ABSTRACT
Genetic models partitioning additive and non-additive genetic effects for populations tested in replicated multi-environment trials (METs) in a plant breeding program have recently been presented in the literature. For these data, the variance model involves the direct product of a large numerator relationship matrix A, and a complex structure for the genotype by environment interaction effects, generally of a factor analytic (FA) form. With MET data, we expect a high correlation in genotype rankings between environments, leading to non-positive definite covariance matrices. Estimation methods for reduced rank models have been derived for the FA formulation with independent genotypes, and we employ these estimation methods for the more complex case involving the numerator relationship matrix. We examine the performance of differing genetic models for MET data with an embedded pedigree structure, and consider the magnitude of the non-additive variance. The capacity of existing software packages to fit these complex models is largely due to the use of the sparse matrix methodology and the average information algorithm. Here, we present an extension to the standard formulation necessary for estimation with a factor analytic structure across multiple environments.
Subject(s)
Environment , Models, Genetic , Plants/genetics , Breeding , Genotype , Regression AnalysisABSTRACT
Optimal sampling times are found for a study in which one of the primary purposes is to develop a model of the pharmacokinetics of itraconazole in patients with cystic fibrosis for both capsule and solution doses. The optimal design is expected to produce reliable estimates of population parameters for two different structural PK models. Data collected at these sampling times are also expected to provide the researchers with sufficient information to reasonably discriminate between the two competing structural models.
Subject(s)
Antifungal Agents/pharmacokinetics , Cystic Fibrosis/metabolism , Itraconazole/pharmacokinetics , Models, Biological , Administration, Oral , Antifungal Agents/administration & dosage , Aspergillosis, Allergic Bronchopulmonary/complications , Aspergillosis, Allergic Bronchopulmonary/drug therapy , Aspergillosis, Allergic Bronchopulmonary/metabolism , Capsules , Cystic Fibrosis/complications , Cystic Fibrosis/drug therapy , Humans , Itraconazole/administration & dosage , Pharmaceutical Solutions , Sampling StudiesABSTRACT
A major consideration in the performance of mouthguards is their ability to absorb energy and reduce transmitted forces when impacted. This is especially important to participants in contact sports such as hockey or football. The thickness of mouthguard materials is directly related to energy absorption and inversely related to transmitted forces when impacted. However, wearer comfort is also an important factor in their use. Thicker mouthguards are not user-friendly. While thickness of material over incisal edges and cusps of teeth is critical, just how thick should a mouthguard be and especially in these two areas? Transmitted forces through different thicknesses of the most commonly used mouthguard material, ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) (Shore A Hardness of 80) were compared when impacted with identical forces which were capable of damaging the oro-facial complex. The constant impact force used in the tests was produced by a pendulum and had an energy of 4.4 joules and a velocity of 3 meters per second. Improvements in energy absorption and reductions in transmitted forces were observed with increasing thickness. However, these improvements lessened when the mouthguard material thickness was greater than 4 mm. The results show that the optimal thickness for EVA mouthguard material with a Shore A Hardness of 80 is around 4 mm. Increased thickness, while improving performance marginally, results in less wearer comfort and acceptance.
