text:
Plant Science Research Weekly: May 29th

Review: The bHLH network underlying plant shade-avoidance

Shade avoidance is a complex phenomenon in which plants avoid shade by altering their developmental program in various ways including early flowering, hypocotyl elongation, and more. Many photoreceptors and transcription factors (TFs) are involved in regulating shade avoidance, including the bHLH (basic helix loop helix) TF family that comprises about 160 members in Arabidopsis. In this review, Buti et al. highlight the contributions of bHLH proteins during shade conditions. They focus on PIF (Phytochrome interacting factors), BEE (Brassinosteroid enhanced expression), BIM (BES1-interacting MIC-1), PAR (Phytochrome-rapidly regulated), and AIF (ATBS1 interacting factor) subfamilies (and they include a helpful table that lists the subfamilies, bHLH name, gene name, and which other proteins each interacts with).  Studies have shown that members of the bHLH family either directly bind DNA or indirectly bind DNA by associating with other bHLH family members or other cofactors to regulate downstream gene expression. The authors also describe the role of photoreceptors in controlling the activity of bHLH sub-families during shade conditions. This review will be a great resource for understanding gene regulation during different light conditions. (Summary by Sunita Pathak @psunita980) Physiologia Plantarum 10.1111/ppl.13074

Nutrient dose-responsive transcriptome changes driven by Michaelis–Menten kinetics underlie plant growth rates

Plants can increase their growth and biomass proportionately to an increase in nutrient dose and, conversely, their growth is limited by limiting nutrients. In this study, Swift et al. explored the molecular underpinnings of the nutrient dose-response phenomenon. The authors first show that nitrogen-dose affects the rate of transcript change genome-wide in Arabidopsis. They showed that this dose-responsive gene expression pattern follows the Michaelis-Menten (MM) kinetics model. However, this relationship is not linear because at higher doses of nitrogen there was a diminishing effect on the rate at which genes were induced or repressed. Since transcription factors largely controls gene expression, the authors reason that transcription factors could be acting as a catalyst driving the rate of transcript change in response to nitrogen-dose. The authors identified three transcription factors; LBD37/38 and TGA1 as candidate transcriptional regulators of the nitrogen-dose response. They looked for cis-regulatory elements overrepresented in the promoter of genes whose transcript change in response to nitrogen-dose follow the MM model and found that the TGA1 binding site was overrepresented. In addition, those genes are also preferentially expressed in the root pericycle and stele where TGA1 itself is expressed. Using knock out mutants and overexpression lines, they showed that TGA1 levels mediate accelerated Arabidopsis growth rates in response to nitrogen dose. (Summary by Toluwase Olukayodo @toluxylic) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA

How do auxin temporal dynamics regulate patterning?

Auxin forms spatial gradients that are implicated in organ morphogenesis. However, it is not known how temporal auxin gradients are integrated with the spatial information. In this paper, Galvan-Ampudia, Cerutti et al., showed using a ratiometric quantitative auxin reporter (quantitative DII-VENUS) that auxin moves faster than cellular growth in the shoot apical meristem (SAM), and that the auxin maximum is not linked to specific cells but travels through the tissue radially in centrifugal manner producing a rhythmic pattern. The authors analyzed orientation of the auxin efflux protein PIN FORMED1 (PIN1) and observed a that the net orientation is towards the center of the SAM raising the question where and when the auxin synthesis happens. Analysis of YUCCA genes encoding auxin biosynthetic enzymes showed that the auxin synthesis happens in the primordia that are more developmentally advanced than the incipient primordia and is channeled to central zone of the SAM by the orientation of the PIN1 protein. Surprisingly, the authors observed that the auxin maximum does not immediately translate into transcriptional responses as there is a delay in the expression of an auxin sensitive transcriptional reporter (DR5) indicating that cells doesn’t become competent to auxin response until 10-14 hrs later (the time between successive organs). Thus, this paper shows that temporal auxin information is integrated in space for organogenesis expanding our understanding of auxin dynamics in time and space. (Summary by Vijaya Batthula @Vijaya_Batthula). eLife 10.7554/eLife.55832.

Design principles of a minimal auxin response system

Auxin controls virtually all facets of growth and development. This plant hormone is sensed by TIR1/AFB F-box receptors which promote ubiquitin-mediated degradation of AUX/IAA transcriptional repressors, releasing ARF transcription factors from inhibition. Phylogenetic analyses divide the ARF family into three conserved classes: A/B/C, where A-ARFs act as activators, with some B and C-ARFs acting as repressors. However, despite the apparent simplicity of this signaling module, each member belongs to gene families that are expanded in most land plants (up to 30 ARFs in Arabidopsis) and therefore may have neo- or sub- functionalized across evolution, acquiring different biochemical properties and functions, thus making the deduction of an ancestral auxin response system difficult. A recent study by Kato et al. took advantage of the liverwort Marchantia polymorpha low genetic redundancy (one TIR/AFB receptor, one AUX/IAA and three ARFs, A/B/C) to uncover the biochemical basis of a minimal auxin response system. Using a combination of molecular, structural and bioinformatic approaches, the authors deduced the M. polymorpha auxin response system, where a single A-ARF (MpARF1) switches from Aux/IAA-mediated repression to transcriptional activator in an auxin-dependent manner, whereas an auxin-insensitive B-ARF (MpARF2) antagonizes MpARF1, competing for the same target sites and acting as a repressor by recruiting the TOPLESS (TPL) corepressor. However, differential spatial distribution patterns influence the stoichiometry of these proteins, therefore resulting in the creation of zones with different auxin sensitivities to fine-tune growth and development. The consistency of this model in more complex lineages, such as Physcomitrella or Arabidopsis, suggests that this simple module may be the chassis for more complex auxin response networks. (Summary by Jesus Leon @jesussaur) Nature Plants 10.1038/s41477-020-0662-y

