:: wikimiki.org ::
| Best In Show |
Best in ShowBest in Show can refer to the following:
- The overall winner among many competitors, usually based on appearance or quality, such as at a dog show
- The mockumentary movie about dog shows, Best in Show
Dog showIn a dog show, judges familiar with specific dog breeds evaluate individual dogs for how well they conform to published breed standards, hence the more accurate term is conformation show (or, sometimes, breed show).
"Dog show" is often used by the general public to refer to any event involving dogs, such as dog sports, but in the dog world it more specifically refers to conformation competitions.
dog sports
Winning at dog shows
Winning at dog shows differs in many countries. Dogs shown in the United States, for example, have different championship requirements than those in other countries.
Dogs compete at dog shows to earn points towards the title of Champion. Each time a dog wins at some level of a show, it earns points towards the championship. The number of points varies depending on what level within a show the win occurs, how many dogs are competing, and whether the show is a major (larger shows) or minor (smaller shows).
Dogs compete in a hierarchical fashion at each show, where winners at lower levels are gradually combined to narrow the winners until the final round, where Best in Show is chosen.
At the lowest level, dogs are divided by breed. Each breed is divided into classes based on sex and age. Dogs (males) are judged first, in their age classes. Within one breed, there are puppies (dogs under a certain age), mature male dogs (subdivided by age into junior, limit (or intermediate) and open); bitches (female dogs) have corresponding classes.
The winners of all classes in each sex (called Puppy Dog, Limit Dog etc.) compete for Challenge (best) Dog and Challenge Bitch; the individuals who will challenge each other for the accolade Best of Breed. The remaining class winners are joined by the runner-up from the class from which the challenge winner was selected and there are competitions for second place in each gender, called Reserve Challenge Dog and Reserve Challenge Bitch. This is for fairness, as one class may contain a stronger field of specimens of the breed. If the judge believes that this is the case, the Challenge Dog and Reserve Challenge Dog, for example, may both be from the same class.
From the two finalists (Challenge Dog and Challenge Bitch) is selected Best of Breed. The runner-up is deemed Best of Opposite Sex (or Runner-up to Best of Breed). There is then a run-off in which the second best individual in the gender of the winner (the Reserve Challenge) is brought back to stand against the Best of Opposite Sex (the Challenge who did not win) for the title of Reserve Best of Breed. So, if the Best of Breed is the Challenge Bitch, the Reserve Best of Breed may be the Challenge Dog or the Reserve Challenge Bitch.
In some breeds, the males and females of the breed have decidedly different appearances, and it is often the males who have the quintessential look of the breed. The judge must set personal preference asided and decide objectively whether the bitch is a better example of the female of the breed than the dog is an example of the male.
In multi-breed and all-breed shows, the winners of all breeds within the kennel club's breed groupings then compete. So, for example, all the Terrier Group breed winners compete to determine Best Terrier (sometimes called Best in Group). These are known as the General Specials.
The audience at a dog show is expected to be participatory and vocal, and often applaud the silkiest, fluffiest or more popular breeds while ignorant of the breed requirements. Those who are owners and breeders may cheer for a popular handler or a sympathetic favourite from a particular breeding kennel; the judge is supposed to ignore all attempts to influence the decision.
Finally, the winners from each group compete for Best in Show.
Strictly speaking, a dog show is not exactly a comparison of one dog to another, it is a comparison of each dog to a judge's concept of the ideal specimen as dictated by the breed standard; based on this, one dog is placed ahead of another. All-breed judges must therefore have a vast amount of knowledge, and the ability (or inability) of humans to retain all these details mentally for hundreds of breeds (and to maintain their objectivity despite their personal preferences) is the subject of intense debate, particularly from the fanciers of working dogs. Politics in the purebred dog world can be as vicious as in any other arena; there have been charges of favoritism, nepotism, bribery and even drugging of competitors' animals.
Note: This describes the Australian model; there may be differences in other countries.
Dog Shows in the UK
There are several types of show in the UK. The smallest are the Companion Shows, where there are usually a few conformation classes for pedigree dogs, and several "novelty" classes, such as waggiest tail and handsomest dog, which are open to any dog including crossbreeds. These shows are usually held to support a charity or other good cause.
