Handling Qualities Prediction of an F-16XL-Based Reduced Sonic Boom Aircraft

A major goal of the Supersonics Project under NASA s Fundamental Aeronautics program is sonic boom reduction of supersonic aircraft. An important part of this effort is development and validation of sonic boom prediction tools used in aircraft design. NASA Dryden s F- 16XL was selected as a potential testbed aircraft to provide flight validation. Part of this task was predicting the handling qualities of the modified aircraft. Due to the high cost of modifying the existing F-16XL control laws, it was desirable to find modifications that reduced the aircraft sonic boom but did not degrade baseline aircraft handling qualities allowing for the potential of flight test without changing the current control laws. This was not a requirement for the initial modification design work, but an important consideration for proceeding to the flight test option. The primary objective of this work was to determine an aerodynamic and mass properties envelope of the F-16XL aircraft. The designers could use this envelope to determine the effect of proposed modifications on aircraft handling qualities

Cell death regulation in Drosophila: Conservation of mechanism and unique insights

Programmed cell death, or apoptosis, is a genetically encoded form of cell suicide that results in the orderly death and phagocytic removal of excess, damaged, or dangerous cells during normal development and in the adult. The cellular machinery required to carry out apoptosis is present in most, if not all cells, but is only activated in cells instructed to die (for review see Jacobson et al. 1997). Here, we review cell death regulation in the fly in the context of a first pass look at the complete Drosophila genome and what is known about death regulation in other organisms, particularly worms and vertebrates

Differential response and traditional protection investigation: a comparison of two child welfare investigation streams

INTRODUCTION Determining an appropriate threshold for which children and families should receive child welfare services has been widely debated in literature. Workers are faced with multiple child welfare orientations when determining the appropriate level of intrusiveness during child maltreatment investigations [3]. Parental rights, family preservation, and safety of the child are some of the competing tensions in the child welfare model that investigating workers must balance [2,9]. Differential Response (DR) model is a flexible approach to child maltreatment investigations developed to provide a range of customized investigative streams incorporating family-centered, and strengths-based practices [4]. This model is a less intrusive approach to investigations for low-risk cases that do not present imminent risk to the child, compared to Traditional Protection Investigations (INV) [5,7]. There is a high degree of jurisdictional variation in screening, intake and administration of DR models resulting in a disparity of findings throughout child welfare research [4]. In 2002, the Alberta Response Model was created to allow child welfare agencies to provide flexible investigative streams to families based on the type and severity of child maltreatment [1,8]. The Family Enhancement Program works as part of the Alberta Response Model to provide children and families with a DR investigation stream [1]. High-risk cases are streamed to INV while lower risk families who are willing are streamed to the Family Enhancement Program [1]. This article will inform practitioners’ understandings of DR model by providing a provincial profile of DR streamed investigations while comparing child, household, maltreatment characteristics and case factor associated with each child welfare investigative stream based on the Alberta Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect 2008 (AIS-2008) [6].     METHODS This analysis is based on secondary analysis of the AIS-2008 dataset. The AIS-2008 is the second cycle of a provincial study that examines incidences of reported child abuse and neglect in Alberta for children 17 years and younger. This paper reports on findings based on a total weighted number of 26,957 child investigations that were noted as either DR streamed investigations, or INV streamed investigations. A total of 6,666 child investigations noted use of DR model, while an additional 20,291 child investigations noted use of INV model. Select comparisons of child, household, case and maltreatment factors from two child welfare investigation streams are presented in this analysis. Bivariate analyses and Pearson’s chi-squared test were used to compare each investigative stream and associated factors. For further information on methodology of the AIS-2008 refer to Chapter 2 of the full report [7].   RESULTS Figure 1 shows primary categories of all reported child maltreatment incidents and risk investigations streamed to DR and INV. Significant differences in child investigations were noted for younger children. Eleven percent of DR streamed investigations involved children who were less than 1 year old, and 8% of INV streamed investigations. Caseworkers were asked to report on nine caregiver risk factors, such as alcohol and/or drug abuse, cognitive impairment, and/or victim of intimate partner violence (IPV) [7]. While differences between the two investigative streams for caregiver risk factors would be expected, there were little differences noted. A risk investigation refers to situations where a specific incident of maltreatment has not yet occurred, however circumstances indicate that there is a significant future risk of maltreatment [7]. DR child investigations more frequently noted risk investigations than INV child investigations. For DR investigations, neglect was noted most frequently (38%), followed by exposure to intimate partner violence (23%), physical abuse (10%), and emotional maltreatment (9%). Ten percent of DR investigations noted emotional harm requiring treatment, compared to 16% of INV investigations. One percent of DR investigations noted physical harm severe enough to require medical attention, and 2% of INV investigations. The percentage of DR child investigations resulting in a formal child welfare placement was significantly less (5%) than INV child investigations (10%). Twenty-five percent of DR investigations remained open for ongoing services compared to 32% of INV investigations. DR investigations less often resulted an application to child welfare court (4%), than INV streamed investigations (13%). Figure 1. Primary Categories of All Reported Child Maltreatment Incidents and Risk Investigations in Alberta in 2008 by Child Welfare Investigation Streams. Percentages of type of maltreatment includes total number of child investigations (n=26,957) streamed to differential response (n=6,666), and traditional protection investigation (n=20,291). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This secondary data analysis examined 26,957 child maltreatment investigations from the AIS-2008 dataset. The increased flexibility of DR model enables workers to balance some of the competing tensions in child welfare. DR model allows child welfare agencies to provide less intrusive approach to investigations for low-risk investigations, compared to INV model which is intended for investigations presenting greater severity of harm. This exploratory analysis examined differences in characteristics between children and families of child maltreatment investigations streamed to DR approach and INV approach. Future research should examine long term outcomes of investigations streamed to DR and INV. Exploring long term outcomes will provide greater insight into the effectiveness of DR model child maltreatment investigations.   LIMITATIONS While the AIS-2008 dataset provides a unique opportunity to examine the child welfare response to reported maltreatment in Alberta, a number of considerations for this secondary analysis must be made when interpreting these findings. The AIS-2008 dataset; 1) only tracked reports investigated by child intervention services and did not include reports that were screened out, only investigated by police, and never reported; 2) is based on the assessments provided by the investigating child intervention workers and could not be independently verified; 3) is weighted using annual estimates which included counts of children investigated more than once during the year, therefore the unit of analysis for the weighted estimates was a child investigation; 4) as weighted estimates provided some instances where sample sizes were too small to derive publishable estimates [7].

Associated factors of investigations involving intimate partner violence and other forms of maltreatment; child family, household, and case characteristics

INTRODUCTION The co-occurrence of intimate partner violence (IPV) and child maltreatment intensifies the trauma experienced by children, compared with children who experience IPV alone [3]. IPV is linked to many negative developmental outcomes [2,7]. Children exposed to IPV are at risk for more social challenges [8], emotional issues [1,8], attachment issues [3], behavioural disorders [3], and more academic challenges [3,8]. There is a debate in literature where some researchers state that the involvement of child welfare in matters related to IPV result in overly intrusive interventions. Other research suggests that children exposed to IPV alone do not in general receive more intrusive intervention, but do require comparable supports as those children experiencing other forms of maltreatment. [2,4,6]   The Alberta Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect 2008 (AIS-2008) is a provincial study examining the characteristics of reported child abuse and neglect [5]. The AIS-2008 dataset provides the opportunity to examine characteristics of children and families involved in IPV child investigations, as well as the short term outcomes. This analysis will examine evidence supporting or challenging the use of child welfare services for children and families experiencing IPV in Alberta in 2008.   METHODS The AIS-2008 is the second provincial study on child abuse and neglect to be conducted in Alberta for children 17 years and younger [5]. This article presents select comparisons of child, family, household, and case factors across 3 groups of substantiated child investigations. This includes: 1) IPV only child investigations where IPV was noted as the single child maltreatment concern; 2) co-occurring child investigations where IPV and at least one other form of child maltreatment (physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect and emotional maltreatment) was noted; and 3) other forms of maltreatment child investigations involving other forms of child maltreatment excluding concerns of IPV. Workers noted IPV as a form of maltreatment if a child had allegedly been a direct witness to physical violence, had indirect exposure to physical violence, and/or exposed to emotional violence. The analyses presented in this article are based on annually and regionally weighted estimates of substantiated child investigations and examines a total of 14,404 substantiated child maltreatment investigations. This includes 3,898 IPV only investigations (27%), 2,302 co-occurring investigations (16%), and 8,204 other forms of maltreatment investigations (57%). Bivariate analyses and Pearson’s chi-squared tests were used to compare IPV investigations with co-occurring investigations and other forms of maltreatment investigations. For further information on the methodology of the AIS-2008 refer to Chapter 2 of the full report [5].   RESULTS Child welfare workers were asked to report on 9 caregiver risk factors at the time of the investigation. Victim and/or perpetrator of domestic violence was excluded as a household caregiver risk factor. Caregiver risk factors varied considerably between IPV only investigations, co-occurring investigations, and other forms of maltreatment investigations. For IPV only investigations, this included alcohol abuse (58%), few social supports (49%), and mental health issues (35%). For co-occurring investigations, alcohol abuse (79%), mental health issues (56%), and few social supports (54%) were the top three concerns that were noted. Other forms of maltreatment investigations identified few social supports (45%), mental health issues (41%), and alcohol abuse (34%). The level of harm was significantly lower for IPV only investigations than both co-occurring investigations and other forms of maltreatment investigations. Fifteen percent of IPV investigations noted severity of emotional harm requiring treatment, compared with 39% of co-occurring investigations, and 26% of other forms of maltreatment investigations. As would be expected, estimates of severity of physical harm were too low to report for IPV only investigations. Sixty-six percent of IPV only investigations involved multiple maltreatment incidents, 88% in co-occurring investigations, and 70% in other forms of maltreatment investigations. Child investigations resulting in out-of-home placement greatly varied by each comparison group. Three percent of IPV only investigations noted formal child welfare placement, 15% in co-occurring investigations, and 20% in other forms of maltreatment investigations. Workers referred 30% of IPV only investigations to ongoing services compared to 56% of co-occurring, and 49% of other forms of maltreatment.   Figure 1. Case Outcome Factors. Percentages of case characteristics include 14,404 child maltreatment substantiated investigations. This includes 3,898 IPV only investigations (27%), 2,302 co-occurring investigations (16%), and 8,204 other forms of maltreatment investigations (57%). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The AIS-2008 dataset provides child, caregiver, household, and case factors associated with IPV only investigations, co-occurring investigations, and other forms of maltreatment investigations. While there is concern that the involvement of child welfare in IPV investigations will result in more intrusive interventions [6], findings from this analysis support Black et al. (2008) [1] who recognized that IPV as a single concern does not necessarily result in more intrusive outcomes. Co-occurring investigations noted the highest severity of harm, compared to IPV only investigations and other forms of maltreatment investigations. Subsequent analyses will build on this work in order to examine specific risk and protective factors that are predictive of child welfare placement and the provision of ongoing services. LIMITATIONS While the AIS-2008 dataset provides a unique opportunity to examine the child welfare response to reported maltreatment in Alberta, a number of considerations for this secondary analysis must be made when interpreting these findings. The AIS-2008 dataset; 1) only tracked reports investigated by child intervention services and did not include reports that were screened out, only investigated by police, and never reported; 2) is based on the assessments provided by the investigating child intervention workers and could not be independently verified; 3) is weighted using annual estimates which included counts of children investigated more than once during the year, therefore the unit of analysis for the weighted estimates was a child investigation; 4) as weighted estimates provided some instances where sample sizes were too small to derive publishable estimates [5].

A comparison of two cohorts among child welfare investigations in Alberta: child, caregivers, household, & case risk factors

