The duties, drawbacks, and bounties, of customs and excise payable in Great Britain, on merchandize, imported, exported, or carried coastwise, as settled by various acts of Parliament, passed prior to the first of August, 1813.

Mode of access: Internet.

Building stone : prepared especially for home study /

"1058-3, edition 2."

Stone masonry : prepared especially for home study /

"1059, edition 3."

Building unit construction : prepared especially for home study /

"5536, edition 1."

Memoirs of the reign of King George the Second.

First published in 1822 in 2 v. under title "Memoirs of the last ten years of the reign of George II.". Reprinted without additions by Colburn, London, 1846, in 3 v. cf, Lowndes, Bibliog. manual.

Who wrote Cavendish's Life of Wolsey?

"One hundred copies printed."--Lowndes.

Twelve precisely! or, A night at Dover: an interlude, in one act. As performed at the Olympic Theatre, Strand, Monday, Jan 1, 1821.

Mode of access: Internet.

The three hunchbacks, or The sabre grinders of Damascus; a comic burletta. As performed, for the first time, Jan. 20, 1823, at the Surrey theatre.

Mode of access: Internet.

Smeeton's historical and biographical tracts.

Each tract has special t.-p.

The Director, a weekly literary journal: containing I. Essays, on subjects of literature, the fine arts and manners. II. Bibliographana. Account of rare and curious books and of the book sales in this country, from the close of the seventeenth century. III. Royal institution. Analyses of the lectures delivered weekly. IV. British Gallery. Description of the principal pictures exhibited ... v. 1-2: Jan. 24-July 4, 1807.

"The biographical part was written by Mr. Dibdin."--Lowndes, The bibliographer's manual of English literature.

Specializations of the granular prefrontal cortex of primates: Implications for cognitive processing

The biological underpinnings of human intelligence remain enigmatic. There remains the greatest confusion and controversy regarding mechanisms that enable humans to conceptualize, plan, and prioritize, and why they are set apart from other animals in their cognitive abilities. Here we demonstrate that the basic neuronal building block of the cerebral cortex, the pyramidal cell, is characterized by marked differences in structure among primate species. Moreover, comparison of the complexity of neuron structure with the size of the cortical area/region in which the cells are located revealed that trends in the granular prefrontal cortex (gPFC) were dramatically different to those in visual cortex. More specifically, pyramidal cells in the gPFC of humans had a disproportionately high number of spines. As neuron structure determines both its biophysical properties and connectivity, differences in the complexity in dendritic structure observed here endow neurons with different computational abilities. Furthermore, cortical circuits composed of neurons with distinguishable morphologies will likely be characterized by different functional capabilities. We propose that 1. circuitry in V1, V2, and gPFC within any given species differs in its functional capabilities and 2. there are dramatic differences in the functional capabilities of gPFC circuitry in different species, which are central to the different cognitive styles of primates. In particular, the highly branched, spinous neurons in the human gPFC may be a key component of human intelligence. (C) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Editorial

Readers may have noted that a short but very important announcement was made in the last issue of CLAE, at the top of the contents page. CLAE has been accepted by Thomson Reuters for abstracting and indexing in its SciSearch, Journal Citation Reports, and Current Contents services. This will ensure a greater visibility to the international research community. In addition, in June 2012 CLAE will receive its very first official Impact Factor – a measure of journal influence of importance to authors and readers alike. The impact factor value has not yet been decided but internal estimates by Elsevier estimate it will be around 1, and it will be applied to all CLAE issue back to January 2009 (volume 32). I would guess readers at this stage would have one of two responses – either ‘that's good news’ or perhaps ‘what's an impact factor?’ If you are in the latter camp then allow me to try and explain. Basically the impact factor or citation index of a journal is based on how many times in the previous year papers published in that journal in the previous two years were cited by authors publishing in other journals. So the 2012 impact factor for CLAE is calculated on how many times in 2011 papers that were published in CLAE in 2010 and 2009 were cited in other journals in 2011, divided by the number of papers published in CLAE 2010 and 2009. Essentially authors will try and get their work published in journals with a higher impact factor as it is thought that the paper will be cited more by other authors or the paper will have higher visibility in the arena. For universities having its published output in higher journals is one of the markers used to judge esteem. For individual authors publishing in journals with a higher impact factor or the number of times one of their papers is published is something that they are likely to add to their CVs or demonstrate the importance of their work. Journals with higher impact factors tend to be more review journals or journals with a wider spectrum so for a relatively small journal with a specialised field like CLAE it is great to be listed with a citation index. The awarding of a citation index crowns many changes that CLAE has undergone since the current Editor took the reins in 2005. CLAE has increased from four issues (in 2004) to six issues per year with at least one review article per issue and one article with continuing education per issue. The rejection rate has gone up significantly meaning that only best papers are published (currently it stands at 37%). CLAE has been Medline/Pubmed indexed for a few years now which is also a very important factor in improving visibility of the journal. The submission and reviewing process for CLAE in now entirely online and finally the editorial board has changed from being merely a list of keynote people to being an active group of keynote people who are enthusiastically involved with the journal. From the editorial board one person is appointed as a Reviews Editor plus we have two additional editors who work as Regional Editors. As ever, on behalf of CLAE I would like to thank the BCLA Council for their continued support (especially Vivien Freeman) and Elsevier for their continuing guidance (in particular Andrew Miller and Rosie Davey) and the excellent Editorial Board (Christopher Snyder, Pauline Cho, Eric Papas, Jan Bergmanson, Roger Buckley, Patrick Caroline, Dwight Cavanagh, Robin Chalmers, Michael Doughty, Nathan Efron, Michel Guillon, Nizar Hirji, Meng Lin, Florence Malet, Philip Morgan, Deborah Sweeney, Brian Tighe, Eef van Der Worp, Barry Weissman, Mark Willcox, James Wolffsohn and Craig Woods). And finally, a big thanks to the authors and reviewers who work tirelessly putting manuscripts together for publication in CLAE. Copyright © 2012 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Changes at the BCLA