Then there are Open shows, which are open only to dogs registered with the Kennel Club. There are many Open Shows that are held all around the country. Here the dog & handler can gain experience and the dog can gain points towards a Junior Warrant award or a Show Certificate of Merit.
There are also Limited shows, which are open only to members of the Society or Club running the show, and Challenge Certificate winners (see below) cannot enter.
Finally, there are the huge Championship shows, where dogs can gain points towards a Junior Warrant and compete for the highly coveted Challenge Certificate (CC). If the breed is sufficiently numerous, the Kennel Club awards a Challenge Certificate for the Best Dog and Best Bitch. A dog needs three CCs from three different judges to be awarded the title of Champion one of which must be awarded when the dog is over 12 month old. The most prestigious Championship show is Crufts, and each dog entered at Crufts has had to qualify by certain wins at Championship or Open show level.
Judging dog shows
Dog-show judge attempt to identify dogs who epitomize the published standards for each breed. This can be challenging, because some judgements must necessarily be subjective. For example, what exactly entails a "full coat" or a "cheerful attitude", which are descriptions that could be found in the breed specifications.
Breed standards include such items (conformation points) as:
- Color of coat
- Pattern of markings
- Length and angle of legs
- Slope of back
- Height of stop (where the dog's muzzle stops and rises to the top of the skull)
- Set of ears
- Shape and color of eyes
- Color of nose
- Quantity of wrinkles
- Health of skin
- Quality of stride as dog trots around ring
- Dog's attitude (for example, growling or snapping at the judge isn't acceptable in any breed)
- Many other qualifiers
Championship titles and registered names
A dog who has earned the Championship title is entitled to use the designation "Champion" (or "Ch") in front of his name, for example, Ch. Emerald's Brightest Sparkle.
Show dogs have a registered name, that is, the name under which they are registered as a purebred with the appropriate kennel club, and a call name, which is how their owners talk to them.
The registered name often refers directly or indirectly to the kennel where the dog was bred; kennel clubs often require that the breeder's kennel prefix form the first part of the dog's registered name. See registered name for a discussion of dogs' names.
Prestigious dog shows
Dog shows take place all year in various locations. Some are small, local shows, while others draw competitors from all around the country or the world. Some shows are so large that they limit entries only to dogs who have already earned their Championships. Therefore, winning Best in Breed or Best in Show can elevate a dog's, a breeder's, or a kennel's reputation to the top of the list overnight. This greatly increases the value of puppies bred from this dog or at the dog's kennel of origin.
Probably the two best-known, largest, and most prestigious annual dog shows are the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show and Crufts.
History of dog showing
The control of points awarded to dogs in most countries is maintained by a national pedigree registry in that country. The Kennel Club of Great Britain is generally recognized as one of the first organizations, if not the first, to register purebred dogs. A second historic registry is the American Kennel Club. France, Italy, and other countries began to maintain important kennel club registries in the 19th century.
Establishing and maintaining a separate breed of dog and, therefore, separate breeding stock and separate registries, from the 14th to 21st century, was not always only a matter of looks or fashion. Dogs have been man's partner for thousands of years. Centuries ago, owners required certain skills and behaviors of some dogs, and many breeds that are recognized today reflect the different jobs that owners historically required dogs to do. A man living in the desert might have needed a dog that could run in sand and last a few days without water or food--that would probably mean a dog with large paws, like a camel, and a very sparse coat to deal with the heat. A man living in polar regions might need a dog that could swim icy waters, run in ice and snow, and survive that region, which would likely mean a lot of coat and a sturdier frame to survive swimming and plodding through snow.
Today, there are dogs who will search the ruins of a bombed building or an avalanche in an effort to find survivors; others assist the blind or the disabled; still others serve as a first defense line to sniff out bombs or drugs. These dogs can do these jobs because they preserve traits historically required of dogs for performing their jobs. A dog standard is a blueprint that describes the physical attributes that a dog breed must have to do its job.
