An examination of the putative glucose tolerance factor activity of amino acid and peptide fractions isolated from brewer's yeast : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Chemistry at Massey University

The first report of the possible existance of a glucose tolerance factor (GTF) was made by Mertz and Schwarz (1955) who noticed that a dietary additive, termed factor 3, isolated from an enzymatic casein hydrolysate (Schwarz (1952)), maintained normal glucose removal rates in diabetic­ like rats. These rats were the subject of a study on the development of dietary necrotic liver degeneration. The immediate cause of death,,in these rats, could be demonstrated to be severe hypoglycaemia (Mertz and Schwarz (1955)) that initially manifested itself, during the latent period of degeneration, as impairment of excess blood glucose removal. The diet used to induce the development of necrotic liver degeneration was a semi-purified, vitamin E-free, ration of 30% Torula yeast which also represented the sole protein source. The vitamin E prevented the development of necrotic liver degeneration but did not affect the removal of excess blood glucose. In 1957, Schwarz and Mertz reported that the factor 3, in itself, was not responsible for the maintainance of normal glucose removal rates but rather that it contained an active fraction separable by fractionation procedures involving evaporation, in vacuo, of a NaCl-containing, factor 3 concentrate. The NaCl was removed by filtration and the GTF activity was found to be present in the separated salt fraction, from which it could be removed by treatment with 65% ethanol. A further claim was made that this separated substance, now termed the glucose tolerance factor (GTF), not only prevented but cured impairment of glucose removal when administered in the diet and that the initial glucose impairment observed was not a symptom of necrotic liver degeneration but a result of a dietary deficiency. GTF prepara­ tions were reported (Mertz and Schwarz (1959)) to be routinely obtained from brewer's yeast as well as acid hydrolysates of dried, defatted, pork kidney powder. [From Introduction

`Superluminal' Photon Propagation in QED in Curved Spacetime is Dispersive and Causal

It is now well-known that vacuum polarisation in QED can lead to superluminal low-frequency phase velocities for photons propagating in curved spacetimes. In a series of papers, we have shown that this quantum phenomenon is dispersive and have calculated the full frequency dependence of the refractive index, explaining in detail how causality is preserved and various familiar results from quantum field theory such as the Kramers-Kronig dispersion relation and the optical theorem are realised in curved spacetime. These results have been criticised in a recent paper by Akhoury and Dolgov arXiv:1003.6110 [hep-th], who assert that photon propagation is neither dispersive nor necessarily causal. In this note, we point out a series of errors in their work which have led to this false conclusion.Comment: 11 page

Land Use in Australia: Rouse Hill House and Farm and the Struggle between Tradition and Modernity

This paper examines the patterns of land use in Australia, tracing the transition from pre-European settlement through to the twenty first century. A critical examination of the concepts of modernism and tradition reveals the shifting prevalence of these movements throughout history, and the resulting struggle between them. By focusing on the area which formerly comprised Rouse Hill Farm in Sydney’s northwest, this paper reveals the factors which drove European progress and which now challenge this notion

Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 422: "The Red Book of Darley"

60. Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 422"The Red Book of Darley"[Ker 70, Gneuss 110-111) History: Two originally separate manuscripts. Part 1 (pp. 1-26, some leaves missing) contains verse and prose "Dialogues of Solomon and Saturn." Part 2 (pp. 27-586) is a liturgical handbook, perhaps for practical pastoral "fieldwork" (Hohler 1972: 41, 44), containing a broad range of texts, including a disorderly and duplicative Sacramentary with votive masses, and a miscellany of other services and liturgies. Among the many masses is one for St. Olaf, king of Norway (1015-1030), apparently the earliest surviving text of a mass in his honor.The origin of Part 1 is not known. Ker proposed mid-10c, others late 10c (Menner 1941: 1; Dobbie 1942: Ii). Kemble (1845-1848: 132) conjectured that Part 1 was the work of a female scribe. The language of the two verse "Dialogues" is predominantly West-Saxon with occasional Anglian forms (Menner 1941: 18-21). Lines 1-93 of the first verse "Dialogue" ("Solomon and Saturn I") occur as an 11c addition in margins of Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 41 [25] (pp. 196-198), probably from southern England, which was at Exeter during the time of Bishop Leofric (1050-1072).Part 2, apparently made ca. 1061, either at Winchester, New Minster for use at Sherborne or at Sherbome based on Winchester models. The Easter tables on pp. 44-45 span 1061-1098; Dumville (1992: 50, n. 75 and p. 74) proposed that since 1061 is not the beginning of a 19-year cycle but towards the end of one, Part 2 "was written between Easter 1060 and Easter 1061." Suggesting a New Minster, Winchester origin are feast days and saints listed in the Calendar, pp. 29-40, as well as saints in some of the liturgical texts (St. Alphege, p. 32, 19 April; St. Swithun, p. 35, 2 and 15July; St. Æthelwold, p. 36, 1 August, and p. 37, 10 September; St. Judoc, p. 29, 9January; St. Grimbald, p. 35, 8July). The former three were all bishops of Winchester, and New Minster possessed the relics of Sts. Judoc and Grimbald from the time of its foundation in the early 10c. The liturgical services include a "Missa cotidiana de Sancto Suuithuno" (pp. 137-41) and a "Missa pro amico uiuenti" which invokes Sts. Dunstan, Alphege, and Swithun (pp. 166-69). The litany on pp. 378-82 lists St. Birinus (bishop of the West Saxons, 634-ca. 650), St. Swithun, St.Judoc, and St. Grimbald (p. 380); the litany on pp. 402-05 lists Sts. Birinus, Swithun, Æthelwold, and Judoc (p. 403). On the other hand, there are connections with St. Mary's, Sherbome or within the diocese (St. Mary's was a Benedictine community that was the seat of a bishopric until 1078, when the see was transferred to Salisbury). At 8 January (p. 29) is indicated the major feast of St. Wulfsin, bishop of Sherbome (i.e., Wulfsige III, bishop of Sherbome ca. 993-1002). At 25 May are added the words 's<an>c<t>i aldhelmi ep<iscop>i' (p. 33/28), Aldhelm having been bishop of Sherbome 705/706-709/710.The small format of the manuscript and the broad range of liturgical texts, which include the office for visiting the sick and forms for trial by ordeal, suggest that Part 2 was produced as a practical handbook for use "in the field." Hohler (1972: 41, 44) proposed that the general character of Part 2, coupled with the absence from its Sacramentary of masses for the principal feasts of theyear (notably Easter), suggests that Part 2 was designed for use by someone who "reckoned he would be travelling a good deal but would be back at his base on principal feasts" and that it "is the book a good, pastorally minded, monk priest is going to take with him round the villages."Parts 1 and 2 joined by 12c, as shown by same 12c handwriting on p. 14/1-16 and p. 49/19-25 (Ker, Cat., 121). By 16c (inscription, p. 586) the united manuscript belonged to the parish of Darley Dale in Derbyshire, whose church is dedicated to St. Helen. Since the 12c hand was adding prayers for a Mass for St. Helen, it is possible that the manuscript could have been at Darley Dale by 12c, possibly via an appointed priest who had Winchester or Sherbome connections.