Feasibility of an in situ measurement device for bubble size and distribution

The feasibility of in situ measurement device for bubble size and distribution was explored. A novel in situ probe measurement system, the EnviroCam™, was developed. Where possible, this probe incorporated strengths, and minimized weaknesses of historical and currently available real-time measurement methods for bubbles. The system was based on a digital, high-speed, high resolution, modular camera system, attached to a stainless steel shroud, compatible with standard Ingold ports on fermenters. Still frames and/or video were produced, capturing bubbles passing through the notch of the shroud. An LED light source was integral with the shroud. Bubbles were analyzed using customized commercially available image analysis software and standard statistical methods. Using this system, bubble sizes were measured as a function of various operating parameters (e.g., agitation rate, aeration rate) and as a function of media properties (e.g., viscosity, antifoam, cottonseed flour, and microbial/animal cell broths) to demonstrate system performance and its limitations. For selected conditions, mean bubble size changes qualitatively compared favorably with published relationships. Current instrument measurement capabilities were limited primarily to clear solutions that did not contain large numbers of overlapping bubbles

Risk, reassurance and routine: a qualitative study of narrative understandings of the potential for HIV self-testing among men who have sex with men in England

BACKGROUND: HIV testing has seen a rapid evolution over the last decade with multiple modalities now in use globally. In recent years HIV self-testing (HIVST) has been legalised in the UK paving the way for further expansion of testing. Interventions are delivered in particular social contexts which shape uptake. It is therefore important to understand how novel interventions are likely to be received by their intended users. This study aims to understand how HIVST compliments existing testing strategies considered or adopted by men who have sex with men (MSM). We do this by analysing normative discourses surrounding HIV testing and their perceptions of HIVST's potential future roles. METHODS: Six focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with 47 MSM in London, Manchester and Plymouth. One focus group included only MSM who reported higher risk behaviours and one with those who had never tested for HIV. Data were analysed through a thematic framework analysis. RESULTS: Three main narratives for testing for HIV were identified: (i) testing in response to a specific risk event; (ii) as reassurance when there was a small amount of doubt or anxiety related to HIV; and (iii) in response to social norms perpetuated through peers, HIV community groups and the medical establishment to test regularly for HIV. HIVST had limited utility for men when testing in response to specific risk events except in the case of significant structural barriers to other testing opportunities. HIVST was considered to have utility when seeking reassurance, and was thought to be very useful when testing to satisfy the needs and expectations of others around regular testing. There was some ambivalence about the incursion of a clinical intervention into the home. CONCLUSIONS: HIVST following risk events will likely be limited to those for whom existing service provision is insufficient to meet immediate needs based on structural or personal barriers to testing. Obligations of biological citizenship are central to MSM's understanding of the utility of HIVST. In the context of discourses of biocitizenship, men perceive HIVST to have dual roles: firstly as a tool to manage (mild) anxiety around one's HIV status based on an acknowledgment of HIV vulnerability arising from being homosexually active. Secondly, HIVST is useful in complying with social norms and meeting the perceived demands of biomedicine

The English City Riots of 2011, "Broken Britain" and the retreat into the present

The responses to the English city riots of 2011 bear a remarkable resemblance to those of historical urban disorders in terms of the way in which they are framed by concerns over "moral decline", "social malaise" and a "lack of self-restraint" among certain sections of the population. In this paper we draw on the work of Norbert Elias and take a long-term perspective in exploring historical precedents and parallels relating to urban disorder and anti-social behaviour. We reject the notion of "Broken Britain" and argue that a more "detached" perspective is necessary in order to appreciate that perceived crises of civilisation are ubiquitous to the urban condition. Through this historical analysis, framed by Elias' theory of involvement and detachment, we present three key arguments. Firstly, that a 'retreat into the present' is evident among both policy discourse and social science in responding to contemporary urban disorder, giving rise to ahistorical accounts and the romanticisation of previous eras; secondly, that particular moral panics have always arisen, specifically focused upon young and working class populations and urban disorder; and, thirdly, that previous techniques of governance to control these populations were often far more similar to contemporary mechanisms than many commentaries suggest. We conclude by advocating a long-term, detached perspective in discerning historical precedents and their direct linkages to the present; and in identifying what is particular about today's concerns and responses relating to urban disorder