Plant synthetic promoters to fine tune expression of engineered genes

Synthetic genetic circuits allow the reconstruction of metabolic pathways in plant systems for production of many natural products including pharmaceuticals. A challenge in genetic engineering these circuits is precisely and predictably regulating gene expression, especially when genes may be desired in different ratios for optimal throughput. This research into minimal synthetic promoters (MinSyns) by Cai et al. identifies functional cis-regulatory elements that they combined to design a suite of MinSyns. Initial analysis enabled computer-guided generation of MinSyns of varying strength that are bound by endogenous transcription factors. They focused on three MinSyn systems that express in most leaf and root tissue with varying strength of which the strongest, #108, induces similar expression levels to CaMV 35S promoter. A MinSyn was used to drive expression of a synthetic transcription factor (TALE) that targets specific MinSyns co-introduced for the genes of interest. By altering the number of TALE binding sites in the reporter gene MinSyn promoters, they were able to adjust the ratio of the two proteins in the circuit. This work has exciting applications in biotechnology to improve natural product biosynthesis by optimizing enzyme ratios under the control of the same synthetic transcription factor. (Summary by Katy Dunning @plantmomkaty) bioRxiv

Genomic history and ecology of the geographic spread of rice

Originating in China’s Yangtze Valley ~9,000 years ago, rice (Oryza sativa) is a staple food for over half of the world’s population. While rice domestication has been well-researched, studies addressing the species’ diversification and spread post-domestication are lacking. Here, Gutaker et al. tell the “first draft of the story” of how rice was dispersed across Asia (check out this “behind the paper” piece and Twitter thread). Several fruitful collaborations facilitated an interdisciplinary modeling approach using genomic (1,400+ landrace whole-genome sequences), historical, archaeobotanical, geographical, and palaeoclimatic data. Using these methods, robust hypotheses were formed regarding the dispersal of two rice subspecies, japonica, and indica. For example, palaeoenvironmental models revealed a global cooling event ~4,200 years ago, and contemporaneously genetic data indicated a dramatic bottleneck in tropical japonica populations. A major split between temperate and tropical lineages occurred, likely resulting from some local varieties slowly adapting to northern latitudes (becoming temperate), while tropical varieties migrated to Southeast Asia where they diversified rapidly, and archaeological and historical evidence supported these patterns. Furthermore, temperature and heat accumulation gradients were identified as key environmental factors implicating genomic diversity between tropical and temperate japonica varieties. A greater understanding of how environmental factors shaped geographic distributions and evolutionary adaptations of domesticated crop species will provide valuable insights into how crops deal with imminent climatic changes, contributing to future breeding efforts and global food security. (Summary by Caroline Dowling @CarolineD0wling) Nature Plants 10.1038/s41477-020-0659-6

ARGONAUTE2 enhances grain length and salt tolerance by activating BIG GRAIN3 to modulate cytokinin distribution in rice

Is it possible to simultaneously increase two incompatible features like grain yield and stress tolerance? Yin et al. suggest that optimizing cytokinin distribution in plant tissues is a promising strategy for that. ARGONAUTE2 (AGO2) and BIG GRAIN3 (BG3) genes work together promoting at the same time grain size and salt tolerance in rice. While AGO2 protein regulates chromatin condensation activating BG3 expression in AGO2-overexpressing (A2OX) plants, BG3 modulates cytokinin distribution, thereby increasing grain size and salt tolerance. The authors observed an increase in cytokinin levels in roots but a decrease in shoots, where BG3 was activated. Moreover, the same cytokinin distribution pattern was found in salt-treated plants, indicating that plants adjust this pattern to adapt to salt stress. These findings can help maintaining stable and high rice yields under saline soils. (Summary by Elisandra Pradella @Elisandra_MP) Plant Cell 10.1105/tpc.19.00542

How does fire affect germination of grasses in the Cerrado? ($)

Fire shapes tropical savannas through direct (i.e., heat and smoke) and indirect (i.e., opening gaps) effects on the vegetation. However, its effects on seeds from neotropical grasses have seldom been addressed. In this paper, Dariel and Fidelis assessed the longevity and the impact of fluctuating temperatures –a consequence of gap-opening– and heat shocks on the germination and viability of ten native grass species from Brazilian savannas. The authors found that fluctuating temperatures did not affect seed viability in any species. Instead, it favored the germination of the three species with physiological dormancy. They also show that most species were able to survive heat shocks of one minute in 100ºC, but no higher temperatures or longer exposures. Surprisingly, they found two species whose germination and viability remained unaffected by heat shocks and one whose germination even peaked after exposure to 200ºC for 1 minute. With these results, the authors show that the seeds of these native grasses are resistant to fire and can even be favored by it. However, they found that most seeds had short longevity, suggesting this could be the limiting factor for the recruitment of this species. (Summary by Carlos A. Ordóñez-Parra @caordonezparra) Seed Sci. Res. 10.1017/S0960258520000094

