scispace - formally typeset
Institution

Kansas State University

EducationManhattan, Kansas, United States
About: Kansas State University is a(n) education organization based out in Manhattan, Kansas, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topic(s): Population & Large Hadron Collider. The organization has 24326 authors who have published 46992 publication(s) receiving 1496790 citation(s). The organization is also known as: Kansas State & K-State.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a simple colorimetric determination of proline in the 0.1 to 36.0 μmoles/g range of fresh weight leaf material was presented.
Abstract: Proline, which increases proportionately faster than other amino acids in plants under water stress, has been suggested as an evaluating parameter for irrigation scheduling and for selecting drought-resistant varieties. The necessity to analyze numerous samples from multiple replications of field grown materials prompted the development of a simple, rapid colorimetric determination of proline. The method detected proline in the 0.1 to 36.0 μmoles/g range of fresh weight leaf material.

12,637 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BRS) as mentioned in this paper was developed to provide a rapid assessment technique particularly suited to the evaluation of patient change, and it is recommended for use where efficiency, speed, and economy are important considerations.
Abstract: The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale was developed to provide a rapid assessment technique particularly suited to the evaluation of patient change. Sixteen symptom constructs which have resulted from factor analyses of several larger sets of items, principally Lorr's Multidimensional Scale for Rating Psychiatric Patients (MSRPP) (1953) and Inpatient Multidimensional Psychiatric Scale (IMPS) (1960), have been included for rating on 7-point ordered category rating scales. The attempt has been to include a single scale to record degree of symptomacology in each of the relatively independent symptom areas which have been identified. Some of the preliminary work which has led to the identification of primary symptom constructs has been published (Gorham & Overall, 1960, 1961, Overall, Gorharn, & Shawver, 1961). While other reports are in preparation, applications of the Brief Scale in both pure and applied research suggest the importance of presenting the basic instrument to the wider scientific audience at this time, together with recommendations for its standard use. The primary purpose in developing the Brief Scale has been the development of a highly efficient, rapid evaluation procedure for use in assessing treatment change in psychiatric patients while at the same time yielding a rather comprehensive description of major symptom characteristics. It is recommended for use where efficiency, speed, and economy are important considerations, while more detailed evaluation procedures, such as those developed by Lorr (1953, 1961) should perhaps be wed in other cases. In order to achieve the maximum effectiveness in use of the Brief Scale, a standard interview procedure and more detailed description of rating concepts are included in this report. In addition, each symptom concept is defined briefly in the rating scale statements themselves. Raters using the scale should become thoroughly familiar with the scale definitions presented herein, after which the rating scale statements should be sufficient to provide recall of the nature and delineation of each symptom area. , To increase the reliability of ratings, it is recommended that patients be interviewed jointly by a team of two clinicians, with the two raters making independent ratings at the completion of the interview. An alternative procedure which has been recommended by some is to have raters discuss and arrive at a

10,139 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Adam Auton1, Gonçalo R. Abecasis2, David Altshuler3, Richard Durbin4  +514 moreInstitutions (90)
01 Oct 2015-Nature
TL;DR: The 1000 Genomes Project set out to provide a comprehensive description of common human genetic variation by applying whole-genome sequencing to a diverse set of individuals from multiple populations, and has reconstructed the genomes of 2,504 individuals from 26 populations using a combination of low-coverage whole-generation sequencing, deep exome sequencing, and dense microarray genotyping.
Abstract: The 1000 Genomes Project set out to provide a comprehensive description of common human genetic variation by applying whole-genome sequencing to a diverse set of individuals from multiple populations. Here we report completion of the project, having reconstructed the genomes of 2,504 individuals from 26 populations using a combination of low-coverage whole-genome sequencing, deep exome sequencing, and dense microarray genotyping. We characterized a broad spectrum of genetic variation, in total over 88 million variants (84.7 million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), 3.6 million short insertions/deletions (indels), and 60,000 structural variants), all phased onto high-quality haplotypes. This resource includes >99% of SNP variants with a frequency of >1% for a variety of ancestries. We describe the distribution of genetic variation across the global sample, and discuss the implications for common disease studies.

9,821 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, results from searches for the standard model Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at 7 and 8 TeV in the CMS experiment at the LHC, using data samples corresponding to integrated luminosities of up to 5.8 standard deviations.
Abstract: Results are presented from searches for the standard model Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s)=7 and 8 TeV in the CMS experiment at the LHC, using data samples corresponding to integrated luminosities of up to 5.1 inverse femtobarns at 7 TeV and 5.3 inverse femtobarns at 8 TeV. The search is performed in five decay modes: gamma gamma, ZZ, WW, tau tau, and b b-bar. An excess of events is observed above the expected background, a local significance of 5.0 standard deviations, at a mass near 125 GeV, signalling the production of a new particle. The expected significance for a standard model Higgs boson of that mass is 5.8 standard deviations. The excess is most significant in the two decay modes with the best mass resolution, gamma gamma and ZZ; a fit to these signals gives a mass of 125.3 +/- 0.4 (stat.) +/- 0.5 (syst.) GeV. The decay to two photons indicates that the new particle is a boson with spin different from one.

8,357 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

4,756 citations


Authors

Showing all 24326 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Carl W. Cotman165809105323
Todd Adams1541866143110
Stephen Sanders1451385105943
Andrei Gritsan1431531135398
Andrew Ivanov142181297390
Barry Blumenfeld1401909105694
Rattan Lal140138387691
Peter Wittich1391646102731
Markus Klute1391447104196
Petar Maksimovic1381707101584
Philip Baringer1381927105322
Alice Bean1371910103717
Hui Li1352982105903
Yurii Maravin1351689102870
Kristian Harder134161396571
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign
225.1K papers, 10.1M citations

94% related

University of California, Davis
180K papers, 8M citations

94% related

Cornell University
235.5K papers, 12.2M citations

93% related

Pennsylvania State University
196.8K papers, 8.3M citations

93% related

University of Wisconsin-Madison
237.5K papers, 11.8M citations

93% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
202251
20212,116
20202,127
20192,098
20181,999
20171,981