INTRODUCTION In 2008, the province of Alberta reported children eleven years and younger made up 71% of all investigations [5]. More than 8,400 children five years of age or younger came to the attention of child welfare in Alberta in 2008 for allegations of child abuse and neglect, compared to approximately 7,700 children ages six to eleven years of age. Younger children are especially vulnerable to their surrounding environment and are heavily dependent on their caregivers to meet their basic needs; which inevitably provides the foundation for future developmental growth [6]. It is imperative for younger children to achieve critical developmental milestones such as language, brain development, emotional regulation, and attachment bonds [6]. Research indicates that younger children who experience maltreatment have an increased risk for health, behavior, and psychological functioning concerns in later life [2,5,6]. The accumulation of risk factors has been attributed to poorer internal and external behavioral trajectories in later childhood and adolescent years [1,3,6,8,9]. Examining child, caregiver, household, and case risk factors associated with these two cohorts will contribute to a greater understanding of the complex experiences between these child age groups. This paper seeks to provide researchers and practitioners with awareness concerning the impact of risk factors on this vulnerable population.   METHODS This secondary analysis was conducted on data collected for the Alberta Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (AIS-2008). The AIS-2008 collected 2,239 child maltreatment investigations from fourteen randomly selected child intervention services offices over a three month case selection period (October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008). Offices were stratified by jurisdiction and size to ensure that all subpopulations were fairly represented in the study, with additional consideration for Aboriginal organizations. This article presents select comparisons of child, family, household, and case factors of child maltreatment investigations and risk of future maltreatment investigations. The analyses compares two child age cohorts: 0-5 years old and 6-11 years old. Bivariate analyses and Pearson’s chi-squared tests were used to examine differences in risk factors associated with the younger and older cohorts.   This analysis was conducted using weighted estimates of 16,120 child investigations for incidents of maltreatment involving children 11 years of age and younger in Alberta. Of the total weighted estimate, 8,415 alleged child maltreatment  investigations involved children five years and younger and 7,705 maltreatment investigations involved children between six and 11 years of age. Analysis included substantiated, suspected and unfounded investigations for the two cohorts from the AIS-2008 data. For further information, refer to the methodology chapter of the AIS-2008: Major Findings Report [5].   RESULTS Figure 1 shows case risk factors for child investigations where a child 11 years old and younger was involved. Thirty-one percent of the 0-5 year old cohort remained open for on-going services and 9% of cases were streamed to differential or alternative response. Twenty-nine percent of the 6-11 cohort remained open for on-going services and of those, 10% of cases were streamed to differential or alternative response. Fifty-one percent of investigations of the 0-5 cohort were previously reported to child welfare for suspected maltreatment. For the older cohort, 61% of investigations were previously reported to child welfare for suspected maltreatment. Workers were asked to report on 6 housing safety concerns: accessible weapons, accessible drugs or drug paraphernalia, drug production or trafficking in the home, chemicals or solvents used in production, other home injury and health hazards. One or two of these household hazard risk factors were identified in 16% of investigations in the 0-5 cohort and 14% in the 6-11 cohort. For the 0-5 cohort, emotional harm was documented in 16% of investigations, whereas physical harm was noted in 7% of investigations. For the older cohort, emotional harm was documented in 30% of investigations and physical harm was documented in 5% of investigations. While 10% of the 0-5 cohort investigations were placed in a child welfare placement, 7% of 6-11 cohort investigations were placed in a child welfare placement.   Figure 1. Case Risk Factors. Percentages of case characteristics include all child investigations for incidents of child maltreatment where a child 11 years or younger was involved (n=16,120), 0-5 years old cohort (n=8,415), and 6-11 years old cohort (n=7,705). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This secondary analysis of the AIS-2008 dataset examined child, caregiver, household, and case risk factors associated with the two youngest cohorts investigated by the child protection system. Firstly, these findings support the need to focus on both the additive effects and breadth of risk factors pertaining to child investigations, rather than focusing on solely one risk factor during an investigation. Second, the present findings indicate that families with young children in the child welfare system are faced with many significant stressors or multiple risk factors, such as parental mental health, social isolation, drug or alcohol abuse, intimate partner violence, financial hardship, and may also have young children experiencing poor functioning in multiple areas of their development. Children eleven and under have longer sustained involvement and multiple involvement with child protection services. Lastly, the array of risk factors and protective factors identified by child welfare workers could potentially shape both prevention and intervention strategies in preventing rates of re-referral and increase overall positive outcomes for children and families.   LIMITATIONS While the AIS-2008 dataset provides a unique opportunity to examine the child welfare response to reported maltreatment in Alberta, a number of considerations for this secondary analysis must be made when interpreting these findings. The AIS-2008 dataset; 1) only tracked reports investigated by child intervention services and did not include reports that were screened out, only investigated by police, and never reported; 2) is based on the assessments provided by the investigating child intervention workers and could not be independently verified; 3) is weighted using annual estimates which included counts of children investigated more than once during the year, therefore the unit of analysis for the weighted estimates was a child investigation; 4) as weighted estimates provided some instances where sample sizes were too small to derive publishable estimates [5].

Reaper is regulated by IAP-mediated ubiquitination

In most cases, apoptotic cell death culminates in the activation of the caspase family of cysteine proteases, leading to the orderly dismantling and elimination of the cell. The IAPs (inhibitors of apoptosis) comprise a family of proteins that oppose caspases and thus act to raise the apoptotic threshold. Disruption of IAP-mediated caspase inhibition has been shown to be an important activity for pro-apoptotic proteins in Drosophila (Reaper, HID, and Grim) and in mammalian cells (Smac/DIABLO and Omi/HtrA2). In addition, in the case of the fly, these proteins are able to stimulate the ubiquitination and degradation of IAPs by a mechanism involving the ubiquitin ligase activity of the IAP itself. In this report, we show that the Drosophila RHG proteins (Reaper, HID, and Grim) are themselves substrates for IAP-mediated ubiquitination. This ubiquitination of Reaper requires IAP ubiquitin-ligase activity and a stable interaction between Reaper and the IAP. Additionally, degradation of Reaper can be blocked by mutating its potential ubiquitination sites. Most importantly, we also show that regulation of Reaper by ubiquitination is a significant factor in determining its biological activity. These data demonstrate a novel function for IAPs and suggest that IAPs and Reaper-like proteins mutually control each other's abundance

