35 results
Impaired coronary microvascular reactivity in youth with bipolar disorder
- Kody G. Kennedy, Nilesh R. Ghugre, Idan Roifman, Xiuling Qi, Kayla Saul, Brian W. McCrindle, Christopher K. Macgowan, Bradley J. MacIntosh, Benjamin I. Goldstein
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 54 / Issue 6 / April 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 31 October 2023, pp. 1196-1206
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is excessively prevalent and premature in bipolar disorder (BD), even after controlling for traditional cardiovascular risk factors. The increased risk of CVD in BD may be subserved by microvascular dysfunction. We examined coronary microvascular function in relation to youth BD.
MethodsParticipants were 86 youth, ages 13–20 years (n = 39 BD, n = 47 controls). Coronary microvascular reactivity (CMVR) was assessed using quantitative T2 magnetic resonance imaging during a validated breathing-paradigm. Quantitative T2 maps were acquired at baseline, following 60-s of hyperventilation, and every 10-s thereafter during a 40-s breath-hold. Left ventricular structure and function were evaluated based on 12–15 short- and long-axis cardiac-gated cine images. A linear mixed-effects model that controlled for age, sex, and body mass index assessed for between-group differences in CMVR (time-by-group interaction).
ResultsThe breathing-paradigm induced a significant time-related increase in T2 relaxation time for all participants (i.e. CMVR; β = 0.36, p < 0.001). CMVR was significantly lower in BD v. controls (β = −0.11, p = 0.002). Post-hoc analyses found lower T2 relaxation time in BD youth after 20-, 30-, and 40 s of breath-holding (d = 0.48, d = 0.72, d = 0.91, respectively; all pFDR < 0.01). Gross left ventricular structure and function (e.g. mass, ejection fraction) were within normal ranges and did not differ between groups.
ConclusionYouth with BD showed evidence of subclinically impaired coronary microvascular function, despite normal gross cardiac structure and function. These results converge with prior findings in adults with major depressive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. Future studies integrating larger samples, prospective follow-up, and blood-based biomarkers are warranted.
Efficacy of residual herbicides influenced by cover-crop residue for control of Amaranthus palmeri and A. tuberculatus in soybean
- Clay M. Perkins, Karla L. Gage, Jason K. Norsworthy, Bryan G. Young, Kevin W. Bradley, Mandy D. Bish, Aaron Hager, Lawrence E. Steckel
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 35 / Issue 1 / February 2021
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 July 2020, pp. 77-81
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Field studies were conducted in 2018 and 2019 in Arkansas, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Tennessee to determine if cover-crop residue interfered with herbicides that provide residual control of Palmer amaranth and waterhemp in no-till soybean. The experiments were established in the fall with planting of cover crops (cereal rye + hairy vetch). Herbicide treatments consisted of a nontreated or no residual, acetochlor, dimethenamid-P, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone + flumioxazin, pendimethalin, metribuzin, pyroxasulfone, and S-metolachlor. Palmer amaranth took 18 d and waterhemp took 24 d in the cover crop–alone (nontreated) treatment to reach a height of 10 cm. Compared with this treatment, all herbicides except metribuzin increased the number of days until 10-cm Palmer amaranth was present. Flumioxazin applied alone or in a mixture with pyroxasulfone were the best at delaying Palmer amaranth growing to a height of 10 cm (35 d and 33 d, respectively). The herbicides that resulted in the lowest Palmer amaranth density (1.5 to 4 times less) integrated with a cover crop were pyroxasulfone + flumioxazin, flumioxazin, pyroxasulfone, and acetochlor. Those four herbicide treatments also delayed Palmer amaranth emergence for the longest period (27 to 34 d). Waterhemp density was 7 to 14 times less with acetochlor than all the other herbicides present. Yield differences were observed for locations with waterhemp. This research supports previous research indicating that utilizing soil-residual herbicides along with cover crops improves control of Palmer amaranth and/or waterhemp.
Consortium of Otolaryngology Journal Editors: collegiality and contributions
- Robert T Sataloff, Rakesh Chandra, Edward W Fisher, David Goldenberg, Ehab Y Hanna, Jonas Johnson, David W Kennedy, Dennis H Kraus, John H Krouse, Michael Link, Lawrence R Lustig, Bert W O'Malley, Jr,, Jay F Piccirillo, Robert Ruben, Sandra Schwartz, Samuel H Selesnick, Raj Sindwani, Richard J Smith, Michael G Stewart, James Tysome, Peter C Weber, D Bradley Welling
-
- Journal:
- The Journal of Laryngology & Otology / Volume 134 / Issue 5 / May 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 June 2020, pp. 379-380
- Print publication:
- May 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
Herbicide programs for the termination of grass and broadleaf cover crop species
- Derek M. Whalen, Mandy D. Bish, Bryan G. Young, Shawn P. Conley, Daniel B. Reynolds, Jason K. Norsworthy, Kevin W. Bradley
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 34 / Issue 1 / February 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 09 September 2019, pp. 1-10
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The use of cover crops in soybean production systems has increased in recent years. There are many questions surrounding cover crops—specifically about benefits to crop production and most effective herbicides for spring termination. No studies evaluating cover crop termination have been conducted across a wide geographic area, to our knowledge. Therefore, field experiments were conducted in 2016 and 2017 in Arkansas, Indiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Wisconsin for spring termination of regionally specific cover crops. Glyphosate-, glufosinate-, and paraquat-containing treatments were applied between April 15 and April 29 in 2016 and April 10 and April 20 in 2017. Visible control of cover crops was determined 28 days after treatment. Glyphosate-containing herbicide treatments were more effective than paraquat- and glufosinate-containing treatments, providing 71% to 97% control across all site years. Specifically, glyphosate at 1.12 kg ha−1 applied alone or with 2,4-D at 0.56 kg ha−1, saflufenacil at 0.025 kg ha−1, or clethodim at 0.56 kg ha−1 provided the most effective control on all grass cover crop species. Glyphosate-, paraquat-, or glufosinate-containing treatments were generally most effective on broadleaf cover crop species when applied with 2,4-D or dicamba. Results from this research indicate that proper herbicide selection is crucial to successfully terminate cover crops in the spring.
