Differential effects of elevated ultraviolet-B radiation on plant species of a dune grassland ecosystem

In a greenhouse study, plants of three monocotyledonous and five dicotyledonous species, which occur in a Dutch dune grassland, were exposed to four levels of ultraviolet-B (UV-B) radiation. UV-B levels simulated up to 30% reduction of the stratospheric ozone column during summertime in The Netherlands. Six of the plant species studied in the greenhouse were also exposed to enhanced UV-B irradiance in an experimental field study. In the field experiment plants either received the ambient UV-B irradiance (control) or an enhanced UV-B level simulating 15–20% ozone depletion during summertime in The Netherlands. The purpose of both experiments was to determine the response of the plant species to UV-B radiation and to compare results obtained in the greenhouse with results of the field experiment. Large intraspecific differences in UV-B sensitivity were observed in the greenhouse study. Total dry matter accumulation of monocotyledons was increased, while dry matter accumulation of dicotyledons remained unaffected or decreased. The increase in biomass production of monocotyledons at elevated UV-B was not related to the rate of photosynthesis but to alterations in leaf orientation. In the greenhouse study, UV-B radiation also affected morphological characteristics. Shoot height or maximum leaf length of five out of eight species was reduced. In the field study only one species showed a significantly decreased maximum leaf length at enhanced UV-B. Possible reasons for this discrepancy are discussed. The absorbance of methanolic leaf extracts also differed between species. UV absorbance of field-grown plants was higher than greenhouse-grown plants. In the greenhouse study, the highest UV-B level increased UV-B absorbance of some species. In the field study however, this stimulation of UV absorbance was not observed. In general, results obtained in the greenhouse study were similar to results obtained in the field study. Difficulties in extrapolating results of UV-B experiments conducted in the greenhouse to the field situation are discussed.     

Why Publishing Everything Is More Effective than Selective Publishing of Statistically Significant Results

Background

De Winter and Happee [1] examined whether science based on selective publishing of significant results may be effective in accurate estimation of population effects, and whether this is even more effective than a science in which all results are published (i.e., a science without publication bias). Based on their simulation study they concluded that “selective publishing yields a more accurate meta-analytic estimation of the true effect than publishing everything, (and that) publishing nonreplicable results while placing null results in the file drawer can be beneficial for the scientific collective” (p.4).

Methods and Findings

Using their scenario with a small to medium population effect size, we show that publishing everything is more effective for the scientific collective than selective publishing of significant results. Additionally, we examined a scenario with a null effect, which provides a more dramatic illustration of the superiority of publishing everything over selective publishing.

Conclusion

Publishing everything is more effective than only reporting significant outcomes.     

Willingness to share research data is related to the strength of the evidence and the quality of reporting of statistical results

Background

The widespread reluctance to share published research data is often hypothesized to be due to the authors'' fear that reanalysis may expose errors in their work or may produce conclusions that contradict their own. However, these hypotheses have not previously been studied systematically.

Methods and Findings

We related the reluctance to share research data for reanalysis to 1148 statistically significant results reported in 49 papers published in two major psychology journals. We found the reluctance to share data to be associated with weaker evidence (against the null hypothesis of no effect) and a higher prevalence of apparent errors in the reporting of statistical results. The unwillingness to share data was particularly clear when reporting errors had a bearing on statistical significance.

Conclusions

Our findings on the basis of psychological papers suggest that statistical results are particularly hard to verify when reanalysis is more likely to lead to contrasting conclusions. This highlights the importance of establishing mandatory data archiving policies.     

Interaction between Depth Order and Density Affects Vection and Postural Sway

Objective

Vection, a feeling of self-motion while being physically stationary, and postural sway can be modulated by various visual factors. Moreover, vection and postural sway are often found to be closely related when modulated by such visual factors, suggesting a common neural mechanism. One well-known visual factor is the depth order of the stimulus. The density, i.e. number of objects per unit area, is proposed to interact with the depth order in the modulation of vection and postural sway, which has only been studied to a limited degree.

Methods

We therefore exposed 17 participants to 18 different stimuli containing a stationary pattern and a pattern rotating around the naso-occipital axis. The density of both patterns was varied between 10 and 90%; the densities combined always added up to 100%. The rotating pattern occluded or was occluded by the stationary pattern, suggesting foreground or background motion, respectively. During pattern rotation participants reported vection by pressing a button, and postural sway was recorded using a force plate.

Results

Participants always reported more vection and swayed significantly more when rotation was perceived in the background and when the rotating pattern increased in density. As hypothesized, we found that the perceived depth order interacted with pattern density. A pattern rotating in the background with a density between 60 and 80% caused significantly more vection and postural sway than when it was perceived to rotate in the foreground.

Conclusions

The findings suggest that the ratio between fore- and background pattern densities is an important factor in the interaction with the depth order, and it is not the density of rotating pattern per se. Moreover, the observation that vection and postural sway were modulated in a similar way points towards a common neural origin regulating both variables.     

Group differences in the heritability of items and test scores

It is important to understand potential sources of group differences in the heritability of intelligence test scores. On the basis of a basic item response model we argue that heritabilities which are based on dichotomous item scores normally do not generalize from one sample to the next. If groups differ in mean ability, the functioning of items at different ability levels may result in group differences in the heritability of items, even when these items function equivalently across groups and the heritability of the underlying ability is equal across groups. We illustrate this graphically, by computer simulation, and by focusing on several problems associated with a recent study by Rushton et al. who argued that the heritability estimates of items of Raven''s Progressive Matrices test in North-American twin samples generalized to other population groups, and hence that the population group differences on this test of general mental ability (or intelligence) had a substantial genetic component. Our results show that item heritabilities are strongly dependent on the group on which the heritabilities were based. Rushton et al.''s results were artefactual and do not speak to the nature of population group differences in intelligence test performance.