Genetic Characterization of H3N2 Influenza Viruses Isolated from Pigs in North America, 1977–1999: Evidence for Wholly Human and Reassortant Virus Genotypes

Since 1998, H3N2 viruses have caused epizootics of respiratory disease in pigs throughout the major swine production regions of the U.S. These outbreaks are remarkable because swine influenza in North America had previously been caused almost exclusively by H1N1 viruses. We sequenced the full-length protein coding regions of all eight RNA segments from four H3N2 viruses that we isolated from pigs in the Midwestern U.S. between March 1998 and March 1999, as well as from H3N2 viruses recovered from a piglet in Canada in January 1997 and from a pig in Colorado in 1977. Phylogenetic analyses demonstrated that the 1977 Colorado and 1997 Ontario isolates are wholly human influenza viruses. However, the viruses isolated since 1998 from pigs in the Midwestern U.S. are reassortant viruses containing hemagglutinin, neuraminidase and PB1 polymerase genes from human influenza viruses, matrix, non-structural and nucleoprotein genes from classical swine viruses, and PA and PB2 polymerase genes from avian viruses. The HA proteins of the Midwestern reassortant swine viruses can be differentiated from those of the 1995 lineage of human H3 viruses by 12 amino acid mutations in HA1. In contrast, the Sw:ONT:97 virus, which did not spread from pig-to-pig, lacks 11 of these changes

Estimate of Hanford Waste Rheology and Settling Behavior

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of River Protection’s Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) will process and treat radioactive waste that is stored in tanks at the Hanford Site. Piping, pumps, and mixing vessels have been selected to transport, store, and mix the high-level waste slurries in the WTP. This report addresses the analyses performed by the Rheology Working Group (RWG) and Risk Assessment Working Group composed of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Bechtel National Inc. (BNI), CH2M HILL, DOE Office of River Protection (ORP) and Yasuo Onishi Consulting, LLC staff on data obtained from documented Hanford waste analyses to determine a best-estimate of the rheology of the Hanford tank wastes and their settling behavior. The actual testing activities were performed and reported separately in referenced documentation. Because of this, many of the required topics below do not apply and are so noted

Framework for sustained climate assessment in the United States

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2019. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 100(5), (2019): 897-908, doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-19-0130.1.As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal “climate assessment consortium” to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.This report would not have been possible without the support and participation of numerous organizations and individuals. We thank New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo for announcing in his 2018 State of the State agenda that the IAC would be reconvened. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (Contract ID 123416), Columbia University’s Earth Institute, and the American Meteorological Society provided essential financial support and much more, including sage advice and moral support from John O’Leary, Shara Mohtadi, Steve Cohen, Alex Halliday, Peter deMenocal, Keith Seitter, Paul Higgins, and Bill Hooke. We thank the attendees of a workshop, generously funded by the Kresge Foundation in November of 2017, that laid a foundation for the idea to establish a civil-society-based assessment consortium. During the course of preparing the report, IAC members consulted with individuals too numerous to list here—state, local, and tribal officials; researchers; experts in nongovernmental and community-based organizations; and professionals in engineering, architecture, public health, adaptation, and other areas. We are so grateful for their time and expertise. We thank the members and staff of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research Program for providing individual comments on preliminary recommendations during several discussions in open sessions of their meetings. The following individuals provided detailed comments on an earlier version of this report, which greatly sharpened our thinking and recommendations: John Balbus, Tom Dietz, Phil Duffy, Baruch Fischhoff, Brenda Hoppe, Melissa Kenney, Linda Mearns, Claudia Nierenberg, Kathleen Segerson, Soroosh Sorooshian, Chris Weaver, and Brian Zuckerman. Mary Black provided insightful copy editing of several versions of the report. We also thank four anonymous reviewers for their effort and care in critiquing and improving the report. It is the dedication, thoughtful feedback, expertise, care, and commitment of all these people and more that not only made this report possible, but allow us all to continue to support smart and insightful actions in a changing climate. We are grateful as authors and as global citizens. Author contributions: RM, SA, KB, MB, AC, JD, PF, KJ, AJ, KK, JK, ML, JM, RP, TR, LS, JS, JW, and DZ were members of the IAC and shared in researching, discussing, drafting, and approving the report. BA, JF, AG, LJ, SJ, PK, RK, AM, RM, JN, WS, JS, PT, GY, and RZ contributed to specific sections of the report

Measuring Five Dimensions of Religiosity Across Adolescence

This paper theorizes and tests a latent variable model of adolescent religiosity in which five dimensions of religiosity are interrelated: religious beliefs, religious exclusivity, external religiosity, private practice, and religious salience. Research often theorizes overlapping and independent influences of single items or dimensions of religiosity on outcomes such as adolescent sexual behavior, but rarely operationalizes the dimensions in a measurement model accounting for their associations with each other and across time. We use longitudinal structural equation modeling (SEM) with latent variables to analyze data from two waves of the National Study of Youth and Religion. We test our hypothesized measurement model as compared to four alternate measurement models and find that our proposed model maintains superior fit. We then discuss the associations between the five dimensions of religiosity we measure and how these change over time. Our findings suggest how future research might better operationalize multiple dimensions of religiosity in studies of the influence of religion in adolescence

Evaluating knowledge to support climate action: A framework for sustained assessment. report of an independent advisory committee on applied climate assessment.

