The Effects of Catalyst Layer Deposition Methodology on Electrode Performance

The catalyst layer of the cathode is arguably the most critical component of low‐temperature fuel cells and carbon dioxide (CO₂) electrolysis cells because their performance is typically limited by slow oxygen (O₂) and CO₂ reduction kinetics. While significant efforts have focused on developing cathode catalysts with improved activity and stability, fewer efforts have focused on engineering the catalyst layer structure to maximize catalyst utilization and overall electrode and system performance. Here, we study the performance of cathodes for O₂ reduction and CO₂ reduction as a function of three common catalyst layer preparation methods: hand‐painting, air‐brushing, and screen‐printing. We employed ex‐situ X‐ray micro‐computed tomography (MicroCT) to visualize the catalyst layer structure and established data processing procedures to quantify catalyst uniformity. By coupling structural analysis with in‐situ electrochemical characterization, we directly correlate variation in catalyst layer morphology to electrode performance. MicroCT and SEM analyses indicate that, as expected, more uniform catalyst distribution and less particle agglomeration, lead to better performance. Most importantly, the analyses reported here allow for the observed differences over a large geometric volume as a function of preparation methods to be quantified and explained for the first time. Depositing catalyst layers via a fully‐automated air‐brushing method led to a 56% improvement in fuel cell performance and a significant reduction in electrode‐to‐electrode variability. Furthermore, air‐brushing catalyst layers for CO₂ reduction led to a 3‐fold increase in partial CO current density and enhanced product selectivity (94% CO) at similar cathode potential but a 10‐fold decrease in catalyst loading as compared to previous reports.     

Comparisons of genetic parameters and clonal value predictions from clonal trials and seedling base population trials of radiata pine

Different methods for predicting clonal values were explored for diameter growth (diameter at breast height (DBH)) in a radiata pine clonal forestry program: (1) clones were analyzed with a full model in which the total genetic variation was partitioned into additive, dominance, and epistasis (Clone Only—Full Model); (2) clones were analyzed together with seedling base population data (Clone Plus Seedling (CPS)), and (3) clones were analyzed with a reduced model in which the only genetic term was the total genetic variance (Clone Only—Reduced Model). DBH was assessed at age 5 for clones and between ages 4 to 13 at the seedling trials. Significant additive, dominance, and epistatic genetic effects were estimated for DBH using the CPS model. Nonadditive genetic effects for DBH were 87% as large as additive genetic effects. Narrow-sense () and broad-sense () heritability estimates for DBH using the CPS model were 0.14 ± 0.01 and 0.26 ± 0.01, respectively. Accuracy of predicted clonal values increased 4% by combining the clone and seedling data over using clonal data alone, resulting in greater confidence in the predicted genetic performance of clones. Our results indicate that exploiting nonadditive genetic effects in clonal varieties will generate greater gains than that typically obtainable from conventional family-based forestry of radiata pine. The predicted genetic gain for DBH from deployment of the top 5% of clones was 24.0%—an improvement of more than 100% over family forestry at the same selection intensity. We conclude that it is best practice to predict clonal values by incorporating seedling base population data in the clonal analysis.     

茶毛虫核型多角体病毒(EpNPV)多角体蛋白基因的定位及克隆

茶毛虫核型多角体病毒(Euproctis pseudoconspersa Nuclear Polyhedrosis Virus简称EpMPV),属于杆状病毒科核型多角体病毒属,能使茶毛虫染病死亡.EpNPV据报道最初由日本学者于1957年发现[1],随后在其它国家和地区也有相关报道[2];我国在贵州、湖北、广西和云南等地也有发现,并在EpNPV病毒杀虫剂的大田应用方面做了大量的工作,取得了一定的社会、经济和生态效益[3].     

Author Index to Volume 24

Authors Index

Author Index to Volume 24     

柯萨奇病毒B3基因组及其变异与心肌损伤的关系

肠道病毒感染是人类急性和慢性心肌炎的常见病因之一,而且也与人类扩张 型心肌病(DCM)的发生发展有密切关系 [1]}.病毒分离,血清学研究,免疫组化技术 、原位核酸杂交技术以及聚合酶链反应技术(PCR)均提示肠道病毒与心肌炎关系密切.最近 ,LI等 [2]}用肠道病毒特异性单克隆抗体,采用改良的免疫组化技术对心肌炎或DCM病人心 肌切片中肠道病毒抗原进行检测,此法直接证明了心肌炎或DCM病人体内确实有子代病毒产 生.但是,肠道病毒究竟通过怎样的机制引起心肌损伤还未阐明,推测可能有多种机制参与 .本文仅就肠道病毒(柯萨奇病毒B3,CVB3)基因组结构及其基因变异与心肌损伤的关系方面加以综述.     

Creating the Future of Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback: From Fantasy to Reality

AAPB and its membership are faced with a number of giant challenges, including but not limited to: (1) the cost savings efforts of third-party payors and managed care organizations; (2) the lack of public awareness of biofeedback and its usefulness; and (3) the lack of sufficient research data on both the effectiveness and efficacy of biofeedback. In spite of these challenges, there are windows of opportunity that have been or which could be created to move biofeedback further into the realm of conventional treatment. We must focus our efforts on working together to: (1) create strategic plans for creating the future of applied psychophysiology and biofeedback; (2) educate all decision makers, including the general public; (3) establish better relationships with other professionals with common interests; (4) conduct more efficacy and effectiveness research; and (5) create a demand for our services so that the public will be more willing to pay for our services out of their own pocket. In order for this to happen, we must stop fighting with each other and direct our energies to productive activities that can change fantasies into realities.     

Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Validity and Reliability of a Portable Device in Non-Specialized Healthcare Settings

Introduction and Objectives

The underdiagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) could be improved through screening using portable devices simpler than conventional spirometers in specific healthcare settings to reach a higher percentage of the at-risk population. This study was designed to assess the validity and reliability of the COPD-6 portable device to screen for COPD in non-specialized healthcare settings.

Methods

Prospective cohort study to validate a diagnostic test. Three cohorts were recruited: primary care (PC), emergency services (ES) and community pharmacies (CPh). Study population: individuals with risk factors for COPD (>40 years, smoking >10 pack-years, with respiratory symptoms). The values measured using the COPD-6 were FEV1, FEV6 and the FEV1/FEV6 ratio. Subsequently, participants underwent conventional spirometry at hospital, using a post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC value <0.7 as the gold standard criterion for the COPD diagnosis.

Results

437 participants were included, 362 were valid for the analysis. COPD was diagnosed in 114 patients (31.5%). The area under the ROC curve for the COPD-6 for COPD screening was 0.8.The best cut-off point for the FEV1/FEV6 ratio was 0.8 (sensitivity, 92.1%) using spirometry with the bronchodilator test as the gold standard. There were practically no differences in the COPD-6 performancein the different settings and also regarding age, gender and smoking status.

Conclusions

The COPD-6 device is a valid tool for COPD screening in non-specialized healthcare settings. In this context, the best cut-off point for the FEV1/FEV6 ratio is 0.8.