Análisis del perfil profesional y académico de la titulación de Terapia Ocupacional en las Universidades Públicas de Castilla y León (Universidad de Salamanca y Universidad de Burgos).

Se analiza el perfil profesional y académico de la titulación de Terapia Ocupacional en la Universidad de Salamanca y en la Universidad de Burgos. Entre las dos universidades se ha creado un grupo de trabajo para dar continuidad a las iniciativas de convergencia europea y cumplir con los objetivos previstos para conseguir la acreditación. El equipo se plantea estudiar el perfil académico y profesional de la titulación para definir las competencias generales, transversales y específicas para formar profesionales dotados de los conocimientos, habilidades y destrezas que les permitan insertarse en el mundo laboral de forma competitiva. Se apoya el proceso de acreditación de la titulación que se imparte en las universidades, liderados por la ANECA y por la Agencia Regional de acreditación y Certificación de Calidad para conseguir ser centros líderes en la oferta de formación en Terapia Ocupacional y un referente dentro de la cultura de excelencia, eficacia y eficiencia en el mundo universitario. El procedimiento comienza con el análisis de la documentación disponible sobre el perfil de la titulación en las diferentes universidades, colegios profesionales o publicaciones. Se diseña y elabora un cuestionario con el que se realizan encuestas a un total de 256 personas, de ellos 124 eran estudiantes, 127 profesionales en activo y 5 estaban desempleados. Se recogen los datos con el paquete estadístico SPSS 11.0. Se interpretan los datos y se redacta la memoria final.

Perfiles neuropsicológicos en niños con dislexia evolutiva.

La presente investigación se propone conseguir dos objetivos básicos. Por un lado identificar el patrón neuropsicológico subyacente a los niños con dislexia evolutiva y, por otro, comprobar la posibilidad de diferenciación de subtipos disléxicos. Cuatro son las hipótesis de trabajo: 1. Los sujetos disléxicos del estudios obtendrán rendimientos significativamente inferiores a los del grupo de control en todas las funciones lingüísticas. 2. Los sujetos disléxicos del estudio obtendrán rendimientos significativamente inferiores a los del grupo de control en proceso mnésicos. 3. Se cree posible prever una diferenciación de subtipos. 4. Los subtipos obtenidos en el estudio compartirán unas características comunes y a su vez presentarán unas características específicas. La muestra objeto de estudio (grupo disléxico) está constituida por 20 sujetos con retraso lector severo. De ellos, 15 son varones y 5 mujeres, además se seleccionó a 20 sujetos cuyo rendimiento escolar es satisfactorio (grupo control) y específicamente su rendimiento en lectoescritura era el adecuado para su edad y curso en que se encontraban. Para la selección de los niños que integrarían la muestra definitiva no se siguió ninguna técnica de muestreo concreta, no obstante, si que se intentó conseguir el mayor número de niños posible que cumpliesen los criterios de selección, lo cual resultó verdaderamente difícil. El diseño de investigación es un análogo del de dos grupos equivalentes. Como la investigación es de tipo correlacional contrastamos siempre al grupo análogo experimental con el grupo análogo de control. Las variables en que se ha centrado la investigación son: 1. Rendimiento lecto-escritor, 2. Inteligencia, 3. Lateralidad manual (presencia manual), 4. Funciones neuropsicológicas y 5. Rendimiento en búsqueda visual. Las variables anteriormente definidas se han evaluado con los siguientes instrumentos (definición operativa de las variables): 1. Test de Análisis de la Lectura y Escritura (Cervera y Toro, 1980) mediante el cual se establece el nivel de retraso lector de dos años de los sujetos que integran la muestra. 2. Escala de Inteligencia de Wechsler para niño (WISC) que permitió evaluar la segunda variable que es la inteligencia. 3. Cuestionario de Preferencia Manual Individual basado en el conocido Oldfield (1971). 4. Batería de Luria-DNI (Diagnóstico Neuropsicológico Infantil inspirado en Luria) de Mangas y Ramos (1991) y 5. Prueba de Búsqueda Visual de Manga (1990). El procedimiento de recogida de datos consistió en la aplicación de forma individual de las pruebas. Se inició con una entrevista semiestructurada, a continuación se aplicaba el T.A.L.E. y posteriormente el WISC. Finalmente, se procedía a la aplicación de la Batería Luria-DNI y la Prueba de Búsqueda Visual. Para la corrección de las pruebas se consideró conveniente la grabación en cinta magnetofónica del T.A.L.E., y en vídeo de la Batería Luria-DNI. Los análisis estadísticos se han realizado utilizando las siguientes pruebas: Prueba `t´ de Student y una prueba de Análisis Discriminante paso a paso y otra de Análisis de Cluster pertenecientes al S.P.S.S., revisión de 1985. Básicamente los resultados ponen de manifiesto los bajos rendimientos de los disléxicos en las habilidades lingüísticas (tanto a nivel receptivo como expresivo), en el análisis y síntesis fonético de palabras y en los procesos amnésicos. También es posible diferenciar subtipos, mediante el análisis de cluster, con base en las puntuaciones de la batería Luria-DNI y en el Disc. Dos de los subgrupos diferenciados presentan diferencias de nivel pero no de patrón neuropsicológico. En otros casos los perfiles parecen ser propios de la dislexia mixta o bien muy atípica. Todo lo cual nos lleva a concluir que el patrón deficitario encontrado en cada niño es relativamente único. Finalmente se hace referencia a propuestas de intervención que han de abarcar al niño en su totalidad y se han de orientar hacia las áreas intactas de funcionamiento neuropsicológico.