External links
- [http://www.westminsterkennelclub.org/ New York's Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show]
- [http://www.the-kennel-club.org.uk England's The Kennel Club's Crufts]
- [http://www.mightymitedoggear.com/forum The Mighty Mite Small Dog Sports Forum - Conformation]
Category:Dog sportsCategory:Dog shows and showing
Best in Show (movie)
Best in Show (2000) is a mockumentary film following five entries in a prestigious dog show. The film shows how much dog owners love their pets ... and how carried away they can get. Christopher Guest directed, having written the script with Eugene Levy.
Many of the people involved also made This Is Spinal Tap (1984), The Return of Spinal Tap (1992), Waiting for Guffman (1996), A Mighty Wind (2003), and/or For Your Consideration (2006).
The film won American, British, and Canadian Comedy Awards.
Ed Begley Jr. plays the manager of a hotel that has to put up all these guests, and Fred Willard plays the 'color commentator' at the event. Colin Cunningham, Teryl Rothery, Rachael Harris, and Don S. Davis also play minor roles.
External links
-
Category:2000 films
Category:Films about dogs
Category:Fictional documentaries BiochipThe development of biochips is a major thrust of the rapidly growing biotechnology industry, which encompasses a very diverse range of
research efforts including genomics, proteomics, computational biology, and
pharmaceuticals, among other activities. Advances in
these areas are giving scientists new methods for unraveling the complex
biochemical processes occurring inside cells, with the larger goal of
understanding and treating human diseases. At the same time, the
semiconductor industry has been steadily perfecting the science of
microminiaturization. The merging of these two fields in recent years has
enabled biotechnologists to begin packing their traditionally bulky
sensing tools into smaller and smaller spaces, onto so-called biochips. These
chips are essentially miniaturized laboratories that can perform hundreds or
thousands of simultaneous biochemical reactions. Biochips enable researchers
to quickly screen large numbers of biological analytes for a variety of
purposes, from disease diagnosis to detection of bioterrorism agents.
History
The development of biochips has a long history, starting with early work on
the underlying sensor technology. One of the first portable, chemistry-based
sensors was the glass pH electrode, invented in 1922 by
Hughes (Hughes, 1922). Measurement of pH was accomplished by
detecting the potential difference developed across a thin glass membrane
selective to the permeation of hydrogen ions; this selectivity was achieved
by exchanges between H+ and SiO sites in the glass. The basic concept of
using exchange sites to create permselective membranes was used to develop
other ion sensors in subsequent years. For example, a K+ sensor was
produced by incorporating valinomycin into a thin membrane (Schultz, 1996).
Over thirty years elapsed before the first true biosensor (i.e. a
sensor utilizing biological molecules) emerged. In 1956, Leland Clark
published a paper on an oxygen sensing electrode (Clark, 1956_41).
This device became the basis for a glucose sensor developed in 1962 by Clark
and colleague Lyons which utilized glucose oxidase molecules embedded in a
dialysis membrane (Clark, 1962). The enzyme functioned in the
presence of glucose to decrease the amount of oxygen available to the oxygen
electrode, thereby relating oxygen levels to glucose concentration. This and
similar biosensors became known as enzyme electrodes, and are still in use
today.
In 1953, Watson and Crick announced their discovery of the now familiar
double helix structure of DNA molecules and set the stage for genetics
research that continues to the present day (Nelson, 2000). The development
of sequencing techniques in 1977 by Gilbert (Maxam, 1977) and
Sanger (Sanger, 1977) (working separately) enabled researchers to
directly read the genetic codes that provide instructions for
protein synthesis. This research showed how hybridization of complementary single
oligonucleotide strands could be used as a basis for DNA sensing. Two
additional developments enabled the technology used in modern DNA-based
biosensors. First, in 1983 Kary Mullis invented the
polymerase chain reaction
(PCR) technique (Nelson, 2000), a method for amplifying DNA concentrations.
This discovery made possible the detection of extremely small quantities of
DNA in samples. Second, in 1986 Hood and coworkers devised a method to label
DNA molecules with fluorescent tags instead of
radiolabels (Smith, 1986), thus enabling hybridization experiments to
be observed optically.
The rapid technological advances of the biochemistry and semiconductor fields
in the 1980's led to the large scale development of biochips in the 1990's.
At this time, it became clear that biochips were largely a "platform"
technology which consisted of several separate, yet integrated components.
