Academic literature on the topic 'Key-value database'

This study presents a comprehensive vegetation mapping inventory project undertaken in Death Valley National Park (DEVA) within the National Park Service?s Mojave Desert Network (MOJN). Spanning 3.4 million acres across California and Nevada, DEVA is the largest national park in the contiguous United States. Renowned for its harsh environment?characterized by intense heat, aridity, and low elevation?DEVA encompasses a variety of landscapes, including playas, alluvial fans, sand dunes, and mountain ranges. Despite its desolate appearance, the park harbors a diverse array of vegetation, with plant communities adapted to the park?s varying elevation, moisture, salinity, and substrate conditions. The project, which began in 2011, was initiated by the National Park Service?s (NPS) Vegetation Mapping Inventory (VMI), aimed to document and classify the plant communities within DEVA. The ten-year project, divided into six phases, began with a thorough review of legacy data and a summary of plant communities. In collaboration with the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), field data were collected across the park, including 111 classification plots and 518 observation points. This data, along with 1,242 samples from previous studies, were entered into the NPS VMI-specific PLOTS database. The CNPS analyzed the collected data to classify 85 plant alliances according to the revised US National Vegetation Classification (rUSNVC) standard, leading to the identification of 186 plant associations within DEVA. Cogan Technology, Inc., then developed a digital vegetation map layer covering the entire park, using a combination of manual and automated mapping techniques. This map was based on imagery from the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) and field data, resulting in the delineation of 90 map units (74 vegetated and 16 land-use/land-cover units). The map?s overall thematic accuracy was assessed at 82%, with a Kappa value of 89%. The final products, including the spatial geodatabase, digital vegetation map layer, field photos, metadata, classification report, and a field key to the vegetation alliances, were delivered to the NPS VMI. These resources provide a comprehensive overview of DEVA?s vegetation and support ongoing conservation and management efforts within this unique and challenging landscape.

Although Cambodia has a strong ambition to become an upper middle-income nation by 2030 and a high income by 2050, it faces various challenges in achieving these goals. This study investigates Cambodia’s progress and potential in this regard by analysing its position and trajectory relative to Greenfield Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) inflows and outflows – where foreign firms establish new operations in Cambodia and Cambodian investors set up businesses abroad. This study also provides preliminary insights on Cambodia's integration into Global and Regional Value Chains (GVCs), always using FDI as a proxy, considering sectoral, functional, and geographical trends and comparing them with those of its neighbouring countries – Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Vietnam – over the 20 years between 2003 and 2022. The research employs a desk review, SWOT analysis, and descriptive statistics by using academic literature, policy documents, stakeholder policy dialogues, and the fDiMarkets database by Financial Times. The analysis shows that FDI has been instrumental in reshaping Cambodia’s economic structure, significantly contributing to economic development and job creation. Key sectors attracting FDI include real estate, financial services, and alternative/renewable energy, while textiles, real estate, and consumer products are notable for generating employment opportunities. However, most FDI projects are concentrated in the capital and coastal areas, and have focused on low-tech manufacturing, which offer limited opportunities for spillovers and industrial upgrading. Cambodia’s outward FDI began in 2008, mainly targeting ASEAN countries. This paper highlights that Cambodia has developed a robust policy framework to attract and re-orient inward FDI, including a provision of various incentives for Qualified Investment Projects. Recent FDI inflow trends indicate growing interest in sectors such as alternative and renewable energy, rubber, automotive OEM, leisure and entertainment, food, tobacco, beverages, and paper, printing, and packaging industries. These sectors could be pivotal for Cambodia’s future growth. While Cambodia is making progress in addressing business challenges, there is a critical need to accelerate efforts to fully leverage FDI and support local firms’ development. This paper offers policy recommendations to address these challenges and maximise the potential benefits of FDI and regional GVCs, supporting Cambodia’s economic transition towards its income targets.