Evaluation of cover crop sensitivity to residual herbicides applied in the previous soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr] crop
- Derek M. Whalen, Mandy D. Bish, Bryan G. Young, Aaron G. Hager, Shawn P. Conley, Daniel B. Reynolds, Lawrence E. Steckel, Jason K. Norsworthy, Kevin W. Bradley
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 33 / Issue 2 / April 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 April 2019, pp. 312-320
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
In recent years, the use of cover crops has increased in U.S. crop production systems. An important aspect of successful cover crop establishment is the preceding crop and herbicide program, because some herbicides have the potential to persist in the soil for several months. Few studies have been conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of cover crops to common residual herbicides used in soybean production. The same field experiment was conducted in 2016 in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee, and Wisconsin, and repeated in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Mississippi, and Missouri in 2017 to evaluate the potential of residual soybean herbicides to carryover and reduce cover crop establishment. Herbicides applied during the soybean growing season included acetochlor; acetochlor plus fomesafen; chlorimuron plus thifensulfuron; fomesafen; fomesafen plus S-metolachlor followed by acetochlor; imazethapyr; pyroxasulfone; S-metolachlor; S-metolachlor plus fomesafen; sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor; sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor; and sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor followed by acetochlor. Across all herbicide treatments, the sensitivity of cover crops to herbicide residues in the fall, from greatest to least, was forage radish = turnip > annual ryegrass = winter oat = triticale > cereal rye = Austrian winter pea = hairy vetch = wheat > crimson clover. Fomesafen (applied 21 and 42 days after planting [(DAP]); chlorimuron plus thifensulfuron and pyroxasulfone applied 42 DAP; sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor; and sulfentrazone plus S-metolachlor followed by fomesafen plus S-metolachlor followed by acetochlor caused the highest visual ground cover reduction to cover crop species at the fall rating. Study results indicate cover crops are most at risk when following herbicide applications in soybean containing certain active ingredients such as fomesafen, but overall there is a fairly low risk of cover crop injury from residual soybean herbicides applied in the previous soybean crop.
Managing Herbicide Resistance: Listening to the Perspectives of Practitioners. Procedures for Conducting Listening Sessions and an Evaluation of the Process
- Jill Schroeder, Michael Barrett, David R. Shaw, Amy B. Asmus, Harold Coble, David Ervin, Raymond A. Jussaume, Jr., Micheal D. K. Owen, Ian Burke, Cody F. Creech, A. Stanley Culpepper, William S. Curran, Darrin M. Dodds, Todd A. Gaines, Jeffrey L. Gunsolus, Bradley D. Hanson, Prashant Jha, Annie E. Klodd, Andrew R. Kniss, Ramon G. Leon, Sandra McDonald, Don W. Morishita, Brian J. Schutte, Christy L. Sprague, Phillip W. Stahlman, Larry E. Steckel, Mark J. VanGessel
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 32 / Issue 4 / August 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 09 August 2018, pp. 489-497
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
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.
Managing Wicked Herbicide-Resistance: Lessons from the Field
- Jill Schroeder, Michael Barrett, David R. Shaw, Amy B. Asmus, Harold Coble, David Ervin, Raymond A. Jussaume, Jr., Micheal D. K. Owen, Ian Burke, Cody F. Creech, A. Stanley Culpepper, William S. Curran, Darrin M. Dodds, Todd A. Gaines, Jeffrey L. Gunsolus, Bradley D. Hanson, Prashant Jha, Annie E. Klodd, Andrew R. Kniss, Ramon G. Leon, Sandra McDonald, Don W. Morishita, Brian J. Schutte, Christy L. Sprague, Phillip W. Stahlman, Larry E. Steckel, Mark J. VanGessel
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 32 / Issue 4 / August 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 09 August 2018, pp. 475-488
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
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.
Gram scale synthesis of Fe/FexOy core–shell nanoparticles and their incorporation into matrix-free superparamagnetic nanocomposites
- John Watt, Grant C. Bleier, Zachary W. Romero, Bradley G. Hance, Jessica A. Bierner, Todd C. Monson, Dale L. Huber
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Materials Research / Volume 33 / Issue 15 / 13 August 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 May 2018, pp. 2156-2167
- Print publication:
- 13 August 2018
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Significant reductions recently seen in the size of wide-bandgap power electronics have not been accompanied by a relative decrease in the size of the corresponding magnetic components. To achieve this, a new generation of materials with high magnetic saturation and permeability are needed. Here, we develop gram-scale syntheses of superparamagnetic Fe/FexOy core–shell nanoparticles and incorporate them as the magnetic component in a strongly magnetic nanocomposite. Nanocomposites are typically formed by the organization of nanoparticles within a polymeric matrix. However, this approach can lead to high organic fractions and phase separation; reducing the performance of the resulting material. Here, we form aminated nanoparticles that are then cross-linked using epoxy chemistry. The result is a magnetic nanoparticle component that is covalently linked and well separated. By using this ‘matrix-free’ approach, we can substantially increase the magnetic nanoparticle fraction, while still maintaining good separation, leading to a superparamagnetic nanocomposite with strong magnetic properties.
