Anatomical Specializations for Nocturnality in a Critically Endangered Parrot, the Kakapo (Strigops habroptilus)

The shift from a diurnal to nocturnal lifestyle in vertebrates is generally associated with either enhanced visual sensitivity or a decreased reliance on vision. Within birds, most studies have focused on differences in the visual system across all birds with respect to nocturnality-diurnality. The critically endangered Kakapo (Strigops habroptilus), a parrot endemic to New Zealand, is an example of a species that has evolved a nocturnal lifestyle in an otherwise diurnal lineage, but nothing is known about its' visual system. Here, we provide a detailed morphological analysis of the orbits, brain, eye, and retina of the Kakapo and comparisons with other birds. Morphometric analyses revealed that the Kakapo's orbits are significantly more convergent than other parrots, suggesting an increased binocular overlap in the visual field. The Kakapo exhibits an eye shape that is consistent with other nocturnal birds, including owls and nightjars, but is also within the range of the diurnal parrots. With respect to the brain, the Kakapo has a significantly smaller optic nerve and tectofugal visual pathway. Specifically, the optic tectum, nucleus rotundus and entopallium were significantly reduced in relative size compared to other parrots. There was no apparent reduction to the thalamofugal visual pathway. Finally, the retinal morphology of the Kakapo is similar to that of both diurnal and nocturnal birds, suggesting a retina that is specialised for a crepuscular niche. Overall, this suggests that the Kakapo has enhanced light sensitivity, poor visual acuity and a larger binocular field than other parrots. We conclude that the Kakapo possesses a visual system unlike that of either strictly nocturnal or diurnal birds and therefore does not adhere to the traditional view of the evolution of nocturnality in birds

“Möbius-Strip Reasoning”: The Evolution of the FCC’s Net Neutrality Nondiscrimination Principle for Broadband Internet Services and Its Necessary Demise

The Internet plays an important role in the economy, providing jobs, productivity growth, and cost savings. More than anything, it has made the lives of many much simpler¾except of course for those who regulate and classify it. Indeed, computers and subsequently the Internet have proven to be a significant challenge to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) from the 1960s with the rise of the modern-day computer, to today, as network neutrality (net neutrality) remains at the forefront of the policy debate after President Obama specifically included provisions in his stimulus package requiring the Commission to formulate a national broadband plan. Thus, since the 1960s the Internet and the net neutrality term “nondiscrimination” (the principle that the Internet is comprised of “dumb pipes” which should give equal priority to all bits on the Internet¾whether it be an email bit or a video bit) have gone on a roller coaster ride that has currently sent the Commission down its sharpest hill yet: a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to codify its four net neutrality policy principles and additionally add and codify principles of nondiscrimination and transparency. This Comment analyzes the current state of the net neutrality nondiscrimination principle after the Net Neutrality NPRM, Comcast, and Third Way NOI, arguing that despite Congress’s mandate to the Commission for regulatory forbearance, the Commission has repositioned the Internet into a Title II regulatory framework. Part I of this Comment explores the path the Commission has taken up to this point, and how that path has led the Commission to both desert and then reassert its Title II authority. Part II analyzes how the nondiscrimination framework came from the shadows to the forefront of the Internet debate and asserts that nondiscrimination can be better clarified¾and Congress’s mandate better fulfilled¾if the Commission takes the advice of Commissioner Robert M. McDowell, by labeling the fifth principle as “anticompetitive” rather than as “nondiscrimination.” In doing so, “beneficial” discrimination, such as blocking spam and preventing congestion, can survive regulation of the Internet. Finally, Part II concludes with how the Commission should move forward, suggesting that the term nondiscrimination¾like the terms common carriage and basic transport¾should be retired rather than expanded in this new era of communications law

“Möbius-Strip Reasoning”: The Evolution of the FCC’s Net Neutrality Nondiscrimination Principle for Broadband Internet Services and Its Necessary Demise

The Internet plays an important role in the economy, providing jobs, productivity growth, and cost savings. More than anything, it has made the lives of many much simpler¾except of course for those who regulate and classify it. Indeed, computers and subsequently the Internet have proven to be a significant challenge to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC or the Commission) from the 1960s with the rise of the modern-day computer, to today, as network neutrality (net neutrality) remains at the forefront of the policy debate after President Obama specifically included provisions in his stimulus package requiring the Commission to formulate a national broadband plan. Thus, since the 1960s the Internet and the net neutrality term “nondiscrimination” (the principle that the Internet is comprised of “dumb pipes” which should give equal priority to all bits on the Internet¾whether it be an email bit or a video bit) have gone on a roller coaster ride that has currently sent the Commission down its sharpest hill yet: a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to codify its four net neutrality policy principles and additionally add and codify principles of nondiscrimination and transparency. This Comment analyzes the current state of the net neutrality nondiscrimination principle after the Net Neutrality NPRM, Comcast, and Third Way NOI, arguing that despite Congress’s mandate to the Commission for regulatory forbearance, the Commission has repositioned the Internet into a Title II regulatory framework. Part I of this Comment explores the path the Commission has taken up to this point, and how that path has led the Commission to both desert and then reassert its Title II authority. Part II analyzes how the nondiscrimination framework came from the shadows to the forefront of the Internet debate and asserts that nondiscrimination can be better clarified¾and Congress’s mandate better fulfilled¾if the Commission takes the advice of Commissioner Robert M. McDowell, by labeling the fifth principle as “anticompetitive” rather than as “nondiscrimination.” In doing so, “beneficial” discrimination, such as blocking spam and preventing congestion, can survive regulation of the Internet. Finally, Part II concludes with how the Commission should move forward, suggesting that the term nondiscrimination¾like the terms common carriage and basic transport¾should be retired rather than expanded in this new era of communications law

MATLAB as a Schedule Assistant for UW-Eau Claire's College of Arts and Sciences

Color poster with text and bar graph.Our team created an agent-based program to advise the administration at UW-Eau Claire when a new class should be scheduled. In creating our model, we used MATLAB to parse and analyze the data from the files we were provided. The goal of this project is to improve and ease the decision making process for course scheduling.University of Wisconsin--Eau Claire Office of Research and Sponsored Programs