Original objectives: Anatomical study of storage root initiation and formation. Induction of storage root formation. Isolation and characterization of genes involved in storage root formation. During the normal course of storage root development. Following stress-induced storage root formation. Background:Sweetpotato is a high value vegetable crop in Israel and the U.S. and acreage is expanding in both countries and the research herein represents an important backstop to improving quality, consistency, and yield. This research has two broad objectives, both relating to sweetpotato storage root formation. The first objective is to understand storage root inductive conditions and describe the anatomical and physiological stages of storage root development. Sweetpotato is propagated through vine cuttings. These vine cuttings form adventitious roots, from pre-formed primordiae, at each node underground and it is these small adventitious roots which serve as initials for storage and fibrous (non-storage) “feeder” roots. What perplexes producers is the tremendous variability in storage roots produced from plant to plant. The marketable root number may vary from none to five per plant. What has intrigued us is the dearth of research on sweetpotato during the early growth period which we hypothesize has a tremendous impact on ultimate consistency and yield. The second objective is to identify genes that change the root physiology towards either a fleshy storage root or a fibrous “feeder” root. Understanding which genes affect the ultimate outcome is central to our research. Major conclusions: For objective one, we have determined that the majority of adventitious roots that are initiated within 5-7 days after transplanting possess the anatomical features associated with storage root initiation and account for 86 % of storage root count at 65 days after transplanting. These data underscore the importance of optimizing the growing environment during the critical storage root initiation period. Water deprivation during this phenological stage led to substantial reduction in storage root number and yield as determined through growth chamber, greenhouse, and field experiments. Morphological characterization of adventitious roots showed adjustments in root system architecture, expressed as lateral root count and density, in response to water deprivation. For objective two, we generated a transcriptome of storage and lignified (non-storage) adventitious roots. This transcriptome database consists of 55,296 contigs and contains data as regards to differential expression between initiating and lignified adventitious roots. The molecular data provide evidence that a key regulatory mechanism in storage root initiation involves the switch between lignin biosynthesis and cell division and starch accumulation. We extended this research to identify genes upregulated in adventitious roots under drought stress. A subset of these genes was expressed in salt stressed plants.

Not opening scientific data is costly. It has been estimated that a significant share of scientific knowledge disappears every year. In a 2014 study less than half of biological datasets from the 1990s have been recovered and when possible the recovery has necessitated significant time and efforts. In comparison, 98% of datasets published on PLOS with unique identifiers (data DOIs) are still available for future research. Open scientific data are fundamental resources for a large variety of scientific activities: meta-analysis, replication of research results or accessibility to primary sources. They also bring a significant economic and social value, as scientific data is commonly used by non-academic professionals as well as public agencies and non-profit organizations. Yet open scientific data is not costless. Ensuring that data is not only downloadable but usable requires significant investment in regards to documentation, data cleaning, licensing and indexation. Not all scientific data can be shared and verifications are frequently necessary to ensure that they do not incorporate copyrighted contents or personal information. To be effective, data sharing has to be anticipated throughout the entire research lifecycle. New principles of scientific data management aims to formalize the preexisting cultures of data in scientific communities and apply common standards. First published in 2016, the FAIR Guiding Principles (findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability) is an influential framework for opening scientific data. Policies in support of data sharing have moved from general and broad encouragement to the concrete development of data sharing services. Early initiatives go back to the first computing infrastructures: in 1957 the World Data Center system aimed to make a large range of scientific data readily available. Open data programs were yet severely limited by the lack of technical support and compatibility for data transfer. After 1991, the web created a universal framework for data exchange and entailed a massive expansion of scientific databases. Yet, numerous projects ran into critical issues of long term sustainability. Open science infrastructure have recently become key stakeholders in the diffusion and management of open scientific data. Data repositories ensure the preservation of scientific resources as well as their discoverability. Data hosted on repositories are more frequently used and quoted than data published in a supplementary file.

Postharvest treatment of garden strawberries and the development of effective storage methods are crucial to increase the shelf life and preserve its quality until consumption. Although some reviews on certain treatment technologies have been published, we have not found studies that considered and compared common and advanced methods of storing garden strawberries. Therefore, the goal of this study is to review modern postharvest methods of strawberry storage (Fragaria × ananassa Duch). The review includes reports published in English and Russian in 2014—2024. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Elibrary and Google Scholar databases were used to search by keywords. 50 scientific publications have been studied. In the first part of our study, the metabolic and biochemistry processes that underlie the ripening process of strawberries are considered, the factors that cause spoilage of strawberry berries are analyzed, and modern methods of strawberry treatment are presented. The preservation of garden strawberries using radiation, light or heat treatment can prevent the development of microorganisms and increase the resistance of berries to diseases. However, these methods can have a negative impact on the nutritional value, color and taste of berries over time. Cold storage is the most commonly used method of storing garden strawberries after harvest throughout the supply chain. In addition to cold storage, post-harvest treatment methods, including thermal, cold plasma and chemical treatments, have been carefully studied and individually applied to further increase of the strawberry shelf life. These treatments help to prevent fungal infection, activate the metabolic protection system and improve the structural integrity of strawberry berries, thereby maintaining their quality over time, especially during cold storage. In addition to treatment methods, storage in a modified atmosphere, the application of active packaging and functional coatings have been recognized as effective ways to preserve the quality of berries and effectively prevent spoilage after harvest. In addition, the combined use of two or more of these methods has proven to be the most effective for improving the shelf life of garden strawberries. The analysis of the antifungal effectiveness of modern storage methods, study of the synergy between different methods and the development of solutions based on biopolymers represent a key path for future research.