A wager on the future: a practicable response to HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and the stubborn fact of process

In this article we focus on public health’s wager on the social implications of a daily antiretroviral pill to prevent HIV, referred to as PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis). The wager is shown to rely on modes of inquiry overly tied to what is known of the present in order to predict the future. Although such inquiry is not unusual when social research is called upon to assist health policy, predictive methodologies are unable to appreciate the dynamic and thus indeterminate nature of process. We ask: what mode of inquiry might practicably appreciate that what happens in the present will have a bearing on the future, without foreclosing on unknown possibles? Drawing on speculative and pragmatic philosophy, we reflect on our own qualitative research on PrEP to suggest that conventional methodological approaches can contribute to the future without seeking to determine what it will become

Direct detection and measurement of wall shear stress using a filamentous bio-nanoparticle

The wall shear stress (WSS) that a moving fluid exerts on a surface affects many processes including those relating to vascular function. WSS plays an important role in normal physiology (e.g. angiogenesis) and affects the microvasculature's primary function of molecular transport. Points of fluctuating WSS show abnormalities in a number of diseases; however, there is no established technique for measuring WSS directly in physiological systems. All current methods rely on estimates obtained from measured velocity gradients in bulk flow data. In this work, we report a nanosensor that can directly measure WSS in microfluidic chambers with sub-micron spatial resolution by using a specific type of virus, the bacteriophage M13, which has been fluorescently labeled and anchored to a surface. It is demonstrated that the nanosensor can be calibrated and adapted for biological tissue, revealing WSS in micro-domains of cells that cannot be calculated accurately from bulk flow measurements. This method lends itself to a platform applicable to many applications in biology and microfluidics