Figure 1 shows the makeup of a typical biochip platform.
The actual sensing component (or "chip") is just one piece of a complete
analysis system. Transduction must be done to translate the actual sensing
event (DNA binding, oxidation/reduction, etc.) into a format
understandable by a computer (voltage, light intensity, mass, etc.),
which then enables additional analysis and processing to produce a final,
human-readable output. The multiple technologies needed to make a successful
biochip -- from sensing chemistry, to microarraying, to signal processing --
require a true multidisciplinary approach, making the barrier to entry steep.
One of the first commercial biochips was introduced by Affymetrix. Their
"GeneChip" products contain thousands of individual DNA sensors for use in
sensing defects, or single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), in genes such as
p53 (a tumor suppressor) and BRCA1 and BRCA2 (related to breast
cancer) (Cheng, 2001). The chips are produced using microlithography
techniques traditionally used to fabricate integrated circuits (see below).
integrated circuits
Today, a large variety of biochip technologies are either in development or
being commercialized. Numerous advancements continue to be made in sensing
research that enable new platforms to be developed for new applications.
Cancer diagnosis through DNA typing is just one market opportunity. A variety
of industries currently desire the ability to simultaneously screen for a
wide range of chemical and biological agents, with purposes ranging from
testing public water systems for disease agents to screening airline cargo
for explosives. Pharmaceutical companies wish to combinatorially screen drug
candidates against target enzymes. To achieve these ends, DNA, RNA, proteins,
and even living cells are being employed as sensing mediators on biochips.
Numerous transduction methods can be employed including surface plasmon resonance, fluorescence, and chemiluminescence. The particular sensing and
transduction techniques chosen depend on factors such as price, sensitivity,
and reusability.
Microarray fabrication
The microarray -- the dense, two-dimensional grid of biosensors -- is the critical component of a biochip
platform. Typically, the sensors are deposited on a flat substrate, which may
either be passive (e.g. silicon or glass) or active, the latter
consisting of integrated electronics or micromechanical devices that perform
or assist signal transduction. Surface chemistry is used to covalently bind
the sensor molecules to the substrate medium. The fabrication of microarrays
is non-trivial and is a major economic and technological hurdle that may
ultimately decide the success of future biochip platforms. The primary
manufacturing challenge is the process of placing each sensor at a specific
position (typically on a Cartesian grid) on the substrate. Various means
exist to achieve the placement, but typically robotic
micro-pipetting (Schena, 1995) or
micro-printing (MacBeath, 1999) systems are used to place tiny
spots of sensor material on the chip surface. Because each sensor is unique,
only a few spots can be placed at a time. The low-throughput nature of this
process results in high manufacturing costs.
Cartesian
Fodor and colleagues developed a unique fabrication process (later used by
Affymetrix) in which a series of microlithography steps is used to
combinatorially synthesize hundreds of thousands of unique, single-stranded
DNA sensors on a substrate one nucleotide at a
time (Fodor, 1991; Pease, 1994) (see Figure 2). As
the figure shows, one lithography step is needed per base type; thus, a total
of four steps is required per nucleotide level. Although this technique is
very powerful in that many sensors can be created simultaneously, it is
currently only feasible for creating short DNA strands (15-25 nucleotides).
Reliability and cost factors limit the number of photolithography steps that
can be done. Furthermore, light-directed combinatorial synthesis techniques
are not currently possible for proteins or other sensing molecules.
As noted above, most microarrays consist of a Cartesian grid of sensors. This
approach is used chiefly to map or "encode" the coordinate of each sensor
to its function. Sensors in these arrays typically use a universal signaling
technique (e.g. fluorescence), thus making coordinates their only
identifying feature. These arrays must be made using a serial process
(i.e. requiring multiple, sequential steps) to ensure that each sensor
is placed at the correct position.
