High performance polyester-based materials

Biaxially oriented films produced from semi-crystalline, semi-aromatic polyesters are utilised extensively as components within various applications, including the specialist packaging, flexible electronic and photovoltaic markets. However, the thermal performance of such polyesters, specifically poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and poly(ethylene-2,6-naphthalate) (PEN), is inadequate for several applications that require greater dimensional stability at higher operating temperatures. The work described in this project is therefore primarily focussed upon the copolymerisation of rigid comonomers with PET and PEN, in order to produce novel polyester-based materials that exhibit superior thermomechanical performance, with retention of crystallinity, to achieve biaxial orientation. Rigid biphenyldiimide comonomers were readily incorporated into PEN and poly(butylene-2,6-naphthalate) (PBN) via a melt-polycondensation route. For each copoly(ester-imide) series, retention of semi-crystalline behaviour is observed throughout entire copolymer composition ratios. This phenomenon may be rationalised by cocrystallisation between isomorphic biphenyldiimide and naphthalenedicarboxylate residues, which enables statistically random copolymers to melt-crystallise despite high proportions of imide sub-units being present. In terms of thermal performance, the glass transition temperature, Tg, linearly increases with imide comonomer content for both series. This facilitated the production of several high performance PEN-based biaxially oriented films, which displayed analogous drawing, barrier and optical properties to PEN. Selected PBN copoly(ester-imide)s also possess the ability to either melt-crystallise, or form a mesophase from the isotropic state depending on the applied cooling rate. An equivalent synthetic approach based upon isomorphic comonomer crystallisation was subsequently applied to PET by copolymerisation with rigid diimide and Kevlar®-type amide comonomers, to afford several novel high performance PET-based copoly(ester-imide)s and copoly(ester-amide)s that all exhibited increased Tgs. Retention of crystallinity was achieved in these copolymers by either melt-crystallisation or thermal annealing. The initial production of a semi-crystalline, PET-based biaxially oriented film with a Tg in excess of 100 °C was successful, and this material has obvious scope for further industrial scale-up and process development.

Regulation of gene and protein expression in cardiac myocyte hypertrophy and apoptosis

Considerable efforts have been expended in elucidating the inter-cellular and intra-cellular signaling pathways which elicit cardiac myocyte hypertrophy or apoptosis, and in identifying the changes which are associated with the end-stage of the response. The challenge now is to link the two. Although some of the signaling effects will be the acute modulation of existing protein function, long-term effects which bring about and maintain the hypertrophic state or which culminate in cell death are mediated at the level of gene and protein expression. With the advances in micro-array technology and genome sequencing, it is now possible to obtain a picture of the global gene expression profile in myocytes or in whole heart which dictates the proteins which could be made. This is not the final picture since additional regulation at the level of translation modulates the relative proportions of each protein that can be made from the transcriptome. Even here, further regulation of protein stability and turnover means that ultimately it is still necessary to examine the proteome to determine what may cause the functional changes in a cell. Thus, in order to gain a full picture of events which regulate the response and gain some insight into possible points of intervention for therapy, it is necessary to examine gene expression, mRNA translation and protein expression in concert.

Exploring the effects of genotypical and phenotypical variations in bitter taste sensitivity on perception, liking and intake of brassica vegetables in the UK

Brassicaceous vegetables (BV) have chemoprotective effects and yet consumption of BV in the UK is low. Previous studies suggest perception, liking and intake of BV are influenced by bitter taste sensitivity which this study further explores. Phenotypical taste sensitivity of 136 subjects was classified using propythiouracil (PROP) and sodium chloride and fungiform papillae density (FPD) was measured from tongue images. Polymorphisms of TAS2R38 and gustin (CA6) genes were analysed. Liking and bitterness of four raw vegetables (two BV (broccoli and white cabbage) and two non-BV (spinach and courgette)), as well as habitual consumption, were evaluated. There was a significant association between TAS2R38 genotype and PROP taster status (p<0.0001) and between FPD and PROP taster status (p=0.029). Individuals with greater sensitivity for PROP predominantly had TAS2R38 PAV/PAV genotype and greater FPD. BV were perceived as more bitter than non-BV (p<0.0001) with PAV/PAV subjects perceiving significantly stronger bitter intensity. There was a significant difference in liking for the four vegetables (p=0.002), and between consumers of different TAS2R38 genotype (p=0.0024). Individuals with TAS2R38 AVI/AVI genotype liked BV more. Regarding intake, both PAV/PAV and AVI/AVI individuals consumed more total vegetables and BV than PAV/AVI. Although PROP nontasters tended to consume more vegetables and BV than the other two phenotype groups, liking and vegetable intake were not significantly affected by taste phenotype. Although there was not a significant effect of CA6 genotype on bitterness ratings, there was a significant interaction between CA6 and TAS2R38, and in addition CA6 genotype was significantly associated with BV intake. However, these effects require validation as the proportions of the population with the CA6 G/G genotype was extremely small (7%). Our results confirmed that bitter taste perception in vegetables was influenced by both genotype and phenotype of bitter taste sensitivity. Moreover, our findings demonstrated that neither genotype nor phenotype of taste sensitivity alone accurately predict vegetable liking and intake as demographic factors were found to have a substantial influence.

A regionally informed abundance index for supporting integrative analyses across butterfly monitoring schemes

1. The rapid expansion of systematic monitoring schemes necessitates robust methods to reliably assess species' status and trends. Insect monitoring poses a challenge where there are strong seasonal patterns, requiring repeated counts to reliably assess abundance. Butterfly monitoring schemes (BMSs) operate in an increasing number of countries with broadly the same methodology, yet they differ in their observation frequency and in the methods used to compute annual abundance indices. 2. Using simulated and observed data, we performed an extensive comparison of two approaches used to derive abundance indices from count data collected via BMS, under a range of sampling frequencies. Linear interpolation is most commonly used to estimate abundance indices from seasonal count series. A second method, hereafter the regional generalized additive model (GAM), fits a GAM to repeated counts within sites across a climatic region. For the two methods, we estimated bias in abundance indices and the statistical power for detecting trends, given different proportions of missing counts. We also compared the accuracy of trend estimates using systematically degraded observed counts of the Gatekeeper Pyronia tithonus (Linnaeus 1767). 3. The regional GAM method generally outperforms the linear interpolation method. When the proportion of missing counts increased beyond 50%, indices derived via the linear interpolation method showed substantially higher estimation error as well as clear biases, in comparison to the regional GAM method. The regional GAM method also showed higher power to detect trends when the proportion of missing counts was substantial. 4. Synthesis and applications. Monitoring offers invaluable data to support conservation policy and management, but requires robust analysis approaches and guidance for new and expanding schemes. Based on our findings, we recommend the regional generalized additive model approach when conducting integrative analyses across schemes, or when analysing scheme data with reduced sampling efforts. This method enables existing schemes to be expanded or new schemes to be developed with reduced within-year sampling frequency, as well as affording options to adapt protocols to more efficiently assess species status and trends across large geographical scales.

Bayesian analysis of uncertainty in the GlobCover 2009 land cover product at climate model grid scale

Land cover data derived from satellites are commonly used to prescribe inputs to models of the land surface. Since such data inevitably contains errors, quantifying how uncertainties in the data affect a model’s output is important. To do so, a spatial distribution of possible land cover values is required to propagate through the model’s simulation. However, at large scales, such as those required for climate models, such spatial modelling can be difficult. Also, computer models often require land cover proportions at sites larger than the original map scale as inputs, and it is the uncertainty in these proportions that this article discusses. This paper describes a Monte Carlo sampling scheme that generates realisations of land cover proportions from the posterior distribution as implied by a Bayesian analysis that combines spatial information in the land cover map and its associated confusion matrix. The technique is computationally simple and has been applied previously to the Land Cover Map 2000 for the region of England and Wales. This article demonstrates the ability of the technique to scale up to large (global) satellite derived land cover maps and reports its application to the GlobCover 2009 data product. The results show that, in general, the GlobCover data possesses only small biases, with the largest belonging to non–vegetated surfaces. In vegetated surfaces, the most prominent area of uncertainty is Southern Africa, which represents a complex heterogeneous landscape. It is also clear from this study that greater resources need to be devoted to the construction of comprehensive confusion matrices.