Open access: is there a predator at the door?
- Rakesh Chandra, Edward W Fisher, Terry M Jones, David W Kennedy, Dennis H Kraus, John H Krouse, Michael Link, Lawrence R Lustig, Bert W O'Malley, Jr, Jay F Piccirillo, Robert Ruben, Robert T Sataloff, Sandra Schwartz, Raj Sindwani, Richard J Smith, Michael G Stewart, Peter C Weber, D Bradley Welling, Robin Youngs
-
- Journal:
- The Journal of Laryngology & Otology / Volume 132 / Issue 3 / March 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 07 March 2018, pp. 189-190
- Print publication:
- March 2018
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
On the bulk motion of the cerebrospinal fluid in the spinal canal
- A. L. Sánchez, C. Martínez-Bazán, C. Gutiérrez-Montes, E. Criado-Hidalgo, G. Pawlak, W. Bradley, V. Haughton, J. C. Lasheras
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Fluid Mechanics / Volume 841 / 25 April 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 February 2018, pp. 203-227
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Radionuclide scanning images published in Nature by Di Chiro in 1964 showed a downward migration along the spinal canal of particle tracers injected in the brain ventricles while also showing an upward flow of tracers injected in the lumbar region of the canal. These observations, since then corroborated by many radiological measurements, have been the basis for the hypothesis that there must be an active circulation mechanism associated with the transport of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) deep down into the spinal canal and subsequently returning a portion back to the cranial vault. However, to date, there has been no physical explanation for the mechanism responsible for the establishment of such a bulk recirculating motion. To investigate the origin and characteristics of this recirculating flow, we have analyzed the motion of the CSF in the subarachnoid space of the spinal canal. Our analysis accounts for the slender geometry of the spinal canal, the small compliance of the dura membrane enclosing the CSF in the canal, and the fact that the CSF is confined to a thin annular subarachnoid space surrounding the spinal cord. We apply this general formulation to study the characteristics of the flow generated in a simplified model of the spinal canal consisting of a slender compliant cylindrical pipe with a coaxial cylindrical inclusion, closed at its distal end, and subjected to small periodic pressure pulsations at its open entrance. We show that the balance between the local acceleration and viscous forces produces a leading-order flow consisting of pure oscillatory motion with axial velocities on the order of a few centimetres per second and amplitudes monotonically decreasing along the length of the canal. We then demonstrate that the nonlinear term associated with the convective acceleration contributes to a second-order correction consisting of a steady streaming that generates a bulk recirculating motion of the CSF along the length of the canal with characteristic velocities two orders of magnitude smaller than the leading-order oscillatory flow. The results of the analysis of this idealized geometry of the spinal canal are shown to be in good agreement not only with experimental measurements in an in-vitro model but also with radiological measurements conducted in human adults.
Influence of Cover Crops on Management of Amaranthus Species in Glyphosate- and Glufosinate-Resistant Soybean
- Mark M. Loux, Anthony F. Dobbels, Kevin W. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Bryan G. Young, Douglas J. Spaunhorst, Jason K. Norsworthy, Matheus Palhano, Lawrence E. Steckel
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 31 / Issue 4 / August 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 August 2017, pp. 487-495
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
A field study was conducted for the 2014 and 2015 growing season in Arkansas, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Ohio, and Tennessee to determine the effect of cereal rye and either oats, radish, or annual ryegrass on the control of Amaranthus spp. when integrated with comprehensive herbicide programs in glyphosate-resistant and glufosinate-resistant soybean. Amaranthus species included redroot pigweed, waterhemp, and Palmer amaranth. The two herbicide programs included were: a PRE residual herbicide followed by POST application of foliar and residual herbicide (PRE/POST); or PRE residual herbicide followed by POST application of foliar and residual herbicide, followed by another POST application of residual herbicide (PRE/POST/POST). Control was not affected by type of soybean resistance trait. At the end of the season, herbicides controlled 100 and 96% of the redroot pigweed and Palmer amaranth, respectively, versus 49 and 29% in the absence of herbicides, averaged over sites and other factors. The PRE/POST and PRE/POST/POST herbicide treatments controlled 83 and 90% of waterhemp at the end of the season, respectively, versus 14% without herbicide. Cover crop treatments affected control of waterhemp and Palmer amaranth and soybean yield, only in the absence of herbicides. The rye cover crop consistently reduced Amaranthus spp. density in the absence of herbicides compared to no cover treatment.
Influence of Tillage Method on Management of Amaranthus Species in Soybean
- Jaime A. Farmer, Kevin W. Bradley, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, William G. Johnson, Jason K. Norsworthy, Vince M. Davis, Mark M. Loux
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 31 / Issue 1 / January 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 30 January 2017, pp. 10-20
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
A field study was conducted in 2014 and 2015 in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin, and Missouri to determine the effects of tillage system and herbicide program on season-long emergence of Amaranthus species in glufosinate-resistant soybean. The tillage systems evaluated were deep tillage (fall moldboard plow followed by (fb) one pass with a field cultivator in the spring), conventional tillage (fall chisel plow fb one pass with a field cultivator in the spring), minimum tillage (one pass of a vertical tillage tool in the spring), and no-tillage (PRE application of paraquat). Each tillage system also received one of two herbicide programs; PRE application of flumioxazin (0.09 kg ai ha–1) fb a POST application of glufosinate (0.59 kg ai ha−1) plus S-metolachlor (1.39 kg ai ha–1), or POST-only applications of glufosinate (0.59 kg ha−1). The deep tillage system resulted in a 62, 67, and 73% reduction in Amaranthus emergence when compared to the conventional, minimum, and no-tillage systems, respectively. The residual herbicide program also resulted in an 87% reduction in Amaranthus species emergence compared to the POST-only program. The deep tillage system, combined with the residual program, resulted in a 97% reduction in Amaranthus species emergence when compared to the minimum tillage system combined with the POST-only program, which had the highest Amaranthus emergence. Soil cores taken prior to planting and herbicide application revealed that only 28% of the Amaranthus seed in the deep tillage system was placed within the top 5-cm of the soil profile compared to 79, 81, and 77% in the conventional, minimum, and no-tillage systems. Overall, the use of deep tillage with a residual herbicide program provided the greatest reduction in Amaranthus species emergence, thus providing a useful tool in managing herbicide-resistant Amaranthus species where appropriate.