Crop Updates 2007 - Lupins, Pulses and Oilseeds

This session covers forty eight papers from different authors: 2006 REGIONAL ROUNDUP 1. South east agricultural region, Mark Seymour1 and Jacinta Falconer2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Cooperative Bulk Handling Group 2. Central agricultural region, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture and Food 3. Great Southern and Lakes region, Rodger Beermier, Department of Agriculture and Food 4. Northern agricultural region, Wayne Parker and Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture and Food LUPINS 5. Development of anthracnose resistant and early flowering albus lupins (Lupinus albus L) in Western Australia, Kedar Adhikari and Geoff Thomas, Department of Agriculture and Food 6. New lupins adapted to the south coast, Peter White, Bevan Buirchell and Mike Baker, Department of Agriculture and Food 7. Lupin species and row spacing interactions by environment, Martin Harries, Peter White, Bob French, Jo Walker, Mike Baker and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture and Food 8. The interaction of lupin species row spacing and soil type, Martin Harries, Bob French, Laurie Maiolo and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture and Food 9. The effects of row spacing and crop density on competitiveness of lupins with wild radish, Bob French and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture and Food 10. The effect of time of sowing and radish weed density on lupin yield, Martin Harries and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture and Food 11. Interaction of time of sowing and weed management in lupins, Martin Harries and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture and Food 12. Delayed sowing as a strategy to manage annual ryegrass, Bob French and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture and Food 13. Is delayed sowing a good strategy for weed management in lupins? Bob French, Department of Agriculture and Food 14. Lupins aren’t lupins when it comes to simazine, Peter White and Leigh Smith, Department of Agriculture and Food 15. Seed yield and anthracnose resistance of Tanjil mutants tolerant to metribuzin, Ping Si1, Bevan Buirchell1,2 and Mark Sweetingham1,2, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, Australia; 2Department of Agriculture and Food 16. The effect of herbicides on nodulation in lupins, Lorne Mills1, Harmohinder Dhammu2 and Beng Tan1, 1Curtin University of Technology and 2Department of Agriculture and Food 17. Effect of fertiliser placements and watering regimes on lupin growth and seed yield in the central grain belt of Western Australia, Qifu Ma1, Zed Rengel1, Bill Bowden2, Ross Brennan2, Reg Lunt2 and Tim Hilder2, 1Soil Science & Plant Nutrition UWA, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 18. Development of a forecasting model for Bean Yellow Mosaic Virus in lupins, T. Maling1,2, A. Diggle1, D. Thackray1,2, R.A.C. Jones2, and K.H.M. Siddique1, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, The University of Western Australia; 2Department of Agriculture and Food 19. Manufacturing of lupin tempe,Vijay Jayasena1,4, Leonardus Kardono2,4, Ken Quail3,4 and Ranil Coorey1,4, 1Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia, 2Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), Indonesia, 3BRI Australia Ltd, Sydney, Australia, 4Grain Foods CRC, Sydney, Australia 20. The impact of lupin based ingredients in ice-cream, Hannah Williams, Lee Sheer Yap and Vijay Jayasena, Curtin University of Technology, Perth WA 21. The acceptability of muffins substituted with varying concentrations of lupin flour, Anthony James, Don Elani Jayawardena and Vijay Jayasena, Curtin University of Technology, PerthWA PULSES 22. Chickpea variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1, Rod Hunter1, Tanveer Khan1,2and Jenny Garlinge1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 23. Advanced breeding trials of desi chickpea, Khan, T.N.1, Siddique, K.H.M.3, Clarke, H.2, Turner, N.C.2, MacLeod, W.1, Morgan, S.1, and Harris, A.1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, 3TheUniversity of Western Australia 24. Ascochyta resistance in chickpea lines in Crop Variety Testing (CVT) of 2006, Tanveer Khan1 2, Bill MacLeod1, Alan Harris1, Stuart Morgan1and Kerry Regan1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 25. Yield evaluation of ascochyta blight resistant Kabuli chickpeas, Kerry Regan1and Kadambot Siddique2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia 26. Pulse WA Chickpea Industry Survey 2006, Mark Seymour1, Ian Pritchard1, Wayne Parker1and Alan Meldrum2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Pulse Australia 27. Genes from the wild as a valuable genetic resource for chickpea improvement, Heather Clarke1, Helen Bowers1and Kadambot Siddique2, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, 2Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia 28. International screening of chickpea for resistance to Botrytis grey mould, B. MacLeod1, Dr T. Khan1, Prof. K.H.M. Siddique2and Dr A. Bakr3, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2The University of Western Australia, 3Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute 29. Balance® in chickpea is safest applied post sowing to a level seed bed, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture and Food, 30. Demonstrations of Genesis 510 chickpea, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture and Food 31. Field pea 2006, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture and Food 32. Field pea variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1, Rod Hunter1, Tanveer Khan1,2 and Jenny Garlinge1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 33. Breeding highlights of the Australian Field Pea Improvement Program (AFPIP),Kerry Regan1, Tanveer Khan1,2, Phillip Chambers1, Chris Veitch1, Stuart Morgan1 , Alan Harris1and Tony Leonforte3, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 34. Field pea germplasm enhancement for black spot resistance, Tanveer Khan, Kerry Regan, Stuart Morgan, Alan Harris and Phillip Chambers, Department of Agriculture and Food 35. Validation of Blackspot spore release model and testing moderately resistant field pea line, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Rodger Beermier, Pam Burgess and Leanne Young, Department of Agriculture and Food 36. Yield losses from sowing field pea seed infected with Pea Seed-borne Mosaic Virus, Brenda Coutts, Donna O’Keefe, Rhonda Pearce, Monica Kehoe and Roger Jones, Department of Agriculture and Food 37. Faba bean in 2006, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture and Food 38. Germplasm evaluation – faba bean, Mark Seymour1, Terri Jasper1, Ian Pritchard1, Mike Baker1 and Tim Pope1,2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, , 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 39. Breeding highlights of the Coordinated Improvement Program for Australian Lentils (CIPAL), Kerry Regan1, Chris Veitch1, Phillip Chambers1 and Michael Materne2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 40. Screening pulse lentil germplasm for tolerance to alternate herbicides, Ping Si1, Mike Walsh2 and Mark Sweetingham1,3, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, 2West Australian Herbicide Resistance Initiative, 3Department of Agriculture and Food 41. Genomic synteny in legumes: Application to crop breeding, Phan, H.T.T.1, Ellwood, S.R.1, Hane, J.1, Williams, A.1, Ford, R.2, Thomas, S.3 and Oliver R1, 1Australian Centre of Necrotrophic Plant Pathogens, Murdoch University, 2BioMarka, University of Melbourne, 3NSW Department of Primary Industries 42. Tolerance of lupins, chickpeas and canola to Balanceâ(Isoxaflutole) and Galleryâ (Isoxaben), Leigh Smith and Peter White, Department of Agriculture and Food CANOLA AND OILSEEDS 43. The performance of TT Canola varieties in the National Variety Test (NVT),WA,2006,Katie Robinson, Research Agronomist, Agritech Crop Research 44. Evaluation of Brassica crops for biodiesel in Western Australia, Mohammad Amjad, Graham Walton, Pat Fels and Andy Sutherland, Department of Agriculture and Food 45. Production risk of canola in different rainfall zones in Western Australia, Imma Farré1, Michael Robertson2 and Senthold Asseng3, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, 3CSIRO Plant Industry 46. Future directions of blackleg management – dynamics of blackleg susceptibility in canola varieties, Ravjit Khangura, Moin Salam and Bill MacLeod, Department of Agriculture and Food 47. Appendix 1: Contributors 48. Appendix 2: List of common acronym

