Efflux Pumps Represent Possible Evolutionary Convergence onto the Beta Barrel Fold

Preprint now published in Structure doi: 10.1016/j.str.2018.06.007There are around 100 types of integral outer membrane proteins in each Gram negative bacteria. All of these proteins have the same fold—an up-down β-barrel. It has been suggested that all membrane β-barrels other than lysins are homologous. Here we suggest that β-barrels of efflux pumps have converged on this fold as well. By grouping structurally-solved outer membrane β-barrels (OMBBs) by sequence we find evidence that the membrane environment may have led to convergent evolution of the barrel fold. Specifically, the lack of sequence linkage to other barrels coupled with distinctive structural differences, such as differences in strand tilt and barrel radius, suggest that efflux pumps have evolutionarily converged on the barrel. Finally, we find a possible ancestor for the OMBB efflux pumps as they are related to periplasmic components of the same pumps

The flyby anomaly: a multivariate analysis approach

[EN] The flyby anomaly is the unexpected variation of the asymptotic post-encounter velocity of a spacecraft with respect to the pre-encounter velocity as it performs a slingshot manoeuvre. This effect has been detected in, at least, six flybys of the Earth but it has not appeared in other recent flybys. In order to find a pattern in these, apparently contradictory, data several phenomenological formulas have been proposed but all have failed to predict a new result in agreement with the observations. In this paper we use a multivariate dimensional analysis approach to propose a fitting of the data in terms of the local parameters at perigee, as it would occur if this anomaly comes from an unknown fifth force with latitude dependence. Under this assumption, we estimate the range of this force around 300 km .Acedo Rodríguez, L. (2017). The flyby anomaly: a multivariate analysis approach. Astrophysics and Space Science. 362(2):1-7. doi:10.1007/s10509-017-3025-zS173622Acedo, L.: Adv. Space Res. 54, 788 (2014). 1505.06884Acedo, L.: Universe 1, 422 (2015a)Acedo, L.: Galaxies 3, 113 (2015b)Acedo, L.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 463(2), 2119 (2016)Acedo, L., Bel, L.: Astron. Nachr. (2016). 1602.03669Adler, S.L.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 25, 4577 (2010). 0908.2414 . doi: 10.1142/S0217751X10050706Adler, S.L.: In: Proceedings of the Conference in Honour of Murray Gellimann’s 80th Birthday, p. 352 (2011). doi: 10.1142/9789814335614_0032Anderson, J.D., Laing, P.A., Lau, E.L., Liu, A.S., Nieto, M.M., Turyshev, S.G.: Phys. Rev. D 65(8), 082004 (2002). gr-qc/0104064 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.65.082004Anderson, J.D., Campbell, J.K., Ekelund, J.E., Ellis, J., Jordan, J.F.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 100(9), 091102 (2008). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.091102Atchison, J.A., Peck, M.A., Streetman, B.J.: J. Guid. Control Dyn. 33, 1115 (2010). doi: 10.2514/1.47413Border, J.S., Pham, T., Bedrossian, A., Chang, C.: 2015 Delta Differential One-way Ranging in Dsn Telecommunication Link Design Handbook (810-005). http://deepspace.jpl.nasa.gov/dsndocs/810-005/210/210A.pdf . Accessed: 2016-11-17Burns, J.A.: Am. J. Phys. 44(10), 944 (1976). doi: 10.1119/1.10237Busack, H.