Management of Pigweed (Amaranthus spp.) in Glufosinate-Resistant Soybean in the Midwest and Mid-South
- Thomas R. Butts, Jason K. Norsworthy, Greg R. Kruger, Lowell D. Sandell, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, Mark M. Loux, Kevin W. Bradley, Shawn P. Conley, David E. Stoltenberg, Francisco J. Arriaga, Vince M. Davis
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 30 / Issue 2 / June 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 355-365
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Pigweeds are among the most abundant and troublesome weed species across Midwest and mid-South soybean production systems because of their prolific growth characteristics and ability to rapidly evolve resistance to several herbicide sites of action. This has renewed interest in diversifying weed management strategies by implementing integrated weed management (IWM) programs to efficiently manage weeds, increase soybean light interception, and increase grain yield. Field studies were conducted across 16 site-years to determine the effectiveness of soybean row width, seeding rate, and herbicide strategy as components of IWM in glufosinate-resistant soybean. Sites were grouped according to optimum adaptation zones for soybean maturity groups (MGs). Across all MG regions, pigweed density and height at the POST herbicide timing, and end-of-season pigweed density, height, and fecundity were reduced in IWM programs using a PRE followed by (fb) POST herbicide strategy. Furthermore, a PRE fb POST herbicide strategy treatment increased soybean cumulative intercepted photosynthetically active radiation (CIPAR) and subsequently, soybean grain yield across all MG regions. Soybean row width and seeding rate manipulation effects were highly variable. Narrow row width (≤ 38 cm) and a high seeding rate (470,000 seeds ha−1) reduced end-of-season height and fecundity variably across MG regions compared with wide row width (≥ 76 cm) and moderate to low (322,000 to 173,000 seeds ha−1) seeding rates. However, narrow row widths and high seeding rates did not reduce pigweed density at the POST herbicide application timing or at soybean harvest. Across all MG regions, soybean CIPAR increased as soybean row width decreased and seeding rate increased; however, row width and seeding rate had variable effects on soybean yield. Furthermore, soybean CIPAR was not associated with end-of-season pigweed growth and fecundity. A PRE fb POST herbicide strategy was a necessary component for an IWM program as it simultaneously managed pigweeds, increased soybean CIPAR, and increased grain yield.
Herbicide Program Approaches for Managing Glyphosate-Resistant Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus and Amaranthus rudis) in Future Soybean-Trait Technologies
- Christopher J. Meyer, Jason K. Norsworthy, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, Kevin W. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Mark M. Loux, Vince M. Davis, Greg R. Kruger, Mohammad T. Bararpour, Joseph T. Ikley, Douglas J. Spaunhorst, Thomas R. Butts
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 29 / Issue 4 / December 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 716-729
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Herbicide-resistant Amaranthus spp. continue to cause management difficulties in soybean. New soybean technologies under development, including resistance to various combinations of glyphosate, glufosinate, dicamba, 2,4-D, isoxaflutole, and mesotrione, will make possible the use of additional herbicide sites of action in soybean than is currently available. When this research was conducted, these soybean traits were still regulated and testing herbicide programs with the appropriate soybean genetics in a single experiment was not feasible. Therefore, the effectiveness of various herbicide programs (PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides) was evaluated in bare-ground experiments on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth and glyphosate-resistant waterhemp (both tall and common) at locations in Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, and Tennessee. Twenty-five herbicide programs were evaluated; 5 of which were PRE herbicides only, 10 were PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides 3 to 4 wks after (WA) the PRE application (EPOST), and 10 were PRE herbicides followed by POST herbicides 6 to 7 WA the PRE application (LPOST). Programs with EPOST herbicides provided 94% or greater control of Palmer amaranth and waterhemp at 3 to 4 WA the EPOST. Overall, programs with LPOST herbicides resulted in a period of weed emergence in which weeds would typically compete with a crop. Weeds were not completely controlled with the LPOST herbicides because weed sizes were larger (≥ 15 cm) compared with their sizes at the EPOST application (≤ 7 cm). Most programs with LPOST herbicides provided 80 to 95% control at 3 to 4 WA applied LPOST. Based on an orthogonal contrast, using a synthetic-auxin herbicide LPOST improves control of Palmer amaranth and waterhemp over programs not containing a synthetic-auxin LPOST. These results show herbicides that can be used in soybean and that contain auxinic- or HPPD-resistant traits will provide growers with an opportunity for better control of glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth and waterhemp over a wide range of geographies and environments.
Tall Waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) and Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Seed Production and Retention at Soybean Maturity
- Lauren M. Schwartz, Jason K. Norsworthy, Bryan G. Young, Kevin W. Bradley, Greg R. Kruger, Vince M. Davis, Larry E. Steckel, Michael J. Walsh
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 30 / Issue 1 / March 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 284-290
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Two of the most problematic Amaranthus species in soybean production today are tall waterhemp and Palmer amaranth. This study determined the percentage of tall waterhemp and Palmer amaranth seed that was retained by the weed at soybean maturity to assess the likelihood of using at-harvest weed seed control tactics for soil seedbank management. Palmer amaranth plants were collected from fields in Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois, Missouri, and Nebraska, and tall waterhemp plants were collected from fields in Nebraska, Missouri, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Collected plants were assessed for at-harvest weed seed retention in 2013 and 2014. Within 1 wk of soybean maturity, Amaranthus plants were harvested and the loose soil and debris beneath the plants were swept into a pan with a hand broom to collect any shattered seed. Percent seed retention ranged from 95 to 100% for all states both years, regardless of species. There was a strong correlation between weed biomass (g) and total seed production (no. plant−1) in that the larger the plant, the more seeds it produced. However, there was no correlation between percent seed retention and weed biomass, which indicates that regardless of plant size and likely time of emergence, seed retention is high at the time of crop maturity. Overall, this study demonstrated that there is great opportunity for Palmer amaranth and tall waterhemp seed capture or destruction at soybean harvest. It is likely that nearly all of the seeds produced for both Amaranthus species passes through the combine during harvest to be returned to the soil seedbank. Thus, there is continued need for research focused on developing and testing harvest weed seed control tactics that aim at reducing the soil seedbank and lowering risks for evolution of herbicide resistance.
Early-Season Palmer Amaranth and Waterhemp Control from Preemergence Programs Utilizing 4-Hydroxyphenylpyruvate Dioxygenase–Inhibiting and Auxinic Herbicides in Soybean
- Christopher J. Meyer, Jason K. Norsworthy, Bryan G. Young, Lawrence E. Steckel, Kevin W. Bradley, William G. Johnson, Mark M. Loux, Vince M. Davis, Greg R. Kruger, Mohammad T. Bararpour, Joseph T. Ikley, Douglas J. Spaunhorst, Thomas R. Butts
-
- Journal:
- Weed Technology / Volume 30 / Issue 1 / March 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2017, pp. 67-75
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Palmer amaranth and waterhemp have become increasingly troublesome weeds throughout the United States. Both species are highly adaptable and emerge continuously throughout the summer months, presenting the need for a residual PRE application in soybean. To improve season-long control of Amaranthus spp., 19 PRE treatments were evaluated on glyphosate-resistant Palmer amaranth in 2013 and 2014 at locations in Arkansas, Indiana, Nebraska, Illinois, and Tennessee; and on glyphosate-resistant waterhemp at locations in Illinois, Missouri, and Nebraska. The two Amaranthus species were analyzed separately; data for each species were pooled across site-years, and site-year was included as a random variable in the analyses. The dissipation of weed control throughout the course of the experiments was compared among treatments with the use of regression analysis where percent weed control was described as a function of time (the number of weeks after treatment [WAT]). At the mean (i.e., average) WAT (4.3 and 3.2 WAT for Palmer amaranth and waterhemp, respectively) isoxaflutole + S-metolachlor + metribuzin had the highest predicted control of Palmer amaranth (98%) and waterhemp (99%). Isoxaflutole + S-metolachlor + metribuzin, S-metolachlor + mesotrione, and flumioxazin + pyroxasulfone had a predicted control ≥ 97% and similar model parameter estimates, indicating control declined at similar rates for these treatments. Dicamba and 2,4-D provided some, short-lived residual control of Amaranthus spp. When dicamba was added to metribuzin or S-metolachlor, control increased compared to dicamba alone. Flumioxazin + pyroxasulfone, a currently labeled PRE, performed similarly to treatments containing isoxaflutole or mesotrione. Additional sites of action will provide soybean growers more opportunities to control these weeds and reduce the potential for herbicide resistance.
Developing one-dimensional implosions for inertial confinement fusion science
- Part of
- J. L. Kline, S. A. Yi, A. N. Simakov, R. E. Olson, D. C. Wilson, G. A. Kyrala, T. S. Perry, S. H. Batha, E. L. Dewald, J. E. Ralph, D. J. Strozzi, A. G. MacPhee, D. A. Callahan, D. Hinkel, O. A. Hurricane, R. J. Leeper, A. B. Zylstra, R. R. Peterson, B. M. Haines, L. Yin, P. A. Bradley, R. C. Shah, T. Braun, J. Biener, B. J. Kozioziemski, J. D. Sater, M. M. Biener, A. V. Hamza, A. Nikroo, L. F. Berzak Hopkins, D. Ho, S. LePape, N. B. Meezan, D. S. Montgomery, W. S. Daughton, E. C. Merritt, T. Cardenas, E. S. Dodd
-
- Journal:
- High Power Laser Science and Engineering / Volume 4 / 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 12 December 2016, e44
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Experiments on the National Ignition Facility show that multi-dimensional effects currently dominate the implosion performance. Low mode implosion symmetry and hydrodynamic instabilities seeded by capsule mounting features appear to be two key limiting factors for implosion performance. One reason these factors have a large impact on the performance of inertial confinement fusion implosions is the high convergence required to achieve high fusion gains. To tackle these problems, a predictable implosion platform is needed meaning experiments must trade-off high gain for performance. LANL has adopted three main approaches to develop a one-dimensional (1D) implosion platform where 1D means measured yield over the 1D clean calculation. A high adiabat, low convergence platform is being developed using beryllium capsules enabling larger case-to-capsule ratios to improve symmetry. The second approach is liquid fuel layers using wetted foam targets. With liquid fuel layers, the implosion convergence can be controlled via the initial vapor pressure set by the target fielding temperature. The last method is double shell targets. For double shells, the smaller inner shell houses the DT fuel and the convergence of this cavity is relatively small compared to hot spot ignition. However, double shell targets have a different set of trade-off versus advantages. Details for each of these approaches are described.
Occipital Bone Cyst Causing Lower Cranial Nerve Palsies
- M. Banna, W. G. Bradley, R. M. Kalbag, B. E. Tomlinson
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Volume 1 / Issue 3 / August 1974
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 18 September 2015, pp. 206-209
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
A 20-year-old girl presented with neck and occipital pain for six weeks, which was found to be due to a unicameral bone cyst of the left occipital condylar region.
Although there have been very few reports of simple bone cysts in bones than the long tubular bones, it appears that the present case is probably the first report of such a lesion occurring in the skull.
Contributors
-
- By Mitchell Aboulafia, Frederick Adams, Marilyn McCord Adams, Robert M. Adams, Laird Addis, James W. Allard, David Allison, William P. Alston, Karl Ameriks, C. Anthony Anderson, David Leech Anderson, Lanier Anderson, Roger Ariew, David Armstrong, Denis G. Arnold, E. J. Ashworth, Margaret Atherton, Robin Attfield, Bruce Aune, Edward Wilson Averill, Jody Azzouni, Kent Bach, Andrew Bailey, Lynne Rudder Baker, Thomas R. Baldwin, Jon Barwise, George Bealer, William Bechtel, Lawrence C. Becker, Mark A. Bedau, Ernst Behler, José A. Benardete, Ermanno Bencivenga, Jan Berg, Michael Bergmann, Robert L. Bernasconi, Sven Bernecker, Bernard Berofsky, Rod Bertolet, Charles J. Beyer, Christian Beyer, Joseph Bien, Joseph Bien, Peg Birmingham, Ivan Boh, James Bohman, Daniel Bonevac, Laurence BonJour, William J. Bouwsma, Raymond D. Bradley, Myles Brand, Richard B. Brandt, Michael E. Bratman, Stephen E. Braude, Daniel Breazeale, Angela Breitenbach, Jason Bridges, David O. Brink, Gordon G. Brittan, Justin Broackes, Dan W. Brock, Aaron Bronfman, Jeffrey E. Brower, Bartosz Brozek, Anthony Brueckner, Jeffrey Bub, Lara Buchak, Otavio Bueno, Ann E. Bumpus, Robert W. Burch, John Burgess, Arthur W. Burks, Panayot Butchvarov, Robert E. Butts, Marina Bykova, Patrick Byrne, David Carr, Noël Carroll, Edward S. Casey, Victor Caston, Victor Caston, Albert Casullo, Robert L. Causey, Alan K. L. Chan, Ruth Chang, Deen K. Chatterjee, Andrew Chignell, Roderick M. Chisholm, Kelly J. Clark, E. J. Coffman, Robin Collins, Brian P. Copenhaver, John Corcoran, John Cottingham, Roger Crisp, Frederick J. Crosson, Antonio S. Cua, Phillip D. Cummins, Martin Curd, Adam Cureton, Andrew Cutrofello, Stephen Darwall, Paul Sheldon Davies, Wayne A. Davis, Timothy Joseph Day, Claudio de Almeida, Mario De Caro, Mario De Caro, John Deigh, C. F. Delaney, Daniel C. Dennett, Michael R. DePaul, Michael Detlefsen, Daniel Trent Devereux, Philip E. Devine, John M. Dillon, Martin C. Dillon, Robert DiSalle, Mary Domski, Alan Donagan, Paul Draper, Fred Dretske, Mircea Dumitru, Wilhelm Dupré, Gerald Dworkin, John Earman, Ellery Eells, Catherine Z. Elgin, Berent Enç, Ronald P. Endicott, Edward Erwin, John Etchemendy, C. Stephen Evans, Susan L. Feagin, Solomon Feferman, Richard Feldman, Arthur Fine, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, William FitzPatrick, Richard E. Flathman, Gvozden Flego, Richard Foley, Graeme Forbes, Rainer Forst, Malcolm R. Forster, Daniel Fouke, Patrick Francken, Samuel Freeman, Elizabeth Fricker, Miranda Fricker, Michael Friedman, Michael Fuerstein, Richard A. Fumerton, Alan Gabbey, Pieranna Garavaso, Daniel Garber, Jorge L. A. Garcia, Robert K. Garcia, Don Garrett, Philip Gasper, Gerald Gaus, Berys Gaut, Bernard Gert, Roger F. Gibson, Cody Gilmore, Carl Ginet, Alan H. Goldman, Alvin I. Goldman, Alfonso Gömez-Lobo, Lenn E. Goodman, Robert M. Gordon, Stefan Gosepath, Jorge J. E. Gracia, Daniel W. Graham, George A. Graham, Peter J. Graham, Richard E. Grandy, I. Grattan-Guinness, John Greco, Philip T. Grier, Nicholas Griffin, Nicholas Griffin, David A. Griffiths, Paul J. Griffiths, Stephen R. Grimm, Charles L. Griswold, Charles B. Guignon, Pete A. Y. Gunter, Dimitri Gutas, Gary Gutting, Paul Guyer, Kwame Gyekye, Oscar A. Haac, Raul Hakli, Raul Hakli, Michael Hallett, Edward C. Halper, Jean Hampton, R. James Hankinson, K. R. Hanley, Russell Hardin, Robert M. Harnish, William Harper, David Harrah, Kevin Hart, Ali Hasan, William Hasker, John Haugeland, Roger Hausheer, William Heald, Peter Heath, Richard Heck, John F. Heil, Vincent F. Hendricks, Stephen Hetherington, Francis Heylighen, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Risto Hilpinen, Harold T. Hodes, Joshua Hoffman, Alan Holland, Robert L. Holmes, Richard Holton, Brad W. Hooker, Terence E. Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Paul Horwich, Vittorio Hösle, Paul Hoβfeld, Daniel Howard-Snyder, Frances Howard-Snyder, Anne Hudson, Deal W. Hudson, Carl A. Huffman, David L. Hull, Patricia Huntington, Thomas Hurka, Paul Hurley, Rosalind Hursthouse, Guillermo Hurtado, Ronald E. Hustwit, Sarah Hutton, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Harry A. Ide, David Ingram, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Alfred L. Ivry, Frank Jackson, Dale Jacquette, Joseph Jedwab, Richard Jeffrey, David Alan Johnson, Edward Johnson, Mark D. Jordan, Richard Joyce, Hwa Yol Jung, Robert Hillary Kane, Tomis Kapitan, Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, James A. Keller, Ralph Kennedy, Sergei Khoruzhii, Jaegwon Kim, Yersu Kim, Nathan L. King, Patricia Kitcher, Peter D. Klein, E. D. Klemke, Virginia Klenk, George L. Kline, Christian Klotz, Simo Knuuttila, Joseph J. Kockelmans, Konstantin Kolenda, Sebastian Tomasz Kołodziejczyk, Isaac Kramnick, Richard Kraut, Fred Kroon, Manfred Kuehn, Steven T. Kuhn, Henry E. Kyburg, John Lachs, Jennifer Lackey, Stephen E. Lahey, Andrea Lavazza, Thomas H. Leahey, Joo Heung Lee, Keith Lehrer, Dorothy Leland, Noah M. Lemos, Ernest LePore, Sarah-Jane Leslie, Isaac Levi, Andrew Levine, Alan E. Lewis, Daniel E. Little, Shu-hsien Liu, Shu-hsien Liu, Alan K. L. Chan, Brian Loar, Lawrence B. Lombard, John Longeway, Dominic McIver Lopes, Michael J. Loux, E. J. Lowe, Steven Luper, Eugene C. Luschei, William G. Lycan, David Lyons, David Macarthur, Danielle Macbeth, Scott MacDonald, Jacob L. Mackey, Louis H. Mackey, Penelope Mackie, Edward H. Madden, Penelope Maddy, G. B. Madison, Bernd Magnus, Pekka Mäkelä, Rudolf A. Makkreel, David Manley, William E. Mann (W.E.M.), Vladimir Marchenkov, Peter Markie, Jean-Pierre Marquis, Ausonio Marras, Mike W. Martin, A. P. Martinich, William L. McBride, David McCabe, Storrs McCall, Hugh J. McCann, Robert N. McCauley, John J. McDermott, Sarah McGrath, Ralph McInerny, Daniel J. McKaughan, Thomas McKay, Michael McKinsey, Brian P. McLaughlin, Ernan McMullin, Anthonie Meijers, Jack W. Meiland, William Jason Melanson, Alfred R. Mele, Joseph R. Mendola, Christopher Menzel, Michael J. Meyer, Christian B. Miller, David W. Miller, Peter Millican, Robert N. Minor, Phillip Mitsis, James A. Montmarquet, Michael S. Moore, Tim Moore, Benjamin Morison, Donald R. Morrison, Stephen J. Morse, Paul K. Moser, Alexander P. D. Mourelatos, Ian Mueller, James Bernard Murphy, Mark C. Murphy, Steven Nadler, Jan Narveson, Alan Nelson, Jerome Neu, Samuel Newlands, Kai Nielsen, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Carlos G. Noreña, Calvin G. Normore, David Fate Norton, Nikolaj Nottelmann, Donald Nute, David S. Oderberg, Steve Odin, Michael O’Rourke, Willard G. Oxtoby, Heinz Paetzold, George S. Pappas, Anthony J. Parel, Lydia Patton, R. P. Peerenboom, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Adriaan T. Peperzak, Derk Pereboom, Jaroslav Peregrin, Glen Pettigrove, Philip Pettit, Edmund L. Pincoffs, Andrew Pinsent, Robert B. Pippin, Alvin Plantinga, Louis P. Pojman, Richard H. Popkin, John F. Post, Carl J. Posy, William J. Prior, Richard Purtill, Michael Quante, Philip L. Quinn, Philip L. Quinn, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Diana Raffman, Gerard Raulet, Stephen L. Read, Andrews Reath, Andrew Reisner, Nicholas Rescher, Henry S. Richardson, Robert C. Richardson, Thomas Ricketts, Wayne D. Riggs, Mark Roberts, Robert C. Roberts, Luke Robinson, Alexander Rosenberg, Gary Rosenkranz, Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal, Adina L. Roskies, William L. Rowe, T. M. Rudavsky, Michael Ruse, Bruce Russell, Lilly-Marlene Russow, Dan Ryder, R. M. Sainsbury, Joseph Salerno, Nathan Salmon, Wesley C. Salmon, Constantine Sandis, David H. Sanford, Marco Santambrogio, David Sapire, Ruth A. Saunders, Geoffrey Sayre-McCord, Charles Sayward, James P. Scanlan, Richard Schacht, Tamar Schapiro, Frederick F. Schmitt, Jerome B. Schneewind, Calvin O. Schrag, Alan D. Schrift, George F. Schumm, Jean-Loup Seban, David N. Sedley, Kenneth Seeskin, Krister Segerberg, Charlene Haddock Seigfried, Dennis M. Senchuk, James