84 research outputs found

    Managing Interspecies Competition to Improve Spring Pasture

    Get PDF
    Orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) is one of the earliest maturing pasture grasses utilized in the northeastern United States. However, wet springs can delay forage harvesting resulting in advanced forage maturity and reduction in nutritive value. Chicory (Cichorium intybus L.) is a tall, upright-growing forb that shows promise as a high-energy companion crop to orchardgrass and may delay orchardgrass maturity through shading effects on plant morphology. The objective of this study was to evaluate monocultures and mixtures of orchardgrass, chicory, and white clover (Trifolium repens L.) over two consecutive springs to determine the effects of species diversity on plant maturity, nutritive characteristics, and botanical composition of forage mass. Forage monocultures and mixtures were planted in central Pennsylvania in August 2018 and were observed for two years with three harvests occurring each year (one each in spring, summer, and fall). In the first spring, orchardgrass demonstrated nine days delay in maturity when grown with chicory as compared to when grown in monocultures or in orchardgrass-white clover mixtures. Although orchardgrass was at an earlier developmental stage, fiber concentrations were similar when grown with or without chicory. Additionally, in the first spring, orchardgrass mixtures containing chicory had 1.5x greater forage mass than orchardgrass monocultures and orchardgrass-white clover mixtures. Chicory biomass was low in the second spring, likely due to winterkill following a late fall harvest the previous year, resulting in a negligible effect on orchardgrass. However, orchardgrass-chicory-white clover mixtures (even with low amounts of chicory in the second year) had the greatest forage mass and nutritive value yield over both years, indicating that these mixtures can provide greater agronomic benefits than orchardgrass monocultures

    Identification of Novel Proteins in Neospora caninum Using an Organelle Purification and Monoclonal Antibody Approach

    Get PDF
    Neospora caninum is an important veterinary pathogen that causes abortion in cattle and neuromuscular disease in dogs. Neospora has also generated substantial interest because it is an extremely close relative of the human pathogen Toxoplasma gondii, yet does not appear to infect humans. While for Toxoplasma there are a wide array of molecular tools and reagents available for experimental investigation, relatively few reagents exist for Neospora. To investigate the unique biological features of this parasite and exploit the recent sequencing of its genome, we have used an organelle isolation and monoclonal antibody approach to identify novel organellar proteins and develop a wide array of probes for subcellular localization. We raised a panel of forty-six monoclonal antibodies that detect proteins from the rhoptries, micronemes, dense granules, inner membrane complex, apicoplast, mitochondrion and parasite surface. A subset of the proteins was identified by immunoprecipitation and mass spectrometry and reveal that we have identified and localized many of the key proteins involved in invasion and host interaction in Neospora. In addition, we identified novel secretory proteins not previously studied in any apicomplexan parasite. Thus, this organellar monoclonal antibody approach not only greatly enhances the tools available for Neospora cell biology, but also identifies novel components of the unique biological characteristics of this important veterinary pathogen

    A many-analysts approach to the relation between religiosity and well-being

    Get PDF
    The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N=10,535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β=0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β=0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

    A Many-analysts Approach to the Relation Between Religiosity and Well-being

    Get PDF
    The relation between religiosity and well-being is one of the most researched topics in the psychology of religion, yet the directionality and robustness of the effect remains debated. Here, we adopted a many-analysts approach to assess the robustness of this relation based on a new cross-cultural dataset (N = 10, 535 participants from 24 countries). We recruited 120 analysis teams to investigate (1) whether religious people self-report higher well-being, and (2) whether the relation between religiosity and self-reported well-being depends on perceived cultural norms of religion (i.e., whether it is considered normal and desirable to be religious in a given country). In a two-stage procedure, the teams first created an analysis plan and then executed their planned analysis on the data. For the first research question, all but 3 teams reported positive effect sizes with credible/confidence intervals excluding zero (median reported β = 0.120). For the second research question, this was the case for 65% of the teams (median reported β = 0.039). While most teams applied (multilevel) linear regression models, there was considerable variability in the choice of items used to construct the independent variables, the dependent variable, and the included covariates

    Addressing climate change with behavioral science:A global intervention tournament in 63 countries

    Get PDF
    Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions' effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior-several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people's initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors.</p

    Addressing climate change with behavioral science: a global intervention tournament in 63 countries

    Get PDF
    Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions’ effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior—several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people’s initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors

    Addressing climate change with behavioral science:A global intervention tournament in 63 countries

    Get PDF
    Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions' effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior-several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people's initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors.</p

    Addressing climate change with behavioral science:A global intervention tournament in 63 countries

    Get PDF

    Many Labs 5:Testing pre-data collection peer review as an intervention to increase replicability

    Get PDF
    Replication studies in psychological science sometimes fail to reproduce prior findings. If these studies use methods that are unfaithful to the original study or ineffective in eliciting the phenomenon of interest, then a failure to replicate may be a failure of the protocol rather than a challenge to the original finding. Formal pre-data-collection peer review by experts may address shortcomings and increase replicability rates. We selected 10 replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P; Open Science Collaboration, 2015) for which the original authors had expressed concerns about the replication designs before data collection; only one of these studies had yielded a statistically significant effect (p < .05). Commenters suggested that lack of adherence to expert review and low-powered tests were the reasons that most of these RP:P studies failed to replicate the original effects. We revised the replication protocols and received formal peer review prior to conducting new replication studies. We administered the RP:P and revised protocols in multiple laboratories (median number of laboratories per original study = 6.5, range = 3?9; median total sample = 1,279.5, range = 276?3,512) for high-powered tests of each original finding with both protocols. Overall, following the preregistered analysis plan, we found that the revised protocols produced effect sizes similar to those of the RP:P protocols (?r = .002 or .014, depending on analytic approach). The median effect size for the revised protocols (r = .05) was similar to that of the RP:P protocols (r = .04) and the original RP:P replications (r = .11), and smaller than that of the original studies (r = .37). Analysis of the cumulative evidence across the original studies and the corresponding three replication attempts provided very precise estimates of the 10 tested effects and indicated that their effect sizes (median r = .07, range = .00?.15) were 78% smaller, on average, than the original effect sizes (median r = .37, range = .19?.50)

    Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results

    Get PDF
    To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer fiveoriginal research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from two separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete one version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: materials from different teams renderedstatistically significant effects in opposite directions for four out of five hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = -0.37 to +0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for two hypotheses, and a lack of support for three hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, while considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim.</div
    corecore