The main recommendations of the panel report can be summarised under five key headings:  Building the Scottish Bronze Age: Narratives should be developed to account for the regional and chronological trends and diversity within Scotland at this time. A chronology Bronze Age Scotland: ScARF Panel Report iv based upon Scottish as well as external evidence, combining absolute dating (and the statistical modelling thereof) with re-examined typologies based on a variety of sources – material cultural, funerary, settlement, and environmental evidence – is required to construct a robust and up to date framework for advancing research.  Bronze Age people: How society was structured and demographic questions need to be imaginatively addressed including the degree of mobility (both short and long-distance communication), hierarchy, and the nature of the ‘family’ and the ‘individual’. A range of data and methodologies need to be employed in answering these questions, including harnessing experimental archaeology systematically to inform archaeologists of the practicalities of daily life, work and craft practices.  Environmental evidence and climate impact: The opportunity to study the effects of climatic and environmental change on past society is an important feature of this period, as both palaeoenvironmental and archaeological data can be of suitable chronological and spatial resolution to be compared. Palaeoenvironmental work should be more effectively integrated within Bronze Age research, and inter-disciplinary approaches promoted at all stages of research and project design. This should be a two-way process, with environmental science contributing to interpretation of prehistoric societies, and in turn, the value of archaeological data to broader palaeoenvironmental debates emphasised. Through effective collaboration questions such as the nature of settlement and land-use and how people coped with environmental and climate change can be addressed.  Artefacts in Context: The Scottish Chalcolithic and Bronze Age provide good evidence for resource exploitation and the use, manufacture and development of technology, with particularly rich evidence for manufacture. Research into these topics requires the application of innovative approaches in combination. This could include biographical approaches to artefacts or places, ethnographic perspectives, and scientific analysis of artefact composition. In order to achieve this there is a need for data collation, robust and sustainable databases and a review of the categories of data.  Wider Worlds: Research into the Scottish Bronze Age has a considerable amount to offer other European pasts, with a rich archaeological data set that includes intact settlement deposits, burials and metalwork of every stage of development that has been the subject of a long history of study. Research should operate over different scales of analysis, tracing connections and developments from the local and regional, to the international context. In this way, Scottish Bronze Age studies can contribute to broader questions relating both to the Bronze Age and to human society in general.

Background Lung cancer is the number one cause of cancer death worldwide.(1) It is the fifth most commonly diagnosed cancer in Australia (12,741 cases diagnosed in 2018) and the leading cause of cancer death.(2) The number of years of potential life lost to lung cancer in Australia is estimated to be 58,450, similar to that of colorectal and breast cancer combined.(3) While tobacco control strategies are most effective for disease prevention in the general population, early detection via low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening in high-risk populations is a viable option for detecting asymptomatic disease in current (13%) and former (24%) Australian smokers.(4) The purpose of this Evidence Check review is to identify and analyse existing and emerging evidence for LDCT lung cancer screening in high-risk individuals to guide future program and policy planning. Evidence Check questions This review aimed to address the following questions: 1. What is the evidence for the effectiveness of lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? 2. What is the evidence of potential harms from lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? 3. What are the main components of recent major lung cancer screening programs or trials? 4. What is the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening programs (include studies of cost–utility)? Summary of methods The authors searched the peer-reviewed literature across three databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Embase) for existing systematic reviews and original studies published between 1 January 2009 and 8 August 2019. Fifteen systematic reviews (of which 8 were contemporary) and 64 original publications met the inclusion criteria set across the four questions. Key findings Question 1: What is the evidence for the effectiveness of lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? There is sufficient evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses of combined (pooled) data from screening trials (of high-risk individuals) to indicate that LDCT examination is clinically effective in reducing lung cancer mortality. In 2011, the landmark National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST, a large-scale randomised controlled trial [RCT] conducted in the US) reported a 20% (95% CI 6.8% – 26.7%; P=0.004) relative reduction in mortality among long-term heavy smokers over three rounds of annual screening. High-risk eligibility criteria was defined as people aged 55–74 years with a smoking history of ≥30 pack-years (years in which a smoker has consumed 20-plus cigarettes each day) and, for former smokers, ≥30 pack-years and have quit within the past 15 years.