305,405 research outputs found
Regulation of the CYB2 gene expression: transcriprtion co-ordination by the Hap1p, Hap2/3/4 and Adr1p transcription factors
No full textMolecular Microbiolog
Phytoseius coheni Swirski & Shechter 1961
No full textPhytoseius coheni Swirski & Shechter Phytoseius (Dubininellus) macropilis coheni Swirski & Shechter 1961: 104. Phytoseius (Phytoseius) macropilis coheni, Ehara 1966: 26. Phytoseius (Dubininellus) coheni, Swirski & Golan 1967: 226; Wu 1997: 153. Phytoseius (Phytoseius) coheni, Moraes et al. 1986: 219. Phytoseius coheni, Moraes et al. 2004: 235; Chant & McMurtry 2007: 129. Phytoseius hawaiiensis Prasad 1968: 1460 (synonymy according to Denmark & Evans 2011). Phytoseius huangi Ehara 1970: 62 (synonymy according to Ehara 2002). Phytoseius jianfengensis Chen, Chu & Zhou 1980: 15 (synonymy according to Wu 1997). This species belongs to the horridus species group as setae J2 and R1 are absent (Chant and McMurtry 1994). It was described from Hong-Kong by Swirski and Shechter (1961) collected on a wide range of plants and very common on citrus. Although species of the genus Phytoseius are considered to belong to the type III (polyphagous generalist predators) of McMurtry and Croft (1997) and McMurtry et al. (2013), its specific biology is totally unknown. World distribution: Australia, China, Hawaii, Hong-Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Tahiti, Taiwan, Thailand, USA. Specimens examined: 4 ♀♀ and 1 ♂ in total. Curepipe, Bld Pasteur (aasl 510 m, lat. 20°19 ′ 21 ″ S, long. 57°31 ′ 45 ″ E), 4 ♀♀ and 1 ♂ on Sphaeropteris cooperi (Hooker ex F. Mueller) R.M. Tryon (Cyatheaceae), 4/XI/2018. Remarks: This species was first reported from Mauritius by Schicha (1984) under the junior synonym name P. hawaiensis. Ferragut and Baumann (2019) recovered the species. Kreiter et al. (2020b) had recently reported this species from Vietnam. Morphological and morphometric characters and all measurements of our specimens fit well measurements in Kreiter et al. (2020b).Published as part of Kreiter, Serge & Abo-Shnaf, Reham I. A., 2020, New records of phytoseiid mites from Mauritius Island (Acari: Mesostigmata, pp. 520-545 in Acarologia 60 (3) on pages 536-537, DOI: 10.24349/acarologia/20204382, http://zenodo.org/record/450344
Paraphytoseius Swirski & Shechter
No full textParaphytoseius Swirski & Shechter Paraphytoseius Swirski & Shechter, 1961: 113; Chant & McMurtry, 2003 b: 216; Moraes et al., 2004: 160. Amblyseius (Paraphytoseius), Ueckermann & Loots, 1987: 221. Amblyseius (Ptenoseius) Pritchard & Baker, 1962: 295. Proprioseius (Paraphytoseius), Karg, 1983: 302. Ptenoseius, Schuster & Pritchard, 1963: 198. Key characteristics of species in this genus are: idiosomal setal pattern 10 A: 6 E/JV- 3:ZV or 10 A: 5 D/JV- 3:ZV; J 2, S 2 and S 4 absent; S 5 present or absent; j 3, s 4, Z 4 and Z 5 elongate, stout, strongly serrate, arising from tubercles; Z 4 and Z 5 close to each other; dorsal shield smooth or lightly sculptured, with posterior margin round; posterior margin of sternal shield straight or slightly concave; posterior margin of genital shield broadly rounded; ventrianal shield much longer than wide, with preanal setae vertically aligned along lateral margins; spermatheca with atrium slightly swollen and with calyx cup-, dish- or trumpet-shaped; fixed cheliceral digit with 7 – 11 teeth; legs I, II and III with or without macrosetae; leg IV with 3 – 5 strong macrosetae. Three species in this genus are reported in this paper. They have idiosomal setal pattern 10 A: 5 D/JV- 3:ZV; J 2, S 2, S 4 and S 5 absent; one pair of round preanal pores posterior to and almost in line with JV 2; 1 pair of metapodal shields.Published as part of De, Gilberto J., Zannou, Ignace D. & Ueckermann, Eddie A., 2007, Phytoseiid mites of the tribes Afroseiulini, Kampimodromini and Phytoseiulini, and complementary notes on mites of the tribes Euseiini and Neoseiulini (Acari: Phytoseiidae) from sub-Saharan Africa, pp. 1-22 in Zootaxa 1628 on page 8, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17933
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
Co-designing Speakers Corner
No full text“What might a twenty-first century Speakers’ Corner look like and how should the design process ensure that local people can contribute?”