Shedding light on plant immunity: Light-regulated defense against P. infestans

While infection by pathogens and the reciprocal immune responses are well studied in plants, the influence of other abiotic factors on these processes is not very clear. In an attempt to understand the role of light on plant defense, Gao and colleagues have shown that the AVRvnt1 effector protein secreted by Phytophthora infestans gives rise to light-dependent responses mediated by the host protein Rpi-vnt1.1 in Solanum venturii. Further analyses have revealed that these responses depend on the interaction of AVRvnt1 with chloroplast-localized glycerate 3-kinase (GLYK), which requires an N-terminal transit peptide. Interestingly, the light dependency is conferred by the light-dependent alternative promoter selection (APS) of GLYK that produces a full-length, chloroplast-localized protein in the presence of light, but in prolonged darkness produces a truncated, cytosolic protein that doesn’t interact with AVRvnt1. Also, the effector protein subverts GLYK activity by interfering with its trafficking and enabling its degradation through proteasome. This work demonstrates that Rpi-vnt1.1–mediated disease resistance is light-dependent, shedding on the regulation of immune response to a commercially important crop pest. (Summary by Pavithran Narayanan @pavi_narayanan). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA.

Hungry bumblebees bite plants to accelerate flowering

Bumblebees receive nutrition from flowers in exchange for aiding plant fertilization. This mutualistic relationship relies on timely availability of flowers for the pollinators, but annual variation in flowering time in changing environments can pose a challenge. Pashalidou and Lambert et al. now found that bumblebees can actively control the flowering of plants. The authors observed that commercial bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) workers use their mandibles and tongue to nibble holes in plant leaves. Laboratory experiments showed that bee-damaged plants bear flowers about 25-30 days earlier than undamaged or mechanically damaged plants, and the damaging behavior of B. terrestris is strongly induced when pollen availability is limited. The latter observation was confirmed by semi-natural experiments conducted over two years. Two wild bumblebee species also showed leaf damaging behavior stimulated by low pollen availability, suggesting the behavior may be widespread. These findings suggest that damaging plant leaves when floral resources run short might be an adaptive trait for bumblebees to accelerate flowering. This study opens many questions, including ones important for basic plant biology: 1) “how do plants accelerate flowering upon leaf damage caused by bumblebees?”, 2) “is this an adaptive strategy for plants to increase the chance for pollination?”, and 3) “how have such mechanisms co-evolved?” (Summary by Tatsuya Nobori @nobolly) Science 10.1126/science.aay0496

Horizontal gene transfer of Fhb7 from fungus underlies Fusarium head blight resistance in wheat

Mycotoxins are fungal toxins with harmful health effects on humans and other animals. Fusarium head blight is a fungal disease of wheat inflorescences that can contaminate the grain and harm its consumers. Previously, Fhb7 was identified in the wheat relative Thinopyrum elongatum as a quantitative trait locus that confers resistance to Fusarium species. Here, Wang et al. cloned Fhb7. They found that this gene shows little homology to plant genes, but high homology to some fungal genes. The authors surmise that it found its way into the plant genome through horizontal gene transfer from an endophytic, often mutualistic, Epichloë fungus, some of which bioprotect against pathogenic fungi. The authors also showed that Fhb7 encodes a glutathione S-transferase that can enzymatically detoxify the fungal toxin, which is the basis for the plant’s resistance to the pathogenic fungus. Introduction of the Fhb7 gene into diverse wheat cultivars confers resistance without yield penalty. (Summary by Mary Williams @PlantTeaching) Science 10.1126/science.aba5435. See also this Perspective in the same issue by Wulff and Jones 10.1126/science.abb9991


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

WARC-Type: response

text:
Rice tiller angle mediated by the LAZY1-dependent asymmetric distribution of auxin

The angle at which leaves extend are held in a rice plant (tiller angle) affects the plant’s ability to intercept light and therefore potential yield. Genetic studies have identified a few genes involved in tiller angle, including the LAZY1 gene that encodes a protein involved in auxin transport. To identify other genes involved in this process, Zhang, Yu and Yu et al. looked at gene expression as rice seedlings responded to gravistimulation after being rotated 90°. The authors identified a HSFA2D, an upstream-acting transcription factor which when knocked out led to increased tiller angles, and two transcription factors (WOX6 and WOX11) that act redundantly downstream of auxin. As the authors summarize, “Collectively these approaches will identify genes to improve grain yields by facilitating the optimization of plant architecture”. (Summary by Mary Williams) Plant Cell10.1105/tpc.18.00063

warcinfo:
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-21
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for May 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-81.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/


text:
Book Club for Kids

Manage series 1535593
By Kitty Felde and Kitty felde. Discovered by Player FM and our community — copyright is owned by the publisher, not Player FM, and audio is streamed directly from their servers. Hit the Subscribe button to track updates in Player FM, or paste the feed URL into other podcast apps.
The place where young readers meet to talk about books. The show includes a celebrity reader and an interview with the author. The host is award winning public radio journalist Kitty Felde. Book Club won the California Library Association Technology Award and the DC Mayor's Award for Excellence in the Humanitites. Named one of the top 10 podcasts for kids by THE TIMES of London.

265 episodes


text:
Go Back   Print Details Book a test drive

Citroen C4 PICASSO 5 VTR PLUS HDI - 2008 (58 plate) £2,490

  • Mileage64,000
  • ColourBLUE
  • TransmissionManual
  • Fuel TypeDiesel
  • Body StyleMPV
  • First Registration Date30/9/2008
  • Engine Size1,560
  • Vehicle locationPlymouth
For all enquiries please call: 01752 229 409
Contact Us

Vehicle Description

Plymouth Trade Centre LTD is based in Faraday Mill Business Park.We have a great selection of hand picked cars available to view in our indoor showroom sure to allow you to view our vehicles comfortably come rain or shine. All our vehicles are valeted and detailed ready for the new owner/s, we provide a comprehensive in-house 3 month warranty to all our vehicles over £1995.00, our lower budget vehicles under £1995.00 come with a 30 day engine and gearbox warranty only, we do offer the option to extend your warranty with our external partner WMS Group (Please ask for further details ' price vary). In addition to this, your vehicle will come with a new MOT, oil and filter service, full PDI and HPI check as well as 12mths AA breakdown cover completely free upon purchase as well as 3 years free servicing and MOT's. All our preparation and warranty work is carried out by our very own technicians at our Service Centre allowing you peace of mind that you will be looked after throughout your entire experience. Plymouth Trade Centre LTD is FCA approved, our sales staff are experts in car finance and able to offer fantastically competitive rates.
  • ABS
  • Air Conditioning
  • Alloy Wheels
  • CD Player
  • Central Locking
  • Climate Control
  • Electric Windows
  • Power Assisted Steering
  • Front Airbags
  • Side Impact Airbags
  • Adjustable Steering
  • Bluetooth
  • Cruise Control
  • Electric Mirrors
  • Engine Immobiliser
  • MP3
  • Radio
  • Safety Belts
  • Safety Belts Rear
  • Satellite Navigation
  • Traction Control
  • Speed Limiter
  • Body Coloured Bumpers
  • Cup Holders
  • Tinted Glass
  • Speakers
  • Steering Wheel Controls
  • ISOFix Anchor Point
  • Electric Folding Mirrors
  • Front Fog Lights
  • Brake Assist


text:
I was asked an interesting question to which I do not have a strict answer. I would only have suggestions, thus I'd like to ask you the same question:

How do you believe regular scrum meetings should be handled when it comes to time? Say you have 2-week long sprints, then in theory: Planning - 4 hours max Review - 2 hours max Retro - 1,5 hours max

Now the sequence for me is clear -> Sprint Planning -> Sprint Review -> Sprint Retrospective.

Question is -> should this all happen in one day (of course given the fact that it may be shorter - planning 1 hour, review 1 hour, retro 1,5 hour)?

The benefits from such distribution in my opinion are that by having all these meetings in one day we have rest of the time in sprint for working on user stories, project discussions, backlog refining activities etc - regular work.

However - spending whole day on meetings may cause them to be ineffective and the team to be less active and Scrum ideas may be lost.

Splitting them into two days again makes two days a bit less productive when it comes to regular work, however team should be able to benefit more from higher activity during meetings.

My idea is there is no strict answer and one should keep in mind context of the team, PO, project etc and adapt it to fit best what the team needs.

What are your opinions?

  • How are you arriving at the time boxes you're using? They seem both arbitrary and unusually short to me. – Todd A. Jacobs Feb 11 '15 at 22:29
  • PLanning is the most divergent - why - because most often we have refined USes, doubts are cleared as mid-sprint activities, we do not take so many new USes (team capability) and estimations go rather quickly. Setting up goal, priorities and agreeing on how things should be done also seems quick. However - sometimes planning and review take more, this was just an example. – Arek Feb 12 '15 at 13:43
  • They should not be help ever, see Daily Stand-Up Meetings Are a Good Tool for a Bad Manager – yegor256 Jul 14 '15 at 23:03

The simplest answer is to ask the team. Go with what they feel most comfortable with. If it doesn't work out, adapt and shift the meetings around.

I have worked with some teams that prefer to have all the meetings in one day. They see that as a 'hands-off' day and like to get it out of the way rather than having meetings spread out.

Other teams don't like to spend all day in meetings and find that planning is less effective at the end of a busy day of meetings.

  • Exactly my point of view, done the same and it wass always different with different teams. – Arek Feb 12 '15 at 13:44

Question is -> should this all happen in one day (of course given the fact that it may be shorter - planning 1 hour, review 1 hour, retro 1,5 hour)?

The typical cadence of a the Scrum ceremony is to host Sprint Planning and then at the mid-point of the timebox run a Backlog Refinement ceremony. The Sprint Review occurs at the end of the timebox as that is when the work the team committed to delivering is due. Finally a Sprint retrospective takes place to discuss improvements in the working environment and practices prior to the next Sprint.

Traditionally for a two-week Sprint it would be

  1. Sprint Planning | 4 hours | First day of the Sprint
  2. Backlog Refinement | 2 Hours | Mid-Sprint
  3. Sprint Review | 2 hours | Last Day of the Sprint
  4. Sprint Retrospective | 1 hour | Last Day of the Sprint

I know some teams have experimented with Mon-Fri type Sprints, Wed-Wed Sprints but I have not come across a working practice which puts Sprint Review, Retrospective and then straight into Planning on the same day.

Personally, I feel that any benefits that arise from cramming all ceremonies into a single day would be eradicated by the severe drop in morale and concentration which would come from such a technique.

My firm answer is that Scrum ceremonies should occur across two days at the least but ideally a third day would incorporate backlog refinement.

