Muscadine Grapes: Identifying Unique Attributes and Postharvest Practices

Arkansas has a long history of grape and wine production, and muscadine grapes (Vitis rotundifolia Michx.), a native disease-resistant grape, are an important part of that industry. Muscadine grapes can be sold as a fresh-market grape or made into juice, wine, and other products. Additionally, the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture (UA System) breeding program has a focus on creating new muscadine cultivars with commercial potential. The objectives of this research were to evaluate muscadine grape genotypes (cultivars and breeding selections) for fresh market consumption and wine production in 2020 and 2021. 33 seeded and seedless genotypes of muscadines grown in Kings Mountain, North Carolina and at the UA System Fruit Research Station in Clarksville, Arkansas were evaluated for fresh market potential. At harvest, most physical and all composition attributes of the muscadines from both locations were significantly impacted by genotype. These grapes that were packaged in clamshells were also evaluated for postharvest storage potential for 14 and 28 d at 2 °C. Most genotypes had good storability with low weight loss (\u3c9%) after 28 d even though berry firmness tended to decrease and weight loss and unmarketable berries increased. Of the genotypes evaluated in each year and location, only seven of 33 had unmarketable berries greater than 10%. The color of the berry skins showed that the L* decreased during storage, with dark/black muscadines having much less decreases in L* compared to bronze muscadines. This data provided information on physical, composition, and postharvest attributes of muscadine grapes that can be used for developing recommendations for standards for grades, marketing, and supporting breeding efforts. For wine production, AM-77 and ‘Noble’ muscadine grapes were harvested from a commercial vineyard as well as at the UA System Fruit Research Station and processed into wine using two skin contact times (0 and 3 d) during fermentation. The 2020 wines were evaluated at bottling and during storage at 15 °C, and the 2021 wines were evaluated at bottling. AM-77 wine had lower pH and higher titratable acidity than ‘Noble’, but ‘Noble’ wines had higher red color, brown color, and color density during 12-months of storage. ‘Noble’ wines with increased skin contact had higher red color and astringent flavors. For the 2020 wines, the wines with 0-days skin contact had fruitier, candy like aromas characteristic of muscadine juice, and AM-77 0-day skin contact was preferred over all ‘Noble’ wines and 3-day skin contact wines in consumer sensory (n=54) evaluation. AM-77 showed potential as compared to ‘Noble’, the commercial standard for muscadine wine production. Overall, this research showed that muscadine grapes including new genotypes, have potential for both fresh market consumption and wine production

Populations of Lepomis auritus (redbreast sunfish) in a thermally influenced section of the James River, Virginia

From October 1971 - September 1973, electrofishing was used to collect 1004 specimens of Lepomis auritus (year classes 0 - V) from a thermally influenced section of the James River near Blemo Bluff, Virginia. Collections of fish from the natural and heated water temperature habitats were analyzed as to year classes, season, length and sex

Towards Principled Responsible Research and Innovation: Employing the Difference Principle in Funding Decisions

Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has emerged as a science policy framework that attempts to import broad social values into technological innovation processes whilst supporting institutional decision-making under conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity. When looking at RRI from a ‘principled’ perspective, we consider responsibility and justice to be important cornerstones of the framework. The main aim of this article is to suggest a method of realising these principles through the application of a limited Rawlsian Difference Principle in the distribution of public funds for research and innovation. There are reasons why the world's combined innovative capacity has spewed forth iPhones and space shuttles but not yet managed to produce clean energy or universal access to clean water. (Stilgoe 2013, xii) I derive great optimism from empathy's evolutionary antiquity. It makes it a robust trait that will develop in virtually every human being so that society can count on it and try to foster and grow it. It is a human universal. (de Waal 2009, 209) Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) has emerged as a science policy framework that attempts to import broad social values into technological innovation processes whilst supporting institutional decision-making under conditions of uncertainty and ambiguity. In this respect, RRI re-focuses technological governance from standard debates on risks to discussions about the ethical stewardship of innovation. This is a radical step in Science & Technology (S&T) policy as it lifts the non-quantifiable concept of values into the driving seat of decision-making. The focus of innovation then goes beyond product considerations to include the processes and – importantly – the purposes of innovation (Owen et al. 2013, 34). Shared public values are seen as the cornerstone of the new RRI framework, while market mechanisms and risk-based regulations are of a secondary order. What are the values that could drive RRI? There are different approaches to the identification of public values. They can be located in democratically agreed processes and commitments (such as European Union treaties and policy statements) or they can be developed organically via public engagement processes. Both approaches have advantages and disadvantages. For instance, although constitutional values can be regarded as democratically legitimate, their application to specific technological fields can be difficult or ambiguous (Schroeder and Rerimassie 2015). On the other hand, public engagement can accurately reflect stakeholder values but is not necessarily free from bias and lobbyist agenda setting. We argue that if RRI is to be more successful in resolving policy dilemmas arising from poorly described and uncertain technological impacts, basic universal principles need to be evoked and applied. When looking at RRI from a ‘principled’ perspective, we consider responsibility and justice to be important cornerstones of the framework. One could describe them in the following manner: Research and innovation should be conducted responsibly. Publicly funded research and innovation should be focused fairly on socially beneficial targets. Research and innovation should promote and not hinder social justice. The main aim of this article is to suggest a method of realising these principles through the application of a limited Rawlsian Difference Principle in the distribution of public funds for research and innovation. This paper is in three parts. The first part discusses the above principles and introduces the Rawlsian Difference Principle. The second part identifies how RRI is currently applied by public funding bodies. The third part discusses the operationalisation of the Rawlsian Difference Principle in responsible funding decisions

