Lincoln\u27s Confidant: The Life of Noah Brooks

Review of: Lincoln’s Confidant: The Life of Noah Brooks, by Wayne C. Temple, edited by Douglas L. Wilson and Rodney O. Davis

The News from Lone Rock: Observations and Witticisms of a Small-Town Newsman

Review of: The News from Lone Rock: Observations and Witticisms of a Small-Town Newsman, by Freeland Dexter, edited by Deanna R. Hane

Verifying the fully “Laplacianised” posterior Naïve Bayesian approach and more

Mussa and Glen would like to thank Unilever for financial support, whereas Mussa and Mitchell thank the BBSRC for funding this research through grant BB/I00596X/1. Mitchell thanks the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance (SULSA) for financial support.Background In a recent paper, Mussa, Mitchell and Glen (MMG) have mathematically demonstrated that the “Laplacian Corrected Modified Naïve Bayes” (LCMNB) algorithm can be viewed as a variant of the so-called Standard Naïve Bayes (SNB) scheme, whereby the role played by absence of compound features in classifying/assigning the compound to its appropriate class is ignored. MMG have also proffered guidelines regarding the conditions under which this omission may hold. Utilising three data sets, the present paper examines the validity of these guidelines in practice. The paper also extends MMG’s work and introduces a new version of the SNB classifier: “Tapered Naïve Bayes” (TNB). TNB does not discard the role of absence of a feature out of hand, nor does it fully consider its role. Hence, TNB encapsulates both SNB and LCMNB. Results LCMNB, SNB and TNB performed differently on classifying 4,658, 5,031 and 1,149 ligands (all chosen from the ChEMBL Database) distributed over 31 enzymes, 23 membrane receptors, and one ion-channel, four transporters and one transcription factor as their target proteins. When the number of features utilised was equal to or smaller than the “optimal” number of features for a given data set, SNB classifiers systematically gave better classification results than those yielded by LCMNB classifiers. The opposite was true when the number of features employed was markedly larger than the “optimal” number of features for this data set. Nonetheless, these LCMNB performances were worse than the classification performance achieved by SNB when the “optimal” number of features for the data set was utilised. TNB classifiers systematically outperformed both SNB and LCMNB classifiers. Conclusions The classification results obtained in this study concur with the mathematical based guidelines given in MMG’s paper—that is, ignoring the role of absence of a feature out of hand does not necessarily improve classification performance of the SNB approach; if anything, it could make the performance of the SNB method worse. The results obtained also lend support to the rationale, on which the TNB algorithm rests: handled judiciously, taking into account absence of features can enhance (not impair) the discriminatory classification power of the SNB approach.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Aged Switchgrass Seed Lot\u27s Response to Dormancy-breaking Chemicals

Aged switchgrass seed lots can display various levels of dormancy. Under-standing the causes for this dormancy will provide better insight into seed physiology, and potentially lead to treatments that reduce variability in seed germination assays. The effects of sodium nitroprusside, potassium ferro-cyanide and hydrogen peroxide on the germination of eight aged switch-grass (Panicum virgatum L.) seed lots, seven of which were produced in the same year at a single experiment station, were examined. Seed germination demonstrated a significant seed lots × days and treatments × days effect. However, responses of individual seed lots to specific chemicals varied considerably. Genetically related seed lots did not display similar responses to the treatments, while switchgrass derived from a different germplasm exhibited a more similar response. Coleoptile emergence was significantly improved by chemical treatments and showed a significant seed lots × treatment interaction. Together, these results indicate (1) chemicals releasing re-active nitrogen species or peroxide can overcome residual dormancy and stimulate seed germination and coleoptile emergence in diverse switchgrassseed lots, and (2) multiple mechanisms, to some extent under genetic control, appear to direct switchgrass seed germination

Chapter 5 Switchgrass Harvest and Storage

The feedstock characteristics of the conversion platform will influence the optimal harvest and post harvest management practices for switchgrass. However, many of the harvest management practices are tied to plant phenology and will be similar across platforms. Proper harvest and storage of switchgrass will help provide a consistent and high-quality feedstock to the biorefinery. Bioenergyspecific switchgrass strains are high-yielding and in most cases can be harvested and baled with commercially available haying equipment. Many options are available for packaging switchgrass for storage and transportation, but large round bales or large rectangular bales are the most readily available and are in use on farms. Large round bales tend to have less storage losses than large rectangular bales when stored outside, but rectangular bales tend to be easier to handle and load a truck for transport without road width restrictions. Although there is limited large-scale experience with harvesting and storing switchgrass for bioenergy, extensive research, as well as a history of harvesting hay crops for livestock in many agroecoregions, makes harvesting and preserving switchgrass for bioenergy feasible at the landscape scale

Grass Invasion into Switchgrass Managed for Biomass Energy

Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) is a C4 perennial grass and is the model herbaceous perennial bioenergy feedstock. Although it is indigenous to North American grasslands east of the Rocky Mountains and has been planted for forage and conservation purposes for more than 75 years, there is concern that switchgrass grown as a biofuel crop could become invasive. Our objective is to report on the invasion of C4 and C3 grasses into the stands of two switchgrass cultivars following 10 years of management for biomass energy under different N and harvest management regimes in eastern Nebraska. Switchgrass stands were invaded by big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii), smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis), and other grasses during the 10 years. The greatest invasion by grasses occurred in plots to which 0 N had been applied and with harvests at anthesis. In general, less grass encroachment occurred in plots receiving at least 60 kg of N ha−1 or in plots harvested after frost. There were differences among cultivars with Cave-in-Rock being more resistant to invasion than Trailblazer. There was no observable evidence of switchgrass from this study invading into border areas or adjacent fields after 10 years of management for biomass energy. Results indicate that switchgrass is more likely to be invaded by other grasses than to encroach into native prairies or perennial grasslands seeded on marginally productive cropland in the western Corn Belt of the USA

Chapter 5 Switchgrass Harvest and Storage

The feedstock characteristics of the conversion platform will influence the optimal harvest and post harvest management practices for switchgrass. However, many of the harvest management practices are tied to plant phenology and will be similar across platforms. Proper harvest and storage of switchgrass will help provide a consistent and high-quality feedstock to the biorefinery. Bioenergyspecific switchgrass strains are high-yielding and in most cases can be harvested and baled with commercially available haying equipment. Many options are available for packaging switchgrass for storage and transportation, but large round bales or large rectangular bales are the most readily available and are in use on farms. Large round bales tend to have less storage losses than large rectangular bales when stored outside, but rectangular bales tend to be easier to handle and load a truck for transport without road width restrictions. Although there is limited large-scale experience with harvesting and storing switchgrass for bioenergy, extensive research, as well as a history of harvesting hay crops for livestock in many agroecoregions, makes harvesting and preserving switchgrass for bioenergy feasible at the landscape scale