-J.: arXiv e-prints 1312.1139 (2013)Butrica, A.J.: In: From Engineering Science to Big Science: The NACA and NASA Collier Trophy Research Project Winners, p. 251 (1998)Cahill, R.T.: arXiv e-prints 0804.0039 (2008)Chamberlin, A., Yeomans, D., Giorgini, J., Chodas, P.: 2016 Horizons Ephemeris System. http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons.cgi . Accessed: 2016-10-27Danby, J.M.A.: Fundamentals of Celestial Mechanics, 2nd edn. Willmann-Bell, Richmond (1988)Dickey, J.O., Bender, P.L., Faller, J.E., Newhall, X.X., Ricklefs, R.L., Ries, J.G., Shelus, P.J., Veillet, C., Whipple, A.L., Wiant, J.R., Williams, J.G., Yoder, C.F.: Science 265, 482 (1994). doi: 10.1126/science.265.5171.482Feng, J.L., Fornal, B., Galon, I., Gardner, S., Somolinsky, J., Tait, T.M.P., Tanedo, P.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 071803 (2016). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.071803Fischbach, E., Buncher, J.B., Gruenwald, J.T., Jenkins, J.H., Krause, D.E., Mattes, J.J., Newport, J.R.: Space Sci. Rev. 145, 285 (2009). doi: 10.1007/s11214-009-9518-5Folkner, W.M., Williamns, J.G., Boggs, D.H., Park, R.S., Kuchynka, P.: IPN Progress Report 42(196) (2014)Franklin, A., Fischback, E.: The Rise and Fall of the Fifth Force. Discovery, Pursuit, and Justification in Modern Physics, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (2016)Hackmann, E., Lämmerzahl, C.: In: 38th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. COSPAR Meeting, vol. 38, p. 3 (2010)Hafele, J.C.: arXiv e-prints 0904.0383 (2009)Iorio, L.: Sch. Res. Exch. 2009 807695 (2009). 0811.3924 . doi: 10.3814/2009/807695Iorio, L.: Astron. J. 142, 68 (2011a). 1102.4572 . doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/3/68Iorio, L.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 415, 1266 (2011b). 1102.0212Iorio, L.: Galaxies 1, 192 (2013). 1306.3166Iorio, L.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24, 1530015 (2015). 1412.7673Jouannic, B., Noomen, R., van den IJSel, J.A.A.: In: Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Space Flight Dynamics ISSFD, Munich (Germany), 2015Krasinsky, G.A., Brumberg, V.A.: Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astron. 90, 267 (2004)Lämmerzahl, C., Preuss, O., Dittus, H.: In: Dittus, H., Lämmerzahl, C., Turyshev, S.G. (eds.) Lasers, Clocks and Drag-Free Control: Exploration of Relativistic Gravity in Space. Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol. 349, p. 75 (2008). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-34377-6_3McCulloch, M.E.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 389, 57 (2008). 0806.4159 . doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2008.00523.xPinheiro, M.J.: Phys. Lett. A 378, 3007 (2014). 1404.1101Pinheiro, M.J.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 461(4), 3948 (2016)Rievers, B., Lämmerzahl, C.: Ann. Phys. 523, 439 (2011). 1104.3985 . doi: 10.1002/andp.201100081Thompson, P.F., Abrahamson, M., Ardalan, S., Bordi, J.: In: 24th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Santa Fe, New Mexico, January 26–30, 2014, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/2014/45519Turyshev, S.G., Toth, V.T.: Living Rev. Relativ. 13, 4 (2010). 1001.3686 . doi: 10.12942/lrr-2010-4Turyshev, S.G., Toth, V.T., Kinsella, G., Lee, S.-C., Lok, S.M., Ellis, J.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 108(24), 241101 (2012). 1204.2507 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.241101Vallado, D.A.: Fundamentals of Astrodynamics and Applications, 2nd edn. (2004)Williams, J.G., Turyshev, S.G., Boggs, D.H.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 93(26), 261101 (2004). gr-qc/0411113 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.26110

