High-Arctic nesting geese occupying less favourable nest sites are more vulnerable to predation

We thank Norwegian Polar Institute for logistical sup-port and the Governor of Svalbard for allowing access to Sassendalen. The authors thank the Climate-ecological Observatory for Arctic Tundra programme for assistance with this study. Comments and suggestions from review-ers greatly improved the manuscript, and we thank them for their time and recommendations.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Using Ordinary Digital Cameras in Place of Near-Infrared Sensors to Derive Vegetation Indices for Phenology Studies of High Arctic Vegetation

We thank Mark Gillespie, Nanna Baggesen, and Anne Marit Vik for field assistance. The University in Svalbard (UNIS) provided logistical support. This work was funded by the Norwegian Research Council through the ‘SnoEco’ project (project No. 230970) and Arctic Field Grant (No. 246110/E10). It was supported by the ESA Prodex project ‘Sentinel-2 for High North Vegetation Phenology’ (contract No. 4000110654), the EC FP7 collaborative project ‘Sentinels Synergy Framework’ (SenSyF), funding from The Fram Centre Terrestrial Flagship, also from the EEA Norway Grants (WICLAP project, ID 198571), and from the GRENE Arctic Climate Change Research Project, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology in Japan.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Biding time before breeding: flexible use of the Arctic landscape by migratory geese during spring

We thank the Governor of Svalbard for allowing access to study sites and the University Centre in Svalbard and Norwegian Polar Institute for logistical support.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

THE EDINBURGH RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF BREAST-CANCER SCREENING - RESULTS AFTER 10 YEARS OF FOLLOW-UP

The Edinburgh Randomised Trial of Breast Cancer Screening recruited 44,288 women aged 45-64 years into the initial cohort of the trial during 1978-81, and 10 years of follow-up is now complete. A total of 22,944 women were randomised into the study group and were offered screening for 7 years; the remaining women formed the control group. After 10 years, breast cancer mortality is 14-21% lower in the study group than in the controls depending on the precise definition of the end point. These differences are not statistically significant; for breast cancer as the underlying cause of death the relative risk is 0.82 (95% confidence interval 0.61-1.11). Rates of locally advanced and metastatic cancer were substantially lower in the study group, but screening has failed to achieve marked reductions in rates of small node-positive cancers. Those women who accepted the final invitation to screening have been monitored over the 3 year period prior to their first screen under the UK service screening programme. Interval cases, expressed as a proportion of the control incidence, increased from 12% in the first year to 67% in the third year. The reduction in breast cancer mortality for older women (aged at least 50 years) is the same as that for the total study group for this duration of follow-up. For analyses of breast cancer mortality in younger women updates recruited to the trial from 1982 to 1985 (10,383 women with 6-8 years' follow-up) have been included. The reduction in breast cancer mortality for women aged 45-49 years at entry was 22% (relative risk = 0.78, 95% confidence interval = 0.46-1.31)

Voices About Choices: The Role of Female Networks in Affirming Life Choices in the Academy

This essay addresses the topic of women\u27s professional development in the academy, noting the critical roles fulfilled by support networks. Research and personal narratives explore the diverse choices women make, the resistance they sometimes face, and the need to find validation for those choices. Recognizing the importance of women\u27s achievement of tenure and publication, the authors also challenge the notion that those traditional measures of academic success are the only, or the best, way to assess women\u27s professional development

The Iowa Homemaker vol.9, no.8

Home Economics in Great Britain by Marguerite Stotts Hopkins, page 1 Farm and Home Week by Nellie Goethe, Ph. D., page 2 Intelligent Buying by Frances A. Sims, page 3 Miss Vigor’s Journal by Margaret Wichman, page 4 Living on $10 a Month by Thelma Carlson, page 5 4-H Club by Helen Melton, page 6 State Association by Marcia E. Turner, page 8 Editorial News, page 11 Alumnae News by Dorothy B. Anderson, page 1

