Institution
University of Haifa
Education•Haifa, Israel•
About: University of Haifa is a education organization based out in Haifa, Israel. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 7558 authors who have published 27141 publications receiving 711629 citations. The organization is also known as: Haifa University & Universiṭat Ḥefah.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
01 May 2007TL;DR: The authors traces the development of the problem of consciousness in Western philosophy from the time of the ancient Greeks to the middle of the 20th century, focusing on the nature of subjectivity.
Abstract: This chapter traces the development of the problem of consciousness in Western philosophy from the time of the ancient Greeks to the middle of the 20th century. The core problem of consciousness focuses on the nature of subjectivity. The chapter focuses on what has become the central issue in consciousness studies, which is the problem of integrating subjectivity into the scientific view of the world. The mainstream view has not long been mainstream, for the problem of consciousness cannot strike one at all until a fairly advanced scientific understanding of the world permits development of the materialism presupposed by the mainstream view. It was the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries that forced the problem of the Christian dogma into prominence. In philosophy, the 1950s saw the beginning of a self-conscious effort to understand the mind and, eventually, consciousness as physical through and through in essentially scientific terms.
398 citations
••
Daniel S. Karp1, Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer2, Timothy D. Meehan3, Emily A. Martin4 +153 more•Institutions (81)
TL;DR: Analysis of the largest pest-control database of its kind shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others.
Abstract: The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win-win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win-win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies.
398 citations
••
TL;DR: This paper discusses and compares estimation procedures for the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve based on the Mann-Whitney statistic; kernel smoothing; normal assumptions; empirical transformations to normality; and compares these in terms of bias and root mean square error.
Abstract: The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve is frequently used as a measure for the effectiveness of diagnostic markers. In this paper we discuss and compare estimation procedures for this area. These are based on (i) the Mann-Whitney statistic; (ii) kernel smoothing; (iii) normal assumptions; (iv) empirical transformations to normality. These are compared in terms of bias and root mean square error in a large variety of situations by means of an extensive simulation study. Overall we find that transforming to normality usually is to be preferred except for bimodal cases where kernel methods can be effective.
398 citations
••
01 Jan 2000TL;DR: The current state of the field of self-regulation, providing foundations of knowledge for the development of a more comprehensive understanding of Self-regulation theory, research, and applications as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Publisher Summary This chapter presents the current state of the field of self-regulation, providing foundations of knowledge for the development of a more comprehensive understanding of self-regulation theory, research, and applications. The chapter reflects recent advances in conceptualization, methodology, research, individual differences, and areas of application, and represents some of the best contemporary thinking and research on key facets of self-regulation. At present, there is considerable confusion with respect to the criteria attributes of self-regulation, its key components, and related constructs from the same semantic domain. There are almost as many definitions and conceptions of self-regulation as there are lines of research on the topic. Thus, the term is used in somewhat different ways by researchers in different subfields, and various terms are used to denote the same concept (for example, self-regulation, self-control, self-management, problem solving, behavioral control, mood control, and self-regulated learning).
397 citations
••
TL;DR: The enigma of genomic and phenotypic diversity and biodiversity evolution of genes, genomes, phenomes, and biomes, reviewed here, was central in the research program of the Institute of Evolution, University of Haifa, since 1975 as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The genomic era revolutionized evolutionary biology. The enigma of
genotypic-phenotypic diversity and biodiversity evolution of genes,
genomes, phenomes, and biomes, reviewed here, was central in the
research program of the Institute of Evolution, University of Haifa,
since 1975. We explored the following questions. ( i ) How
much of the genomic and phenomic diversity in nature is adaptive and
processed by natural selection? ( ii ) What is the origin
and evolution of adaptation and speciation processes under
spatiotemporal variables and stressful macrogeographic and
microgeographic environments? We advanced ecological genetics into
ecological genomics and analyzed globally ecological, demographic, and
life history variables in 1,200 diverse species across life, thousands
of populations, and tens of thousands of individuals tested mostly for
allozyme and partly for DNA diversity. Likewise, we tested thermal,
chemical, climatic, and biotic stresses in several model organisms.
Recently, we introduced genetic maps and quantitative trait loci to
elucidate the genetic basis of adaptation and speciation. The
genome–phenome holistic model was deciphered by the global regressive,
progressive, and convergent evolution of subterranean mammals. Our
results indicate abundant genotypic and phenotypic diversity in nature.
The organization and evolution of molecular and organismal diversity in
nature at global, regional, and local scales are nonrandom and
structured; display regularities across life; and are positively
correlated with, and partly predictable by, abiotic and biotic
environmental heterogeneity and stress. Biodiversity evolution, even in
small isolated populations, is primarily driven by natural selection,
including diversifying, balancing, cyclical, and purifying selective
regimes, interacting with, but ultimately overriding, the effects of
mutation, migration, and stochasticity.
397 citations
Authors
Showing all 7747 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Markku Laakso | 162 | 945 | 142292 |
M.-Marsel Mesulam | 150 | 558 | 90772 |
Michael Levin | 111 | 986 | 45667 |
Peter Schmidt | 105 | 638 | 61822 |
Eviatar Nevo | 95 | 848 | 40066 |
Uri Alon | 91 | 442 | 54822 |
Dan Roth | 85 | 523 | 28166 |
Simon G. Potts | 82 | 249 | 31557 |
Russell G. Foster | 79 | 318 | 23206 |
Leo Radom | 79 | 604 | 34075 |
Stevan E. Hobfoll | 74 | 271 | 35870 |
Larry Davidson | 69 | 459 | 20177 |
Alan R. Templeton | 67 | 249 | 28320 |
Uri Gneezy | 65 | 211 | 29671 |
Benny Pinkas | 64 | 156 | 21122 |