"Random" fabrication, in which the sensors are placed at arbitrary
positions on the chip, is an alternative to the serial method (see
Figure 3). The tedious and expensive positioning process is
not required, enabling the use of parallelized self-assembly techniques. In
this approach, large batches of identical sensors can be produced; sensors
from each batch are then combined and assembled into an array. A
non-coordinate based encoding scheme must be used to identify each sensor. As
the figure shows, such a design was first demonstrated (and later
commercialized by Illumina) using functionalized beads placed randomly in the
wells of an etched fiber optic
cable (Steemers, 2000; Michael, 1998) Each bead was uniquely
encoded with a fluorescent signature. However, this encoding scheme is
limited in the number of unique dye combinations that be can be used and
successfully differentiated.
fiber optic
Protein Biochip Array Technology
Microarrays are not limited to DNA analysis; protein microarrays can also be produced using biochips. [http://www.randox.com Randox] Laboratories Ltd. launched Evidence®, the first protein Biochip Array Technology analyzer in 2003. In protein Biochip Array Technology, the biochip replaces the ELISA plate or cuvette as the reaction platform. The biochip is used to simultaneously analyze a panel of related tests in a single sample, producing a patient profile. The patient profile can be used in disease screening, diagnosis, monitoring disease progression or monitoring treatment. Performing multiple analyses simultaneously, described as multiplexing, allows a significant reduction in processing time and the amount of patient sample required. Biochip Array Technology is a novel application of a familiar methodology, using sandwich, competitive and antibody-capture immunoassays. The difference from conventional immunoassays is that the capture ligands are covalently attached to the surface of the biochip in an ordered array rather than in solution.
In sandwich assays an enzyme-labelled antibody is used; in competitive assays an enzyme-labelled antigen is used. On antibody-antigen binding a chemiluminescence reaction produces light. Detection is by a charge-coupled device (CCD) camera. The CCD camera is a sensitive and high-resolution sensor able to accurately detect and quantify very low levels of light. The test regions are located using a grid pattern then the chemiluminescence signals are analysed by imaging software to rapidly and simultaneously quantify the individual analytes.
See also
- DNA microarray
- Protein array
- Tissue microarray
- Single nucleotide polymorphism
- Sequencing
External links
- Biochip companies
- [http://www.randox.com Randox Laboratories Ltd.]
- [http://www.affymetrix.com Affymetrix, Inc.]
- [http://www.illumina.com Illumina, Inc.]
- [http://www.procognia.com Procognia Ltd.]
- [http://www.cipergen.com Ciphergen Biosystems, Inc.]
- [http://www.cellixltd.com Cellix Ltd.] - Microfluidic biochips for cell based assays.
References
- W. S. Hughes, “The potential difference between glass and electrolytes in contact with water,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 44, pp. 2860–2866, 1922.
- J. S. Schultz and R. F. Taylor in Handbook of Chemical and Biological Sensors, J. S. Schultz and R. F. Taylor, eds., ch. Introduction to Chemical and Biological Sensors, pp. 1–10, Institute of Physics Publishing, Philadelphia, 1996.
- L. C. Clark, Jr., “Monitor and control of blood tissue O2 tensions,” Transactions of the American Society for Artificial Internal Organs 2, pp. 41–84, 1956.
- L. C. Clark, Jr. and C. Lyons, “Electrode system for continuous monitoring in cardiovascular surgery,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 148, pp. 133–153, 1962.
- D. L. Nelson and M. M. Cox, Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry, Worth Publishers, New York, 2000.
- A. M. Maxam and W. Gilbert, “A new method for sequencing DNA,” Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 74, pp. 560–664, 1977.
- F. Sanger, S. Nicklen, and A. R. Coulson, “DNA sequencing with chainterminating inhibitors,” Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 74, pp. 5463–5467, 1977.
- L. M. Smith, J. Z. Sanders, R. J. Kaiser, P. Hughes, C. Dodd, C. R. Connell, C. Heiner, S. B. H. Kent, and L. E. Hood, “Fluorescence detection in automated DNA sequence analysis,” Nature 321, pp. 61–67, 1986.
- P. Fortina, D. Graves, C. Stoeckert, Jr., S. McKenzie, and S. Surrey in Biochip Technology, J. Cheng and L. J. Kricka, eds., ch. Technology Options and Applications of DNA Microarrays, pp. 185–216, Harwood Academic Publishers, Philadelphia, 2001.
- M. Schena, D. Shalon, R. W. Davis, and P. O. Brown, “Quantitative monitoring of gene expression patterns with a complementary DNA microarray,” Science 270, pp. 467–470, 1995.