My process as Scrum Master

I think that Sprint Planning is a fairly relaxed introduction to the new week and we plan on Mondays. I always ensure that I arrive with snacks and drinks for the team (cheese, doughnuts, gourmet coffee etc).

We start Sprint Planning approximately 1 hour after the working day begins which gives the team time to review emails after the weekend and collate all of their commitments and holidays and constraints before arriving at the planning session.

We actually run a three hour Sprint Planning session but that is an adaptation we found because of our workflow.

Normally it finishes around 12.15 at which point we break for lunch. In that break I place each of the committed cards back on the Board and the team return from lunch ready to start work by picking up their first cards around 1pm.

Our Sprint Planning Agenda is as follows (feel free to steal)

  • 2 mins [SM] Open
  • 5 mins [PO] Planning Vision and Roadmap
  • 10 mins [Gov Mgr] Development and Architecture Status
  • 5 mins [BP] Sprint Goal and Theme
  • 5 mins [SM] Velocity Review
  • 5 mins [SM] Sprint Timebox considerations
  • 15 mins [All] Team Capacity
  • 10 mins [All] Issues / Concerns
  • 10 mins [PO] Review Definition of Done
  • 2 hours [PO & Team] Product Backlog Items for consideration
  • 15 mins [Dev Team] User Story Owners
  • 15 mins [Dev Team] Assumptions / Dependencies for User Stories
  • 5 mins [All] Agreement
  • 15 mins [SM] Parked Items
  • 5 mins [SM] Action Items
  • 2 mins [SM] Closure

For Sprint retrosepctives we use a round robin of ideas from Retromat - a retrospective generator.

As you said, there isn't necessarily a "right" answer. However, in teams I worked with, I split it into two days, but it's the afternoon of the first day and the morning of the second. The most success I've had so far has been

Day 1:

Sprint Review

--End of Day--

Day 2:

--Start of Day--

Sprint Planning

Personally, I like having the retrospective before sprint planning because I often find that the team decides to do things in the next sprint that need to be accounted for in planning. The order of day 1 can go either way. Retro before Review risks missing things from the review in the retro, which the other way risks the review items overriding important lessons from throughout the sprint. So, I'll swap those around depending on the team. Having the planning first thing on day 2 means people come in fresh and the other meetings are still clearly in memory, but aren't taxing their ability to focus on planning.

I'll agree that there isn't a right answer and it really is up to the team.

That said how you run the meetings makes a major impact on things. This goes to basic meeting facilitation and isn't agile specific.

  • Publish an agenda ahead of time: On average, half your team hates to be surprised. They want to go into a meeting well prepared. This includes providing an update on the current backlog in the email or calendar invite, even if its easy to pull from your tool of choice.

  • Post the agenda during the meeting. An agenda shown on the first slide of a .ppt deck ( a bigger crime in waterfall) is useless as soon as you change slides. Post the agenda clearly for everyone to see.

  • Make sure there is a clock in the room, big and easy to read. Yes, everyone has a cell phone. That requires more effort and draws more focus (from everyone) than a quick glance at a wall clock. Also means everyone is on exactly the same time.

  • Do a time based agenda. Venture's agenda is excellent. However put it in clock times, so "Meeting Open: 10:00, Planning and Vision: 10:05, Dev an Arch status: 10:10." By putting the time the agenda item starts it makes it much easier to track to your agenda. If it's 10:15 and you still haven't started Dev and Arch Status, you know you need to shave 5 minutes of Dev and Arch or agree with the team to shave it elsewhere.

  • Plan and schedule breaks: Science and years of experience have shown us the human mind can't stay focused for more than about 90 minutes in a stretch. After this, even the most engaging topic will start to lose focus. Plan your breaks into the agenda and then enforce them. Engineers are notorious for the "let's keep going, we're almost done" syndrome. They may get done faster, the right issues might not have come up because brains were too foggy.

  • Limit the technology: A good running agile team knows this already. If everyone has their laptop open and active, it will pull energy away. Most successful teams I know will do all their planning with old fashioned wall and post its and then transfer it to their electronic tool of choice. I'd even support a phone bowl, where everyone puts their phone during planning. They can have them at breaks.

Again, not agile, just good meeting facilitation that can make an agile ceremony even more effective.

  • This is really nice general summary for meeting facilitation, thanks! – Arek Feb 16 '15 at 8:20

Our team prefers having all meetings in one day. Our schedule is as follows, on every other Tuesday:

  • 10-11am: Sprint Review
  • 11-12pm: Sprint Retrospective
  • 1-5pm: Sprint Planning

Grooming occurs on mid-sprint Tuesdays. This schedule was suggested in my Scrum Master training class, and it's working out great for us.

In my opinion, these should generally be across two days.

It does depend however on the size, preferences etc of the team but also the length of the sprints. The team should all collectively decide on this in line with Scrums values. @CodeGnome asked where @Arek got his timings from. These are based on halving the scrum guides maximum time boxes for a 1-month sprint.

The reasons I believe it should generally be two days are due to both focus and context.

Firstly, having a day full of meetings is generally not a good idea as people will loose focus easily and miss something. This can be slightly alleviated by having regular breaks, say every hour if it is a requirement.

In terms of context, we are looking at items from one sprint and then items for another sprint so it is good to give them a break in-between.

There is also a general business overhead that should be considered, and someone else mentioned, regarding checking emails and other business activities. These should be given time to be done bearing in mind that no-one should be fully allocated for a sprint to account for these anyway.