As we welcome 2014 we say goodbye to 2013 and I must start with an apology to authors who have submitted papers to CLAE and seen a delay in either the review process or the hard copy publication of their proofed article. The delays were caused by a major hike in the number of submissions to the journal in 2012 that increased further in 2013. In the 12 months leading to the end of October 2011 we had 94 new paper submissions, and for the same period to the end of 2012 the journal had 116 new papers. In 2012 we were awarded an impact factor for the first time and following that the next 12 month period to the end of October 2013 saw a massive increase in submissions with 171 new manuscripts being submitted. This is nearly twice as many papers as 2 years ago and 3 times as many as when I took over as Editor-in-Chief. In addition to this the UK academics will know that 2014 is a REF year (Research Excellence Framework) where universities are judged on their research and one of the major components of this measure remains to be published papers so there is a push to publishing before the REF deadline for counting. The rejection rate at CLAE has gone up too and currently is around 50% (more than double the rejection rate when I took over as Editor-in-Chief). At CLAE the number of pages that we publish each year has remained the same since 2007. When compiling issue 1 for 2014 I chose the papers to be included from the papers that were proofed and ready to go and there were around 200 proofed pages ready, which is enough to fill 3½ issues! At present Elsevier and the BCLA are preparing to increase the number the pages published per issue so that we can clear some of this backlog and remain up to date with the papers published in CLAE. I should add that on line publishing of papers is still available and there may have been review delays but there are no publishing online so authors can still get an epub on line final version of their paper with a DOI (digital object identifier) number enabling the paper to be cited. There are two awards that were made in 2013 that I would like to make special mention of. One was for my good friend Jan Bergmanson, who was awarded an honorary life fellowship of the College of Optometrists. Jan has served on the editorial board of CLAE for many years and in 2013 also celebrated 30 years of his annual ‘Texan Corneal and contact lens meeting’. The other award I wish to mention is Judith Morris, who was the BCLA Gold Medal Award winner in 2013. Judith has had many roles in her career and worked at Moorfields Eye Hospital, the Institute of Optometry and currently at City University. She has been the Europe Middle East and Africa President of IACLE (International Association of Contact Lens Educators) for many years and I think I am correct in saying that Judith is the only person who was President of both the BCLA (1983) and a few years later she was the President College of Optometrists (1989). Judith was also instrumental in introducing Vivien Freeman to the BCLA as they had been friends and Judith suggested that Vivien apply for an administrative job at the BCLA. Fast forward 29 years and in December 2013 Vivien stepped down as Secretary General of the BCLA. I would like to offer my own personal thanks to Vivien for her support of CLAE and of me over the years. The BCLA will not be the same and I wish you well in your future plans. But 2014 brings in a new position to the BCLA – Cheryl Donnelly has been given the new role of Chief Executive Officer. Cheryl was President of the BCLA in 2000 and has previously served on council. I look forward to working with Cheryl and envisage a bright future for the BCLA and CLAE. In this issue we have some great papers including some from authors who have not published with CLAE before. There is a nice paper on contact lens compliance in Nepal which brings home some familiar messages from an emerging market. A paper on how corneal curvature is affected by the use of hydrogel lenses is useful when advising patients how long they should leave their contact lenses out for to avoid seeing changes in refraction or curvature. This is useful information when refracting these patients or pre-laser surgery. There is a useful paper offering tips on fitting bitoric gas permeable lenses post corneal graft and a paper detailing surgery to implant piggyback multifocal intraocular lenses. One fact that I noted from the selection of papers in the current issue is where they were from. In this issue none of the corresponding authors are from the United Kingdom. There are two papers each from the United States, Spain and Iran, and one each from the Netherlands, Ireland, Republic of Korea, Australia and Hong Kong. This is an obvious reflection of the widening interest in CLAE and the BCLA and indicates the new research groups emerging in the field.