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.

Analyses of cataract surgery performed by the Unified Health System in Brazil, 2006-2007

Objective. Estimate cataract surgical rates (CSR) for Brazil and each federal unit in 2006 and 2007 based on the number of surgeries performed by the Unified Health System to help plan a comprehensive ophthalmology network in order to eliminate cataract blindness in compliance with the target set by the World Health Organization (WHO) of 3 000 cataract surgeries per million inhabitants per year. Methods. This descriptive study calculates CSR by using the number of cataract surgeries carried out by the Brazilian Unified Health System for each federal unit and estimates the need for cataract surgery in Brazil for 2006-2007, with official population data provided by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. The number of cataract surgeries was compared with the WHO target. Results. To reach the WHO goal for eliminating age-related cataract blindness in Brazil, 560 312 cataract surgeries in 2006 and 568 006 surgeries in 2007 needed to be done. In 2006, 179 121 cataract surgeries were done by the Unified Health System, corresponding to a CSR of 959 per million population; in 2007, 223 317 were performed, with a CSR of 1 179. With the Brazilian Council of Ophthalmology estimation of 165 000 surgeries each year by the non-public services, the CSR for Brazil would be 1 842 for 2006 and 2 051 for 2007. The proportions needed to achieve the proposed target were 38.6% in 2006 and 31.6% in 2007. Conclusions. Human resources, technical expertise, and equipment are crucial to reach the WHO goal. Brazil has enough ophthalmologists but needs improved planning and infrastructure in order to eliminate the problem, aspects that require greater financial investment and stronger political commitment.

Body mass index values for newborns according to gestational age

Objective: The combination of twho anthropometric parameters has been more appropriate to assess body composition and proportions in children, with special attention to the Body Mass Index (BMI), as it relates weight and length. However the BMI values for the neonatal period have not been determined yet. This study shows the BMI for newborns at different gestational ages represented in a normal smoothed percentile curve. Methods: Retrospective study including 2,406 appropriate for gestational age newborns following the Alexander et al curve (1996) from 29 to 42 weeks of gestational age. Weight and lenght were measured following standard procedures. For the construction aof a normal smoothed percentile curve, the 3(rd) 5(th), 10(th), 25(th), 5(th), 75(th), 90(th) and 95(th) percentiles were determined and a statistical procedure based on the mathematical model ""sinosuoidal fit"" was applied to establish a curve that estimates biological growth parameters. Results: The Body Mass Index values for gestational age in all percentiles shows a steady increase up to 38 weeks, levels off up to the 40(th) week, followed by a slight decrease to the 42(nd) week in both genders. Conclusion: The results show a direct correlation between gestational age and Body Mass Index for both genders in the nine percentiles, and can provide a useful reference to assess intra-uterine proportional growth.

Influence of nitric oxide during maturation on bovine oocyte meiosis and embryo development in vitro