If you get the situation where there are a few hours left at the end of the day then these extra activities can be completed along with potentially some training so it's never wasted time.

Going back to my earlier comment, though, take this information to the team and let them collectively decide it. It's not set in stone and can change over time in line with Kaizen as well.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.


text:
Conversions and Comparisons

  1. Convert the angles 30, 45, 90, and 135 degrees into radians. Can you develop a formula that will simply allow you to plug in the degrees and get radians?
  2. Similar to number one, convert π/6, 3π/2, 5π/4, and 2π radians into degrees and develop a formula for this conversion.
  3. A person begins to walk around a circular garden with radius 10 meters. If they travel 120 degrees around the garden’s circumference. How far have they walked? What if they traveled 225 degrees? 450 degrees? Have you developed a technique for doing this quickly?
  4. Check out this Three-Act Math task from Dan Meyer: Attempt this problem and explain your proof/results to the sequel.
  5. When deciding who will reach a destination first, distance may only be one factor. What else may apply? Give another Three-Act Math task a try: Include a proof of your work to the sequels.

**To be expanded


WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: application/xhtml+xml

text:
Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Slowroll??? I think not.

As you may have gathered, I've been back to the felt since Friday, after a week off, and things pretty much feel back to normal. Three wins and one loss so far, a ratio I'm prepared to accept. We'll see if it lasts.

I played at Caesars Palace tonight. My entire profit for the session came in one hand--literally. I was about $30 down from my initial buy-in when it occurred, and I left shortly after it had taken place.

I was the second one to limp, holding the 5c-7c. The button raised to $12. I had been playing with him for a couple of hours, and I knew that he was tight but not very good, that he was completely straightforward, and that he routinely overplayed his top-pair kind of hands. The pot swelled when one of the blinds and the other limper called. Except for the fact that I would have to play before the raiser, it was an excellent crAAKKer kind of situation.

The situation became even more excellent when the flop came 5-7-5. It was checked around to the button, who bet $60. That was nearly half of what he had left--I liked this because he might feel pot-committed and give me the rest. I was pretty sure he had a big overpair, because he had shown a tendency to get timid with A-K kinds of hands, especially against more than one opponent, when he missed the flop. The blind folded. To my surprise, the other limper moved all-in for about $235. I had about $260 left. I called. The button mucked in great disgust.

The dealer put out the turn and river, which I think were a ten and jack. The other guy still hadn't shown his cards. Then he said, "I've got a pair," but did nothing else. When I didn't react to that, he flipped over a 7 without looking to see which one it was. That left the possibility that he had pocket 7s, and was playing cruel with me. I didn't really think so, because I don't think he would have check-raised all-in with a hand that big; I think he would have just called, to avoid risking losing me. Also, before he showed the 7, I knew it was entirely possible that he had had pocket tens or jacks, and had gotten extremely lucky after the money was in. Rightly or wrongly, based on his previous play and table talk during hands, I judged him to be among that small group of experienced players who are capable and willing to deliberately miscall their hands--in this case saying that he had a pair when his hand was actually a full house, to be sure that he got to see my cards before showing the winner.

But what was on my mind more than the possibility that I had run into a massive cooler or suckout, more than the possibility that he was angle-shooting me, was my ongoing disgust with players who have a pathological aversion to ever showing their cards, even when the duty devolves upon them to do so. They wait, hesitate, fake the reveal, say what they have, maybe show one card--all in an effort to pressure the other guy to show first. This is horrible etiquette, annoying as hell, and wastes everybody's time. It's a rude, selfish way to behave. It's a dick move. If you are in this subclass of player, you're a dick.

I have writtten about this conduct at least twice before, most recently here (with an unusually lively and interesting debate in the comments following) and here (again with good discussion in the comments). Despite vigorous disagreement from some people who I like and respect, I stand by my view that the game is better served in the long run by players banding together to refuse to tolerate this despicable, unethical practice.

So, in accordance with this strongly held view, I just stared at him and sat and waited for him to show or muck. Mucking didn't seem very likely, since he was obviously not on a total bluff and wouldn't want to pass up the chance at taking a roughly $580 pot. Finally he rolled over his other card--an ace. I then immediately showed the winner and began stacking the chips.

As I was doing so, a woman who hadn't been involved in the hand said, with a distinctly sarcastic tone, "Slow-rolling with the nuts. Nice."

I ignored her. I did not feel like getting into a debate about rules and etiquette with her or anybody else. But I resent the charge, so I'll answer it here.

I did not slowroll. First, I didn't know for sure whether I had the winner. More importantly, though, the prescribed order of showdown was him first, me second. As soon as he either showed or mucked, I was prepared to do my part and either show or muck. Any delay in getting the hands shown was on his head, because my response was instant, as soon as he fulfilled his obligation.

There are times when I will just show regardless of the obligation being on the other guy. Factors that will push me in that direction include:

  • I have a completely unbeatable hand.
  • The game's atmosphere is unusually light and playful.
  • I'm in an especially good mood.
  • The opponent is clearly new to casino poker and doesn't seem to understand the showdown rules and etiquette.
  • The opponent is a straightforward player and I already have a pretty good idea of what he is holding.
  • The opponent is somebody I have some reason to like, either from an outside relationship or because we have been chatty and friendly during the game. (Don't smirk--it does happen once in a while!)

