Head and eye movements and lane keeping in drivers with hemianopia and quadrantanopia compared to controls

Purpose: To compare the eye and head movements and lane-keeping of drivers with hemianopia and quadrantanopia with that of age-matched controls when driving under real world conditions. Methods: Participants included 22 hemianopes and 8 quadrantanopes (M age 53 yrs) and 30 persons with normal visual fields (M age 52 yrs) who were ≥ 6 months from the brain injury date and either a current driver or aiming to resume driving. All participants drove an instrumented dual-brake vehicle along a 14-mile route in traffic that included non-interstate city driving and interstate driving. Driving performance was scored using a standardised assessment system by two “backseat” raters and the Vigil Vanguard system which provides objective measures of speed, braking and acceleration, cornering, and video-based footage from which eye and head movements and lane-keeping can be derived. Results: As compared to drivers with normal visual fields, drivers with hemianopia or quadrantanopia on average were significantly more likely to drive slower, to exhibit less excessive cornering forces or acceleration, and to execute more shoulder movements off the seat. Those hemianopic and quadrantanopic drivers rated as safe to drive by the backseat evaluator made significantly more excursive eye movements, exhibited more stable lane positioning, less sudden braking events and drove at higher speeds than those rated as unsafe, while there was no difference between safe and unsafe drivers in head movements. Conclusions: Persons with hemianopic and quadrantanopic field defects rated as safe to drive have different driving characteristics compared to those rated as unsafe when assessed using objective measures of driving performance.

Driving-related eye and head movements are changed by the type of presbyopic correction

Purpose: To investigate whether wearing different presbyopic vision corrections alters the pattern of eye and head movements when viewing dynamic driving-related traffic scenes. Methods: Participants included 20 presbyopes (mean age: 56±5.7 years) who had no experience of wearing presbyopic vision corrections (i.e. all were single vision wearers). Eye and head movements were recorded while wearing five different vision corrections: single vision lenses (SV), progressive addition spectacle lenses (PALs), bifocal spectacle lenses (BIF), monovision (MV) and multifocal contact lenses (MTF CL) in random order. Videotape recordings of traffic scenes of suburban roads and expressways (with edited targets) were presented as dynamic driving-related stimuli and digital numeric display panels included as near visual stimuli (simulating speedometer and radio). Eye and head movements were recorded using the faceLAB™ system and the accuracy of target identification was also recorded. Results: The magnitude of eye movements while viewing the driving-related traffic scenes was greater when wearing BIF and PALs than MV and MTF CL (p≤0.013). The magnitude of head movements was greater when wearing SV, BIF and PALs than MV and MTF CL (p<0.0001) and the number of saccades was significantly higher for BIF and PALs than MV (p≤0.043). Target recognition accuracy was poorer for all vision corrections when the near stimulus was located at eccentricities inferiorly and to the left, rather than directly below the primary position of gaze (p=0.008), and PALs gave better performance than MTF CL (p=0.043). Conclusions: Different presbyopic vision corrections alter eye and head movement patterns. In particular, the larger magnitude of eye and head movements and greater number of saccades associated with the spectacle presbyopic corrections, may impact on driving performance.

Investigation of highly regulated promoters for the production of recombinant proteins in plants