Crop Updates 2005 - Lupins and Pulses

This session covers sixty five papers from different authors: 1. 2004 LUPIN AND PULSE INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS, Peter White Department of Agriculture 2. BACKGROUND, Peter White Department of Agriculture 2004 REGIONAL ROUNDUP 3. Northern Agricultural Region, Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 4. Central Agricultural Region, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture 5. Great Southern and Lakes, Rodger Beermier, Department of Agriculture 6. Esperance Port Zone, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture, and David Syme, The Grain Pool of WA LUPIN AND PULSE PRODUCTION AGRONOMY AND GENETIC IMPROVEMENT 7. Lupin, Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 8. Narrow-leafed lupin breeding, Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 9. Yellow lupin breeding in Western Australia, Kedar Adhikari, Mark Sweetingham and Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 10. WALAB2000 - First Anthracnose resistant albus lupins, Kedar Adhikari, Bevan Buirchell, MarkSweetingham and Geoff Thomas, Department of Agriculture 11. Improving lupin grain quality and yield through genetic manipulation of key physiological traits, Jon Clements1 and Bevan Buirchell2,1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 12. Lupin alkaloids in four Australian species, Shao Fang Wang, Chemistry Centre (WA), CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 13. Improving lupin tolerance to herbicides of metribuzin, isoxaflutole and carfentrazone-ethyl, Ping Si1, Mark Sweetingham12, Bevan Buirchell12, David Bowran2 and Huaan Yang12 , 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agriculture 14. Combined cultural and shielded sprayer herbicide application for weed management, Martin Harries and Mike Baker Department of Agriculture 15. Field testing of lupin seed of various sources with and without post maturity, pre harvest rain for field establishment, Martin Harries, Wayne Parker, Mike Baker, Department of Agriculture 16. Lupin seed rate by wide row spacing, Martin Harries, Bob French, Damien Owen D’arcy, Department of Agriculture 17. How environment influences row spacing response in lupins, Bob French, Department of Agriculture 18. The effect of wider row spacing on lupin architecture, growth and nutrient uptake dynamics, Bill Bowden and Craig Scanlan, Department of Agriculture 19. Fertiliser placement and application rate in wide rows, Martin Harries, Damien Owen D’arcy, Department of Agriculture 20. The pros and cons of cowing lupins in ‘wide’ rows, Wayne Parker, Bob French and Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 21. Investigation into the influence of row orientation in lupin crops, Jeff Russell1 and Angie Roe2, 1Department of Agriculture, 2Farm Focus Consultants 22. Making the most of Mandelup, Greg Shea and Chris Matthews, Department of Agriculture 23. The effect of wild radish density and lupin cultivars on their competition at Merredin, Shahab Pathan, Abul Hashem and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 24. The potential of pearl lupin (Lupinus mutabilis) for southern Australia, Jon Clements1, Mark Sweetingham2, Bevan Buirchell2, Sofia Sipsas2, Geoff Thomas2, John Quealy1, Roger Jones2, Clive Francis1, Colin Smith2 and Gordon Francis1, 1CLIMA, University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 25. Field pea, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 26. Breeding highlights, Tanveer. Khan and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 27. Variety evaluation, Tanveer Khan, Kerry Regan, Jenny Garlinge and Rod Hunter, Department of Agriculture 28. Large scale field pea variety trials, Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture 29. Kaspa demonstrations, Rodger Beermier, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Graham Mussell, Department of Agriculture 30. Field pea harvesting demonstration at Merredin, Glen Riethmuller, Greg Shea and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 31. Does Kaspa respond differently to disease, fungicides, time of sowing or seed rate, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 32. Field pea response to foliar Manganese in mallee district, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 33. Kaspa harvesting observations 2004, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Glen Riethmuller, Department of Agriculture 34. ‘Blackspot Manager’ for understanding blackspot of peas and ascochyta blight management, Moin Salam and Jean Galloway, Department of Agriculture 35. 250,000 ha of field pea in WA – Is it sustainable? Larn McMurray1 and Mark Seymour2, 1South Australian Research and Development Institute, 2Department of Agriculture 36. Desi chickpea, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 37. Breeding highlights, Tanveer Khan1,2 and Kadambot Siddique2,1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 38. Variety evaluation, Tanveer Khan, Kerry Regan, Jenny Garlinge and Rod Hunter, Department of Agriculture 39. Large scale variety testing of desi chickpeas, Martin Harries, Greg Shea, Mike Baker, Dirranie Kirby, Department of Agriculture 40. Desi variety chickpea trial, Martin Harries and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 41. Seeding rates and row spacing of chickpea desi, Martin Harries, MurrayBlyth, Damien Owen D’arcy, Department of Agriculture 42. Molecular characterisation of chickpea wild relatives, Fucheng Shan, Heather Clarke and Kadambot Siddique, CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 43. Plant phosphorus status has a limited influence on the concentration of phosphorus-mobilising carboxylates in the rhizosphere of chickpea, Madeleine Wouterlood, Hans Lambers and Erik Veneklaas, The University of Western Australia 44. Kabuli chickpea, Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 45. ‘Kimberly Large’ A high quality and high yielding new variety for the Ord River Irrigation Area, Kerry Regan1,2, Kadambot Siddique2, Peter White1,2, Peter Smith1 and Gae Plunkett1,1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, University of Western Australia 46. Development of ascochyta resistant and high quality varieties for Australia, Kadambot Siddique1, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope1 and Mike Baker2, 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 47. Towards double haploids in chickpeas and field pea, Janine Croser, Julia Wilson and Kadambot Siddique, CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 48. Crossing chickpea with wild Cicer relatives to introduce resistance to disease and tolerance to environmental stress, Heather Clarke and Kadambot Siddique, CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 49. Faba bean, Peter White, Department of Agriculture 50. Germplasm evaluation, Peter White1,2, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope2, Martin Harries1, Mark Seymour1, Rodger Beermier1 and Leanne Young1, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 51. Lentil, Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 52. Variety and germplasm evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope2, Leanne Young1, Martin Harries1, Murray Blyth1 and Michael Materne3, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, University of Western Australia, 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 53. Lathyrus species, Kadambot Siddique1, Kerry Regan2, and Colin Hanbury2, 1CLIMA, the University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agricultur

Factors associated with spontaneous stone passage in a contemporary cohort of patients presenting with acute ureteric colic. Results from the MIMIC Study (A Multi-centre cohort study evaluating the role of Inflammatory Markers in patients presenting with acute ureteric Colic)

