Peer Review #3 of "Long-term warming results in species-specific shifts in seed mass in alpine communities (v0.3)"

Background Global warming can cause variation in plant functional traits due to phenotypic plasticity or rapid microevolutionary change. Seed mass represents a fundamental axis of trait variation in plants, from an individual to a community scale. Here, we hypothesize that long-term warming can shift the mean seed mass of species. Methods We tested our hypothesis in plots that had been warmed over 18 years in alpine meadow communities with a history of light grazing (LG) and heavy grazing (HG) on the Qinghai-Tibet plateau. In this study, seeds were collected during the growing season of 2015. Results We found that warming increased the mean seed mass of 4 (n = 19) species in the LG meadow and 6 (n = 20) species in the HG meadow, while decreasing the mean seed mass of 6 species in the LG and HG meadows, respectively. For 7 species, grazing history modified the effect of warming on seed mass. Therefore, we concluded that long-term warming can shift the mean seed mass at the species level. However, the direction of this variation is species-specific. Our study suggests that mean seed mass of alpine plant species appears to decrease in warmer (less stressful) habitats based on life-history theory, but it also suggests there may be an underlying trade-off in which mean seed mass may increase due to greater thermal energy inputs into seed development. Furthermore, the physical and biotic environment modulating this trade-off result in complex patterns of variation in mean seed mass of alpine plant species facing global warming.

Download Full-text

Online Publication of Monuments

The Oxford Handbook of Egyptian Epigraphy and Paleography ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190604653.013.24 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 355-369

Author(s):

Willeke Wendrich

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

3D Modeling ◽

Online Publication ◽

New Technologies ◽

3D Scanning ◽

Architectural Drawings ◽

3D Gis ◽

Unity 3D ◽

Long Term Preservation

This chapter outlines the advantages of digital epigraphy in the context of the original monuments. It analyzes the perception of epigraphic publication of monuments, taking into account new technologies. 3DVR models can be created using architectural drawings and measurements (CAD and 3D modeling), 3D scanning, and Structure for Motion (SfM). These systems present different advantages and challenges, which are discussed. Current options for publication include VSim, 3D GIS, and Unity 3D platforms. The issues of peer review of publications and long-term preservation of data are addressed. The chapter concludes with a consideration of the issue of potentially misleading impressions given by 3DVR representations.

Download Full-text

Effects of training on quality of peer review: randomised controlled trial

BMJ ◽

10.1136/bmj.38023.700775.ae ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 328 (7441) ◽

pp. 673 ◽

Cited By ~ 112

Author(s):

Sara Schroter ◽

Nick Black ◽

Stephen Evans ◽

James Carpenter ◽

Fiona Godlee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomised Controlled Trial ◽

Peer Review ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Control Group ◽

Group Score ◽

The Difference ◽

Randomised Controlled ◽

Quality Instrument

AbstractObjective To determine the effects of training on the quality of peer review.Design Single blind randomised controlled trial with two intervention groups receiving different types of training plus a control group.Setting and participants Reviewers at a general medical journal.Interventions Attendance at a training workshop or reception of a self taught training package focusing on what editors want from reviewers and how to critically appraise randomised controlled trials.Main outcome measures Quality of reviews of three manuscripts sent to reviewers at four to six monthly intervals, evaluated using the validated review quality instrument; number of deliberate major errors identified; time taken to review the manuscripts; proportion recommending rejection of the manuscripts.Results Reviewers in the self taught group scored higher in review quality after training than did the control group (score 2.85 v 2.56; difference 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.44; P = 0.001), but the difference was not of editorial significance and was not maintained in the long term. Both intervention groups identified significantly more major errors after training than did the control group (3.14 and 2.96 v 2.13; P < 0.001), and this remained significant after the reviewers' performance at baseline assessment was taken into account. The evidence for benefit of training was no longer apparent on further testing six months after the interventions. Training had no impact on the time taken to review the papers but was associated with an increased likelihood of recommending rejection (92% and 84% v 76%; P = 0.002).Conclusions Short training packages have only a slight impact on the quality of peer review. The value of longer interventions needs to be assessed.

Download Full-text