Estabilidade e eficácia de fotoprotetores contendo filtros inorgânicos e quercetina

A exposição ao sol traz benefícios à saúde, no entanto, o excesso pode ocasionar danos cutâneos dentre os quais se destacam as neoplasias. A fotoproteção é um método para a prevenção dos efeitos danosos da radiação ultravioleta (UV) e a biodiversidade Brasileira é campo fértil para pesquisas nesta área. Dessa forma, os objetivos deste estudo envolveram o desenvolvimento de formulações fotoprotetoras contendo quercetina (composto bioativo) e filtros solares físicos (dióxido de titânio e óxido de zinco), com posterior caracterização das formulações e avaliação da sua estabilidade. As formulações contendo o composto bioativo, isolado ou em associação com os filtros físicos, possuíram valores de pH biocompatíveis com a pele,intervalo de viscosidade aparente entre 10550 e 23600 cP; fator de proteção solar (FPS) estimado entre 2.1 e 22.5; e amplo espectro de proteção, com comprimentos de onda crítico acima de 379 nm. Constatou-se que não foi adequado utilizar a quercetina associada aos filtros solares físicos devido às interações negativas que ocorreram entre o composto e os metais, somente identificadas ao longo do estudo de estabilidade. No entanto, em função da eficácia estimada in vitro apresentada pelo flavonoide, seu uso ainda pode ser explorado como substituto alternativo aos filtros solares clássicos.

Workplace Innovation and Technological Change. CEPS Special Report, September 2012

This paper explores the extent to which the illusive phenomenon of workplace innovation has pervaded workplaces in Europe and whether it could be one of the answers to Europe’s longterm social and economic challenges that stem from an ageing workforce and the need for more flexibility to stay competitive. Basic data drawn from European Working Conditions Survey conducted every five years by the Dublin-based European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions are supplemented by a series of case studies to look at the problems encountered in introducing workplace innovation and possible solutions. One set of case studies examines the following organisations: SGI/GI (Slovak Governance Institute (Slovakia), as representative of the world of small- and medium-sized enterprises; Oticon (Denmark) as representative of manufacturing companies; the Open University (UK), as representative of educational organizations; and FPS Social Security (Belgium) representing the public sector. Two final case studies focus on the country-level, one looking at of how a specific innovation can become fully mainstreamed (in the Netherlands and the ‘part-time economy’) and the other (Finland and TEKES) looking at how a government programme can help disseminate workplace innovation. These six case studies, together with the statistical analysis, constitute the main empirical value added of the report.