Objectives There is conflicting data on the role of white blood cell count (WBC) and other inflammatory markers in spontaneous stone passage in patients with acute ureteric colic. The aim of the study was to assess the relationship of WBC and other routinely collected inflammatory and clinical markers including stone size, stone position and Medically Expulsive Therapy use (MET) with spontaneous stone passage (SSP) in a large contemporary cohort of patients with acute ureteric colic. Subjects and Methods Multi‐centre retrospective cohort study coordinated by the British Urology Researchers in Surgical Training (BURST) Research Collaborative at 71 secondary care hospitals across 4 countries (United Kingdom, Republic of Ireland, Australia and New Zealand). 4170 patients presented with acute ureteric colic and a computer tomography confirmed single ureteric stone. Our primary outcome measure was SSP as defined by the absence of need for intervention to assist stone passage. Multivariable mixed effects logistic regression was used to explore the relationship between key patient factors and SSP. Results 2518 patients were discharged with conservative management and had further follow up with a SSP rate of 74% (n = 1874/2518). Sepsis after discharge with conservative management was reported in 0.6% (n = 16/2518). On multivariable analysis neither WBC, Neutrophils or CRP were seen to predict SSP, with an adjusted OR of 0.97 [95% CI 0.91 to 1.04, p = 0.38], 1.06 [95% CI 0.99 to 1.13, p = 0.1] and 1.00 [95% CI 0.99 to 1.00, p = 0.17], respectively. Medical expulsive therapy (MET) also did not predict SSP [adjusted OR 1.11 [95% CI 0.76 to 1.61]). However, stone size and stone position were significant predictors. SSP for stones 7mm. For stones in the upper ureter the SSP rate was 52% [95% CI 48 to 56], middle ureter was 70% [95% CI 64 to 76], and lower ureter was 83% [95% CI 81 to 85]. Conclusion In contrast to the previously published literature, we found that in patients with acute ureteric colic who are discharged with initial conservative management, neither WBC, Neutrophil count or CRP help determine the likelihood of spontaneous stone passage. We also found no overall benefit from the use of MET. Stone size and position are important predictors and our findings represent the most comprehensive stone passage rates for each mm increase in stone size from a large contemporary cohort adjusting for key potential confounders. We anticipate that these data will aid clinicians managing patients with acute ureteric colic and help guide management decisions and the need for intervention