(5) All-cause mortality was reduced by 6.7% (95% CI, 1.2% – 13.6%; P=0.02). Initial data from the second landmark RCT, the NEderlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings ONderzoek (known as the NELSON trial), have found an even greater reduction of 26% (95% CI, 9% – 41%) in lung cancer mortality, with full trial results yet to be published.(6, 7) Pooled analyses, including several smaller-scale European LDCT screening trials insufficiently powered in their own right, collectively demonstrate a statistically significant reduction in lung cancer mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.73–0.91).(8) Despite the reduction in all-cause mortality found in the NLST, pooled analyses of seven trials found no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90–1.00).(8) However, cancer-specific mortality is currently the most relevant outcome in cancer screening trials. These seven trials demonstrated a significantly greater proportion of early stage cancers in LDCT groups compared with controls (RR 2.08, 95% CI 1.43–3.03). Thus, when considering results across mortality outcomes and early stage cancers diagnosed, LDCT screening is considered to be clinically effective. Question 2: What is the evidence of potential harms from lung cancer screening for higher-risk individuals? The harms of LDCT lung cancer screening include false positive tests and the consequences of unnecessary invasive follow-up procedures for conditions that are eventually diagnosed as benign. While LDCT screening leads to an increased frequency of invasive procedures, it does not result in greater mortality soon after an invasive procedure (in trial settings when compared with the control arm).(8) Overdiagnosis, exposure to radiation, psychological distress and an impact on quality of life are other known harms. Systematic review evidence indicates the benefits of LDCT screening are likely to outweigh the harms. The potential harms are likely to be reduced as refinements are made to LDCT screening protocols through: i) the application of risk predication models (e.g. the PLCOm2012), which enable a more accurate selection of the high-risk population through the use of specific criteria (beyond age and smoking history); ii) the use of nodule management algorithms (e.g. Lung-RADS, PanCan), which assist in the diagnostic evaluation of screen-detected nodules and cancers (e.g. more precise volumetric assessment of nodules); and, iii) more judicious selection of patients for invasive procedures. Recent evidence suggests a positive LDCT result may transiently increase psychological distress but does not have long-term adverse effects on psychological distress or health-related quality of life (HRQoL). With regards to smoking cessation, there is no evidence to suggest screening participation invokes a false sense of assurance in smokers, nor a reduction in motivation to quit. The NELSON and Danish trials found no difference in smoking cessation rates between LDCT screening and control groups. Higher net cessation rates, compared with general population, suggest those who participate in screening trials may already be motivated to quit. Question 3: What are the main components of recent major lung cancer screening programs or trials? There are no systematic reviews that capture the main components of recent major lung cancer screening trials and programs. We extracted evidence from original studies and clinical guidance documents and organised this into key groups to form a concise set of components for potential implementation of a national lung cancer screening program in Australia: 1. Identifying the high-risk population: recruitment, eligibility, selection and referral 2. Educating the public, people at high risk and healthcare providers; this includes creating awareness of lung cancer, the benefits and harms of LDCT screening, and shared decision-making 3. Components necessary for health services to deliver a screening program: a. Planning phase: e.g. human resources to coordinate the program, electronic data systems that integrate medical records information and link to an established national registry b. Implementation phase: e.g. human and technological resources required to conduct LDCT examinations, interpretation of reports and communication of results to participants c. Monitoring and evaluation phase: e.g. monitoring outcomes across patients, radiological reporting, compliance with established standards and a quality assurance program 4. Data reporting and research, e.g. audit and feedback to multidisciplinary teams, reporting outcomes to enhance international research into LDCT screening 5. Incorporation of smoking cessation interventions, e.g. specific programs designed for LDCT screening or referral to existing community or hospital-based services that deliver cessation interventions. Most original studies are single-institution evaluations that contain descriptive data about the processes required to establish and implement a high-risk population-based screening program. Across all studies there is a consistent message as to the challenges and complexities of establishing LDCT screening programs to attract people at high risk who will receive the greatest benefits from participation. With regards to smoking cessation, evidence from one systematic review indicates the optimal strategy for incorporating smoking cessation interventions into a LDCT screening program is unclear. There is widespread agreement that LDCT screening attendance presents a ‘teachable moment’ for cessation advice, especially among those people who receive a positive scan result. Smoking cessation is an area of significant research investment; for instance, eight US-based clinical trials are now underway that aim to address how best to design and deliver cessation programs within large-scale LDCT screening programs.