Nonlinear set-membership estimation: a support vector machine approach

In this paper a support vector machine (SVM) approach for characterizing the feasible parameter set (FPS) in non-linear set-membership estimation problems is presented. It iteratively solves a regression problem from which an approximation of the boundary of the FPS can be determined. To guarantee convergence to the boundary the procedure includes a no-derivative line search and for an appropriate coverage of points on the FPS boundary it is suggested to start with a sequential box pavement procedure. The SVM approach is illustrated on a simple sine and exponential model with two parameters and an agro-forestry simulation model.

On competitive bidding: scoring and position probability graphs

Iso-score curves graph (iSCG) and mathematical relationships between Scoring Parameters (SP) and Forecasting Parameters (FP) can be used in Economic Scoring Formulas (ESF) used in tendering to distribute the score among bidders in the economic part of a proposal. Each contracting authority must set an ESF when publishing tender specifications and the strategy of each bidder will differ depending on the ESF selected and the weight of the overall proposal scoring. The various mathematical relationships and density distributions that describe the main SPs and FPs, and the representation of tendering data by means of iSCGs, enable the generation of two new types of graphs that can be very useful for bidders who want to be more competitive: the scoring and position probability graphs.

CGIAR research program on grain legumes

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources:  review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings  review of previous assessments and evaluations  sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1  more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member.  meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups  online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives  bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results  quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2.  There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised.  There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties.  There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources.  The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified.  Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented.  Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience:  There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction.  Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes.  The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities.  A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.)  PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts.  More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this.  If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend:  A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach.  Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use.  Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species.  Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement.  Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance.  Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP).  Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped.  Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed.  The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding.  Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment.  It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded.  Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.”  The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component.  In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users.  Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress.  Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes.  Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes.  In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy.  The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which  Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP  Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology  Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes  In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.

Automatic camera control in virtual environments augmented using multiple sparse videos

Automated virtual camera control has been widely used in animation and interactive virtual environments. We have developed a multiple sparse camera based free view video system prototype that allows users to control the position and orientation of a virtual camera, enabling the observation of a real scene in three dimensions (3D) from any desired viewpoint. Automatic camera control can be activated to follow selected objects by the user. Our method combines a simple geometric model of the scene composed of planes (virtual environment), augmented with visual information from the cameras and pre-computed tracking information of moving targets to generate novel perspective corrected 3D views of the virtual camera and moving objects. To achieve real-time rendering performance, view-dependent textured mapped billboards are used to render the moving objects at their correct locations and foreground masks are used to remove the moving objects from the projected video streams. The current prototype runs on a PC with a common graphics card and can generate virtual 2D views from three cameras of resolution 768 x 576 with several moving objects at about 11 fps. (C)2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Atividades proteolíticas e microrganismos envolvidos na maturação do queijo serrano