Crop Updates 2006 - Lupins and Pulses

This session covers sixty six papers from different authors: 2005 LUPIN AND PULSE INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS 1. Lupin Peter White, Department of Agriculture 2. Pulses Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 3. Monthly rainfall at experimental sites in 2005 4. Acknowledgements Amelia McLarty EDITOR 5. Contributors 6. Background Peter White, Department of Agriculture 2005 REGIONAL ROUNDUP 7. Northern agricultural region Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 8. Central agricultural region Ian Pritchard and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 9. Great southern and lakes Rodger Beermier, Department of Agriculture 10. South east region Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture LUPIN AND PULSE PRODUCTION AGRONOMY AND GENETIC IMPROVEMENT 11. Lupin Peter White, Department of Agriculture 12. Narrow-leafed lupin breeding Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 13. Progress in the development of pearl lupin (Lupinus mutabilis) for Australian agriculture, Mark Sweetingham1,2, Jon Clements1, Geoff Thomas2, Roger Jones1, Sofia Sipsas1, John Quealy2, Leigh Smith1 and Gordon Francis1 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 14. Molecular genetic markers and lupin breeding, Huaan Yang, Jeffrey Boersma, Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 15. Construction of a genetic linkage map using MFLP, and identification of molecular markers linked to domestication genes in narrow-leafed lupin (Lupinus augustiflolius L) Jeffrey Boersma1,2, Margaret Pallotta3, Bevan Buirchell1, Chengdao Li1, Krishnapillai Sivasithamparam2 and Huaan Yang1 1Department of Agriculture, 2The University of Western Australia, 3Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics, South Australia 16. The first gene-based map of narrow-leafed lupin – location of domestication genes and conserved synteny with Medicago truncatula, M. Nelson1, H. Phan2, S. Ellwood2, P. Moolhuijzen3, M. Bellgard3, J. Hane2, A. Williams2, J. Fos‑Nyarko4, B. Wolko5, M. Książkiewicz5, M. Cakir4, M. Jones4, M. Scobie4, C. O’Lone1, S.J. Barker1, R. Oliver2, and W. Cowling1 1School of Plant Biology, The University of Western Australia, 2Australian Centre for Necrotrophic Fungal Pathogens, Murdoch University, 3Centre for Bioinformatics and Biological Computing, Murdoch University, 4School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, SABC, Murdoch University,5Institute of Plant Genetics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznań, Poland 17. How does lupin optimum density change row spacing? Bob French and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture 18. Wide row spacing and seeding rate of lupins with conventional and precision seeding machines Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 19. Influence of row spacing and plant density on lupin competition with annual ryegrass, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 20. Effect of timing and speed of inter-row cultivation on lupins, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Steve Cosh, Department of Agriculture 21. The interaction of atrazine herbicide rate and row spacing on lupin seedling survival, Martin Harries and Jo Walker Department of Agriculture 22. The banding of herbicides on lupin row crops, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 23. Large plot testing of herbicide tolerance of new lupin lines, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 24. Effect of seed source and simazine rate of seedling emergence and growth, Peter White and Greg Shea, Department of Agriculture 25. The effect of lupin row spacing and seeding rate on a following wheat crop, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Dirranie Kirby, Department of Agriculture 26. Response of crop lupin species to row spacing, Leigh Smith1, Kedar Adhikari1, Jon Clements2 and Patrizia Guantini3, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3University of Florence, Italy 27. Response of Lupinus mutabilis to lime application and over watering, Peter White, Leigh Smith and Mark Sweetingham, Department of Agriculture 28. Impact of anthracnose on yield of Andromeda lupins, Geoff Thomas, Kedar Adhikari and Katie Bell, Department of Agriculture 29. Survey of lupin root health (in major production areas), Geoff Thomas, Ken Adcock, Katie Bell, Ciara Beard and Anne Smith, Department of Agriculture 30. Development of a generic forecasting and decision support system for diseases in the Western Australian wheatbelt, Tim Maling1, Art Diggle1,2, Debbie Thackray1, Kadambot Siddique1 and Roger Jones1,2 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agriculture 31.Tanjil mutants highly tolerant to metribuzin, Ping Si1, Mark Sweetingham1,2, Bevan Buirchell1,2 and Huaan Yang l,2 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agriculture 32. Precipitation pH vs. yield and functional properties of lupin protein isolate, Vijay Jayasena1, Hui Jun Chih1 and Ken Dods2 1Curtin University of Technology, 2Chemistry Centre 33. Lupin protein isolation with the use of salts, Vijay Jayasena1, Florence Kartawinata1,Ranil Coorey1 and Ken Dods2 1Curtin University of Technology, 2Chemistry Centre 34. Field pea, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 35. Breeding highlights Kerry Regan1,2, Tanveer Khan1,2, Stuart Morgan1 and Phillip Chambers1 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 36. Variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tanveer Khan1,2, Jenny Garlinge1 and Rod Hunter1 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 37. Days to flowering of field pea varieties throughout WA Mark Seymour1, Ian Pritchard1, Rodger Beermier1, Pam Burgess1 and Dr Eric Armstrong2 Department of Agriculture, 2NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga 38. Semi-leafless field peas yield more, with less ryegrass seed set, in narrow rows, Glen Riethmuller, Department of Agriculture 39. Swathing, stripping and other innovative ways to