Statnote 34 : the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test

The Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) test is a non-parametric test which can be used in two different circumstances. First, it can be used as an alternative to chi-square (?2) as a ‘goodness-of-fit’ test to compare whether a given ‘observed’ sample of observations conforms to an ‘expected’ distribution of results (KS, one-sample test). An example of the use of the one-sample test to determine whether a sample of observations was normally distributed was described previously. Second, it can be used as an alternative to the Mann-Whitney test to compare two independent samples of observations (KS, two-sample test). Hence, this statnote describes the use of the KS test with reference to two scenarios: (1) to compare the observed frequency (Fo) of soil samples containing cysts of the protozoan Naegleria collected each month for a year with an expected equal frequency (Fe) across months (one-sample test), and (2) to compare the abundance of bacteria on cloths and sponges sampled in a domestic kitchen environment (two-sample test).

Local delivery of the KCa3.1 blocker, TRAM-34, prevents acute angioplasty-induced coronary smooth muscle phenotypic modulation and limits stenosis

Objective-We previously demonstrated that upregulation of intermediate-conductance Ca2+ -activated K+ channels (KCa 3.1) is necessary for mitogen-induced phenotypic modulation in isolated porcine coronary smooth muscle cells (SMCs). The objective of the present study was to determine the role of KCa3.1 in the regulation of coronary SMC phenotypic modulation in vivo using a swine model of postangioplasty restenosis. Methods and Results-Balloon angioplasty was performed on coronary arteries of swine using either noncoated or balloons coated with the specific KCa3.1 blocker TRAM-34. Expression of KCa3.1, c-jun, c-fos, repressor element-1 silencing transcription factor (REST), smooth muscle myosin heavy chain (SMMHC), and myocardin was measured using qRT-PCR in isolated medial cells 2 hours and 2 days postangioplasty. KCa3.1, c-jun, and c-fos mRNA levels were increased 2 hours postangioplasty, whereas REST expression decreased. SMMHC expression was unchanged at 2 hours, but decreased 2 days postangioplasty. Use of TRAM-34 coated balloons prevented KCa3.1 upregulation and REST downregulation at 2 hours, SMMHC and myocardin downregulation at 2 days, and attenuated subsequent restenosis 14 and 28 days postangioplasty. Immunohistochemical analysis demonstrated corresponding changes at the protein level. Conclusion-Blockade of KCa3.1 by delivery of TRAM-34 via balloon catheter prevented smooth muscle phenotypic modulation and limited subsequent restenosis. © 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

[Review of] Ivo Mijnssen, The Quest for an Ideal Youth in Putin’s Russia I. Back to Our Future! History, Modernity and Patriotism According to Nashi, 2005–2012. Soviet and Post-Soviet Politics and Society, Stuttgart: Ibidem Verlag, 2012, 202pp., e 34.90 p/b

THE YOUTH MOVEMENT NASHI (OURS) WAS FOUNDED IN THE SPRING of 2005 against the backdrop of Ukraine’s ‘Orange Revolution’. Its aim was to stabilise Russia’s political system and take back the streets from opposition demonstrators. Personally loyal to Putin and taking its ideological orientation from Surkov’s concept of ‘sovereign democracy’, Nashi has sought to turn the tide on ‘defeatism’ and develop Russian youth into a patriotic new elite that ‘believes in the future of Russia’ (p. 15). Combining a wealth of empirical detail and the application of insights from discourse theory, Ivo Mijnssen analyses the organisation’s development between 2005 and 2012. His analysis focuses on three key moments—the organisation’s foundation, the apogee of its mobilisation around the Bronze Soldier dispute with Estonia, and the 2010 Seliger youth camp—to help understand Nashi’s organisation, purpose and ideational outlook as well as the limitations and challenges it faces. As such,the book is insightful both for those with an interest in post-Soviet Russian youth culture, and for scholars seeking a rounded understanding of the Kremlin’s initiatives to return a sense of identity and purpose to Russian national life.The first chapter, ‘Background and Context’, outlines the conceptual toolkit provided by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe to help make sense of developments on the terrain of identity politics. In their terms, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia has experienced acute dislocation of its identity. With the tangible loss of great power status, Russian realities have become unfixed from a discourse enabling national life to be constructed, albeit inherently contingently, as meaningful. The lack of a Gramscian hegemonic discourse to provide a unifying national idea was securitised as an existential threat demanding special measures. Accordingly, the identification of those who are ‘notUs’ has been a recurrent theme of Nashi’s discourse and activity. With the victory in World War II held up as a foundational moment, a constitutive other is found in the notion of ‘unusual fascists’. This notion includes not just neo-Nazis, but reflects a chain of equivalence that expands to include a range of perceived enemies of Putin’s consolidation project such as oligarchs and pro-Western liberals.The empirical background is provided by the second chapter, ‘Russia’s Youth, the Orange Revolution, and Nashi’, which traces the emergence of Nashi amid the climate of political instability of 2004 and 2005. A particularly note-worthy aspect of Mijnssen’s work is the inclusion of citations from his interviews with Nashicommissars; the youth movement’s cadres. Although relatively few in number, such insider conversations provide insight into the ethos of Nashi’s organisation and the outlook of those who have pledged their involvement. Besides the discussion of Nashi’s manifesto, the reader thus gains insight into the motivations of some participants and behind-the-scenes details of Nashi’s activities in response to the perceived threat of anti-government protests. The third chapter, ‘Nashi’s Bronze Soldier’, charts Nashi’s role in elevating the removal of a World War II monument from downtown Tallinn into an international dispute over the interpretation of history. The events subsequent to this securitisation of memory are charted in detail, concluding that Nashi’s activities were ultimately unsuccessful as their demands received little official support.The fourth chapter, ‘Seliger: The Foundry of Modernisation’, presents a distinctive feature of Mijnssen’s study, namely his ethnographic account as a participant observer in the Youth International Forum at Seliger. In the early years of the camp (2005–2007), Russian participants received extensive training, including master classes in ‘methods of forestalling mass unrest’ (p. 131), and the camp served to foster a sense of group identity and purpose among activists. After 2009 the event was no longer officially run as a Nashi camp, and its role became that of a forum for the exchange of ideas about innovation, although camp spirit remained a central feature. In 2010 the camp welcomed international attendees for the first time. As one of about 700 international participants in that year the author provides a fascinating account based on fieldwork diaries.Despite the polemical nature of the topic, Mijnssen’s analysis remains even-handed, exemplified in his balanced assessment of the Seliger experience. While he details the frustrations and disappointments of the international participants with regard to the unaccustomed strict camp discipline, organisational and communication failures, and the controlled format of many discussions,he does not neglect to note the camp’s successes in generating a gratifying collective dynamic between the participants, even among the international attendees who spent only a week there.In addition to the useful bibliography, the book is back-ended by two appendices, which provide the reader with important Russian-language primary source materials. The first is Nashi’s ‘Unusual Fascism’ (Neobyknovennyi fashizm) brochure, and the second is the booklet entitled ‘Some Uncomfortable Questions to the Russian Authorities’ (Neskol’ko neudobnykh voprosov rossiiskoivlasti) which was provided to the Seliger 2010 instructors to guide them in responding to probing questions from foreign participants. Given that these are not readily publicly available even now, they constitute a useful resource from the historical perspective.