A proposição do presente trabalho foi avaliar o potencial das enzimas das NSLAB do queijo Serrano quanto às atividades aminopeptidásicas. Seis bateladas de queijo Serrano foram elaboradas (3 no verão e 3 no inverno) por três diferentes produtores (A, B e C) de Caxias do Sul (RS), utilizando leite cru, sem adição de culturas iniciadoras. A atividade das aminopeptidases foi avaliada nas FPS dos queijos e nos extratos aquosos dos microrganismos através da hidrólise dos substratos sintéticos Gly- NA, Arg- NA, Tyr- NA, Leu- NA e Asp- NA, Glu- NA, Lys- NA, e Pro- NA. Nos queijos do produtor A, que apresentaram as maiores atividades (19 a 74 U/g de queijo), foram analisados os amino ácidos livres (AAL) e os resultados revelaram que eles aumentam continuamente, estão presentes em quantidades elevadas (4051 mg/100g de ES do queijo aos 60 d), e os AAL com maiores concentrações nos queijos foram Glu, Arg, Lys, Pro e Leu (juntos representam 58% a 61% do total de AAL). Extratos aquosos das NSLAB dos queijos de verão foram parcialmente purificados por cromatografia de troca iônica de fluxo rápido, utilizando Q-sepharose e incubados com os substratos Glu- NA, Arg- NA, Lys- NA, Leu- NA e Pro- NA, indicando atividade para todos os substratos e que a atividade nas frações mudam nas NSLAB para queijos com diferentes tempos de maturação. Uma comparação das atividades aminopeptidases recuperadas após o zimograma do gel de eletroforese-PAGE das FPS dos queijos e dos microrganismos, sugerem que as PepN, PepC e PepL ativas nas FPS têm suas origens na lise das NSLAB presentes nos mesmos.

Inexpensive solution for real-time video and image stitching

Image stitching is the process of joining several images to obtain a bigger view of a scene. It is used, for example, in tourism to transmit to the viewer the sensation of being in another place. I am presenting an inexpensive solution for automatic real time video and image stitching with two web cameras as the video/image sources. The proposed solution relies on the usage of several markers in the scene as reference points for the stitching algorithm. The implemented algorithm is divided in four main steps, the marker detection, camera pose determination (in reference to the markers), video/image size and 3d transformation, and image translation. Wii remote controllers are used to support several steps in the process. The built‐in IR camera provides clean marker detection, which facilitates the camera pose determination. The only restriction in the algorithm is that markers have to be in the field of view when capturing the scene. Several tests where made to evaluate the final algorithm. The algorithm is able to perform video stitching with a frame rate between 8 and 13 fps. The joining of the two videos/images is good with minor misalignments in objects at the same depth of the marker,misalignments in the background and foreground are bigger. The capture process is simple enough so anyone can perform a stitching with a very short explanation. Although real‐time video stitching can be achieved by this affordable approach, there are few shortcomings in current version. For example, contrast inconsistency along the stitching line could be reduced by applying a color correction algorithm to every source videos. In addition, the misalignments in stitched images due to camera lens distortion could be eased by optical correction algorithm. The work was developed in Apple’s Quartz Composer, a visual programming environment. A library of extended functions was developed using Xcode tools also from Apple.

Compressão de imagem e vídeo com controlador ARM

Este trabalho foi desenvolvido num estágio na empresa ABS GmbH sucursal em Portugal, e teve como foco a compressão de imagem e vídeo com os padrões JPEG e H.264, respetivamente. Foi utilizada a plataforma LeopardBoard DM368, com um controlador ARM9. A análise do desempenho de compressão de ambos os padrões foi realizada através de programas em linguagem C, para execução no processador DM368. O programa para compressão de imagem recebe como parâmetros de entrada o nome e a resolução da imagem a comprimir, e comprime-a com 10 níveis de quantização diferentes. Os resultados mostram que é possível obter uma velocidade de compressão até 73 fps (frames per second) para a resolução 1280x720, e que imagens de boa qualidade podem ser obtidas com rácios de compressão até cerca de 22:1. No programa para compressão de vídeo, o codificador está configurado de acordo com as recomendações para as seguintes aplicações: videoconferência, videovigilância, armazenamento e broadcasting/streaming. As configurações em cada processo de codificação, o nome do ficheiro, o número de frames e a resolução do mesmo representam os parâmetros de entrada. Para a resolução 1280x720, foram obtidas velocidades de compressão até cerca de 68 fps, enquanto para a resolução 1920x1088 esse valor foi cerca de 30 fps. Foi ainda desenvolvida uma aplicação com capacidades para capturar imagens ou vídeos, aplicar processamento de imagem, compressão, armazenamento e transmissão para uma saída DVI (Digital Visual Interface). O processamento de imagem em software permite melhorar dinamicamente as imagens, e a taxa média de captura, compressão e armazenamento é cerca de 5 fps para a resolução 1280x720, adequando-se à captura de imagens individuais. Sem processamento em software, a taxa sobe para cerca de 23 fps para a resolução 1280x720, sendo cerca de 28 fps para a resolução 1280x1088, o que é favorável à captura de vídeo.

