We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
Seven half-day regional listening sessions were held between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicide-resistance management. The objective of the listening sessions was to connect with stakeholders and hear their challenges and recommendations for addressing herbicide resistance. The coordinating team hired Strategic Conservation Solutions, LLC, to facilitate all the sessions. They and the coordinating team used in-person meetings, teleconferences, and email to communicate and coordinate the activities leading up to each regional listening session. The agenda was the same across all sessions and included small-group discussions followed by reporting to the full group for discussion. The planning process was the same across all the sessions, although the selection of venue, time of day, and stakeholder participants differed to accommodate the differences among regions. The listening-session format required a great deal of work and flexibility on the part of the coordinating team and regional coordinators. Overall, the participant evaluations from the sessions were positive, with participants expressing appreciation that they were asked for their thoughts on the subject of herbicide resistance. This paper details the methods and processes used to conduct these regional listening sessions and provides an assessment of the strengths and limitations of those processes.
Herbicide resistance is ‘wicked’ in nature; therefore, results of the many educational efforts to encourage diversification of weed control practices in the United States have been mixed. It is clear that we do not sufficiently understand the totality of the grassroots obstacles, concerns, challenges, and specific solutions needed for varied crop production systems. Weed management issues and solutions vary with such variables as management styles, regions, cropping systems, and available or affordable technologies. Therefore, to help the weed science community better understand the needs and ideas of those directly dealing with herbicide resistance, seven half-day regional listening sessions were held across the United States between December 2016 and April 2017 with groups of diverse stakeholders on the issues and potential solutions for herbicide resistance management. The major goals of the sessions were to gain an understanding of stakeholders and their goals and concerns related to herbicide resistance management, to become familiar with regional differences, and to identify decision maker needs to address herbicide resistance. The messages shared by listening-session participants could be summarized by six themes: we need new herbicides; there is no need for more regulation; there is a need for more education, especially for others who were not present; diversity is hard; the agricultural economy makes it difficult to make changes; and we are aware of herbicide resistance but are managing it. The authors concluded that more work is needed to bring a community-wide, interdisciplinary approach to understanding the complexity of managing weeds within the context of the whole farm operation and for communicating the need to address herbicide resistance.
BEFORE TELLING YOU about these two remarkable Australians, I should explain that around a hundred and ten years or so ago, quite a number of foreigners came to Japan from Australia, or via Australia. They had been attracted to Australia by the boom on the newly-found goldfields, or the prospects of establishing themselves in business in that colony. But when the boom came to an end, many of them decided to try their luck elsewhere. They looked around and moved on to Japan, which had by then been opened to foreign trade.
Some became very successful businessmen. For example, to name only one, E. H. Hunter came to Japan via Australia, and, as you may know, he established, among other enterprises, the Osaka Iron Works which eventually grew into the great Hitachi Dockyard.
But of the two remarkable persons of whom I am going to speak tonight, one was a natural-born Australian. The other had lived in Australia for forty-five years. We may therefore fairly claim them as Australians. One, a boy, was brought to Japan by his parents at the age of about five years, and subsequently became a famous professional Japanese story-teller. The other a widow came to Japan at the age of fifty-eight with the determination to support herself, teaching music, singing, dancing and deportment.
First I shall tell you about the boy.
Around fifty years ago at the time of his death in 1923 at the age of sixty-five, obituaries appeared in some of the newspapers in Japan and later there were occasional magazine articles in which he was erroneously referred to as having been an Englishman or a Scot. I have therefore taken the precaution of bringing with me tonight a photostat copy of the registration of his birth. I received it through the courtesy of Dr D. C. S. Sissons of Canberra. It is dated at Adelaide, South Australia, on 1 February 1859. The details of his birth were declared to be true by Anna Burnett, who presumably was the family servant or the midwife. It is interesting to note that she could not write, and therefore affixed her mark, an ‘X’, instead of a signature to the Birth Register.
It declares that Henry James Black, for such was his name, was born at North Adelaide on 22 December 1858.
1873 IS THE year which is popularly quoted as the date of the introduction of baseball into Japan. That is not correct. Baseball was introduced into Japan through the Foreign Settlements nearly fourteen years before 1873, and in fact, very soon after the opening of the treaty ports in 1859.
Several persons at one time or another have claimed credit for the introduction of baseball into Japan, and many more have had that honour thrust posthumously upon them. Certainly many baseball enthusiasts did on occasions make important individual contributions towards popularizing the game in various schools, universities, clubs, and other places, but the names of those who actually first introduced the game into Japan is something which never will be known. Furthermore nobody knows, nobody can ever know, exactly where or precisely when the first game was played. Certainly it would have been a very modest and informal affair.
There appears to be an irresistible urge on the part of writers, concerning the early days, to describe a certain happening as being the “first” of its kind without troubling to do any research on the subject. For example we are told of the first cow to be slaughtered for meat, the first butchers shop, the first beef restaurant, the first baker's shop, the first foreigner to visit some particular locality in Japan, the first persons to introduce baseball, and so on without end. I advise readers to look with suspicion on any “firsts” regarding the early days, and indeed on those who relate them. Rarely have I found any such “firsts” which have stood up to a close investigation.
From time to time one reads a glamourous account of how some famous team of basebailers visited Japan and played an exhibition game at which some important dignitary was present, whereupon the sport was adopted by the Japanese. In some so-called official histories of foreign sports in Japan, several such lively accounts are given of the introduction of various other sports also. The fact, however, is that foreign sports were not introduced in that fashion. Actually they usually crept in unobserved, as it were, and gradually spread, until suddenly people realized they were here.
An aortopulmonary window is a communication between the ascending aorta and pulmonary trunk in the presence of two separate arterial valves, and is often complicated by other associated defects. We sought to determine management and related outcomes in patients with this malformation.
We identified those patients presenting between 1969 and 1999 from the databases held in our Departments of Cardiology, Pathology and Cardiovascular Surgery. We obtained data relating to issues concerning demography, clinical findings, imaging, management and outcome.
The median age at presentation for the 42 patients identified, of whom 23 were female, was 62 days, with a range from birth to 6 years. Associated cardiac defects were present in 34 patients, including interruption of the aortic arch in 6 patients. The correct diagnosis was initially missed in 13 patients. Of the patients, six died without surgical repair, and 1 patient was lost-to-follow-up. Repair was performed in 35 patients, subsequent to repair of other defects in 4, in association with repair of other defects in 17, of whom 3 died, and as an isolated procedure in 14 patients, one of the latter being treated by transcatheter closure. Overall, there were 9 deaths, all in patients with complex associated defects, except 1 patient with a missed aortopulmonary window after repair of aortic coarctation. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival were 81% at 3 months until 11.5 years, and 69% up to 21 years. Only the presence of interrupted aortic arch was independently associated with increased time-related mortality, the hazard ratio being 5.87 (p = 0.009).
The outcome for an isolated lesion is excellent. Mortality occurs mainly before repair, mostly with complex associated lesions, particularly interruption of the aortic arch.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.