Heavy quarkonium: progress, puzzles, and opportunities

A golden age for heavy quarkonium physics dawned a decade ago, initiated by the confluence of exciting advances in quantum chromodynamics (QCD) and an explosion of related experimental activity. The early years of this period were chronicled in the Quarkonium Working Group (QWG) CERN Yellow Report (YR) in 2004, which presented a comprehensive review of the status of the field at that time and provided specific recommendations for further progress. However, the broad spectrum of subsequent breakthroughs, surprises, and continuing puzzles could only be partially anticipated. Since the release of the YR, the BESII program concluded only to give birth to BESIII; the $B$-factories and CLEO-c flourished; quarkonium production and polarization measurements at HERA and the Tevatron matured; and heavy-ion collisions at RHIC have opened a window on the deconfinement regime. All these experiments leave legacies of quality, precision, and unsolved mysteries for quarkonium physics, and therefore beg for continuing investigations. The plethora of newly-found quarkonium-like states unleashed a flood of theoretical investigations into new forms of matter such as quark-gluon hybrids, mesonic molecules, and tetraquarks. Measurements of the spectroscopy, decays, production, and in-medium behavior of c\bar{c}, b\bar{b}, and b\bar{c} bound states have been shown to validate some theoretical approaches to QCD and highlight lack of quantitative success for others. The intriguing details of quarkonium suppression in heavy-ion collisions that have emerged from RHIC have elevated the importance of separating hot- and cold-nuclear-matter effects in quark-gluon plasma studies. This review systematically addresses all these matters and concludes by prioritizing directions for ongoing and future efforts.Comment: 182 pages, 112 figures. Editors: N. Brambilla, S. Eidelman, B. K. Heltsley, R. Vogt. Section Coordinators: G. T. Bodwin, E. Eichten, A. D. Frawley, A. B. Meyer, R. E. Mitchell, V. Papadimitriou, P. Petreczky, A. A. Petrov, P. Robbe, A. Vair