The effect of s-nitroso-N-acetyl-1,1-penicillamine (SNAP, a nitric oxide donor) during in vitro maturation (IVM) on nuclear maturation and embryo development was investigated. The effect of increasing nitric oxide (NO) during prematuration or maturation, or both, on embryo development was also assessed. 10(-3) M SNAP nearly blocked oocytes reaching metaphase II (MII) (7%, P < 0.05) while 10(-5) M SNAP showed intermediate proportions (55%). For 10(-7) M SNAP and controls (without SNAP), MII percentages were similar (72% for both, P > 0.05), but superior to the other treatment groups (P < 0.05). Blastocyst development, however, was not affected (38% for all treatments, P < 0.05). TUNEL-positive cells in hatched blastocysts (Day 9) increased when IVM included 10(-5) M SNAP (8 v. 3 to 4 cells in the other treatments, P > 0.05), without affecting total cell numbers (240 to 291 cells, P > 0.05). When oocytes were prematured followed by IVM with or without 10(-7) M SNAP, during either culture period or both, blastocyst development was similar (26 to 40%, P > 0.05). When SNAP was included during both prematuration and IVM, the proportion of Day 9 hatched embryos increased (28% v. 14 to 19% in the other treatments, P < 0.05). Apoptotic cells, however, increased when SNAP was included (6 to 10 cells) in comparison to prematuration and maturation without SNAP (3 cells, P < 0.05). NO may be involved in meiotic progression and apoptosis during embryo development.

The use of spray drying technology to reduce bitter taste of casein hydrolysate

The utilization of protein hydrolysates in food systems is frequently hindered due to their bitterness and hygroscopicity. Spray drying technology could be an alternative for reducing these problems. The aim of this work was to reduce or to mask the casein hydrolysate bitter taste using spray drying and mixtures of gelatin and soy protein isolate (SPI) as carriers. Six formulations were studied: three with 20% of hydrolysate and 80% of mixture (gelatine/SPI at proportions of 50/50, 40/60 and 60/40%) and three with 30% of hydrolysate and 70% of mixture (gelatine/SPI at proportions of 50/50, 40/60 and 60/40%). The spray-dried formulations were evaluated by SEM, hygroscopicity, thermal behavior (DSC), dissolution, and bitter taste, by a trained sensory panel using a paired-comparison test (free samples vs. spray-dried samples); all samples were presented in powder form. SEM analysis showed mostly spherically shaped particles, with many concavities and some particles with pores. All formulations were oil and water compatible and showed lower hygroscopicity values than free casein hydrolysate. At Aw 0.83, the free hydrolysate showed Tg about 25 degrees C lower than the formulations, indicating that the formulations may be more stable at Aw >= 0.65 since the glass transition should be prevented. The sensory panel found the formulations, tasted in the powder form, to be less bitter (P < 0.05) than the free casein hydrolysate. These results indicated that spray drying of casein hydrolysate with mixtures of gelatin and SPI was successful to attenuate the bitterness of casein hydrolysate. Thus, spray drying widens the possibilities of application of casein hydrolysates. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Production and properties of casein hydrolysate microencapsulated by spray drying with soybean protein isolate

The aim of this work was to encapsulate casein hydrolysate by spray drying with soybean protein isolate (SPI) as wall material to attenuate the bitter taste of that product. Two treatments were prepared: both with 12 g/100 g solids and containing either two proportions of SPI: hydrolysate (70:30 and 80:20), called M1 and M2, respectively. The samples were evaluated for morphological characteristics (SEM), particle size, hygroscopicity, solubility, hydrophobicity, thermal behavior and bitter taste with a trained sensory panel using a paired-comparison test (non-encapsulated samples vs. encapsulated samples). Microcapsules had a continuous wall, many concavities, and no porosity. Treatments M1 and M2 presented average particle sizes of 11.32 and 9.18 mu m, respectively. The wall material and/or the microencapsulation raised the hygroscopicity of the hydrolysate since the free hydrolysate had hygroscopicity of 53 g of water/100 g of solids and M1 and M2 had 106.99 and 102.19 g of water/100 g of solids, respectively. However, the hydrophobicity decreases, the absence of a peak in encapsulated hydrolysates, and the results of the panel sensory test considering the encapsulated samples less bitter (p < 0.05) than the non-encapsulated, showed that spray drying with SPI was an efficient method for microencapsulation and attenuation of the bitter taste of the casein hydrolysate. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Comparing species and measures of landscape structure as indicators of conservation importance