harvest field peas, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Rodger Beermier and Pam Burgess, Department of Agriculture 40. Pulse demonstrations, Ian Pritchard, Wayne Parker, Greg Shea, Department of Agriculture 41. Field pea extension – focus on field peas 2005, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture 42. Field pea blackspot disease in 2005: Prediction versus reality, Moin Salam, Jean Galloway, Pip Payne, Bill MacLeod and Art Diggle, Department of Agriculture 43. Pea seed-borne mosaic virus in pulses: Screening for seed quality defects and virus resistance, Rohan Prince, Brenda Coutts and Roger Jones, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 44. Yield losses from sowing field peas infected with pea seed-borne mosaic virus, Rohan Prince, Brenda Coutts and Roger Jones, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 45. Desi chickpea, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 46. Breeding highlights, Tanveer Khan 1,2, Pooran Gaur3, Kadambot Siddique2, Heather Clarke2, Stuart Morgan1and Alan Harris1, 1Department of Agriculture2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3International Crop Research Institute for Semi Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), India 47. National chickpea improvement program, Kerry Regan1, Ted Knights2 and Kristy Hobson3,1Department of Agriculture, 2Agriculture New South Wales 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 48. Chickpea breeding lines in CVT exhibit excellent ascochyta blight resistance, Tanveer Khan1,2, Alan Harris1, Stuart Morgan1 and Kerry Regan1,2, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 49. Variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tanveer Khan1,2, Jenny Garlinge2 and Rod Hunter2, 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 50. Desi chickpeas for the wheatbelt, Wayne Parker and Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture 51. Large scale demonstration of new chickpea varieties, Wayne Parker, MurrayBlyth, Steve Cosh, Dirranie Kirby and Chris Matthews, Department of Agriculture 52. Ascochyta management with new chickpeas, Martin Harries, Bill MacLeod, Murray Blyth and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture 53. Management of ascochyta blight in improved chickpea varieties, Bill MacLeod1, Colin Hanbury2, Pip Payne1, Martin Harries1, Murray Blyth1, Tanveer Khan1,2, Kadambot Siddique2, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 54. Botrytis grey mould of chickpea, Bill MacLeod, Department of Agriculture 55. Kabuli chickpea, Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 56. New ascochyta blight resistant, high quality kabuli chickpea varieties, Kerry Regan1,2, Kadambot Siddique2, Tim Pope2 and Mike Baker1, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 57. Crop production and disease management of Almaz and Nafice, Kerry Regan and Bill MacLeod, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 58. Faba bean,Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 59. Germplasm evaluation – faba bean, Mark Seymour1, Tim Pope2, Peter White1, Martin Harries1, Murray Blyth1, Rodger Beermier1, Pam Burgess1 and Leanne Young1,1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 60. Factors affecting seed coat colour of faba bean during storage, Syed Muhammad Nasar-Abbas1, Julie Plummer1, Kadambot Siddique2, Peter White 3, D. Harris4 and Ken Dods4.1The University of Western Australia, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3Department of Agriculture, 4Chemistry Centre 61. Lentil,Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 62. Variety and germplasm evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope2, Leanne Young1, Phill Chambers1, Alan Harris1, Wayne Parker1 and Michael Materne3, 1Department of Agriculture 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria Pulse species 63. Land suitability for production of different crop species in Western Australia, Peter White, Dennis van Gool, and Mike Baker, Department of Agriculture 64. Genomic synteny in legumes: Application to crop breeding, Huyen Phan1, Simon Ellwood1, J. Hane1, Angela Williams1, R. Ford2, S. Thomas3 and Richard Oliver1,1Australian Centre of Necrotrophic Plant Pathogens, Murdoch University 2BioMarka, School of Agriculture and Food Systems, ILFR, University of Melbourne 3NSW Department of Primary Industries 65. ALOSCA – Development of a dry flow legume seed inoculant, Rory Coffey and Chris Poole, ALOSCA Technologies Pty Ltd 66. Genetic dissection of resistance to fungal necrotrophs in Medicago truncatula, Simon Ellwood1, Theo Pfaff1, Judith Lichtenzveig12, Lars Kamphuis1, Nola D\u27Souza1, Angela Williams1, Emma Groves1, Karam Singh2 and Richard Oliver1 1Australian Centre of Necrotrophic Plant Pathogens, Murdoch University, 2CSIRO Plant Industry APPENDIX I: LIST OF COMMON ACRONYM

A Ship ‘for which Great Neptune Raves’: The Sovereign of the Seas, la Couronne and Seventeenth-Century International Competition over Warship Design

Charles I’s great warship the Sovereign of the Seas is famed for its design, decoration and importance as a tool that heightened the image of English naval supremacy. By exploring its career, size, name and decoration, this article highlights the Sovereign of the Seas’ significance as a national symbol of political and cultural power. It argues that Charles’s leading warship was developed as a reaction to naval advances and current affairs in Europe. Through a diverse range of evidence including diplomatic correspondence, printed texts and artwork from both English and French institutions, as well as relating this to similar advances in the Netherlands and Sweden, the Sovereign of the Seas’ development is internationally contextualized. By comparing it with other contemporary warships, most importantly la Couronne of France, it is shown that Charles’s flagship was a product of a growing international theatre of maritime activity that was inspired by cultural and political competition, as much as it was by military escalation