A pathway of signals regulating effector and initiator caspases in the developing Drosophila eye

Regulated cell death and survival play important roles in neural development. Extracellular signals are presumed to regulate seven apparent caspases to determine the final structure of the nervous system. In the eye, the EGF receptor, Notch, and intact primary pigment and cone cells have been implicated in survival or death signals. An antibody raised against a peptide from human caspase 3 was used to investigate how extracellular signals controlled spatial patterning of cell death. The antibody crossreacted specifically with dying Drosophila cells and labelled the activated effector caspase Drice. It was found that the initiator caspase Dronc and the proapoptotic gene head involution defective were important for activation in vivo. Dronc may play roles in dying cells in addition to activating downstream effector caspases. Epistasis experiments ordered EGF receptor, Notch, and primary pigment and cone cells into a single pathway that affected caspase activity in pupal retina through hid and Inhibitor of Apoptosis Proteins. None of these extracellular signals appeared to act by initiating caspase activation independently of hid. Taken together, these findings indicate that in eye development spatial regulation of cell death and survival is integrated through a single intracellular pathway

The Drosophila Caspase DRONC Cleaves following Glutamate or Aspartate and Is Regulated by DIAP1, HID, and GRIM

The caspase family of cysteine proteases plays important roles in bringing about apoptotic cell death. All caspases studied to date cleave substrates COOH-terminal to an aspartate. Here we show that the Drosophila caspase DRONC cleaves COOH-terminal to glutamate as well as aspartate. DRONC autoprocesses itself following a glutamate residue, but processes a second caspase, drICE, following an aspartate. DRONC prefers tetrapeptide substrates in which aliphatic amino acids are present at the P2 position, and the P1 residue can be either aspartate or glutamate. Expression of a dominant negative form of DRONC blocks cell death induced by the Drosophila cell death activators reaper, hid, and grim, and DRONC overexpression in flies promotes cell death. Furthermore, the Drosophila cell death inhibitor DIAP1 inhibits DRONC activity in yeast, and DIAP1's ability to inhibit DRONC-dependent yeast cell death is suppressed by HID and GRIM. These observations suggest that DRONC acts to promote cell death. However, DRONC activity is not suppressed by the caspase inhibitor and cell death suppressor baculovirus p35. We discuss possible models for DRONC function as a cell death inhibitor

The Drosophila Inhibitor of Apoptosis (IAP) DIAP2 Is Dispensable for Cell Survival, Required for the Innate Immune Response to Gram-negative Bacterial Infection, and Can Be Negatively Regulated by the Reaper/Hid/Grim Family of IAP-binding Apoptosis Inducers

Many inhibitor of apoptosis (IAP) family proteins inhibit apoptosis. IAPs contain N-terminal baculovirus IAP repeat domains and a C-terminal RING ubiquitin ligase domain. Drosophila IAP DIAP1 is essential for the survival of many cells, protecting them from apoptosis by inhibiting active caspases. Apoptosis initiates when proteins such as Reaper, Hid, and Grim bind a surface groove in DIAP1 baculovirus IAP repeat domains via an N-terminal IAP-binding motif. This evolutionarily conserved interaction disrupts DIAP1-caspase interactions, unleashing apoptosis-inducing caspase activity. A second Drosophila IAP, DIAP2, also binds Rpr and Hid and inhibits apoptosis in multiple contexts when overexpressed. However, due to a lack of mutants, little is known about the normal functions of DIAP2. We report the generation of diap2 null mutants. These flies are viable and show no defects in developmental or stress-induced apoptosis. Instead, DIAP2 is required for the innate immune response to Gram-negative bacterial infection. DIAP2 promotes cytoplasmic cleavage and nuclear translocation of the NF-{kappa}B homolog Relish, and this requires the DIAP2 RING domain. Increasing the genetic dose of diap2 results in an increased immune response, whereas expression of Rpr or Hid results in down-regulation of DIAP2 protein levels. Together these observations suggest that DIAP2 can regulate immune signaling in a dose-dependent manner, and this can be regulated by IBM-containing proteins. Therefore, diap2 may identify a point of convergence between apoptosis and immune signaling pathways