162,365 research outputs found
The colonial ascidian fauna of Fiordland, New Zealand, with a description of two new species
No full textFigure 4. Botrylloides leachii (NIWA 4998): (A) Zooid; (B1, B2) parietal and mesial sides of the stomach; (C) ventral side of a zooid showing relative position of gonads. Scale bars: A, C 1 mm; B 0.5 mm.Published as part of Page, M.J., Willis, T.J. & Handley, S.J., 2014, The colonial ascidian fauna of Fiordland, New Zealand, with a description of two new species, pp. 1653-1688 in Journal of Natural History (J. Nat. Hist.) 48 (27-28) on page 1659, DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2014.896487, http://zenodo.org/record/519387
Variations on the Author
No full text“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Larry O. Spencer, Conference Author Presentation
No full textGen. Larry O. Spencer, USAF (Ret.), author of Dark Horse: A Journey from the Horseshoe to the Pentago
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
No full textWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
Consensus model of biofilm structure
No full textBiofilms have been defined in various ways by various researchers. The definition is usually structured to be all inclusive of the many environments that biofilms are found and disciplines that the subject covers. Characklis and Marshall (1990) define a biofilm as consisting of “cells immobilized at a substratum and frequently embedded in an organic polymer matrix of microbial origin”. A broader definition is supplied by Costerton et al. (1995) who defined biofilms as “matrix-enclosed bacterial populations adherent to each other and/or to surfaces or interfaces”. It might be easiest to define biofilms in terms of what they are not - single cells homogeneously dispersed in fluid, the well mixed batch culture of which much of contemporary microbiology is based. Structural organisation is a characteristic feature of biofilms which distinguishes biofilm cultures from conventional suspended cultures, with or without an association with an interface. Biofilm structure is a recurrent topic of discussion among biofilm researchers generally and has been featured in a number of presentations at the first two British Biofilm Club Gregynog meetings. Much discussion time has been spent in search of a “universal” conceptual biofilm model describing biofilm structure (Handley 1995). The existence of such a model is appealing but given the enormous diversity of biofilms is it possible to characterise all biofilms with a single conceptual model? And if we do agree on a working model how useful will such a model be? Possibly we should not restrict a biofilm model to certain structural constraints but instead look for common features or basic building blocks of biofilms which could be readily incorporated into different structural models in a modular fashion
- …