Author Posting. © American Meteorological Society, 2019. This article is posted here by permission of American Meteorological Society for personal use, not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in Weather Climate and Society 11(3), (2019):465-487, doi: 10.1175/WCAS-D-18-0134.1.As states, cities, tribes, and private interests cope with climate damages and seek to increase preparedness and resilience, they will need to navigate myriad choices and options available to them. Making these choices in ways that identify pathways for climate action that support their development objectives will require constructive public dialogue, community participation, and flexible and ongoing access to science- and experience-based knowledge. In 2016, a Federal Advisory Committee (FAC) was convened to recommend how to conduct a sustained National Climate Assessment (NCA) to increase the relevance and usability of assessments for informing action. The FAC was disbanded in 2017, but members and additional experts reconvened to complete the report that is presented here. A key recommendation is establishing a new nonfederal “climate assessment consortium” to increase the role of state/local/tribal government and civil society in assessments. The expanded process would 1) focus on applied problems faced by practitioners, 2) organize sustained partnerships for collaborative learning across similar projects and case studies to identify effective tested practices, and 3) assess and improve knowledge-based methods for project implementation. Specific recommendations include evaluating climate models and data using user-defined metrics; improving benefit–cost assessment and supporting decision-making under uncertainty; and accelerating application of tools and methods such as citizen science, artificial intelligence, indicators, and geospatial analysis. The recommendations are the result of broad consultation and present an ambitious agenda for federal agencies, state/local/tribal jurisdictions, universities and the research sector, professional associations, nongovernmental and community-based organizations, and private-sector firms.This report would not have been possible without the support and participation of numerous organizations and individuals. We thank New York State Governor Andrew M. Cuomo for announcing in his 2018 State of the State agenda that the IAC would be reconvened. The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (Contract ID 123416), Columbia University’s Earth Institute, and the American Meteorological Society provided essential financial support and much more, including sage advice and moral support from John O’Leary, Shara Mohtadi, Steve Cohen, Alex Halliday, Peter deMenocal, Keith Seitter, Paul Higgins, and Bill Hooke. We thank the attendees of a workshop, generously funded by the Kresge Foundation in November of 2017, that laid a foundation for the idea to establish a civil-society-based assessment consortium. During the course of preparing the report, IAC members consulted with individuals too numerous to list here—state, local, and tribal officials; researchers; experts in nongovernmental and community-based organizations; and professionals in engineering, architecture, public health, adaptation, and other areas. We are so grateful for their time and expertise. We thank the members and staff of the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee to Advise the U.S. Global Change Research Program for providing individual comments on preliminary recommendations during several discussions in open sessions of their meetings. The following individuals provided detailed comments on an earlier version of this report, which greatly sharpened our thinking and recommendations: John Balbus, Tom Dietz, Phil Duffy, Baruch Fischhoff, Brenda Hoppe, Melissa Kenney, Linda Mearns, Claudia Nierenberg, Kathleen Segerson, Soroosh Sorooshian, Chris Weaver, and Brian Zuckerman. Mary Black provided insightful copy editing of several versions of the report. We also thank four anonymous reviewers for their effort and care in critiquing and improving the report. It is the dedication, thoughtful feedback, expertise, care, and commitment of all these people and more that not only made this report possible, but allow us all to continue to support smart and insightful actions in a changing climate. We are grateful as authors and as global citizens. Author contributions: RM, SA, KB, MB, AC, JD, PF, KJ, AJ, KK, JK, ML, JM, RP, TR, LS, JS, JW, and DZ were members of the IAC and shared in researching, discussing, drafting, and approving the report. BA, JF, AG, LJ, SJ, PK, RK, AM, RM, JN, WS, JS, PT, GY, and RZ contributed to specific sections of the report.2020-05-2

Lista de gêneros de Hymenoptera (Insecta) do Espírito Santo, Brasil

The first checklist of genera of Hymenoptera from Espírito Santo state, Brazil is presented. A total of 973 genera of Hymenoptera is listed, of which 555 (57%) are recorded for the first time from this state. Ichneumonoidea and Chalcidoidea are the two superfamilies with the most genera, 241 and 203 respectively. Braconidae, with 141 genera, are the richest family.The first checklist of genera of Hymenoptera from Espírito Santo state, Brazil is presented. A total of 973 genera of Hymenoptera is listed, of which 555 (57%) are recorded for the first time from this state. Ichneumonoidea and Chalcidoidea are the two superfamilies with the most genera, 241 and 203 respectively. Braconidae, with 141 genera, are the richest family.Fil: Azevedo, Celso O.. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Molin, Ana Dal. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: Penteado-Dias, Angelica. Universidade Federal do São Carlos; BrasilFil: Macedo, Antonio C. C.. Secretaria do Meio Ambiente do Estado de São Paulo; BrasilFil: Rodriguez-V, Beatriz. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Dias, Bianca Z. K.. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Waichert, Cecilia. State University of Utah; Estados UnidosFil: Aquino, Daniel Alejandro. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo. División Entomología; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Smith, David. Smithsonian Institution; Estados UnidosFil: Shimbori, Eduardo M.. Universidade Federal do São Carlos; BrasilFil: Noll, Fernando B.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Gibson, Gary. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada; CanadáFil: Onody, Helena. Universidade Federal do São Carlos; BrasilFil: Carpenter, James M.. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Lattke, John. Universidad Nacional de Loja; EcuadorFil: Ramos, Kelli dos S.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Williams, Kevin. Florida State Collection of Arthropods; Estados UnidosFil: Masner, Lubomir. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada; CanadáFil: Kimsey, Lynn. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Tavares, Marcelo T.. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Olmi, Massimo. Università degli Studi della Tuscia; ItaliaFil: Buffington, Matthew L.. United States Department of Agriculture; Estados UnidosFil: Ohl, Michael. Staatliches Museum fur Naturkunde Stuttgart; AlemaniaFil: Sharkey, Michael. University of Kentucky; Estados UnidosFil: Johnson, Norman F.. Ohio State University; Estados UnidosFil: Kawada, Ricardo. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Gonçalves, Rodrigo B.. Universidade Federal do Paraná; BrasilFil: Feitosa, Rodrigo. Universidade Federal do Paraná; BrasilFil: Heydon, Steven. University of California; Estados UnidosFil: Guerra, Tânia M.. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: da Silva, Thiago S. R.. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Costa, Valmir. Instituto Biológico; Brasi

LSST: from Science Drivers to Reference Design and Anticipated Data Products

(Abridged) We describe here the most ambitious survey currently planned in the optical, the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST). A vast array of science will be enabled by a single wide-deep-fast sky survey, and LSST will have unique survey capability in the faint time domain. The LSST design is driven by four main science themes: probing dark energy and dark matter, taking an inventory of the Solar System, exploring the transient optical sky, and mapping the Milky Way. LSST will be a wide-field ground-based system sited at Cerro Pach\'{o}n in northern Chile. The telescope will have an 8.4 m (6.5 m effective) primary mirror, a 9.6 deg$^2$ field of view, and a 3.2 Gigapixel camera. The standard observing sequence will consist of pairs of 15-second exposures in a given field, with two such visits in each pointing in a given night. With these repeats, the LSST system is capable of imaging about 10,000 square degrees of sky in a single filter in three nights. The typical 5$\sigma$ point-source depth in a single visit in $r$ will be $\sim 24.5$ (AB). The project is in the construction phase and will begin regular survey operations by 2022. The survey area will be contained within 30,000 deg$^2$ with $\delta<+34.5^\circ$, and will be imaged multiple times in six bands, $ugrizy$, covering the wavelength range 320--1050 nm. About 90\% of the observing time will be devoted to a deep-wide-fast survey mode which will uniformly observe a 18,000 deg$^2$ region about 800 times (summed over all six bands) during the anticipated 10 years of operations, and yield a coadded map to $r\sim27.5$. The remaining 10\% of the observing time will be allocated to projects such as a Very Deep and Fast time domain survey. The goal is to make LSST data products, including a relational database of about 32 trillion observations of 40 billion objects, available to the public and scientists around the world.Comment: 57 pages, 32 color figures, version with high-resolution figures available from https://www.lsst.org/overvie

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Genome modeling system: A knowledge management platform for genomics

In this work, we present the Genome Modeling System (GMS), an analysis information management system capable of executing automated genome analysis pipelines at a massive scale. The GMS framework provides detailed tracking of samples and data coupled with reliable and repeatable analysis pipelines. The GMS also serves as a platform for bioinformatics development, allowing a large team to collaborate on data analysis, or an individual researcher to leverage the work of others effectively within its data management system. Rather than separating ad-hoc analysis from rigorous, reproducible pipelines, the GMS promotes systematic integration between the two. As a demonstration of the GMS, we performed an integrated analysis of whole genome, exome and transcriptome sequencing data from a breast cancer cell line (HCC1395) and matched lymphoblastoid line (HCC1395BL). These data are available for users to test the software, complete tutorials and develop novel GMS pipeline configurations. The GMS is available at https://github.com/genome/gms

Optics and Quantum Electronics

Contains table of contents for Section 3 and reports on eighteen research projects.Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency/MIT Lincoln Laboratory Contract MDA972-92-J-1038Joint Services Electronics Program Grant DAAH04-95-1-0038National Science Foundation Grant ECS 94-23737U.S. Air Force - Office of Scientific Research Contract F49620-95-1-0221U.S. Navy - Office of Naval Research Grant N00014-95-1-0715MIT Center for Material Science and EngineeringNational Center for Integrated Photonics Technology Contract DMR 94-00334National Center for Integrated Photonics TechnologyU.S. Navy - Office of Naval Research (MFEL) Contract N00014-94-1-0717National Institutes of Health Grant 9-R01-EY11289MIT Lincoln Laboratory Contract BX-5098Electric Power Research Institute Contract RP3170-25ENEC