Black Coffee Gossip

Design Mentor Statement: This work was a class project in my creative design processes class. Students were challenged to incorporate two or more fabric manipulation techniques into a wearable art ensemble based on their design research. Each student engaged in an extensive design research process, seeking information from a variety of visual, verbal, 2D, and 3D sources. From the research, students created 20 sketchbook pages, juxtaposing images and text from a wide range of sources with their own inspiration sketches. Each student created a mood board (Figure 1), their patterns, first sample, and final ensemble. Students were mentored with formative feedback at two points during the design research process as well as throughout the creation process. I selected to submit this student’s work because it has a very strong concept. The student has really thought about how to visually represent the different ways in which the concept—the dangers of gossip—can be interpreted by the viewer of the piece. The student also did high-quality work, putting much effort into the patternmaking, figuring out the supporting inner construction and hours of work on the fabric manipulation techniques. The outcome is striking and thought-provoking. Statement of Purpose: Purpose and context. In my design research process, I found the poem Black Coffee by Gould (1949). “Smiling sweetly, respected trulls / Drinking coffee from polished skulls. / A touch of arsenic, ‘One lump, or two?’ / And the cups go round with their deadly brew. / The Atomic Bomb is an awesome thing / But so is woman . . . / Gossiping!” I sought to convey the meaning and feelings of this poem in a three-dimensional piece of wearable art. The intent of this design was to create a garment that reflects a societal issue or norm: gossiping. I wanted to bring awareness to this issue and give the intangible a presence that is thought provoking. I wanted to create something worthy of someone’s time to analyze and see the story within it at a closer glance. Finally, I wanted to give the audience freedom to interpret the garment as they see fit

Manifesto: Reconsideração do Inglês como Língua Franca em Contextos Acadêmico-Científicos [Rethinking English as a Lingua Franca in Scientific-Academic Contexts]

Buscamos discutir alguns pressupostos sobre o uso do inglês como “língua franca” em contextos acadêmico-científicos, identificar o impacto destes pressupostos nas trajetórias de produção e recepção de conhecimentos, e legitimar o uso de múltiplas línguas para a troca acadêmica transnacional. Propomos dez princípios: o uso do inglês quanto “língua franca” acadêmico-científica não sempre promove a inclusão; uma suposta “língua franca” acadêmicocientífica pode atuar como língua de dominação; uma política de inglês como “língua franca” pode desincentivar as traduções e limitar a participação; as políticas que posicionam o inglês como a “língua franca” acadêmico-científica contemporânea podem sugerir que o conhecimento produzido em inglês é o único que existe; a imposição do inglês como suposta “língua franca” acadêmico-científica é uma manifestação da distribuição desigual da produção e recepção do conhecimento; as línguas/variedades funcionam como recursos potentes para a criação de conhecimento; a escolha de uma língua de publicação ou apresentação é um direito sociolinguístico; a escolha de uma língua de publicação ou apresentação é um ato político; os organizadores de congressos deveriam ter o direito de eleger qual(is) língua(s) fomentar; os organizadores e participantes em congressos deveriam ser criativos e atentos para incluir audiências tão diversas quanto possível. We aim to challenge assumptions made about the use of English as a “lingua franca” in scientific- academic contexts, identify the impact of such assumptions on trajectories of knowledge production and uptake, and legitimize the use of multiple languages for transnational scholarly exchange. We set out ten principles: Using English as a scientific-academic “lingua franca” does not always promote inclusion; A language positioned as a scientific-academic “lingua franca” can act as a language of domination; Positioning English as the “lingua franca” policy may discourage translations and exclude participation; Policies which position English as being the contemporary scientific-academic “lingua franca” may convey the idea that knowledge produced in English is the only knowledge that exists; The imposition of English as a presumed scientific-academic “lingua franca” is a manifestation of the unequal distribution of knowledge production and uptake; Languages/varieties function as powerful resources for knowledge making; Choosing a language for publishing or presenting is a sociolinguistic right; Choosing a language to publish or present in is a political act; Convention organizers should have the right to promote the language(s) of their choice; Convention organizers and scholars should be as creative and sensitive to including as diverse an audience as possible