The paper considers this question through describing a three year collaboration between MA Creative Practice for Narrative Environments (MACPfNE) at CSM, and the Speakers’ Corner Trust (SCT). SCT is a charity promoting public debate and active citizenship to revitalise civil society in the UK. It pursues its aims by forming local Committees which ‘own’ and steer the establishment of Speakers’ Corners as platforms for public engagement. MACPfNE is an innovative course that encourages multidisciplinary collaboration and the use of narrative as a tool to develop user focused environments.
Working closely with SCT, MACPfNE staff and students developed a methodology whereby communities co-create their own physical manifestation of Speakers’ Corner to suit needs and environment. The methodology and its theoretical foundation were developed through a series of live projects, including: a generic mobile Speakers’ Corner prototype, tested at the Global Forum for Freedom of Expression in Oslo; the co-design with local school children, followed by implementation of London’s second Speakers’ Corner in a community park in North London; and a pilot project to co-design Speakers’ Corner in every school playground
Phytoseius crinitus Swirski & Shechter 1961
No full textPhytoseius crinitus Swirski & Shechter Phytoseius (Dubininellus) crinitus Swirski & Shechter 1961: 102. Phytoseius crinitus, Amitai & Swirski 1966: 21 ; Denmark 1966: 66 ; Swirski & Amitai 1966: 11 ; Moraes et al. 1986: 220, 2004: 236; Chant & McMurtry 2007: 129. As the previous species, this species belongs also to the horridus species group (Chant and McMurtry 1994). It was recorded in several countries of Asia, in Burundi, Madagascar (Demite et al. 2020) and La Réunion (Quilici et al. 2000). Its biology remains totally unknown. It was recently recorded in Mauritius Island by Ferragut and Baumann (2019). World distribution: Burundi, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Madagascar Island, Philippines, la Réunion Island, Singapore, Taiwan. Specimens examined: a single ♀ specimen collected during this study. Pomoni, exit of the village (34 m aasl, 12°17 ′ 01 ″ S, 44°24 ′ 52 ″ E), 1 ♀ on Hibiscus tiliaceus L. (Malvaceae), 30/XI/2018. Remarks: this species was the more numerous species of Phytoseius collected in Mauritius by Ferragut and Baumann (2019) and Kreiter and AboShnaf (2020b). It was reported for the first time by these authors from Mauritius, but was already reported by Quilici et al. (2000) from Mascareignes Archipelago in La Réunion Island where Kreiter et al. (2020d) had recovered the species, and from Rodrigues Island (Kreiter and aboShnaf 2020a). Morphological and morphometric characters of our specimens fit well with those provided by Ueckermann et al. (2007) and Kreiter et al. (2020d).Published as part of Kreiter, Serge, Payet, Rose-My & Azali, Hamza Abdou, 2021, Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Mesostigmata) of Anjouan Island (Comoros Archipelago), pp. 62-83 in Acarologia 61 (1) on page 74, DOI: 10.24349/acarologia/20214418, http://zenodo.org/record/539410
Phytoseius crinitus Swirski & Shechter 1961
No full textPhytoseius crinitus Swirski & Shechter Phytoseius (Dubininellus) crinitus Swirski & Shechter 1961: 102; Amitai & Swirski 1966: 21; Denmark 1966: 66; Swirski & Amitai 1966: 11; Moraes et al. 1986: 220. Phytoseius crinitus, Moraes et al. 2004: 236; Chant & McMurtry 2007: 129. This species belongs to the horridus species group (Chant and McMurtry 1994). It was recorded in several countries of Asia, in Burundi, Madagascar (Demite et al. 2020) and La Réunion (Quilici et al. 2000). The biology of P. crinitus remains totally unknown. World distribution: Burundi, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Madagascar Island, Philippines, La Réunion Island, Singapore, Taiwan. Specimens examined: 21 ♀♀ in total. Curepipe, Anderson street (aasl 560 m, lat. 20°19 ′ 11 ″ S, long. 57°31 ′ 52 ″ E), 13 ♀♀ on Litsea glutinosa (Loureiro) Robinson (Lauraceae), 27/X/2018; Curepipe, Botanical Garden (aasl 540 m, lat. 20°19 ′ 28 ″ S, long. 57°30 ′ 50 ″ E), 1 ♀ on Vernicia montana Loureiro (Euphorbiaceae), 29/X/2018; Nouvelle-France (aasl 442 m, lat. 20°22 ′ 34 ″ S, long. 57°35 ′ 58 ″ E), 1 ♀ on Camelia sinensis (L.) Kuntze (Theaceae), 31/X/2018; Belle Rive (aasl 158 m, lat. 20°19 ′ 24 ″ S, long. 57°42 ′ 08 ″ E), 1 ♀ on Acalypha hispida Burman (Euphorbiaceae), 1/XI/2018; Baie du Cap, sea