Whales, dolphins, and porpoises of the eastern North Pacific and adjacent Arctic waters: a guide to their identification

This is an identification guide for cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), that was designed to assist laymen in identifying cetaceans encountered in eastern North Pacific and Arctic waters. It was intended for use by ongoing cetacean observer programs. This is a revision of an earlier guide with the same title published in 1972 by the Naval Undersa Center and the National Marine Fisheries Service. It includes sections on identifying cetaceans at sea as well as stranded animals on shore. Species accounts are divided by body size and presence or lack of a dorsal fin. Appendices include illustrations of tags on whales, dolphins, and porpoises, by Larry Hobbs; how to record data from observed cetaceans at sea and for stranded cetaceans; and a list of cetacean names in Japanese and Russian. (Document contains 245 pages - file takes considerable time to open

Report on the 2013 Rapid Assessment Survey of Marine Species at New England Bays and Harbors

Introduced species (i.e., non-native species that have become established in a new location) have increasingly been recognized as a concern as they have become more prevalent in marine and terrestrial environments (Mooney and Cleland 2001; Simberloff et al. 2005). The ability of introduced species to alter population, community, and ecosystem structure and function, as well as cause significant economic damage is well documented (Carlton 1989, 1996b, 2000; Cohen and Carlton 1995; Cohen et al. 1995; Elton 1958; Meinesz et al. 1993; Occhipinti-Ambrogi and Sheppard 2007; Pimentel et al. 2005; Thresher 2000). The annual economic costs incurred from managing the approximately 50,000 introduced species in the United States alone are estimated to be over $120 billion (Pimentel et al. 2005). Having a monitoring network in place to track new introductions and distributional changes of introduced species is critical for effective management, as these efforts may be more successful when species are detected before they have the chance to become established. A rapid assessment survey is one such method for early detection of introduced species. With rapid assessment surveys, a team of taxonomic experts record and monitor marine species–providing a baseline inventory of native, introduced, and cryptogenic (i.e., unknown origin) species (as defined by Carlton 1996a)–and document range expansions of previously identified species. Since 2000, five rapid assessment surveys have been conducted in New England. These surveys focus on recording species at marinas, which often are in close proximity to transportation vectors (i.e., recreational boats). Species are collected from floating docks and piers because these structures are accessible regardless of the tidal cycle. Another reason for sampling floating docks and other floating structures is that marine introduced species are often found to be more prevalent on artificial surfaces than natural surfaces (Glasby and Connell 2001; Paulay et al. 2002). The primary objectives of these surveys are to: (1) identify native, introduced, and cryptogenic marine species, (2) expand on data collected in past surveys, (3) assess the introduction status and range extensions of documented introduced species, and (4) detect new introductions. This report presents the introduced, cryptogenic, and native species recorded during the 2013 survey

The Complex Rupture Process of the 1996 Deep Flores, Indonesia Earthquake (M w 7.9) from teleseismic P‐waves

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/95103/1/grl10185.pd

Marine Invaders in the Northeast: Rapid Assessment Survey of Non-native and Native Marine Species of Floating Dock Communities, August 2003

In his seminal book on The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants, Elton (1958) laid the foundation for the science of biological invasions. He identified the importance of human-mediated vectors as means of transporting organisms to new locations and discussed invasions in the context of ecological impacts and evolutionary consequences. Elton even identified what needed to be done to prevent practical and ecological damages from invaders--keep them out, eradicate them, and if all else fails, manage them at acceptable levels. We have not been vigilant in applying this knowledge to marine ecosystems, although this is changing. Our ability to detect changes in numbers and rate of marine introductions depends on well-documented lists of species in time and space, appropriate identification of non-native species, and careful records that follow changes in nomenclature, distribution, potential vectors, and ecosystem alterations caused by non-native species.United States. Environmental Protection Agency (Grant X83055701

Report on the 2013: Rapid assessment survey of marine species at New England Bays and Harbors

