition, findings are often based on general colour preferences leaving open the question whether results generalise to specific objects. Here, 88 participants selected the colours they preferred most and least for three context conditions (general, interior walls, t-shirt) using a high-precision colour picker. Participants also indicated whether they associated their colour choice to a valenced object or concept. The chosen colours varied widely between individuals and contexts and so did the reasons for their choices. Consistent patterns also emerged, as most preferred colours in general were more chromatic, while for walls they were lighter and for t-shirts they were darker and less chromatic compared to least preferred colours. This meant that general colour preferences could not explain object specific colour preferences. Measures of the selection process further revealed that, compared to most preferred colours, least preferred colours were chosen more quickly and were less often linked to valenced objects or concepts. The high intra- and inter-individual variability in this and previous reports furthers our understanding that colour preferences are determined by subjective experiences and that most and least preferred colours are not processed equally.