Anomalous accelerations in spacecraft flybys of the Earth

[EN] The flyby anomaly is a persistent riddle in astrodynamics. Orbital analysis in several flybys of the Earth since the Galileo spacecraft flyby of the Earth in 1990 have shown that the asymptotic post-encounter velocity exhibits a difference with the initial velocity that cannot be attributed to conventional effects. To elucidate its origin, we have developed an orbital program for analyzing the trajectory of the spacecraft in the vicinity of the perigee, including both the Sun and the Moon¿s tidal perturbations and the geopotential zonal, tesseral and sectorial harmonics provided by the EGM96 model. The magnitude and direction of the anomalous acceleration acting upon the spacecraft can be estimated from the orbital determination program by comparing with the trajectories fitted to telemetry data as provided by the mission teams. This acceleration amounts to a fraction of a mm/s2 and decays very fast with altitude. The possibility of some new physics of gravity in the altitude range for spacecraft flybys is discussed.Acedo Rodríguez, L. (2017). Anomalous accelerations in spacecraft flybys of the Earth. Astrophysics and Space Science. 362(12):1-15. doi:10.1007/s10509-017-3205-xS11536212Acedo, L.: Galaxies 3, 113 (2015)Acedo, L.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 463(2), 2119 (2016)Acedo, L.: Adv. Space Res. 59(7), 1715 (2017). 1701.06939Acedo, L., Bel, L.: Astron. Nachr. 338(1), 117 (2017). 1602.03669Adler, S.L.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 25, 4577 (2010). 0908.2414 . doi: 10.1142/S0217751X10050706Adler, S.L.: In: Proceedings of the Conference in Honour of Murray Gellimann’s 80th Birthday, p. 352 (2011). doi: 10.1142/9789814335614_0032Anderson, J.D., Nieto, M.M.: In: Klioner, S.A., Seidelmann, P.K., Soffel, M.H. (eds.) Relativity in Fundamental Astronomy: Dynamics, Reference Frames, and Data Analysis. IAU Symposium, vol. 261, p. 189 (2010). doi: 10.1017/S1743921309990378Anderson, J.D., Laing, P.A., Lau, E.L., Liu, A.S., Nieto, M.M., Turyshev, S.G.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 81(14), 2858 (1998). gr-qc/0104064 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.2858Anderson, J.D., Laing, P.A., Lau, E.L., Liu, A.S., Nieto, M.M., Turyshev, S.G.: Phys. Rev. D 65(8), 082004 (2002). gr-qc/0104064 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.65.082004Anderson, J.D., Campbell, J.K., Ekelund, J.E., Ellis, J., Jordan, J.F.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 100(9), 091102 (2008). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.091102Atchison, J.A., Peck, M.A.: J. Guid. Control Dyn. 33, 1115 (2010). doi: 10.2514/1.47413Bertolami, O., Francisco, F., Gil, P.J.S.: Class. Quantum Gravity 33(12), 125021 (2016). 1507.08457 . doi: 10.1088/0264-9381/33/12/125021Bolton, S.J., Adriani, A., Adumitroaie, V., Allison, M., Anderson, J., Atreya, S., Bloxham, J., Brown, S., Connerney, J.E.P., DeJong, E., Folkner, W., Gautier, D., Grassi, D., Gulkis, S., Guillot, T., Hansen, C., Hubbard, W.B., Iess, L., Ingersoll, A., Janssen, M., Jorgensen, J., Kaspi, Y., Levin, S.M., Li, C., Lunine, J., Miguel, Y., Mura, A., Orton, G., Owen, T., Ravine, M., Smith, E., Steffes, P., Stone, E., Stevenson, D., Thorne, R., Waite, J., Durante, D., Ebert, R.W., Greathouse, T.K., Hue, V., Parisi, M., Szalay, J.R., Wilson, R.: Science 356, 821 (2017). doi: 10.1126/science.aal2108Cahill, R.T.: ArXiv e-prints (2008). 0804.0039Chamberlin, A., Yeomans, D., Giorgini, J., Chodas, P.: Horizons Ephemeris System (2016). http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/horizons.cgi . Accessed: 2016-10-27Chao, B.F.: C. R. Géosci. 338, 1123 (2006). doi: 10.1016/j.crte.2006.09.014Coddington, E., Levinson, N.: McGraw-Hill, New York (1955)Debono, I., Smoot, G.F.: Universe 2(4), 23 (2016). doi: 10.3390/universe2040023Desai, S.D.: J. Geophys. Res., Oceans 107(C11), 7 (2002). 3186. doi: 10.1029/2001JC001224Dickey, J.O., Bender, P.L., Faller, J.E., Newhall, X.X., Ricklefs, R.L., Ries, J.G., Shelus, P.J., Veillet, C., Whipple, A.L., Wiant, J.R., Williams, J.G., Yoder, C.F.: Science 265, 482 (1994). doi: 10.1126/science.265.5171.482Dyson, F.W., Eddington, A.S., Davidson, C.: Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond., Ser. A 220, 291 (1920). doi: 10.1098/rsta.1920.0009Everitt, C.W.F., et al.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 221101(106) (2011)Feng, J.L., Fornal, B., Galon, I., Gardner, S., Smolinsky, J., Tait, T.M.P., Tanedo, P.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 071803 (2016). 1604.07411 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.071803Folkner, W.M., Williams, J.G., Boggs, D.H., Park, R.S., Kuchynka, P.: IPN Prog. Rep. 42(196) (2014)Fornberg, B.: Math. Comput. 51(184), 699 (1988). doi: 10.1090/S0025-5718-1988-0935077-0Franklin, A., Fischback, E.: The Rise and Fall of the Fifth Force. Discovery, Pursuit, and Justification in Modern Physics, second edition. Springer, New York (2016)Giorgini, J.D.: Personal communication (2015)Hackmann, E., Laemmerzahl, C.: In: 38th COSPAR Scientific Assembly. COSPAR Meeting, vol. 38, p. 3 (2010)Hafele, J.C.: ArXiv e-prints (2009). 0904.0383ICGEM: International Center for Global Gravity Field Models. http://icgem.gfz-potsdam.de/tom_longtimeIERS: In: Petit, G., Luzum, B. (eds.) IERS Conventions (2010), p. 1. Verlag des Bundesamts für Kartographie und Geodäsie, Frankfurt am Main (2010)Iess, L., Asmar, S.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 16, 2117 (2007). doi: 10.1142/S0218271807011449Iess, L., Asmar, S., Tortora, P.: Acta Astronaut. 65, 666 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.01.049Iess, L., Di Benedetto, M., James, M., Mercolino, M., Simone, L., Tortora, P.: Acta Astronaut. 94, 699 (2014). doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2013.06.011Iorio, L.: Sch. Res. Exch. (2009). 0811.3924 . doi: 10.3814/2009/807695Iorio, L.: Astron. J. 142, 68 (2011a). 1102.4572 . doi: 10.1088/0004-6256/142/3/68Iorio, L.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 415, 1266 (2011b). 1102.0212Iorio, L.: Europhys. Lett. (2011c). 1105.4145 . doi: 10.1209/0295-5075/96/30001Iorio, L.: Adv. Space Res. 54(11), 2441 (2014a). 1311.4218 . doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2014.06.035Iorio, L.: Galaxies 2, 259 (2014b). 1404.6537 . doi: 10.3390/galaxies2020259Iorio, L.: Universe 1(1), 38 (2015a). doi: 10.3390/universe1010038Iorio, L.: Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 24, 1530015 (2015b). 1412.7673Iorio, L., Giudice, G.: New Astron. 11, 600 (2006). gr-qc/0601055Iorio, L., Lichtenegger, H.I.M., Ruggiero, M.L., Corda, C.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 331, 351 (2011). 1009.3225 . doi: 10.1007/s10509-010-0489-5Jouannic, B., Noomen, R., van den IJSel, J.A.A.: In: Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Space Flight Dynamics ISSFD, Munich, Germany (2015)Kennefick, D.: Phys. Today 62, 37 (2009). doi: 10.1063/1.3099578King-Hele, D.: Satellite Orbits in an Atmosphere. Theory and Applications. Blackie and Son Ltd., Glasgow (1987)Lämmerzahl, C., Preuss, O., Dittus, H.: In: Dittus, H., Lammerzahl, C., Turyshev, S.G. (eds.) Lasers, Clocks and Drag-Free Control: Exploration of Relativistic Gravity in Space. Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol. 349, p. 75 (2008). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-34377-6_3Le Verrier, U.: C. R. Hebd. Acad. Sci. 49, 379 (1859)Lemoine, F.G.E.A.: NASA/TP-1998-206861 (1998)Lewis, R.A.: In: Robertson, G.A. (ed.) American Institute of Physics Conference Series. American Institute of Physics Conference Series, vol. 1103, p. 226 (2009). doi: 10.1063/1.3115499Longair, M.: Philos. Trans. R. Soc., Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. (2015). doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0287McCulloch, M.E.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 389, 57 (2008). 0806.4159 . doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3933.2008.00523.xMoe, M.M., Wallace, S.D., Moe, K.: In: Washington DC American Geophysical Union Geophysical Monograph Series, vol. 87, p. 349 (1995). doi: 10.1029/GM087p0349Murphy, E.M.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1890 (1998). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.1890Naval Observatory: Dept. of the Navy, USA (2009)Newcomb, S.: Tables of the Four Inner Planets. Government Printing Office, Washington (1895)Nyambuya, G.G.: ArXiv e-prints (2008). 0803.1370Nyambuya, G.G.: New Astron. 57, 22 (2017). doi: 10.1016/j.newast.2017.06.001Páramos, J., Hechenblaikner, G.: Adv. Space Res. 79–80(7), 76 (2013). 1210.7333v1Peskin, M.E., Schroeder, D.V.: An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory. Westview Press, Perseus Books Group, London (1995)Pinheiro, M.J.: Phys. Lett. A 378, 3007 (2014). 1404.1101Pinheiro, M.J.: Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 461(4), 3948 (2016)Renzetti, G.: Cent. Eur. J. Phys. 11, 531 (2013). doi: 10.2478/s11534-013-0189-1Rievers, B., Lämmerzahl, C.: Ann. Phys. 523, 439 (2011). 1104.3985 . doi: 10.1002/andp.201100081Roseveare, N.T.: Mercury’s Perihelion, from Le Verrier to Einstein. Clarendon Press, Wotton-under-Edge (1982)Rubincam, D.P.: Icarus 148, 2 (2000). doi: 10.1006/icar.2000.6485Standish, E.M.: In: Macias, A., Lämmerzahl, C., Camacho, A. (eds.) Recent Developments in Gravitation and Cosmology. American Institute of Physics Conference Series, vol. 977, p. 254 (2008). doi: 10.1063/1.2902789Standish, E.M.: In: Klioner, S.A., Seidelmann, P.K., Soffel, M.H. (eds.) Relativity in Fundamental Astronomy: Dynamics, Reference Frames, and Data Analysis. IAU Symposium, vol. 261, p. 179 (2010). doi: 10.1017/S1743921309990354Thompson, P.F., Abrahamson, M., Ardalan, S., Bordi, J.: In: 24th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Santa Fe, New Mexico, January 26–30, 2014 (2014). http://hdl.handle.net/2014/45519Turyshev, S.G., Toth, V.T.: Living Rev. Relativ. (2010). 1001.3686 . doi: 10.12942/lrr-2010-4Turyshev, S.G., Toth, V.T., Kinsella, G., Lee, S.-C., Lok, S.M., Ellis, J.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 108(24), 241101 (2012). 1204.2507 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.241101Varieschi, G.U.: Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 46, 1741 (2014). 1401.6503 . doi: 10.1007/s10714-014-1741-zWilhelm, K., Dwivedi, B.N.: Astrophys. Space Sci. 358, 18 (2015). doi: 10.1007/s10509-015-2413-5Will, C.M.: Living Rev. Relativ. 3(9) (2006)Will, C.M.: Class. Quantum Gravity (2015). doi: 10.1098/rsta.2014.0287Will, C.M.: In: Peron, R., Colpi, M., Gorini, V., Moschella, U. (eds.) Gravity: Where Do We Stand? Astrophysics and Space Science Library, vol. 349, p. 9 (2016). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-20224-2_2Williams, J.G., Boggs, D.H.: Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astron. 126, 89 (2016). doi: 10.1007/s10569-016-9702-3Williams, J.G., Dickey, J.O.: In: Noomen, R., Klosko, S., Noll, C., Pearlman, M. (eds.) Proceedings of 13th International Workshop on Laser Ranging, p. 75 (2003). http://cddisa.gsfc.nasa.gov/lw13/lw_proceedings.htmlWilliams, J.G., Newhall, X.X., Dickey, J.O.: Phys. Rev. D 53, 6730 (1996). doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.53.6730Williams, J.G., Turyshev, S.G., Boggs, D.H.: Phys. Rev. Lett. 93(26), 261101 (2004). gr-qc/0411113 . doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.261101Williams, J.G., Turyshev, S.G., Boggs, D.H.: Planet. Sci. 3, 2 (2014). doi: 10.1186/s13535-014-0002-5Williams, J.G., Boggs, D.H., Yoder, C.F., Ratcliff, J.T., Dickey, J.O.: J. Geophys. Res. 106, 27933 (2001). doi: 10.1029/2000JE001396Wolfram, S.: The Mathematica Book, fifth edition. Wolfram Media, Champaign (2003