Antibody and blood leukocyte response in Rhipicephalus sanguineus (Latreille, 1806) tick-infested dogs and guinea pigs

The dog is considered to be the natural host of Rhipicephalus sanguineus and is unable to develop appreciable resistance even after repeated feedings. The guinea pig develops strong resistance after one infestation with adult ticks. Antibody (IgG) titres against tick salivary gland antigens (SGAs) and blood leukocyte numbers in dogs and guinea pigs undergoing experimental R. sanguineus tick infestations were measured to detect a possible correlation with susceptibility or resistance of hosts. Since infested dogs develop an immediate hypersensitivity reaction to R. sanguineus antigens, total and anti-R. sanguineus SGA IgE levels were also measured in this host species. IgG and IgE antibody levels were determined by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) along three consecutive infestations of both hosts. Most dogs and guinea pigs displayed low IgG levels against R. sanguineus SGAs, though marked differences in individual response were observed. Although dog's total serum IgE levels increased significantly after infestations, no change in the amount of anti-salivary gland IgE was detected. Total and differential blood cell counts were determined in dogs and guinea pigs during primary and secondary infestation. In dogs, a tertiary infestation and a subsequent higher infestation level were also evaluated. Infested dogs did not display any alteration in blood leukocyte counts throughout the experiment. Guinea pigs, on the other hand, developed a significant basophilia during primary infestation which increased further during secondary infestation. These data reveal similarities and differences in the reactions of resistant and non-resistant hosts to ticks. They contribute for the understanding of such host-parasite relationships and will hopefully aid in the development of immune control of ticks. (C) 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Influência da adição de carga na marcha em esteira de crianças com paralisia cerebral hemiparética espástica

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior

Influence of natural polymer derived from starch as a sensory modifier in sunscreen formulations

Background: Nowadays, there has been increased incidence of skin cancer, which is mainly related to increased sun exposure. Although sunscreen products may prevent the appearing of this disease, consumers may not use them due to some factors, including the sensory properties. The Aluminum Starch Octenylsuccinate (Dry-Flo® Pure, Akzo Nobel), an aluminum salt produced by the reaction of anhydride octenylsuccinic with starch, is able to improve the spreadability on the skin and reduce the oiliness of the formulation. Objective: To verify volunteers' acceptance for sunscreen formulation with natural polymer, compared with a control formulation (without polymer). Methods: To carry out the sensory analysis a formulation with or without 2. 0% Aluminum Starch Octenylsuccinate was prepared. Formulations had FPS 15, with critical wavelength of 353 nm, determined by testing in silico using the BASF® Sunscreen Simulator. Sensory analysis was performed on 60 students of both sexes, aged between 18 and 25 years, regular users of sunscreen products. Results: The results suggested that the polymer was able to promote a very soft and velvety feel on the skin when used in a sunscreen formulation, and it was able to mitigate and noticeably reduce the oiliness of the skin. Of the 60 volunteers who participated in the study, 45 volunteers (75%) considered that the polymer formulation provides little brightness or did not notice the difference in brightness of the skin after application. Conclusions: It was able to improve the sensory of the product, contributing to greater volunteers' acceptance.

Desenvolvimento de filtros solares a partir de complexos metálicos de Zn2+ e/ou Ce3+ com quercetina para protetores solares

Pós-graduação em Química - IQ