Introduced species (i.e., non-native species that have become established in\ud a new location) have increasingly been recognized as a concern as they have\ud become more prevalent in marine and terrestrial environments (Mooney and\ud Cleland 2001; Simberloff et al. 2005). The ability of introduced species to alter\ud population, community, and ecosystem structure and function, as well as\ud cause significant economic damage is well documented (Carlton 1989, 1996b,\ud 2000; Cohen and Carlton 1995; Cohen et al. 1995; Elton 1958; Meinesz et al.\ud 1993; Occhipinti-Ambrogi and Sheppard 2007; Pimentel et al. 2005; Thresher\ud 2000). The annual economic costs incurred from managing the approximately\ud 50,000 introduced species in the United States alone are estimated to be over\ud $120 billion (Pimentel et al. 2005).\ud Having a monitoring network in place to track new introductions and\ud distributional changes of introduced species is critical for effective\ud management, as these efforts may be more successful when species are\ud detected before they have the chance to become established. A rapid\ud assessment survey is one such method for early detection of introduced\ud species. With rapid assessment surveys, a team of taxonomic experts\ud record and monitor marine species–providing a baseline inventory of\ud native, introduced, and cryptogenic (i.e., unknown origin) species (as\ud defined by Carlton 1996a)–and document range expansions of previously\ud identified species.\ud Since 2000, five rapid assessment surveys have been conducted in New\ud England. These surveys focus on recording species at marinas, which often\ud are in close proximity to transportation vectors (i.e., recreational boats).\ud Species are collected from floating docks and piers because these structures\ud are accessible regardless of the tidal cycle. Another reason for sampling floating\ud docks and other floating structures is that marine introduced species are often\ud found to be more prevalent on artificial surfaces than natural surfaces (Glasby\ud and Connell 2001; Paulay et al. 2002). The primary objectives of these surveys\ud are to: (1) identify native, introduced, and cryptogenic marine species,\ud (2) expand on data collected in past surveys, (3) assess the introduction status\ud and range extensions of documented introduced species, and (4) detect new\ud introductions. This report presents the introduced, cryptogenic, and native\ud species recorded during the 2013 survey.CZM through NOAA NA13NOS4190040MIT Sea Grant through NOAA NA10OAR4170086

Enzymatic Primer-Extension with Glycerol-Nucleoside Triphosphates on DNA Templates

selection. Template-dependent GNA synthesis is essential to any GNA-based selection system.In this study, we investigated the ability of various DNA polymerases to use glycerol-nucleoside triphosphates (gNTPs) as substrates for GNA synthesis on DNA templates. Therminator DNA polymerase catalyzes quantitative primer-extension by the incorporation of two glyceronucleotides, with much less efficient extension up to five glyceronucleotides. Steady-state kinetic experiments suggested that GNA synthesis by Therminator was affected by both decreased catalytic rates and weakened substrate binding, especially for pyrimidines. In an attempt to improve pyrimidine incorporation by providing additional stacking interactions, we synthesized two new gNTP analogs with 5-propynyl substituted pyrimidine nucleobases. This led to more efficient incorporation of gC, but not gT.We suggest that directed evolution of Therminator might lead to mutants with improved substrate binding and catalytic efficiency

The 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis: Phase 2 methodological report

Objective The American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism have developed new classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The aim of Phase 2 of the development process was to achieve expert consensus on the clinical and laboratory variables that should contribute to the final criteria set. Methods Twenty-four expert RA clinicians (12 from Europe and 12 from North America) participated in Phase 2. A consensus-based decision analysis approach was used to identify factors (and their relative weights) that influence the probability of “developing RA,” complemented by data from the Phase 1 study. Patient case scenarios were used to identify and reach consensus on factors important in determining the probability of RA development. Decision analytic software was used to derive the relative weights for each of the factors and their categories, using choice-based conjoint analysis. Results The expert panel agreed that the new classification criteria should be applied to individuals with undifferentiated inflammatory arthritis in whom at least 1 joint is deemed by an expert assessor to be swollen, indicating definite synovitis. In this clinical setting, they identified 4 additional criteria as being important: number of joints involved and site of involvement, serologic abnormality, acute-phase response, and duration of symptoms in the involved joints. These criteria were consistent with those identified in the Phase 1 data-driven approach. Conclusion The consensus-based, decision analysis approach used in Phase 2 complemented the Phase 1 efforts. The 4 criteria and their relative weights form the basis of the final criteria set.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/78048/1/27580_ftp.pd