Crop Updates 2005 Oilseeds

This session covers fifteen papers from different authors: 1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, Douglas Hamilton, FARMING SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER CROP AGRONOMY AND NUTRITION 2. Canola workshop at Crop Updates 2005, Oilseeds WA, John Duff, EXECUTIVE OFFICER OILSEEDS WA 3. Comparison of IT and TT canola varieties in geographic zones of WA, 2003-4, Graham Walton and Hasan Zaheer, Department of Agriculture 4. Farmer scale canola variety trials in WA, 2004, Graham Walton, John Duff, Neil Harris and Heather Cosgriff, Oilseeds WA 5. Oilseed crops for industrial uses, Margaret C. Campbell, Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture (CLIMA), Graham Walton,Department of Agriculture 6. Weed control opportunities with GM canola, Bill Crabtree, Independent Consultant, Northam 7. Soil and tissue tests for the sulfur requirements of canola, R.F. Brennan and M.D.A. Bolland, Department of Agriculture 8. Tests to predict the potassium requirements of canola, R.F. Brennan and M.D.A. Bolland, Department of Agriculture 9. Genotypic variation in potassium efficiency of canola, P.M. Damon and Z. Rengel, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, UWA 10. Atrazine contamination of groundwater in the agricultural region of Western Australia, Russell Speed1, Neil Rothnie2, John Simons1, Ted Spadek2 and John Moore1;1Department of Agriculture, 2Chemistry Centre (WA) PESTS AND DISEASES 11. Controlling aphids and Beet western yellows virus in canola using imidacloprid seed dressing, Brenda Coutts and Roger Jones; Department of Agriculture 12. Managing sclerotinia in canola, Neil Harris, Dovuro Seeds Western Australia 13. Slugs, the trail of destruction in canola, Neil Harris, Dovuro Seeds Western Australia 14. Blackleg risk assessment and strategies for risk management in canola during 2005 and beyond, Moin Salam, Ravjit Khanguraand Art Diggle, Department of Agriculture 15. Modelling: BRAT – Blackleg Risk Appraisal Tool, Moin Salam, Ravjit KhanguraDepartment of Agricultur

Effect of operating variables on the yield of recombinant trypsinogen for a pulse-fed dilution-refolding reactor

The inclusion body process route for manufacturing proteins offers distinct process advantages in terms of expression levels and the ease of initial inclusion body recovery. The efficiency of the refolding unit operation, however, does determine the overall economic feasibility of a process. Dilution refolding is the simplest and most extensively used refolding operation, although significant yield losses often occur due mainly to aggregation. Operating variables may have a significant effect on the degree of aggregation, but a systematic study has not been reported. This study investigates the effect of operating variables on the dilution refolding of solubilized r-trypsinogen inclusion bodies in a pulse-fed stirred reactor. Variables investigated were inclusion body washing, stirring speed, feed rate, concentration of solubilized r-trypsinogen, and concentration of urea during solubilization of the inclusion bodies. Additionally, the effect of baffles in the reactor was investigated. The yield of renatured r-trypsinogen varied between 12+/-0.2% and 21+/-1.0% depending on the specific combination of operating variables employed. It is clear that a suboptimal operating strategy can significantly reduce protein yield. In particular, we note that an increased intensity of mixing adversely affected yield in contrast to previous reports indicating that enhanced dispersion increases yield. We conclude that yield is determined not only by the efficiency of dispersion, but also by the local chemical environment of the protein as it folds, and the rate of change of this environment. This will be controlled by micromixing effects, and hence the intensity of agitation, in a complex manner requiring further characterization. (C) 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Biotechnol Bioeng 77: 435-444, 2002; DOI 10.1002/bit.10148

Crop Updates 2005 Oilseeds

This session covers fifteen papers from different authors: 1. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS, Douglas Hamilton, FARMING SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER CROP AGRONOMY AND NUTRITION 2. Canola workshop at Crop Updates 2005, Oilseeds WA, John Duff, EXECUTIVE OFFICER OILSEEDS WA 3. Comparison of IT and TT canola varieties in geographic zones of WA, 2003-4, Graham Walton and Hasan Zaheer, Department of Agriculture 4. Farmer scale canola variety trials in WA, 2004, Graham Walton, John Duff, Neil Harris and Heather Cosgriff, Oilseeds WA 5. Oilseed crops for industrial uses, Margaret C. Campbell, Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture (CLIMA), Graham Walton,Department of Agriculture 6. Weed control opportunities with GM canola, Bill Crabtree, Independent Consultant, Northam 7. Soil and tissue tests for the sulfur requirements of canola, R.F. Brennan and M.D.A. Bolland, Department of Agriculture 8. Tests to predict the potassium requirements of canola, R.F. Brennan and M.D.A. Bolland, Department of Agriculture 9. Genotypic variation in potassium efficiency of canola, P.M. Damon and Z. Rengel, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, UWA 10. Atrazine contamination of groundwater in the agricultural region of Western Australia, Russell Speed1, Neil Rothnie2, John Simons1, Ted Spadek2 and John Moore1;1Department of Agriculture, 2Chemistry Centre (WA) PESTS AND DISEASES 11. Controlling aphids and Beet western yellows virus in canola using imidacloprid seed dressing, Brenda Coutts and Roger Jones; Department of Agriculture 12. Managing sclerotinia in canola, Neil Harris, Dovuro Seeds Western Australia 13. Slugs, the trail of destruction in canola, Neil Harris, Dovuro Seeds Western Australia 14. Blackleg risk assessment and strategies for risk management in canola during 2005 and beyond, Moin Salam, Ravjit Khanguraand Art Diggle, Department of Agriculture 15. Modelling: BRAT – Blackleg Risk Appraisal Tool, Moin Salam, Ravjit KhanguraDepartment of Agricultur

Herkunft numerischer und struktureller Aberrationen des X-Chromosoms

Nachdem 1956 durch Tjio und Levan die Darstellung der Metaphasenchromosomen eingeführt worden war, wurden in kurzer Folge ab 1959 verschiedene menschliche Aneuploidien als Ursache häufiger und z.T. bereits vorher bekannter klinischer Syndrome entdeckt (47,XXY als Ursache des Klinefelter-Syndroms: Jacobs u. Strong 1959; Trisomie 21 beim Down-Syndrom: Lejeune et al. 1959; 45,X als Basis des Turner-Syndroms: Ford et al. 1959). Später stellte sich heraus, daß fast die Hälfte der Patienten mit den klinischen Befunden des Turner-Syndroms 46 Chromosomen besitzt, aber entweder ein Mosaik oder eine strukturelle Aberration eines X-Chromosoms oder beides aufweist (Schmid et al. 1974)