[Note: The manuscript ends with an added 12c quire containing various lections, including for the Feast of the Invention of the Cross; the lections are followed by chants for Lauds of this Feast, including chants naming St. Helen. The accomplished musical notation on pp. 578-86 suggests the quire was prepared in a metropolitan center. The quire was perhaps prepared as a refurbishment of Part 1 in preparation for sending the liturgical manuscript to Darley Dale. The second of the two hands responsible for the quire also wrote the first of the three prayers for a Mass for St. Helen (p. 49/ 14-18). This prayer may therefore have been added in preparation for sending Part 2 to Darley Dale, whereas the two prayers that follow, which are in an inexpert hand, could have been added after the manuscript reached Darley Dale.]Ker (Cat., 121) thought it likely "that part A was used as flyleaves by the binder of part B." First leaf of Part 1 may have been a pastedown (see Codicological Description). But the 13 leaves of Part 1 (two quires) are more than would be required for flyleaves, and though there are leaves missing, there seems to have been an intention to preserve the OE dialogues; however, the erasure of the original text on p. 14 to make way for a 12c formula of excommunication suggests that by then OE texts were not valued or understood.On p. 586, 16c inscriptions attest the manuscript's presence at Darley Dale and transfer of ownership to Matthew Parker. First inscription in an unidentified secretary hand, 'the rede boke of darleye in the peake in darbyshire', perhaps written by Richard Wendesley (see below). Second inscription, in secretary, perhaps by Matthew Parker's son John (1548-1619), 'This booke was sum time had in such reverence in darbie shire that it was comonlie beleved that whosoeuer should sweare vntruelie vppo<n> this booke should run madd'. 1bird inscription, in italic, probably by John Parker, notes that the book was given to Matthew Parker by 'Richard Wendesley esquier', presumably the same as the 'Richardus Wendesley armigerus Senescallus meus', who is named an executor of Matthew Parker's will. The Wendesleys were a prominent family in the parish of Darley Dale, lords of the manor of Wendesley or Wensley (memorial in St. Helen's church); Richard is mentioned in the heralds' Derbyshire Visitation Pedigrees of 1569 as "livinge" in that year (London, British Library, Harley 2134, f. 49r; see also Smith 1951: 11). He may well be the same Richard Wendesley as served as Parker's seneschal, although, as lord of the manor, it is unclear why he should have entered Parker's service. In the lower margins of pp. 130-31 are several signatures of "Margaret Rollysley" (various spellings) who became widowed in 1562 and mentions her widowhood on p. 130. The Rollesleys or Rowsleys were a prominent Darley Dale family, apparently related to the Wendesleys by marriage (cf. Harley 2134, f. 49r and Harley 1093, f. 41va). Margaret's husband's great-uncle had been rector of Darley 1514-1531 (Smith 1951: 42). The manuscript may have been owned by the Rollesleys in 1562 and Richard Wendesley may have obtained it from them for presentation to Matthew Parker. Parker's interest in aspects of the liturgical portion of the manuscript-in particular, the texts for trial by ordeal-is demonstrated by Parkerian notes and transcriptions on pp. 310, 318-319, and 330; these parallel the attention paid to the equivalent texts in other Parkerian manuscripts, e.g., CCCC 44 [26] and 146 [32]. MS 422 passed to Corpus Christi College by Parker's indenture of 1575. CODICOLOGICAL DESCRIPTION: Within Part 1, the leaves of Quire I are mostly rather thick and supple, with suede-like surfaces. The leaves of Quire II are somewhat thinner. Pp. 11-12 have a hole acquired while the skin was still on the animal. The discoloration and staining of the leaves of Part 1, and the character of their preparation, make it difficult to tell hair side from flesh side; according to Ker (Cat., 120), the hair side is on the outside of all sheets, so that hair side faces flesh side across openings. The leaves measure ca. 192 x 127 mm. The written area measures ca. 164 x 95 mm. in Quire I, and ca. 158 x 95 mm. in Quire II. The text is laid out in single columns, with the number of lines to the page varying: 22 lines on pp. 1-2, 23 lines on pp. 3-6 and 15-26, and 24 lines on pp. 7-13. The leaves were not pricked in the inner margins. The trimming of the leaves has removed all the prickings from the outer margins and many of those of the upper and lower margins. The ruling is drypoint, and is more easily visible in Quire II, where it was made from the recto, with pairsof bounding lines at each side of the column. The drypoint ruling of the outer bounding lines on p. 23 has been supplemented in places in ink.The text of Part 1 was written by one scribe in small, neat A-S minuscule, with runes occurring on pp. 3-5. The openings of the two verse "Dialogues" are in capitals. Verse "Dialogue II" has a somewhat different layout from verse "Dialogue I" and the prose "Dialogue," with each speech of verse "Dialogue II" beginning on a new line with a large initial S (variously for "Solomon" or "Saturnus"), with horizontally aligned spiral-shaped line-fillers frequently occupying the resulting space in the preceding lines, and with the opening word<s> of many speeches written in capitals. The text is undecorated, except for the occasional use of quatrefoil and other forms for the o's of Solomon's name in verse "Dialogue II" (as on p. 20,lines 4,8,15,and 22). No pigment is used in Part 1.The original leaves of Part 2 vary in thickness from rather thin to rather thick,with cream-colored or yellowish, often scaly surfaces. The 12c supplied leaves (pp. 571-86) have yellowish, suede-like surfaces. A few leaves have holes acquired while the skins still belonged to their animals (for example,pp. 61-62, 173-74, 307-08,and 455-56). The leaves are arranged so that hair side faces hair side and flesh side faces flesh side, with hair side on the outside of the quires. The leaves measure ca. 194 x 129 mm. The written area measures ca. 160 x 108 mm. The text is laid out in single columns (double columns for the litanies on pp. 378-80 and 402-04),with varying numbers of lines to the page: 19 lines on pp. 67-70,289-90,295-96,479-80, and 489-90; 20 lines on pp. 54-66,71-288,291-94,297-308,319-478,481-88,495-96,501-02,523-52, and 555-70; 21 lines on pp. 493-94,497-500,503-04, and 507-22; and 22 lines on pp. 491-92 and 505-06. The tables on pp. 27-45 have multiple columns of between 31 and 37 lines. The added 12c quire has 20 lines to the page on pp. 571-79,29 lines on pp. 580-81 and 583-85, and 28 lines on p. 582. The leaves were not pricked in the inner margin. Trimming the book for binding has removed most of the prickings in the outer margins, but some leaves, for example pp. 203-18, retain some or all of their prickings. Trimming has also removed many of the prickings in the upper and lower margins. The sheets were individually ruled in drypoint, on the hair side. There are pairs of bounding lines (often skewed at a diagonal) at each side of the column.The original portion of Part 2 was written probably by two or three scribes using a similar style of script, in English Caroline minuscule for Latin and A-S minuscule for OE. Musical elements were mostly written in smaller script, leaving room above for neumes; but neumes (some of them added later) have been entered only on pp. 51-52,286-88,470-86,489-99,507-11,552-53,and 555-70. Titles and headings are written in red pigment in capitals, sometimes mixed with minuscule forms. There are numerous initials in red or green pigment. The initials frequently have modest decoration, usually simple beading; two initials on p. 58 have outlined human faces within them. Ink initials within the lection from the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:1-12) on p. 142 have an infilling of green pigment; elsewhere in the manuscript, some ink initials have an infilling of red pigment. The Calendar and other tables on pp. 27-45 use red and green pigment, the table on p. 41 being laid out under decorative arcades. The Order of the Mass begins on p. 51 with a decorative page of text dominated by a large polychrome pigment and ink initial which includes decorated panels, interlace, animal heads, and foliate ornament. There are two polychrome pigment and ink illustrations in outline drawingstyle, with painted portions. The Preface of the Mass (p. 52) has an illustration of Christ in Majesty flanked by angels, the opening words of the Preface being written in red and green pigment to either side of Christ within his mandorla, and to either side of the angels. The initial T of the Canon (p. 53) is depicted as a rough-hewn cross bearing the crucified Christ, with the Virgin at the left, a tree growing between the Cross and the Virgin, a bird (perhaps the dove of the Holy Spirit) at the upper left, and the hand of God at the upper right; the opening words of the canon are written in red and green pigment to the right of the initial.The added 12c quire at the end of Part 2 was written by two scribes in Proto-Gothic minuscule. The second scribe entered the incipits of musical chants in smaller script at the end of lections; several of the chants are neumed. Within the original portion of Part 2, there are late 11c and 12c additions of prayers, hymns, and other texts on pp. 49-50, 310-18, and 553-54; neumes have been added to the hymns on pp. 315-16, and also occur at the end of the marginal portion of the text added on p. 554. Late 11c and 12c corrections, pen trials, and casual entries (including sketches) occur in several margins, for example on pp. 60-61, 123-24, 144, 209, 272, 338-39, 360, and 520; a chant added in the margin of p. 205 has neumes on a four-line stave. A somewhat naive sketch of a long-necked creature on p. 586 is probably late medieval or 16c. Within the Calendar, the word 'papae' or its abbreviation 'pp' has been lined through in the four references to popes on pp. 38 and 40 (7 and 14 October; 11 and 31 December), although there has been no such deletion of thepapal references on pp. 29, 31, 32, 33, and 34 (26January; 12 and 29 March; 26 April; 30 May; 28 June). An added rubricated entry for 29 January (p. 40), likely to be for St. Thomas Becket, has been erased. The erasure and the crossings-out must date from the 1530s or later: in 1534 Henry VIII ordered the deletion of all references to the pope in books belonging to churches, and in 1538 he ordered Becket's name to be erased from all Calendars. The leaves of both parts of MS 422 have suffered various forms of damage. The recto of the first leaf of Part 1 is considerably darkened and stained, leaving the text mostly illegible. James (1912: 316), followed by Menner (1941: 2), concluded that the leaf had served as the pastedown of a former binding of the manuscript. The evidence on the leaf is, however, difficult to interpret. The recto does not have smears of paste such as one might expect to find on a former pastedown, nor does it have offsets of wood-grain such as pastedowns frequently acquire when they are lifted from the wooden boards to which they have been pasted. On the other hand, the recto acquired other signs which indicate that it suffered from exposure. The upper portion of the page carries some entries of script scratched into the page in drypoint. There are deposits of red pigment in the right-hand area, between 36 and 66 mm. from the top of the leaf, up to a distance of 18 mm. from the fore-edge; and deposits of green pigment, or green copper-alloy stains, between 97 and 110 mm. from the top of the leaf, up to a distance of 15 mm. from the fore-edge. Examination of the page under a microscope reveals scattered small deposits of a brownish viscous substance; the nature of the substance and the cause of the deposits are unclear. The cause of the darkening and staining of the page is uncertain, but they perhaps resulted from exposure rather than from the use of the leaf as a pastedown.The first seven leaves of Part 1 have holes (mostly rust-stained) or reddish brown marks resulting from the mounts of a former binding. Portions of most pages of Part 1 have yellowish brown stains where the pages have been treated with a reagent in an attempt to make the text more legible. This happened before 1912, as the description of the manuscript by James mentions the stains.In Part 2, the drypoint ruling, made with a sharp instrument, has cut through parts of several leaves, for example pp. 51-52, 67-68, and 137-38. Sometimes the resulting cuts, and some other tears to the leaves, have been repaired with modern cellophane tape, as on pp. 33-34 and 145-78. Other leaves (pp. 119-20, 349-50, 429-30, and 571-72) have had tears repaired with stitching during the medieval period. Two leaves (pp. 27-30) have lost their original upper outer corners, which have been repaired with vellum patches sewn to the leaves; the repairs are old, and perhaps date from the 1lc or 12c, a date not contradicted by now mostly blurred elements of script on the patch of p. 30. Several leaves, for example pp. 165, 167, 267, and 270, have modern vellum patches pasted to them. Pigments have corroded, rubbed, and faded, with the result that many rubricated initials, headings, and texts are now almost invisible under normal light. Exposure to liquid has caused the formation of ink lakes on some pages, for example pp. 86-87, 104-05, and 301-04. Many leaves have become grubby and stained through exposure. P. 570, which as a result of misbinding is now the last leaf of the original portion of Part 2, is darkened, and its red pigment has blackened; this may indicate that it was exposed as the last leaf of the book before the addition of the 12c quire, in which case the misbinding is datable before that addition. The last leaf of the misplaced quire (pp. 491-506; the quire originally followed p. 570) is stained from exposure and has a rust-tinged hole. It and the preceding leaf share rust stains and wormholes. These features were presumably acquired when the leaves were at the back of the book, adjacent to a binding with wooden boards and metal mounts. The first leaf of Quire XIX (pp. 301-02) is darkened and stained from exposure, and the ink has run in places to form ink lakes. The leaf also has scattered rust stains,at least some of which were made from the verso; their cause is unclear. There are small areas of rust stains on some other leaves,for example pp. 474--75 and 491.Several leaves in Part 2 have lost portions of marginal script through the trimming of the margins for binding: for example, pp. 61,205,and 375. Rust­ burn marks across the fore-edge of the last leaves of Part 1 and the first leaves of Part 2 (pp. 21-50) derive from the upper clasp of a former binding which dates from after the two parts were combined. Such a clasping mechanism would be late medieval or later. The area discolored by the marks includes the contour of the fore-edges, which have therefore not been trimmed since the leaves acquired the marks.The present binding is a half-binding of tanned pigskin with blue paper sides over millboards, with single endpapers at both ends. Although unsigned and undated, the binding is attributable to the Cambridge Binding Guild in 1937 or 1938, as shown by Budny (1997: 650). The binding replaces an 18c binding of August 1748 which is recorded in the Library and Plate records of Corpus Christi College for the years 1708-1771: Corpus Christi College, Archives B. 3, f. 88v. Bindings that survive at Corpus from the intensive rebinding campaign of 1748-1750 are of a uniform character, comprising quarter-bindings in sheepskin with vellum sides. The note "in red leather" on p. 1 of MS 422,which appears to be in the hand of Robert Masters,Fellow of Corpus 1738-1758,presumably refers to the color of the cover of the pre-1748 binding. The note implies that the medieval binding that gave rise to the name "The Red Book of Darley" survived into the 18c. COLLATION: i + 13 (pp. 1-26) + 281 (pp. 27-586) + i. One 20c paper endleaf at front and back.Part 1: I8 (wants 7) (pp. 1-14); II8 (wants 3,6) (pp. 15-26).Part 2: III12 (pp. 27-50); IV10 (lacks 3,7) (pp. 51-66); V10 (lacks 10) (pp. 67-84 [the stub conjoint with pp. 67-68 now precedes p. 67, rather than following p. 84]); VI-VII8 (pp. 85-116); VIII12 (lacks 4,8) (pp. 117-36); IX8 (pp. 137-52); X12 (lacks 1, 5,9) (pp. 153-70); XI10 (lacks 4, 8) (pp. 171-86); XII-XV8 (pp. 187-250); XVI10 (lacks 3, 7) (pp. 251-64 [the pagination omits the leaf following p. 252]); XVII12 (lacks 1,3) (pp. 265-84); XVIII10 (lacks 4, 8) (pp. 285-300); XIX10 (lacks 10) (pp.301-18); XX10 (lacks 2, 8) (pp.319-34); XXI10 (lacks 4, 8) (pp. 335-50 [the stub conjoint with pp. 345-46 now precedes p. 345, rather than preceding p.341]);XXII-XXIII8 (pp.351-82); XXIV10 (lacks 3, 7) (pp. 383-98 [the stub conjoint with pp. 393-94 now precedes p. 393, rather than preceding p.387)); XXV10 (lacks 3, 7) (pp.399-414); XXVI10 (lacks 3, 7) (pp. 415-30); XXVII10 (lacks 4, 8) (pp. 431-46); XXVIII-XXIX8 (pp. 447-78); XXX6 (pp. 479-90); XXXI10 (lacks 3, 7) (pp. 491-506); XXXII-XXXIV8 (pp.507-54); XXXV10 (lacks 3, 7) (pp.555-70); XXXVI8 (pp. 571-86).[Note: This collation differs from that ofJames in some respects. James was apparently unaware of the textual gaps between pp. 18-19 and 22-23, which attest to the loss of leaves 3 and 6 from Quire II. James stated a different number of leaves and/or a different structure for Quires X, XI, XVII, and XXVI. The present tight binding of the manuscript

The Contingent Fee Contract in Domestic Relations Cases - \u3cem\u3eThompson v. Thompson\u3c/em\u3e

This Note will sketch the background of the contingent fee in North Carolina and then examine contingent fee agreements in domestic relations actions in other jurisdictions. The Note will then examine the Thompson court\u27s holding and look at some unanswered questions. The Note concludes that, based on the public policy of North Carolina and of the majority of other jurisdictions, the court reached the correct decision in holding that contingent fee contracts in domestic relations actions are against public policy

The Contingent Fee Contract in Domestic Relations Cases - Thompson v. Thompson

This Note will sketch the background of the contingent fee in North Carolina and then examine contingent fee agreements in domestic relations actions in other jurisdictions. The Note will then examine the Thompson court\u27s holding and look at some unanswered questions. The Note concludes that, based on the public policy of North Carolina and of the majority of other jurisdictions, the court reached the correct decision in holding that contingent fee contracts in domestic relations actions are against public policy