Plants have been identified as promising expression systems for the commercial production of recombinant proteins. Plant-based protein production or “biofarming” offers a number of advantages over traditional expression systems in terms of scale of production, the capacity for post-translation processing, providing a product free of contaminants and cost effectiveness. A number of pharmaceutically important and commercially valuable proteins, such as antibodies, biopharmaceuticals and industrial enzymes are currently being produced in plant expression systems. However, several challenges still remain to improve recombinant protein yield with no ill effect on the host plant. The ability for transgenic plants to produce foreign proteins at commercially viable levels can be directly related to the level and cell specificity of the selected promoter driving the transgene. The accumulation of recombinant proteins may be controlled by a tissue-specific, developmentally-regulated or chemically-inducible promoter such that expression of recombinant proteins can be spatially- or temporally- controlled. The strict control of gene expression is particularly useful for proteins that are considered toxic and whose expression is likely to have a detrimental effect on plant growth. To date, the most commonly used promoter in plant biotechnology is the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S promoter which is used to drive strong, constitutive transgene expression in most organs of transgenic plants. Of particular interest to researchers in the Centre for Tropical Crops and Biocommodities at QUT are tissue-specific promoters for the accumulation of foreign proteins in the roots, seeds and fruit of various plant species, including tobacco, banana and sugarcane. Therefore this Masters project aimed to isolate and characterise root- and seed-specific promoters for the control of genes encoding recombinant proteins in plant-based expression systems. Additionally, the effects of matching cognate terminators with their respective gene promoters were assessed. The Arabidopsis root promoters ARSK1 and EIR1 were selected from the literature based on their reported limited root expression profiles. Both promoters were analysed using the PlantCARE database to identify putative motifs or cis-acting elements that may be associated with this activity. A number of motifs were identified in the ARSK1 promoter region including, WUN (wound-inducible), MBS (MYB binding site), Skn-1, and a RY core element (seed-specific) and in the EIR1 promoter region including, Skn-1 (seed-specific), Box-W1 (fungal elicitor), Aux-RR core (auxin response) and ABRE (ABA response). However, no previously reported root-specific cis-acting elements were observed in either promoter region. To confirm root specificity, both promoters, and truncated versions, were fused to the GUS reporter gene and the expression cassette introduced into Arabidopsis via Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. Despite the reported tissue-specific nature of these promoters, both upstream regulatory regions directed constitutive GUS expression in all transgenic plants. Further, similar levels of GUS expression from the ARSK1 promoter were directed by the control CaMV 35S promoter. The truncated version of the EIR1 promoter (1.2 Kb) showed some differences in the level of GUS expression compared to the 2.2 Kb promoter. Therefore, this suggests an enhancer element is contained in the 2.2 Kb upstream region that increases transgene expression. The Arabidopsis seed-specific genes ATS1 and ATS3 were selected from the literature based on their seed-specific expression profiles and gene expression confirmed in this study as seed-specific by RT-PCR analysis. The selected promoter regions were analysed using the PlantCARE database in order to identify any putative cis elements. The seed-specific motifs GCN4 and Skn-1 were identified in both promoter regions that are associated with elevated expression levels in the endosperm. Additionaly, the seed-specific RY element and the ABRE were located in the ATS1 promoter. Both promoters were fused to the GUS reporter gene and used to transform Arabidopsis plants. GUS expression from the putative promoters was consitutive in all transgenic Arabidopsis tissue tested. Importantly, the positive control FAE1 seed-specific promoter also directed constitutive GUS expression throughout transgenic Arabidopsis plants. The constitutive nature seen in all of the promoters used in this study was not anticipated. While variations in promoter activity can be caused by a number of influencing factors, the variation in promoter activity observed here would imply a major contributing factor common to all plant expression cassettes tested. All promoter constructs generated in this study were based on the binary vector pCAMBIA2300. This vector contains the plant selection gene (NPTII) under the transcriptional control of the duplicated CaMV 35S promoter. This CaMV 35S promoter contains two enhancer domains that confer strong, constitutive expression of the selection gene and is located immediately upstream of the promoter-GUS fusion. During the course of this project, Yoo et al. (2005) reported that transgene expression is significantly affected when the expression cassette is located on the same T-DNA as the 35S enhancer. It was concluded, the trans-acting effects of the enhancer activate and control transgene expression causing irregular expression patterns. This phenomenon seems the most plausible reason for the constitutive expression profiles observed with the root- and seed-specific promoters assessed in this study. The expression from some promoters can be influenced by their cognate terminator sequences. Therefore, the Arabidopsis ARSK1, EIR1, ATS1 and ATS3 terminator sequences were isolated and incorporated into expression cassettes containing the GUS reporter gene under the control of their cognate promoters. Again, unrestricted GUS activity was displayed throughout transgenic plants transformed with these reporter gene fusions. As previously discussed constitutive GUS expression was most likely due to the trans-acting effect of the upstream CaMV 35S promoter in the selection cassette located on the same T-DNA. The results obtained in this study make it impossible to assess the influence matching terminators with their cognate promoters have on transgene expression profiles. The obvious future direction of research continuing from this study would be to transform pBIN-based promoter-GUS fusions (ie. constructs containing no CaMV 35S promoter driving the plant selection gene) into Arabidopsis in order to determine the true tissue specificity of these promoters and evaluate the effects of their cognate 3’ terminator sequences. Further, promoter truncations based around the cis-elements identified here may assist in determining whether these motifs are in fact involved in the overall activity of the promoter.

Development of a hemispherical compound Eye for egomotion estimation

Biological inspiration has produced some successful solutions for estimation of self motion from visual information. In this paper we present the construction of a unique new camera, inspired by the compound eye of insects. The hemispherical nature of the compound eye has some intrinsically valuable properties in producing optical flow fields that are suitable for egomotion estimation in six degrees of freedom. The camera that we present has the added advantage of being lightweight and low cost, making it suitable for a range of mobile robot applications. We present some initial results that show the effectiveness of our egomotion estimation algorithm and the image capture capability of the hemispherical camera.