(9) Question 4: What is the cost-effectiveness of lung cancer screening programs (include studies of cost–utility)? Assessing the value or cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening involves a complex interplay of factors including data on effectiveness and costs, and institutional context. A key input is data about the effectiveness of potential and current screening programs with respect to case detection, and the likely outcomes of treating those cases sooner (in the presence of LDCT screening) as opposed to later (in the absence of LDCT screening). Evidence about the cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening programs has been summarised in two systematic reviews. We identified a further 13 studies—five modelling studies, one discrete choice experiment and seven articles—that used a variety of methods to assess cost-effectiveness. Three modelling studies indicated LDCT screening was cost-effective in the settings of the US and Europe. Two studies—one from Australia and one from New Zealand—reported LDCT screening would not be cost-effective using NLST-like protocols. We anticipate that, following the full publication of the NELSON trial, cost-effectiveness studies will likely be updated with new data that reduce uncertainty about factors that influence modelling outcomes, including the findings of indeterminate nodules. Gaps in the evidence There is a large and accessible body of evidence as to the effectiveness (Q1) and harms (Q2) of LDCT screening for lung cancer. Nevertheless, there are significant gaps in the evidence about the program components that are required to implement an effective LDCT screening program (Q3). Questions about LDCT screening acceptability and feasibility were not explicitly included in the scope. However, as the evidence is based primarily on US programs and UK pilot studies, the relevance to the local setting requires careful consideration. The Queensland Lung Cancer Screening Study provides feasibility data about clinical aspects of LDCT screening but little about program design. The International Lung Screening Trial is still in the recruitment phase and findings are not yet available for inclusion in this Evidence Check. The Australian Population Based Screening Framework was developed to “inform decision-makers on the key issues to be considered when assessing potential screening programs in Australia”.(10) As the Framework is specific to population-based, rather than high-risk, screening programs, there is a lack of clarity about transferability of criteria. However, the Framework criteria do stipulate that a screening program must be acceptable to “important subgroups such as target participants who are from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, people from disadvantaged groups and people with a disability”.(10) An extensive search of the literature highlighted that there is very little information about the acceptability of LDCT screening to these population groups in Australia. Yet they are part of the high-risk population.(10) There are also considerable gaps in the evidence about the cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening in different settings, including Australia. The evidence base in this area is rapidly evolving and is likely to include new data from the NELSON trial and incorporate data about the costs of targeted- and immuno-therapies as these treatments become more widely available in Australia.

According to the UN,1 there are more than 90 million managed beehives around the world producing about 1.9 million tonnes of honey worth more than £5 billion a year. That honey will then be packaged, as single origin or a blend of honey from different sources, and sold for consumption. Given the size of the market and the immense environmental benefits of beekeeping – three out of four crops depend on pollination by bees – it is an industry on which both livelihoods and lives depend. Target for adulteration As a labour-intensive, high-value expensive product with an often complex supply chain, honey is subject to internationally and nationally agreed definitions – and is a target for adulteration. Testing honey is therefore critical, but there is no single universal analytical method available which is capable of detecting all types of adulteration with adequate sensitivity. A variety of methods are used to detect honey adulteration, each test has strengths and weaknesses, and there are issues with interpretation. NMR analysis Testing for honey adulterated with added sugars may be based on analytical techniques using analytical tools, such as those using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR). This is especially helpful in detecting certain types of adulteration, such as the addition of cane or beet sugars. Bees generally forage on plants that use the same photosynthetic pathway as beet sugars. This makes it difficult for traditional tests based on isotopic differences to provide effective results. The ‘chemical fingerprint’ provided by NMR is specific to the sample that has been tested and can be compared with the fingerprint from other sample results enabling the user to assess consistency. Reference databases Interpretation of results depends on comparison against a reference database of authenticated samples. The reference database needs to be representative of the variation that can occur, which includes differing beekeeping practices, origins, seasonality and variations in climate. Information is also needed on the collection of reference samples, curation of databases, interpretation and reporting of data. The nature of the reference databases is key to understanding how the results have been interpreted. However, these reference databases are owned by and commercially sensitive for the testing laboratories that have developed them. How can such data be shared in a trustworthy way between key stakeholders along the honey and analytical supply chain so that all parties can have confidence in honey authenticity test results? This research is looking into the implications of these hidden databases, especially in terms of the trust related to the validation certificates and the value that they have in the honey supply chain.