Rethinking English as a Lingua Franca in Scientific-Academic Contexts

Buscamos discutir algunos presupuestos sobre el uso del inglés como “lengua franca” en contextos científico-académicos, identificar el impacto de estos presupuestos en las trayectorias de producción y recepción de conocimientos, y legitimar el uso de múltiples lenguas para el intercambio académico transnacional. Proponemos diez principios: el uso del inglés como “lengua franca” científico-académica no siempre promueve la inclusión; una supuesta “lengua franca” científico-académica puede actuar como lengua de dominación; las políticas que posicionan al inglés como “lengua franca” pueden desalentar las traducciones y limitar la participación; las políticas que colocan al inglés como la “lengua franca” científico-académica contemporánea pueden sugerir que el conocimiento producido en inglés es el único que existe; la imposición del inglés como presunta “lengua franca” científico-académica es una expresión de la distribución desigual de la producción y recepción de conocimiento; las lenguas y variedades actúan como poderosos recursos para la producción de conocimiento; la elección de una lengua de publicación o presentación es un derecho sociolingüístico; la elección de una lengua de publicación o presentación es un acto político; los organizadores de congresos deberían tener derecho a fomentar la(s) lengua(s) de su preferencia; los organizadores y participantes de congresos deberían ser creativos y estar atentos a la inclusión de audiencias lo más diversas posible.We aim to challenge assumptions made about the use of English as a “lingua franca” in scientific-academic contexts, identify the impact of such assumptions on trajectories of knowledge production and uptake, and legitimize the use of multiple languages for transnational scholarly exchange. We set out ten principles: Using English as a scientific-academic “lingua franca” does not always promote inclusion; A language positioned as a scientific-academic “lingua franca” can act as a language of domination; Positioning English as the “lingua franca” policy may discourage translations and exclude participation; Policies which position English as being the contemporary scientific-academic “lingua franca” may convey the idea that knowledge produced in English is the only knowledge that exists; The imposition of English as a presumed scientific-academic “lingua franca” is a manifestation of the unequal distribution of knowledge production and uptake; Languages/ varieties function as powerful resources for knowledge making; Choosing a language for publishing or presenting is a sociolinguistic right; Choosing a language to publish or present in is a political act; Convention organizers should have the right to promote the language(s) of their choice; Convention organizers and scholars should be as creative and sensitive to including as diverse an audience as possible.Fil: Navarro, Federico Daniel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de O Higgins;Fil: Lillis, Theresa. The Open University (ou);Fil: Donahue, Tiane. Darmouth College; Estados UnidosFil: Curry, Mary Jane. University Of Rochester; Estados UnidosFil: Ávila Reyes, Natalia. Universidad Católica de Chile; ChileFil: Gustafsson, Magnus. Chalmers University of Technology; SueciaFil: Zavala, Virginia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Perú; PerúFil: Lauria, Daniela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Instituto de Lingüística; Argentina. Universidad Pedagógica Nacional; ArgentinaFil: Lukin, Annabelle. Macquarie University; AustraliaFil: McKinney, Carolyn. University of Cape Town; SudáfricaFil: Feng, Haiying. University Of International Business And Economics; ChinaFil: Motta Roth, Désirée. Universidade Federal de Santa Maria; Brasi

Safety and Reactogenicity of an MSP-1 Malaria Vaccine Candidate: A Randomized Phase Ib Dose-Escalation Trial in Kenyan Children

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of an investigational malaria vaccine. DESIGN: This was an age-stratified phase Ib, double-blind, randomized, controlled, dose-escalation trial. Children were recruited into one of three cohorts (dosage groups) and randomized in 2:1 fashion to receive either the test product or a comparator. SETTING: The study was conducted in a rural population in Kombewa Division, western Kenya. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects were 135 children, aged 12–47 mo. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects received 10, 25, or 50 μg of falciparum malaria protein 1 (FMP1) formulated in 100, 250, and 500 μL, respectively, of AS02A, or they received a comparator (Imovax® rabies vaccine). OUTCOME MEASURES: We performed safety and reactogenicity parameters and assessment of adverse events during solicited (7 d) and unsolicited (30 d) periods after each vaccination. Serious adverse events were monitored for 6 mo after the last vaccination. RESULTS: Both vaccines were safe and well tolerated. FMP1/AS02A recipients experienced significantly more pain and injection-site swelling with a dose-effect relationship. Systemic reactogenicity was low at all dose levels. Hemoglobin levels remained stable and similar across arms. Baseline geometric mean titers were comparable in all groups. Anti-FMP1 antibody titers increased in a dose-dependent manner in subjects receiving FMP1/AS02A; no increase in anti-FMP1 titers occurred in subjects who received the comparator. By study end, subjects who received either 25 or 50 μg of FMP1 had similar antibody levels, which remained significantly higher than that of those who received the comparator or 10 μg of FMP1. A longitudinal mixed effects model showed a statistically significant effect of dosage level on immune response (F(3,1047) = 10.78, or F(3, 995) = 11.22, p < 0.001); however, the comparison of 25 μg and 50 μg recipients indicated no significant difference (F(1,1047) = 0.05; p = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: The FMP1/AS02A vaccine was safe and immunogenic in malaria-exposed 12- to 47-mo-old children and the magnitude of immune response of the 25 and 50 μg doses was superior to that of the 10 μg dose

Blood Stage Malaria Vaccine Eliciting High Antigen-Specific Antibody Concentrations Confers No Protection to Young Children in Western Kenya

The antigen, falciparum malaria protein 1 (FMP1), represents the 42-kDa C-terminal fragment of merozoite surface protein-1 (MSP-1) of the 3D7 clone of P. falciparum. Formulated with AS02 (a proprietary Adjuvant System), it constitutes the FMP1/AS02 candidate malaria vaccine. We evaluated this vaccine's safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy in African children.A randomised, double-blind, Phase IIb, comparator-controlled trial.The trial was conducted in 13 field stations of one mile radii within Kombewa Division, Nyanza Province, Western Kenya, an area of holoendemic transmission of P. falciparum. We enrolled 400 children aged 12-47 months in general good health.Children were randomised in a 1ratio1 fashion to receive either FMP1/AS02 (50 microg) or Rabipur(R) rabies vaccine. Vaccinations were administered on a 0, 1, and 2 month schedule. The primary study endpoint was time to first clinical episode of P. falciparum malaria (temperature >/=37.5 degrees C with asexual parasitaemia of >/=50,000 parasites/microL of blood) occurring between 14 days and six months after a third dose. Case detection was both active and passive. Safety and immunogenicity were evaluated for eight months after first immunisations; vaccine efficacy (VE) was measured over a six-month period following third vaccinations.374 of 400 children received all three doses and completed six months of follow-up. FMP1/AS02 had a good safety profile and was well-tolerated but more reactogenic than the comparator. Geometric mean anti-MSP-1(42) antibody concentrations increased from1.3 microg/mL to 27.3 microg/mL in the FMP1/AS02 recipients, but were unchanged in controls. 97 children in the FMP1/AS02 group and 98 controls had a primary endpoint episode. Overall VE was 5.1% (95% CI: -26% to +28%; p-value = 0.7).FMP1/AS02 is not a promising candidate for further development as a monovalent malaria vaccine. Future MSP-1(42) vaccine development should focus on other formulations and antigen constructs.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00223990

Intra- and Inter-clade Cross-reactivity by HIV-1 Gag Specific T-Cells Reveals Exclusive and Commonly Targeted Regions: Implications for Current Vaccine Trials

The genetic diversity of HIV-1 across the globe is a major challenge for developing an HIV vaccine. To facilitate immunogen design, it is important to characterize clusters of commonly targeted T-cell epitopes across different HIV clades. To address this, we examined 39 HIV-1 clade C infected individuals for IFN-γ Gag-specific T-cell responses using five sets of overlapping peptides, two sets matching clade C vaccine candidates derived from strains from South Africa and China, and three peptide sets corresponding to consensus clades A, B, and D sequences. The magnitude and breadth of T-cell responses against the two clade C peptide sets did not differ, however clade C peptides were preferentially recognized compared to the other peptide sets. A total of 84 peptides were recognized, of which 19 were exclusively from clade C, 8 exclusively from clade B, one peptide each from A and D and 17 were commonly recognized by clade A, B, C and D. The entropy of the exclusively recognized peptides was significantly higher than that of commonly recognized peptides (p = 0.0128) and the median peptide processing scores were significantly higher for the peptide variants recognized versus those not recognized (p = 0.0001). Consistent with these results, the predicted Major Histocompatibility Complex Class I IC50 values were significantly lower for the recognized peptide variants compared to those not recognized in the ELISPOT assay (p<0.0001), suggesting that peptide variation between clades, resulting in lack of cross-clade recognition, has been shaped by host immune selection pressure. Overall, our study shows that clade C infected individuals recognize clade C peptides with greater frequency and higher magnitude than other clades, and that a selection of highly conserved epitope regions within Gag are commonly recognized and give rise to cross-clade reactivities

The Plankton Lifeform Extraction Tool: a digital tool to increase the discoverability and usability of plankton time-series data

Publication history: Accepted - 25 October 2021; Published online - 6 December 2021.Plankton form the base of the marine food web and are sensitive indicators of environmental change. Plankton time series are therefore an essential part of monitoring progress towards global biodiversity goals, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity Aichi Targets, and for informing ecosystem-based policy, such as the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Multiple plankton monitoring programmes exist in Europe, but differences in sampling and analysis methods prevent the integration of their data, constraining their utility over large spatio-temporal scales. The Plankton Lifeform Extraction Tool brings together disparate European plankton datasets into a central database from which it extracts abundance time series of plankton functional groups, called “lifeforms”, according to shared biological traits. This tool has been designed to make complex plankton datasets accessible and meaningful for policy, public interest, and scientific discovery. It allows examination of large-scale shifts in lifeform abundance or distribution (for example, holoplankton being partially replaced by meroplankton), providing clues to how the marine environment is changing. The lifeform method enables datasets with different plankton sampling and taxonomic analysis methodologies to be used together to provide insights into the response to multiple stressors and robust policy evidence for decision making. Lifeform time series generated with the Plankton Lifeform Extraction Tool currently inform plankton and food web indicators for the UK's Marine Strategy, the EU's Marine Strategy Framework Directive, and for the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR) biodiversity assessments. The Plankton Lifeform Extraction Tool currently integrates 155 000 samples, containing over 44 million plankton records, from nine different plankton datasets within UK and European seas, collected between 1924 and 2017. Additional datasets can be added, and time series can be updated. The Plankton Lifeform Extraction Tool is hosted by The Archive for Marine Species and Habitats Data (DASSH) at https://www.dassh.ac.uk/lifeforms/ (last access: 22 November 2021, Ostle et al., 2021). The lifeform outputs are linked to specific, DOI-ed, versions of the Plankton Lifeform Traits Master List and each underlying dataset.Funding that supports this work and the data collected has come from the European Commission, European Union (EU) grant no. 11.0661/2015/712630/SUB/ENVC.2 OSPAR; UK Natural Environment Research Council (grant nos. NE/R002738/1 and NE/M007855/1); EMFF, Climate Linked Atlantic Sector Science (grant no. NE/R015953/1), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK Government (grant nos. ME-5308 and ME-414135), NSF USA OCE-1657887, DFO CA F5955150026/001/HAL, Natural Environment Research Council UK (grant no. NC-R8/H12/100); Horizon 2020 (MISSION ATLANTIC (grant no. 862428)); iCPR (grant no. SBFF-2019-36526), IMR Norway; DTU Aqua Denmark; and the French Ministry of Environment, Energy, and the Sea (MEEM). Recent funding for the development of PLET and the Pelagic Habitats Indicator has been provided by HBDSEG/Defra and MMO/EMFF. The MSS Scottish Coastal Observatory data and analyses are funded and maintained by the Scottish Government Schedules of Service (grant nos. ST05a and ST02H), MSS Stonehaven Samplers, North Atlantic Fisheries College, Shetland, Orkney Islands Harbour Council, and Isle Ewe Shellfish

Developing a sociolinguistic voice?: Students and linguistic descriptivism

The research discussed in this paper forms part of a larger project on academic literacies in a UK OPen University distance-tuaght undergraduate course on the English language (U(ZS)210 'The English Language: past, present and future'. This paper focusses on responses from students in three broad contexts: England, Singapore and Greece, to a section of the course on 'Varieties of English'