Cornell University

About: Cornell University is a education organization based out in Ithaca, New York, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Gene. The organization has 102246 authors who have published 235546 publications receiving 12283673 citations. The organization is also known as: Cornell & CUI.

A Robust, Simple Genotyping-by-Sequencing (GBS) Approach for High Diversity Species

Abstract: Advances in next generation technologies have driven the costs of DNA sequencing down to the point that genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) is now feasible for high diversity, large genome species. Here, we report a procedure for constructing GBS libraries based on reducing genome complexity with restriction enzymes (REs). This approach is simple, quick, extremely specific, highly reproducible, and may reach important regions of the genome that are inaccessible to sequence capture approaches. By using methylation-sensitive REs, repetitive regions of genomes can be avoided and lower copy regions targeted with two to three fold higher efficiency. This tremendously simplifies computationally challenging alignment problems in species with high levels of genetic diversity. The GBS procedure is demonstrated with maize (IBM) and barley (Oregon Wolfe Barley) recombinant inbred populations where roughly 200,000 and 25,000 sequence tags were mapped, respectively. An advantage in species like barley that lack a complete genome sequence is that a reference map need only be developed around the restriction sites, and this can be done in the process of sample genotyping. In such cases, the consensus of the read clusters across the sequence tagged sites becomes the reference. Alternatively, for kinship analyses in the absence of a reference genome, the sequence tags can simply be treated as dominant markers. Future application of GBS to breeding, conservation, and global species and population surveys may allow plant breeders to conduct genomic selection on a novel germplasm or species without first having to develop any prior molecular tools, or conservation biologists to determine population structure without prior knowledge of the genome or diversity in the species.

Review of particle properties.

Abstract: This biennial Review summarizes much of Particle Physics. Using data from previous editions, plus 2205 new measurements from 667 papers, we list, evaluate, and average measured properties of gauge bosons, leptons, quarks, mesons, and baryons. We also summarize searches for hypothetical particles such as Higgs bosons, heavy neutrinos, and supersymmetric particles. All the particle properties and search limits are listed in Summary Tables. We also give numerous tables, figures, formulae, and reviews of topics such as the Standard Model, particle detectors, probability, and statistics. This edition features expanded coverage of CP violation in B mesons and of neutrino oscillations. For the first time we cover searches for evidence of extra dimensions (both in the particle listings and in a new review). Another new review is on Grand Unified Theories. A booklet is available containing the Summary Tables and abbreviated versions of some of the other sections of this full Review. All tables, listings, and reviews (and errata) are also available on the Particle Data Group website: http://pdg.lbl.gov.

Toward a positive theory of consumer choice

Abstract: The economic theory of the consumer is a combination of positive and normative theories. Since it is based on a rational maximizing model it describes how consumers should choose, but it is alleged to also describe how they do choose. This paper argues that in certain well-defined situations many consumers act in a manner that is inconsistent with economic theory. In these situations economic theory will make systematic errors in predicting behavior. Kanneman and Tversey's prospect theory is proposed as the basis for an alternative descriptive theory. Topics discussed are: undeweighting of opportunity costs, failure to ignore sunk costs, scarch behavior choosing not to choose and regret, and precommitment and self-control.

Identification and analysis of functional elements in 1% of the human genome by the ENCODE pilot project

Abstract: We report the generation and analysis of functional data from multiple, diverse experiments performed on a targeted 1% of the human genome as part of the pilot phase of the ENCODE Project. These data have been further integrated and augmented by a number of evolutionary and computational analyses. Together, our results advance the collective knowledge about human genome function in several major areas. First, our studies provide convincing evidence that the genome is pervasively transcribed, such that the majority of its bases can be found in primary transcripts, including non-protein-coding transcripts, and those that extensively overlap one another. Second, systematic examination of transcriptional regulation has yielded new understanding about transcription start sites, including their relationship to specific regulatory sequences and features of chromatin accessibility and histone modification. Third, a more sophisticated view of chromatin structure has emerged, including its inter-relationship with DNA replication and transcriptional regulation. Finally, integration of these new sources of information, in particular with respect to mammalian evolution based on inter- and intra-species sequence comparisons, has yielded new mechanistic and evolutionary insights concerning the functional landscape of the human genome. Together, these studies are defining a path for pursuit of a more comprehensive characterization of human genome function.

Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change

Abstract: It has become a commonplace belief that learning is the result of the interaction between what the student is taught and his current ideas or concepts.’ This is by no means a new view of learning. Its roots can be traced back to early Gestalt psychologists. However, Piaget’s (1929, 1930) early studies of children’s explanations of natural phenomena and his more recent studies of causality (Piaget, 1974) have perhaps had the greatest impact on the study of the interpretive frameworks students bring to learning situations. This research has led to the widespread study of students’ scientific misconceptions.2 From these studies and, particularly, from recent work by researchers such as Viennot ( 1979) and Driver (1 973), we have developed a more detailed understanding of some of these misconceptions and, more importantly, why they are so “highly robust” and typically outlive teaching which contradicts them (Viennot, 1979, p. 205). But identifying misconceptions or, more broadly speaking, “alternative frameworks” (Driver & Easley, 1978), and understanding some reasons for their persistence, falls short of developing a reasonable view of how a student’s current ideas interact with new, incompatible ideas. Although Piaget (1974) developed one such theory, there appears to be a need for work which focuses “more on the actual content of the pupil’s ideas and less on the supposed underlying logical structures” (Driver & Easley, 1978, p. 76). Several research studies have been performed (Nussbaum, 1979; Nussbaum & Novak, 1976; Driver, 1973; Erickson, 1979) which have investigated “the substance of the actual beliefs and concepts held by children” (Erickson, 1979, p. 221). However, there has been no well-articulated theory explaining or describing the substantive dimensions of the process by which people’s central, organizing concepts change from one set of concepts to another set, incompatible with the first. We believe that a major source of hypotheses concerning this issue is contemporary philosophy of science, since a central question of recent philosophy of science is how concepts change under the impact of new ideas or new information. In this article we first sketch a general model of conceptual change which is largely derived from current philosophy of science, but which we believe can illuminate * This article is partly based on a paper entitled “Learning Special Relativity: A Study of Intellectual Problems Faced by College Students,” presented at the International Conference Celebrating the 100th Anniversary of Albert Einstein, November 8-10, 1979 at Hofstra University.