There's no formula to this decision, no magical combination of factors that will automatically prompt me to take the initiative; it's just a feel thing. But when I do it, it is a courtesy, not an obligation. And the one thing that will absolutely preclude me extending somebody this courtesy is him being a dick who is clearly experienced enough to know better, and is just stalling, trying to transfer the monkey to my back. No chance, pal. We'll sit here all night if that's what it's going to take, and the more you try to wriggle out of what you know the rules require you to do, the more I'm going to dig in my heels and defy you.

You think you're stubborn? Buddy, you haven't even SEEN stubborn yet. Bring on the stares and impatient comments from the other players. Let the dealer plead with me to reveal my cards, or even issue a direct command to do so. Nothing doing. Not gonna happen. The foundations of the casino will crumble from decay and vines will encircle all of us before I'm turning over my hand to the smug satisfaction of a non-showing douchebag. And even that would just be getting the contest underway. I will sit there until the sun burns itself down to a dark lump of iron, and then keeping sitting there, my cards firmly capped, until we see the coming of the very heat death of the universe, before I will yield in such a test of wills. "To the last I grapple with thee; from hell's heart I stab at thee; for hate's sake I spit my last breath at thee."

(Did I mention something here recently about occasionally getting overly dramatic?)

To the woman at the table, I say this: You were wrong. I did not slowroll. I simply waited for when it was my turn to show. Your venom was directed at the innocent party rather than the guilty one. Maybe you should find a good poker blog to read that would keep you informed of how things are supposed to work at the tables.

Incidentally, this story had an amusing coda. The button was kind of a jerk all night, and this hand really set him off. He began berating me--not for the slight delay of game at the end, but for having called his pre-flop raise with such a terrible hand. "Nice call!" (Dripping with sarcasm.) "Next time I have a big pair, I'm gonna raise to $30. See if you call that." (OK, pal, you want to risk $30 to win $4 in blinds, be my guest.)

In short, hilarity ensued.

The essence of what Grange calls a crAAKKer hand is one that can make a hand to beat a big pair (straight or flush or set, usually) in a sneaky, under-the-radar kind of way, precisely because there are players who just won't consider the possibility that an opponent played so "badly" as to call a sizeable pre-flop raise with "that kind of trash." I have written a bunch of times about making big scores with junk against opponents who just can't fold an overpair, no matter how much evidence you give them that they're beat. See, e.g., here, here, and here as just a sampling of such stories. Neither Grange or I were exactly the original inventors of this route to poker winning. It was the revealing of precisely this kind of play--when conventional wisdom said to wait for big pairs and big aces--that got Doyle Brunson's fellow road warriors mad at him when he first published Super/System, and forever changed how the game is played.

Frankly, I don't see what the guy was complaining about. The other player's action of check-raising all-in made it relatively easy for him to fold. I'd say he got off pretty cheap!

Matthew Yauch said...

Dear Grump,

Thanks for not educating the fools at the table and breaking your own rule. :) Anyone that either refuses to show in order or is as dense as that lady is just keeping our money warm for us.

Congrats on the upswing!

Karl said...

Glad you're back at the tables. Your poker rants are the best.

Snuffy said...

When you flop that hard just show your hand rather than hold up the game. It really isn't worth it to wait for his hand. Show it and take the pot.

Unknown said...

You did write that you'd roll the hand over immediately if you had an unbeatable hand.

If you'd had quad 5s in that spot, would you have flipped them up when the aggressor showed just a seven?

Either way, well played and that lady should learn the rules before spouting off like that about a slowroll that wasn't.

Anonymous said...

The Grump is back, the Grump is back!!

Bluejack said...

What baffles me is how anyone hits those flops. I've lost so much money on that crAAKKer move it's not even funny.

As for the slow roll, I *hate* the slow roll accusation. I got shouted at for slow rolling the other day when I took my time calling an all in with an ace high flush -- but there were two pairs on the board! Hardly the nuts.

home poker chips said...

3 wins and a loss is still a remarkable stat. It's nice to hear that you're back. I enjoy reading your rantings.

bellatrix78 said...

Always be nice to the fish, no matter what. They are your customers, customer is king, even if he's in the wrong. It's called customer service.

Check out the term "fastroll" by Tommy Angelo.

While you might be in the right because of the rules, you are not in the right in the spirit of the game. It is as if you're deliberately trying to cause a car accident, because the guy cutting in didn't signal correctly.

Grange95 said...

If you wait for the heat death of the universe, you're going to mess up the dealer pushes, and really tick off the management. Would hate it if being 86'd from Caesars Palace was your last conscious experience before dissolving into the sea of photons.

As for the showdown dance of the seven sunglasses, it annoys me so much I may do a responsive blog post later this week. Suffice it to say I think you did nothing wrong in combatting this scourge.

Jordan said...

Hey Grump. In case you are looking for topics to write about, I for one would love to read about what its like playing poker daily, and how you deal with the losses. Obviously, when you are having a long string of losses, it can be wearing, but what happens when you have just one loss. Does that set you off at all, because obviously it has to happen, but no one likes to lose. What do you consider a big loss for a day and how to you deal with that? I guess I've been thinking about the difficult mental aspects of poker and given your near-daily play, I thought you might have an interesting perspective

Rakewell said...

Drizztdj: That is not what I wrote. Having an unbeatable hand is one thing that makes it more likely that I'll be willing to just show and be done with it, but neither it nor any other single factor is always determinative. Yes, it is possible that if I had had quads there I would have shown as soon as the button mucked and the action was over. I often--even usually--would in such a situation, though not always.

baglife said...