P>1. The use of indicators to identify areas of conservation importance has been challenged on several grounds, but nonetheless retains appeal as no more parsimonious approach exists. Among the many variants, two indicator strategies stand out: the use of indicator species and the use of metrics of landscape structure. While the first has been thoroughly studied, the same cannot be said about the latter. We aimed to contrast the relative efficacy of species-based and landscape-based indicators by: (i) comparing their ability to reflect changes in community integrity at regional and landscape spatial scales, (ii) assessing their sensitivity to changes in data resolution, and (iii) quantifying the degree to which indicators that are generated in one landscape or at one spatial scale can be transferred to additional landscapes or scales. 2. We used data from more than 7000 bird captures in 65 sites from six 10 000-ha landscapes with different proportions of forest cover in the Atlantic Forest of Brazil. Indicator species and landscape-based indicators were tested in terms of how effective they were in reflecting changes in community integrity, defined as deviations in bird community composition from control areas. 3. At the regional scale, indicator species provided more robust depictions of community integrity than landscape-based indicators. At the landscape scale, however, landscape-based indicators performed more effectively, more consistently and were also more transferable among landscapes. The effectiveness of high resolution landscape-based indicators was reduced by just 12% when these were used to explain patterns of community integrity in independent data sets. By contrast, the effectiveness of species-based indicators was reduced by 33%. 4. Synthesis and applications. The use of indicator species proved to be effective; however their results were variable and sensitive to changes in scale and resolution, and their application requires extensive and time-consuming field work. Landscape-based indicators were not only effective but were also much less context-dependent. The use of landscape-based indicators may allow the rapid identification of priority areas for conservation and restoration, and indicate which restoration strategies should be pursued, using remotely sensed imagery. We suggest that landscape-based indicators might often be a better, simpler, and cheaper strategy for informing decisions in conservation.

Morphology and phylogenetic relationships of a remarkable new genus and two new species of Neotropical freshwater stingrays from the Amazon basin (Chondrichthyes: Potamotrygonidae)

The morphology and phylogenetic relationships of a new genus and two new species of Neotropical freshwater stingrays, family Potamotrygonidae, are investigated and described in detail. The new genus, Heliotrygon, n. gen., and its two new species, Heliotrygon gomesi, n. sp. (type-species) and Heliotrygon rosai, n. sp., are compared to all genera and species of potamotrygonids, based on revisions in progress. Some of the derived features of Heliotrygon include its unique disc proportions (disc highly circular, convex anteriorly at snout region, its width and length very similar), extreme subdivision of suborbital canal (forming a complex honeycomb-like pattern anterolaterally on disc), stout and triangular pelvic girdle, extremely reduced caudal sting, basibranchial copula with very slender and acute anterior extension, and precerebral and frontoparietal fontanellae of about equal width, tapering very little posteriorly. Both new species can be distinguished by their unique color patterns: Heliotrygon gomesi is uniform gray to light tan or brownish dorsally, without distinct patterns, whereas Heliotrygon rosai is characterized by numerous white to creamy-white vermiculate markings over a light brown, tan or gray background color. Additional proportional characters that may further distinguish both species are also discussed. Morphological descriptions are provided for dermal denticles, ventral lateral-line canals, skeleton, and cranial, hyoid and mandibular muscles of Heliotrygon, which clearly corroborate it as the sister group of Paratrygon. Both genera share numerous derived features of the ventral lateral-line canals, neurocranium, scapulocoracoid, pectoral basals, clasper morphology, and specific patterns of the adductor mandibulae and spiracularis medialis muscles. Potamotrygon and Plesiotrygon are demonstrated to share derived characters of their ventral lateral-line canals, in addition to the presence of angular cartilages. Our morphological phylogeny is further corroborated by a molecular phylogenetic analysis of cytochrome b based on four sequences (637 base pairs in length), representing two distinct haplotypes for Heliotrygon gomesi. Parsimony analysis produced a single most parsimonious tree revealing Heliotrygon and Paratrygon as sister taxa (boot-strap proportion of 70%), which together are the sister group to a clade including Plesiotrygon and species of Potamotrygon. These unusual stingrays highlight that potamotrygonid diversity, both in terms of species composition and undetected morphological and molecular patterns, is still poorly known.

Potamotrygon tigrina, a new species of freshwater stingray from the upper Amazon basin, closely related to Potamotrygon schroederi Fernandez-Yepez, 1958 (Chondrichthyes: Potamotrygonidae)

A new species of Neotropical freshwater stingray, family Potamotrygonidae, is described from the Rio Nanay in the upper Rio Amazonas basin of Peru. Potamotrygon tigrina, n. sp., is easily distinguished from all congeners by its conspicuous dorsal disc coloration, composed of bright yellow to orange vermiculations strongly interwoven with a dark-brown to deep-black background. Additional features that in combination diagnose P. tigrina, n. sp., include the presence of a single angular cartilage, low and not closely grouped dorsal tail spines, and coloration of tail composed of relatively wide and alternating bands of creamy white and dark brown to black. Potamotrygon tigrina is closely related to Potamotrygon schroederi Fernandez-Yepez, 1958, which occurs in the Rio Negro (Brazil) and Rio Orinoco (Venezuela, Colombia). Both species are very similar in proportions and counts, and share features hypothesized to be derived within Potamotrygonidae, related to their specific angular cartilage morphology, distal tail color, dorsal tail-spine pattern, and ventral lateral-line system. To further substantiate the description of P. tigrina, n. sp., we provide a redescription of P. schroederi based on material from the Rio Negro (Brazil) and Rio Orinoco (Venezuela). Specimens from the two basins differ in number of vertebral centra and slightly in size and frequency of rosettes on dorsal disc, distinctions that presently do not warrant their specific separation. Potamotrygon tigrina is frequently commercialized in the international aquarium trade but virtually nothing is known of its biology or conservation status.

DGGE with genomic DNA: Suitable for detection of numerically important organisms but not for identification of the most abundant organisms

Identification of all important community members as well as of the numerically dominant members of a community are key aspects of microbial community analysis of bioreactor samples. A systematic study was conducted with artificial consortia to test whether denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGCE) is a reliable technique to obtain such community data under conditions where results would not be affected by differences in DNA extraction efficiency from cells. A total of 27 consortia were established by mixing DNA extracted from Escherichia coli K12, Burkholderia cepacia and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in different proportions. Concentrations of DNA of single organisms in the consortia were either 0.04, 0.4 or 4 ng/mu l. DGGE-PCR of genomic DNA with primer sets targeted at the V3 and V6-V8 regions of the 16S rDNA failed to detect the three community members in only 7% of consortia, but provided incorrect information about dominance or co-dominance for 85% and 89% of consortia with the primer sets for the V6-V8 and V3 regions, respectively. The high failure rate in detection of dominant B. cepacia with the primers for the V6-V8 region was attributable to a single nucleoticle primer mismatch in the target sequences of both, the forward and reverse primer. Amplification bias in PCR of E. coli and S. maltophilia for the V6-V8 region and for all three organisms for the V3 region occurred due to interference of genomic DNA in PCR-DGGE, since a nested PCR approach, where PCR-DGGE was started from mixtures of 16S rRNA genes of the organisms, provided correct information about the relative abundance of original DNA in the sample. Multiple bands were not observed in pure culture amplicons produced with the V6-V8 primer pair, but pure culture V3 DGGE profiles of E. coli, S. maltophilia and B. cepacia contained 5, 3 and 3 bands, respectively. These results demonstrate DGGE was suitable for identification of all important community members in the three-membered artificial consortium, but not for identification of the dominant organisms in this small community. Multiple DGGE bands obtained for single organisms with the V3 primer pair could greatly confound interpretation of DGGE profiles. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.