Grain boundary effects on magnetotransport in bi-epitaxial films of La0.7_{0.7}Sr0.3_{0.3}MnO3_3

The low field magnetotransport of La$_{0.7}$Sr$_{0.3}$MnO$_3$ (LSMO) films grown on SrTiO$_3$ substrates has been investigated. A high qualtity LSMO film exhibits anisotropic magnetoresistance (AMR) and a peak in the magnetoresistance close to the Curie temperature of LSMO. Bi-epitaxial films prepared using a seed layer of MgO and a buffer layer of CeO$_2$ display a resistance dominated by grain boundaries. One film was prepared with seed and buffer layers intact, while a second sample was prepared as a 2D square array of grain boundaries. These films exhibit i) a low temperature tail in the low field magnetoresistance; ii) a magnetoconductance with a constant high field slope; and iii) a comparably large AMR effect. A model based on a two-step tunneling process, including spin-flip tunneling, is discussed and shown to be consistent with the experimental findings of the bi-epitaxial films.Comment: REVTeX style; 14 pages, 9 figures. Figure 1 included in jpeg format (zdf1.jpg); the eps was huge. Accepted to Phys. Rev.

The ‘mosaic habitat’ concept in human evolution: past and present

The habitats preferred by hominins and other species are an important theme in palaeoanthropology, and the ‘mosaic habitat’ (also referred to as habitat heterogeneity) has been a central concept in this regard for the last four decades. Here we explore the development of this concept – loosely defined as a range of different habitat types, such as woodlands, riverine forest and savannah within a limited spatial area– in studies of human evolution in the last sixty years or so. We outline the key developments that took place before and around the time when the term ‘mosaic’ came to wider palaeoanthropological attention. To achieve this we used an analysis of the published literature, a study of illustrations of hominin evolution from 1925 onwards and an email survey of senior researchers in palaeoanthropology and related fields. We found that the term mosaic starts to be applied in palaeoanthropological thinking during the 1970’s due to the work of a number of researchers, including Karl Butzer and Glynn Isaac , with the earliest usage we have found of ‘mosaic’ in specific reference to hominin habitats being by Adriaan Kortlandt (1972). While we observe a steady increase in the numbers of publications reporting mosaic palaeohabitats, in keeping with the growing interest and specialisation in various methods of palaeoenvironmental reconstruction, we also note that there is a lack of critical studies that define this habitat, or examine the temporal and spatial scales associated with it. The general consensus within the field is that the concept now requires more detailed definition and study to evaluate its role in human evolution

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time, and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space. While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes, vast areas of the tropics remain understudied. In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity, but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases. To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge, it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost