The program “Nb_HetEx” estimates the effective number of breeders (Nb) that produced the sampled progeny based on genotype counts contained in that sample. When the number of breeders is very small, ...there is an excess of heterozygotes in their progeny: the smaller the number of breeders, the larger the heterozygote excess. The Nb_HetEx program also estimates Ne through the temporal method.
Calcium sulfate powder materials containing terbium ions at 0, 1.0, or 2.0 mol.% were obtained. They are characterized by the presence of a CaSO4 × 0.5H2O phase, while Tb3+ is incorporated into the ...lattice at ≤1.0 mol.%. Specific surface area enlarged from 2.1 to 22.5 m2/g as crystallite size decreased from 68 to 31 nm. Thermal analysis showed that terbium slightly raises the temperature of CaSO4 × 2H2O-to-CaSO4 transition. Studies of solubility in SBF solution showed the presence of a calcium phosphate layer in terbium-containing cements on the 7th day. Luminescent properties were studied by excitation at 266 nm and 489 nm corresponding to absorption bands of the host and Tb3+ (7F6 - 5D4 absorption band). The recorded emission peaks of the materials showed that the luminescence of the samples was green, with the luminescence intensity increasing when Tb3+ was introduced. The developed materials can find applications in medicine as bioimplants with a possibility of noninvasive visualization of the bone restoration process.
Display omitted
This paper analyzes the applicability of the article mean citation rate measures in the Science Citation Index Journal Citation Reports (SCI JCR) to the five JCR mathematical subject categories. ...These measures are the traditional 2‐year impact factor as well as the recently added 5‐year impact factor and 5‐year article influence score. Utilizing the 2008 SCI JCR, the paper compares the probability distributions of the measures in the mathematical categories to the probability distribution of a scientific model of impact factor distribution. The scientific model distribution is highly skewed, conforming to the negative binomial type, with much of the variance due to the important role of review articles in science. In contrast, the three article mean citation rate measures' distributions in the mathematical categories conformed to either the binomial or Poisson, indicating a high degree of randomness. Seeking reasons for this, the paper analyzes the bibliometric structure of Mathematics, finding it a disjointed discipline of isolated subfields with a weak central core of journals, reduced review function, and long cited half‐life placing most citations beyond the measures' time limits. These combine to reduce the measures' variance to one commensurate with random error. However, the measures were found capable of identifying important journals. Using data from surveys of the Louisiana State University (LSU) faculty, the paper finds a higher level of consensus among mathematicians and others on which are the important mathematics journals than the measures indicate, positing that much of the apparent randomness may be due to the measures' inapplicability to mathematical disciplines. Moreover, tests of the stability of impact factor ranks across a 5‐year time span suggested that the proper model for Mathematics is the negative binomial.
It is well known that uninformed science administrators often use ISI's journal impact factors without taking into account the inherent citation characteristics of individual scientific disciplines. ...A rank normalized impact factor (rnlF) is proposed which involves use of order statistics for the complete set of journals within each JCR category. We believe the normalization procedure provides reliable and easily interpretable values. For any journal j, its rnlF is designated as rnlF1and equals (K–R1+ 1)/K, where R1 is the descending rank of journal j in its JCR category and K is the number of journals in the category. Note: JCR impact factor listings are published in descending order. The proposed rnlF is compared with normalized impact factors proposed by earlier authors. The efficacy of the rnlF is illustrated in the cases of seven highly‐cited scientists, one each from seven different fields.
The Journal Impact Factor (JIF) has been heavily criticized over decades. This opinion piece argues that the JIF should not be demonized. It still can be employed for research evaluation purposes by ...carefully considering the context and academic environment.
PDF