The Global Burden of Cancer 2013

IMPORTANCE: Cancer is among the leading causes of death worldwide. Current estimates of cancer burden in individual countries and regions are necessary to inform local cancer control strategies. OBJECTIVE: To estimate mortality, incidence, years lived with disability (YLDs), years of life lost (YLLs), and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 28 cancers in 188 countries by sex from 1990 to 2013. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The general methodology of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2013 study was used. Cancer registries were the source for cancer incidence data as well as mortality incidence (MI) ratios. Sources for cause of death data include vital registration system data, verbal autopsy studies, and other sources. The MI ratios were used to transform incidence data to mortality estimates and cause of death estimates to incidence estimates. Cancer prevalence was estimated using MI ratios as surrogates for survival data; YLDs were calculated by multiplying prevalence estimates with disability weights, which were derived from population-based surveys; YLLs were computed by multiplying the number of estimated cancer deaths at each age with a reference life expectancy; and DALYs were calculated as the sum of YLDs and YLLs. FINDINGS: In 2013 there were 14.9 million incident cancer cases, 8.2 million deaths, and 196.3 million DALYs. Prostate cancer was the leading cause for cancer incidence (1.4 million) for men and breast cancer for women (1.8 million). Tracheal, bronchus, and lung (TBL) cancer was the leading cause for cancer death in men and women, with 1.6 million deaths. For men, TBL cancer was the leading cause of DALYs (24.9 million). For women, breast cancer was the leading cause of DALYs (13.1 million). Age-standardized incidence rates (ASIRs) per 100 000 and age-standardized death rates (ASDRs) per 100 000 for both sexes in 2013 were higher in developing vs developed countries for stomach cancer (ASIR, 17 vs 14; ASDR, 15 vs 11), liver cancer (ASIR, 15 vs 7; ASDR, 16 vs 7), esophageal cancer (ASIR, 9 vs 4; ASDR, 9 vs 4), cervical cancer (ASIR, 8 vs 5; ASDR, 4 vs 2), lip and oral cavity cancer (ASIR, 7 vs 6; ASDR, 2 vs 2), and nasopharyngeal cancer (ASIR, 1.5 vs 0.4; ASDR, 1.2 vs 0.3). Between 1990 and 2013, ASIRs for all cancers combined (except nonmelanoma skin cancer and Kaposi sarcoma) increased by more than 10 in 113 countries and decreased by more than 10 in 12 of 188 countries. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Cancer poses a major threat to public health worldwide, and incidence rates have increased in most countries since 1990. The trend is a particular threat to developing nations with health systems that are ill-equipped to deal with complex and expensive cancer treatments. The annual update on the Global Burden of Cancer will provide all stakeholders with timely estimates to guide policy efforts in cancer prevention, screening, treatment, and palliation. Copyright 2015 American Medical Association. All rights reserved

Strategies for Controlled Placement of Nanoscale Building Blocks

The capability of placing individual nanoscale building blocks on exact substrate locations in a controlled manner is one of the key requirements to realize future electronic, optical, and magnetic devices and sensors that are composed of such blocks. This article reviews some important advances in the strategies for controlled placement of nanoscale building blocks. In particular, we will overview template assisted placement that utilizes physical, molecular, or electrostatic templates, DNA-programmed assembly, placement using dielectrophoresis, approaches for non-close-packed assembly of spherical particles, and recent development of focused placement schemes including electrostatic funneling, focused placement via molecular gradient patterns, electrodynamic focusing of charged aerosols, and others

The performance of the jet trigger for the ATLAS detector during 2011 data taking

The performance of the jet trigger for the ATLAS detector at the LHC during the 2011 data taking period is described. During 2011 the LHC provided proton–proton collisions with a centre-of-mass energy of 7 TeV and heavy ion collisions with a 2.76 TeV per nucleon–nucleon collision energy. The ATLAS trigger is a three level system designed to reduce the rate of events from the 40 MHz nominal maximum bunch crossing rate to the approximate 400 Hz which can be written to offline storage. The ATLAS jet trigger is the primary means for the online selection of events containing jets. Events are accepted by the trigger if they contain one or more jets above some transverse energy threshold. During 2011 data taking the jet trigger was fully efficient for jets with transverse energy above 25 GeV for triggers seeded randomly at Level 1. For triggers which require a jet to be identified at each of the three trigger levels, full efficiency is reached for offline jets with transverse energy above 60 GeV. Jets reconstructed in the final trigger level and corresponding to offline jets with transverse energy greater than 60 GeV, are reconstructed with a resolution in transverse energy with respect to offline jets, of better than 4 % in the central region and better than 2.5 % in the forward direction

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks, 1990-2015: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