front (aasl 158 m, lat. 20°30 ′ 14 ″ S, long. 57°23 ′ 02 ″ E), 3 ♀♀ on Casuarina equisetifolia L. (Casuarinaceae), 5/XI//2018; Morne-Brabant (aasl 249 m, lat. 20°22 ′ 05 ″ S, long. 57°29 ′ 31 ″ E), 2 ♀♀ on Chromolaena odorata (L.) R.M. King and H. Robinson (Asteraceae), 5/XI/2018. Remarks: this species is the more numerous species of Phytoseius collected in the present study. This was also the case with Ferragut and Baumann (2019) along with Phytoseius haroldi. It was reported for the first time by these authors from Mauritius, but was already reported by Quilici et al. (2000) from Mascareignes Archipelago in La Réunion Island where Kreiter et al. (2020c) had recovered high numbers of the species. Morphological and morphometric characters and all measurements of our specimens fit well measurements in Kreiter et al. (2020c).Published as part of Kreiter, Serge & Abo-Shnaf, Reham I. A., 2020, New records of phytoseiid mites from Mauritius Island (Acari: Mesostigmata, pp. 520-545 in Acarologia 60 (3) on page 537, DOI: 10.24349/acarologia/20204382, http://zenodo.org/record/450344
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
Phytoseius coheni Swirski & Shechter 1961
No full text<i>Phytoseius coheni</i> Swirski & Shechter <p> <i>Phytoseius</i> (<i>Dubininellus</i>) <i>macropilis coheni</i> Swirski & Shechter 1961: 104.</p> <p> <i>Phytoseius</i> (<i>Phytoseius</i>) <i>macropilis coheni</i>, Ehara 1966: 26.</p> <p> <i>Phytoseius</i> (<i>Dubininellus</i>) <i>coheni</i>, Swirski & Golan 1967: 226; Wu 1997: 153.</p> <p> <i>Phytoseius</i> (<i>Phytoseius</i>) <i>coheni</i>, Moraes <i>et al.</i> 1986: 219.</p> <p> <i>Phytoseius coheni</i> Moraes <i>et al.</i>, 2004: 235; Chant & McMurtry 2007: 129.</p> <p> <i>Phytoseius hawaiiensis</i> Prasad 1968: 1460 (synonymy according to Denmark & Evans 2011).</p> <p> <i>Phytoseius huangi</i> Ehara 1970: 62 (synonymy according to Ehara 2002).</p> <p> <i>Phytoseius jianfengensis</i> Chen, Chu & Zhou 1980: 15 (synonymy according to Wu 1997).</p> <p> This species belongs to the <i>horridus</i> species group as setae <i>J2</i> and <i>R1</i> are absent (Chant and McMurtry 1994).</p> <p> This species was described from Hong-Kong by Swirski and Shechter (1961) collected on a wide range of plants and very common on citrus. Although species of the genus <i>Phytoseius</i> are considered to belong to the type III (polyphagous generalist predators) of McMurtry and Croft (1997) and McMurtry <i>et al.</i> (2013), its specific biology is totally unknown.</p> <p> <b>World distribution</b>: Australia, China, Hawaii, Hon-Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mauritius, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Tahiti, Taiwan, Thailand, USA.</p> <p> <b>Specimens examined</b>: a single ♀ during this study. <b>Port-Mathurin</b>, City Center (11 m aasl, lat. 19°40 ′ 53 ″ S, long. 63°25 ′ 17 ″ E), 1 ♀ on <i>Polyscias scutellaria</i> (Burman) Fosberg (Araliaceae), 11/XI/2020.</p> <p> <b>Remarks</b>: this species was firstly reported from Mauritius by Schicha (1984) under the junior synonym name <i>P. hawaiensis</i>. Ferragut and Baumann (2019) recovered the species. Kreiter <i>et al.</i> (2020b) have recently reported this species from Vietnam. Morphological and morphometric characters and all measurements of our specimens fit well with measurements in Kreiter <i>et al.</i> (2020b).</p>Published as part of <i>Kreiter, Serge & Abo-Shnaf, Reham I. A., 2020, Phytoseiid mites of Rodrigues Island (Acari: Mesostigmata), pp. 449-468 in Acarologia 60 (2)</i> on page 460, DOI: 10.24349/acarologia/20204376, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4488033">http://zenodo.org/record/4488033</a>
Author, publisher and bookseller : a tripartite synergy in Nigerian book industry
No full textThis work is about the roles of Author, Publisher and Bookseller in Book development in
Nigeria. The paper started by delving into the history of Book Publishing in Nigeria after
which it proceeded by defining who an author, a publisher, and a bookseller is and
expatiated on the indispensable roles of these key actors in Nigerian Book Industry and in
the emerging Information Society. Furthermore, the various constraints to book
development were identified while the paper advised on how the Book Industry can be
further promoted in Nigeria. However, the paper concluded and made recommendations
on how the Book sector can help in enhancing scholarship in the country
- …