- G. MacBeath, A. N. Koehler, and S. L. Schreiber, “Printing small molecules as microarrays and detecting protein-ligand interactions en masse,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 121, pp. 7967–7968, 1999.
- S. P. Fodor, J. L. Read, M. C. Pirrung, L. Stryer, A. T. Lu, and D. Solas, “Light-directed, spatially addressable parallel chemical analysis,” Science 251, pp. 767–773, 1991.
- A. C. Pease, D. Solas, E. J. Sullivan, M. T. Cronin, C. P. Holmes, and S. P. Fodor, “Light-generated oligonucleotide arrays for rapid DNA sequence analysis,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 91, pp. 5022–5026, 1994.
- F. J. Steemers, J. A. Ferguson, and D. R. Walt, “Screening unlabeled DNA targets with randomly-ordered fiber-optic gene arrays,” Nature Biotechnology 18, pp. 91–94, 2000.
- K. L. Michael, L. C. Taylor, S. L. Schultz, and D. R. Walt, “Randomly ordered addressable high-density optical sensor arrays,” Analytical Chemistry 70, pp. 1242–1248, 1998.
- K. L. Gunderson, S. Kruglyak, M. S. Graige, F. Garcia, B. G. Kermani, C. Zhao, D. Che, T. Dickinson, E. Wickham, J. Bierle, D. Doucet, M. Milewski, R. Yang, C. Siegmund, J. Haas, L. Zhou, A. Oliphant, J.-B. Fan, S. Barnard, and M. S. Chee, “Decoding randomly ordered DNA arrays,” Genome Research 14(5), pp. 870–877, 2004.
- C. Roberts, C. S. Chen, M. Mrksich, V. Martichonok, D. E. Ingber, and G. M. Whitesides, “Using mixed self-assembled monolayers presenting RGD and (EG)3OH groups to characterize long-term attachment of bovine capillary endothelial cells to surfaces,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 120, pp. 6548–6555, 1998.
Category:Biotechnology
Category:Biochemistry
Category:Biosensing
Category:Molecular biology
Category:Bioinformatics
Category:Combinatorial chemistry
Stockholm hotel piesni kultura wegetarianizm Malaga accommodation
|
|
|
| :: RELATED NEWS :: |
Gorgias (dialogue)
:This article is about the Plato dialogue. For the Greek rhetorician, see Gorgias.
Gorgias refers to the last dialogue that Plato wrote before leaving Athens. It features Socrates and Gorgias participating in a microcosm of the sophist-philosopher debate that raged
|
Sixth Patriarch
Huineng (慧能, 638 - 713) was a Chinese Chan (Chinese Zen) monastic who is one of the most important figures in the entire tradition. Huineng is the Sixth Patriarch of Chinese Chan Buddhism. In Japanese he is known as Daikan Enō.
He is said to have advocated an immediate and direct approach to Buddhist practice and enligh
|
Bangladesh agricultural university
Bangladesh Agricultural University (BAU) was established as the only university of its kind in Bangladesh in 1961.
The scheme for the establishment of BAU was finalized on 8 June 1961 and its ordinance was promulgated on 18 August 1961. With the appointment of its first Vice-Chancellor [http://www.bau-mymensingh.org/Files/vc.htm], t
|
Eric Breuer
Eric Breuer is a Swiss archaeologist and historian.
He studied archaeology and history at the Universities of Munich, Vienna, Fribourg and Bale. He
discovered the Roman vicus of Erisk
|
|
Maggie Lizer
This is a list of the main and recurring fictional characters from the Fox television comedy series, Arrested Development.
George Bluth Sr.
Arrested Development
George Oscar Bluth, Sr. is the Patriarch of the Bluth family, imprisoned on a number of charges. As of the beginning of the third season, he is currently under house arrest d
|
|
Tommy Smith
:For the ice hockey player, see Tommy Smith (ice hockey player).
:For the saxophonist, see Tommy Smith (saxophonist).
:For the prominent Australian racehorse trainer Tommy (T J) Smith.
:For the Derby County footballer, see Tommy Smith (footballer).
Tomm
|
|