F. Sennett, William Lad Sessions, Stewart Shapiro, Tommie Shelby, Donald W. Sherburne, Christopher Shields, Roger A. Shiner, Sydney Shoemaker, Robert K. Shope, Kwong-loi Shun, Wilfried Sieg, A. John Simmons, Robert L. Simon, Marcus G. Singer, Georgette Sinkler, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Matti T. Sintonen, Lawrence Sklar, Brian Skyrms, Robert C. Sleigh, Michael Anthony Slote, Hans Sluga, Barry Smith, Michael Smith, Robin Smith, Robert Sokolowski, Robert C. Solomon, Marta Soniewicka, Philip Soper, Ernest Sosa, Nicholas Southwood, Paul Vincent Spade, T. L. S. Sprigge, Eric O. Springsted, George J. Stack, Rebecca Stangl, Jason Stanley, Florian Steinberger, Sören Stenlund, Christopher Stephens, James P. Sterba, Josef Stern, Matthias Steup, M. A. Stewart, Leopold Stubenberg, Edith Dudley Sulla, Frederick Suppe, Jere Paul Surber, David George Sussman, Sigrún Svavarsdóttir, Zeno G. Swijtink, Richard Swinburne, Charles C. Taliaferro, Robert B. Talisse, John Tasioulas, Paul Teller, Larry S. Temkin, Mark Textor, H. S. Thayer, Peter Thielke, Alan Thomas, Amie L. Thomasson, Katherine Thomson-Jones, Joshua C. Thurow, Vzalerie Tiberius, Terrence N. Tice, Paul Tidman, Mark C. Timmons, William Tolhurst, James E. Tomberlin, Rosemarie Tong, Lawrence Torcello, Kelly Trogdon, J. D. Trout, Robert E. Tully, Raimo Tuomela, John Turri, Martin M. Tweedale, Thomas Uebel, Jennifer Uleman, James Van Cleve, Harry van der Linden, Peter van Inwagen, Bryan W. Van Norden, René van Woudenberg, Donald Phillip Verene, Samantha Vice, Thomas Vinci, Donald Wayne Viney, Barbara Von Eckardt, Peter B. M. Vranas, Steven J. Wagner, William J. Wainwright, Paul E. Walker, Robert E. Wall, Craig Walton, Douglas Walton, Eric Watkins, Richard A. Watson, Michael V. Wedin, Rudolph H. Weingartner, Paul Weirich, Paul J. Weithman, Carl Wellman, Howard Wettstein, Samuel C. Wheeler, Stephen A. White, Jennifer Whiting, Edward R. Wierenga, Michael Williams, Fred Wilson, W. Kent Wilson, Kenneth P. Winkler, John F. Wippel, Jan Woleński, Allan B. Wolter, Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Rega Wood, W. Jay Wood, Paul Woodruff, Alison Wylie, Gideon Yaffe, Takashi Yagisawa, Yutaka Yamamoto, Keith E. Yandell, Xiaomei Yang, Dean Zimmerman, Günter Zoller, Catherine Zuckert, Michael Zuckert, Jack A. Zupko (J.A.Z.)
- Edited by Robert Audi, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
- Published online:
- 05 August 2015
- Print publication:
- 27 April 2015, pp ix-xxx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Francesco Acerbi, Ayca Akgoz, Matthew R. Amans, Ramsey Ashour, Mohammed Ali Aziz-Sultan, H. Hunt Batjer, Donnie Bell, Bernard R. Bendok, Giovanni Broggi, Morgan Broggi, Charles A. Bruno, Steven D. Chang, In Sup Choi, Omar Choudhri, Douglas J. Cook, William P. Dillon, Peter Dirks, Rose Du, Travis M. Dumont, Tarek Y. El Ahmadieh, Najib E. El Tecle, Mohamed Samy Elhammady, Paolo Ferroli, Alana M. Flexman, John C. Flickinger, Kai U. Frerichs, Sasikhan Geibprasert, Adrian W. Gelb, Y. Pierre Gobin, Bradley A. Gross, Seunggu J. Han, Tomoki Hashimoto, Juha Hernesniemi, Roberto C. Heros, Steven W. Hetts, Randall T. Higashida, Joshua A. Hirsch, Nikolai J. Hopf, L. Nelson Hopkins, Maziyar A. Kalani, M. Yashar S. Kalani, Hideyuki Kano, Syed Aftab Karim, Robert M. Koffie, Douglas S. Kondziolka, Timo Krings, Aki Laakso, Giuseppe Lanzino, Michael T. Lawton, Elad I. Levy, L. Dade Lunsford, Adel M. Malek, Michael P. Marks, George A. C. Mendes, Philip M. Meyers, Jacques Morcos, Nitin Mukerji, Christian Musahl, Ludmila Pawlikowska, Matthew B. Potts, Ross Puffer, James D. Rabinov, Jonathan J. Russin, Mina G. Safain, Duke Samson, Marco Schiariti, R. Michael Scott, Jason P. Sheehan, Paul Singh, Edward R. Smith, Scott G. Soltys, Robert F. Spetzler, Gary K. Steinberg, Philip E. Stieg, Hua Su, Karel terBrugge, Kiron Thomas, Tarik Tihan, Babu Welch, Jonathan White, H. Richard Winn, Chun-Po Yen, Jacky T. Yeung, Byron Yip, Samer G. Zammar
- Edited by Robert F. Spetzler, Douglas S. Kondziolka, Randall T. Higashida, University of California, San Francisco, M. Yashar S. Kalani
-
- Book:
- Comprehensive Management of Arteriovenous Malformations of the Brain and Spine
- Published online:
- 05 January 2015
- Print publication:
- 08 January 2015, pp x-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation