Concert recording 2019-03-09a

[Tracks 1-2]. Duo sonata / Gregory Wanamaker -- [Track 3]. Aulos - In memorium a Debussy / Ivana Loudova -- [Track 4]. Strange humors / John Mackey -- [Track 5]. Circus parade / Pierre Max Dubois -- [Track 6]. Parable XI for solo alto saxophone / Vincent Persichetti -- [Track 7]. Three preludes / George Gershwin arranged by Ryan Reynolds

Evolution of sex-specific pace-of-life syndromes: genetic architecture and physiological mechanisms

Sex differences in life history, physiology, and behavior are nearly ubiquitous across taxa, owing to sex-specific selection that arises from different reproductive strategies of the sexes. The pace-of-life syndrome (POLS) hypothesis predicts that most variation in such traits among individuals, populations, and species falls along a slow-fast pace-of-life continuum. As a result of their different reproductive roles and environment, the sexes also commonly differ in pace-of-life, with important consequences for the evolution of POLS. Here, we outline mechanisms for how males and females can evolve differences in POLS traits and in how such traits can covary differently despite constraints resulting from a shared genome. We review the current knowledge of the genetic basis of POLS traits and suggest candidate genes and pathways for future studies. Pleiotropic effects may govern many of the genetic correlations, but little is still known about the mechanisms involved in trade-offs between current and future reproduction and their integration with behavioral variation. We highlight the importance of metabolic and hormonal pathways in mediating sex differences in POLS traits; however, there is still a shortage of studies that test for sex specificity in molecular effects and their evolutionary causes. Considering whether and how sexual dimorphism evolves in POLS traits provides a more holistic framework to understand how behavioral variation is integrated with life histories and physiology, and we call for studies that focus on examining the sex-specific genetic architecture of this integration

BFA 2017-2018 Senior Show Catalog

Exhibition catalog for December 2017 and Spring 2018 Bachelor of Fine Arts (B.F.A.) thesis exhibitions in the Earl & Virginia Green Art Gallery at Biola University. In Particular - photography - Emily Hayashida; Cross Over Move Into - photography - Marika Adamopoulos; In progress - photography - Shelby Montelongo; have a dream and have a job and - photography - Jordan Wilson; One Thing at a Time Frankie - drawing & painting - Kat Ashdown; How\u27s Your Family? - Interdisciplinary - Janna Christian; Transept - drawing & painting - Rebecca Mott; Mr. Pareidolia - Interdisciplinary - Delanie Eng; Mojo - Interdisciplinary - Trevor Lunde; Gas Bill - drawing & painting - Michelle Parada; Exactly Not It - Interdisciplinary - Amanda Delaplane; I’ll Be There for You Sometimes - Interdisciplinary - Brianna Eng; Recovered - drawing & painting - Laura Webster; Embody - drawing & painting - Wesleigh Byrd; More Accidentally on Purpose - Interdisciplinary - Lisa Tixier; The Darkness He Called Night - drawing & painting - Kaila Williams; Invitation - sculpture - Kibbi Peng; Dynamo Genesis - design - Tony Walsh; Ambient - design - Chad Swanson; December Eleventh - Interdisciplinary - Jeddiah Angkasa; Side Eye - design - Sean Leone;https://digitalcommons.biola.edu/exhibit-catalogs/1000/thumbnail.jp

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health