Background: The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2015 provides an up-to-date synthesis of the evidence for risk factor exposure and the attributable burden of disease. By providing national and subnational assessments spanning the past 25 years, this study can inform debates on the importance of addressing risks in context. Methods: We used the comparative risk assessment framework developed for previous iterations of the Global Burden of Disease Study to estimate attributable deaths, disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and trends in exposure by age group, sex, year, and geography for 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks from 1990 to 2015. This study included 388 risk-outcome pairs that met World Cancer Research Fund-defined criteria for convincing or probable evidence. We extracted relative risk and exposure estimates from randomised controlled trials, cohorts, pooled cohorts, household surveys, census data, satellite data, and other sources. We used statistical models to pool data, adjust for bias, and incorporate covariates. We developed a metric that allows comparisons of exposure across risk factors—the summary exposure value. Using the counterfactual scenario of theoretical minimum risk level, we estimated the portion of deaths and DALYs that could be attributed to a given risk. We decomposed trends in attributable burden into contributions from population growth, population age structure, risk exposure, and risk-deleted cause-specific DALY rates. We characterised risk exposure in relation to a Socio-demographic Index (SDI). Findings: Between 1990 and 2015, global exposure to unsafe sanitation, household air pollution, childhood underweight, childhood stunting, and smoking each decreased by more than 25%. Global exposure for several occupational risks, high body-mass index (BMI), and drug use increased by more than 25% over the same period. All risks jointly evaluated in 2015 accounted for 57·8% (95% CI 56·6–58·8) of global deaths and 41·2% (39·8–42·8) of DALYs. In 2015, the ten largest contributors to global DALYs among Level 3 risks were high systolic blood pressure (211·8 million [192·7 million to 231·1 million] global DALYs), smoking (148·6 million [134·2 million to 163·1 million]), high fasting plasma glucose (143·1 million [125·1 million to 163·5 million]), high BMI (120·1 million [83·8 million to 158·4 million]), childhood undernutrition (113·3 million [103·9 million to 123·4 million]), ambient particulate matter (103·1 million [90·8 million to 115·1 million]), high total cholesterol (88·7 million [74·6 million to 105·7 million]), household air pollution (85·6 million [66·7 million to 106·1 million]), alcohol use (85·0 million [77·2 million to 93·0 million]), and diets high in sodium (83·0 million [49·3 million to 127·5 million]). From 1990 to 2015, attributable DALYs declined for micronutrient deficiencies, childhood undernutrition, unsafe sanitation and water, and household air pollution; reductions in risk-deleted DALY rates rather than reductions in exposure drove these declines. Rising exposure contributed to notable increases in attributable DALYs from high BMI, high fasting plasma glucose, occupational carcinogens, and drug use. Environmental risks and childhood undernutrition declined steadily with SDI; low physical activity, high BMI, and high fasting plasma glucose increased with SDI. In 119 countries, metabolic risks, such as high BMI and fasting plasma glucose, contributed the most attributable DALYs in 2015. Regionally, smoking still ranked among the leading five risk factors for attributable DALYs in 109 countries; childhood underweight and unsafe sex remained primary drivers of early death and disability in much of sub-Saharan Africa. Interpretation: Declines in some key environmental risks have contributed to declines in critical infectious diseases. Some risks appear to be invariant to SDI. Increasing risks, including high BMI, high fasting plasma glucose, drug use, and some occupational exposures, contribute to rising burden from some conditions, but also provide opportunities for intervention. Some highly preventable risks, such as smoking, remain major causes of attributable DALYs, even as exposure is declining. Public policy makers need to pay attention to the risks that are increasingly major contributors to global burden. Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Anemia prevalence in women of reproductive age in low- and middle-income countries between 2000 and 2018

Anemia is a globally widespread condition in women and is associated with reduced economic productivity and increased mortality worldwide. Here we map annual 2000–2018 geospatial estimates of anemia prevalence in women of reproductive age (15–49 years) across 82 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), stratify anemia by severity and aggregate results to policy-relevant administrative and national levels. Additionally, we provide subnational disparity analyses to provide a comprehensive overview of anemia prevalence inequalities within these countries and predict progress toward the World Health Organization’s Global Nutrition Target (WHO GNT) to reduce anemia by half by 2030. Our results demonstrate widespread moderate improvements in overall anemia prevalence but identify only three LMICs with a high probability of achieving the WHO GNT by 2030 at a national scale, and no LMIC is expected to achieve the target in all their subnational administrative units. Our maps show where large within-country disparities occur, as well as areas likely to fall short of the WHO GNT, offering precision public health tools so that adequate resource allocation and subsequent interventions can be targeted to the most vulnerable populations.Peer reviewe