Evaluating single-sided natural ventilation models against full-scale idealised measurements: impact of wind direction and turbulence

Commonly single-sided natural ventilation is used in temperate climates to provide comfortable and healthy indoor environments. However, within built-up areas it is difficult to predict natural ventilation rates for buildings as they depend on many flow factors and opening type. Here, existing models are evaluated using the nine-month Refresh Cube Campaign (RCC). Pressure-based ventilation rates were determined for a small opening (1% porosity) in a cubical test building (side=6 m). The building was isolated and then sheltered in a limited staggered building array to simulate turbulent flows in dense urban areas. Internal and external flow, temperature and pressure measurements captured a wide range of scales of variability. Although the Warren and Parkins (1985, WP85) model performed best for 30-minute mean ventilation rates, all four models tested underestimated ventilation rates by a factor of 10. As wind dominated the stack effect, new coefficients were derived for the WP85 wind-driven model as a function of wind angle. Predictions were mostly improved, except for directions with complex flow patterns during the sheltered case. For the first time, the relation between ventilation rate and turbulence intensity (TI) around a full-scale building was tested. Results indicate that the wind-driven model for single-sided ventilation in highly turbulent flows (0.5<TI<4) can be improved by including TI as a multiplicative factor. Although small window openings with highly turbulent flows are common for sheltered buildings in urban areas, future model development should include a variety of configurations to assess the generality of these results

Novel Borna Virus in Psittacine Birds with Proventricular Dilatation Disease

Pyrosequencing of cDNA from brains of parrots with proventricular dilatation disease (PDD), an unexplained fatal inflammatory central, autonomic, and peripheral nervous system disease, showed 2 strains of a novel Borna virus. Real-time PCR confirmed virus presence in brain, proventriculus, and adrenal gland of 3 birds with PDD but not in 4 unaffected birds

Why does fertilization reduce plant species diversity? Testing three competition-based hypotheses

1 Plant species diversity drops when fertilizer is added or productivity increases. To explain this, the total competition hypothesis predicts that competition above ground and below ground both become more important, leading to more competitive exclusion, whereas the light competition hypothesis predicts that a shift from below-ground to above-ground competition has a similar effect. The density hypothesis predicts that more above-ground competition leads to mortality of small individuals of all species, and thus a random loss of species from plots. 2 Fertilizer was added to old field plots to manipulate both below-ground and above-ground resources, while shadecloth was used to manipulate above-ground resources alone in tests of these hypotheses. 3 Fertilizer decreased both ramet density and species diversity, and the effect remained significant when density was added as a covariate. Density effects explained only a small part of the drop in diversity with fertilizer. 4 Shadecloth and fertilizer reduced light by the same amount, but only fertilizer reduced diversity. Light alone did not control diversity, as the light competition hypothesis would have predicted, but the combination of above-ground and below-ground competition caused competitive exclusion, consistent with the total competition hypothesis.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75695/1/j.1365-2745.2001.00662.x.pd