Experimental feasibility of investigating acoustic waves in Couette flow with entropy and pressure gradients

The feasibility is discussed for an experimental program for studying the behavior of acoustic wave propagation in the presence of strong gradients of pressure, temperature, and flow. Theory suggests that gradients effects can be experimentally observed as resonant frequency shifts and mode shape changes in a waveguide. A convenient experimental geometry for such experiments is the annular region between two co-rotating cylinders. Radial temperature gradients in a spinning annulus can be generated by differentially heating the two cylinders via electromagnetic induction. Radial pressure gradients can be controlled by varying the cylinder spin rates. Present technology appears adequate to construct an apparatus to allow independent control of temperature and pressure gradients. A complicating feature of a more advanced experiment, involving flow gradients, is the requirement for independently controlled cylinder spin rates. Also, the boundary condition at annulus terminations must be such that flow gradients are minimally disturbed. The design and construction of an advanced apparatus to include flow gradients will require additional technology development

A Formal Theory of Democratic Deliberation

Inspired by impossibility theorems of social choice theory, many democratic theorists have argued that aggregative forms of democracy cannot lend full democratic justification for the collective decisions reached. Hence, democratic theorists have turned their attention to deliberative democracy, according to which “outcomes are democratically legitimate if and only if they could be the object of a free and reasoned agreement among equals” (Cohen 1997a, 73). However, relatively little work has been done to offer a formal theory of democratic deliberation. This article helps fill that gap by offering a formal theory of three different modes of democratic deliberation: myopic discussion, constructive discussion, and debate. We show that myopic discussion suffers from indeterminacy of long run outcomes, while constructive discussion and debate are conclusive. Finally, unlike the other two modes of deliberation, debate is path independent and converges to a unique compromise position, irrespective of the initial status quo

Dream capitalism

John Tomasi’s Free Market Fairness represents an heroic attempt to bridge the gap between Rawlsian ‘high liberals’ and the advocates of classical liberalism/contemporary libertarianism. I argue that Tomasi’s project fails, above all because it cannot give a compelling account of contemporary (American) capitalism or of its capacity to deliver free market fairness

Cincuenta años después de Hiroshima

Translation by Jorge Giraldo Ramírez published for the first time in Spanish with the proper authorization of the editors of John Rawls: Collected Papers, Cambridge, Mass .: Harvard University Press, 1999, pp. 565-572, edited by Samuel Freeman. CopyrightTraducción de Jorge Giraldo Ramírez publicada por primera vez en español con la debida autorización de los editores de John Rawls: Collected Papers, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1999, pp. 565-572, editado por Samuel Freeman. Copyright © po

Teisingumas kaip nešališkumas

Amerikiečių socialinio filosofo J. Rawlso kūrinio sutrumpintame vertime nagrinėjamas teisingumo vaidmuo, teisingumo objektas, formuluojama teisingumo kaip nešališkumo koncepcija, aptariama pirminės pozicijos koncepcija ir jos pagrindimas. Teigiama, kad teisingumas yra pagrindinė socialinių institucijų vertybė. Pirminis teisingumo objektas yra bazinė visuomenės struktūra arba būdas, kuriuo pagrindinės visuomeninės institucijos skirsto fundamentalias teises bei pareigas ir nustato visuomeninės kooperacijos pranašumų paskirstymą. Šios struktūros teisingumo principai yra pirminio susitarimo tikslas. Pirminės pozicijos idėja yra aiškinamoji priemonė, apibendrinanti sąžiningos visuomeninės kooperacijos sąlygų prasmę ir padedanti nustatyti jų padarinius