The Iowa Homemaker vol.10, no.1

Home Economics in Denmark by Marguerite Stotts Hopkins, page 1 The Swan Song of the Silk Storm by Clareta Walker, page 2 Follies at I. S. C. by Julia Bourne, page 3 Found – Thirty-five Hours a Week by Ethel Cessna Morgan, page 4 Cannibals Visit the Matrix Table, page 5 4-H Club by Helen Melton, page 6 Watch Out for Measles by Elizabeth Armstrong, page 7 State Association by Marcia E. Turner, page 8 Editorial, page 11 Alumnae News by Dorothy B. Anderson, page 12 Putting Life in the Living Room by Mabel Russell, page 1

The Iowa Homemaker vol.10, no.3

Iowa State “Mans” the Kitchen by Helen Melton, page 1 At Home in Nippon by Sarah Field, page 2 And Rush That Order, Please! by Bessie Hammer, page 3 Luncheon – Mile High by Mildred Ghrist Day, page 3 Gotta Job? by Julia Bourne, page 4 “P’s” and “Q’s” in China Selection by Ida M. Shilling, page 5 4-H Club by Helen Melton, page 6 State Association by Marcia E. Turner, page 8 Child Health May Day by Anafred Stephenson, page 10 Editorial, page 11 Alumnae News by Dorothy B. Anderson, page 1

A new NDVI measure that overcomes data sparsity in cloud-covered regions predicts annual variation in ground-based estimates of high-arctic plant productivity

Processing of the MODIS dataset for monitoring the onset of the growing season was, in part, funded by the Environmental Monitoring of Svalbard and Jan Mayen (MOSJ). We are grateful to senior advisor John Richard Hansen, our contact person at the Norwegian Polar Institute in MOSJ, for his support, and to the members of the Arctic Biomass project (Research Council of Norway [RCN], grant 227064/E10) for valuable discussion about the NDVI – biomass relationships. Additional funding was provided by the RCN through the projects ‘Predicting effects of climate change on Svalbard reindeer population dynamics: a mechanistic approach’ (grant 216051) and ‘SnoEco’ (grant 230970), the ESA PRODEX project ‘Sentinel-2 for High North Vegetation Phenology’ (grant 4000110654), and the Svalbard Environmental Protection Funded project ’Effects of climate change on plant productivity’ (grant 15/28).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Citizen science data reveals the need for keeping garden plant recommendations up-to-date to help pollinators

Widespread concern over declines in pollinating insects has led to numerous recommendations of which “pollinator-friendly” plants to grow and help turn urban environments into valuable habitat for such important wildlife. Whilst communicated widely by organisations and readily taken up by gardeners, the provenance, accuracy, specificity and timeliness of such recommendations remain unclear. Here we use data (6429 records) gathered through a UK-wide citizen science programme (BeeWatch) to determine food plant use by the nations’ bumblebee species, and show that much of the plant use recorded does not reflect practitioner recommendations: correlation between the practitioners’ bumblebee-friendly plant list (376 plants compiled from 14 different sources) and BeeWatch records (334 plants) was low (r = 0.57), and only marginally higher than the correlation between BeeWatch records and the practitioners’ pollinator-friendly plant list (465 plants from 9 different sources; r = 0.52). We found pollinator-friendly plant lists to lack independence (correlation between practitioners’ bumblebee-friendly and pollinator-friendly lists: r = 0.75), appropriateness and precision, thus failing to recognise the non-binary nature of food-plant preference (bumblebees used many plants, but only in small quantities, e.g. lavender—the most popular plant in the BeeWatch database—constituted, at most, only 11% of records for any one bumblebee species) and stark differences therein among species and pollinator groups. We call for the provision and use of up-to-date dynamic planting recommendations driven by live (citizen science) data, with the possibility to specify pollinator species or group, to powerfully support transformative personal learning journeys and pollinator-friendly management of garden spaces