Excellent rant well done. The issue is not caving to such a dick.

MelloAceCv said...

Not only does she not know what a slowroll is, she also doesn't know what the nuts is. You actually had the 7th nuts. Waiting your turn to show the lowest full house is hardly the same as waiting to show quads.


text:
President Obama’s Neoliberal Theocracy – A Must Read!!

Political Night Train believes gaining insight into Senator Obama’s values and beliefs is essential to the 2008 election.  Lee Cary’s article below provides what is probably the most insightful article to date on how Obama would govern, if elected.  This is also the basis for the theology of many black churches.  If Obama has done nothing else related to religion, he has given white American’s a peek inside black churches.  Most white Americans view the black church based on those scenes of James Brown and the Triple Rock in the movie “Blues Brothers”.

March 16, 2008

A President Obama’s Neoliberal Theocracy

By Lee CaryBarack Obama’s first vocational choice was to help people in a poor African-American community. Later, he joined a church founded on black liberation theology. This combination could result in an Obama presidency that embodies something new in American history — a Neoliberal Theocracy.  When we in the West hear the word theocracy, we think of mullahs, fatwas, and human pronouncements issued with the presumptuous authority of divine edicts.  But not all theocracies are so dictatorially dogmatic. They range from the theocratic-lite nature of the United Kingdom’s monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England, to the industrial-strength theocracy of Iran where the two top offices, Supreme Leader and head of the Guardian Council, are reserved for Shiite clergy. A new, softer-and-gentler American theocracy may be in our future.   What does “Neoliberal Theocracy” mean? In a Neoliberal Theocracy the principles of political liberalism that guide decisions of statecraft are aligned with beliefs thought to constitute a moral theology. In other words, the federal government, particularly the Executive Branch, acts in accordance with a defined, theological belief system. Neoliberal is to liberal as neoconservative is to conservative.  It represents the evolution of thinking that occurs when a stable ideological platform (contemporary political liberalism) is applied to new circumstances (Barack Obama’s deeply held theological belief system).  The social gospel of an Obama presidency could be traced back to the race-based class dialectic of the black liberation theology movement. That movement emerged as the theological wing of the broader Black Power movement of the late 1960’s – early 1970’s. Among a constellation of groups and personalities representing Black Power were: the 1968 Olympic Black Power salute; the Black Panthers; Malcolm X; Bobby Seale; the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (“snick”), etc.  Far and away the most important expression of Black Power was Dr. Martin Luther King’s historic leadership in the Civil Rights Movement. Black liberation theology forms the core identity of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ (UCC) – Obama’s home church for two decades.  Today, that congregation espouses a Black Value System.  It reflects the movement’s class dialectic that remains unabashedly race-based. The black values concept was first introduced by one of the founders of the black liberation theology movement, Dr. James H. Cone, in Black Theology & Black Power (© 1969, Harper & Row, 1969, p.127).  “To carve out a Black Theology based on black oppression will of necessity mean the creation of new values independent of and alien to the values of white society…They will be alien because white American ‘Christian’ values are based on racism.” While the media didn’t hesitate to probe the religious beliefs of Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, reporters have been reluctant, until recently, to inquire into Obama’s religious principles. Perhaps political correctness has made them hyper-sensitive to giving the appearance of delving into racial issues. Their hesitancy persists, even though Obama has used biblical literary devices in his speeches.  He has copied several of King’s speech patterns and oratorical motifs.  And, he juxtaposes his interpretation of Christianity to those of the religious right who, he claims, have “hijacked” the faith.  It’s as though he has invited religion questions from a media too timid to ask. When addressing a faith-based audience, Obama, quoting largely from his book The Audacity of Hope (p.202), lent an existential spiritual tone to his campaign.   “They [Americans] want a sense of purpose, a narrative arc to their lives.  They’re looking to relieve a chronic loneliness, a feeling supported by a recent study that shows Americans have fewer close friends and confidants than ever before. And so they need an assurance that somebody out there cares about them, is listening to them – that they are not just destined to travel down that long highway towards nothingness.”    Message: Obama, the helper, cares for those who hurt. In that same speech, quoting again from of his book (p. 207), Obama said, “I believed and still believe in the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change…Because of its past, the black church understands in an intimate way the Biblical call to feed the hungry and cloth the naked and challenge powers and principalities. And in its historical struggles for freedom and the rights of man, I was able to see faith as more than just a comfort to the weary or a hedge against death, but rather as an active, palpable agent in the world. As a source of hope.”   Message: The black church truly understands the social gospel. The channel of Christianity that Obama entered at Trinity UCC gave a theological motive to his preexistent passion to be a helper. There he found a social gospel that, today, undergirds his advocacy for an activist federal government more aggressively involved in social programs, both foreign and domestic.    How would this represent a theocracy of any kind? In this way: His presidential social activism would be based on an economic-based class dialectic that is theologically grounded. In language conveying near messianic overtones, the authors of his primary campaign document, The Blueprint For Change, wrote, He will help the world’s weakest states to build healthy and educated communities, reduce poverty…”   How might a Neoliberal Theocracy influence U.S. foreign relations?   Tyrants test adversaries they perceive as weak. Khrushchev interpreted Kennedy’s failure to provide American air assets at the Bay of Pigs as weakness, and tested him with missiles in Cuba. The November 26, 1979 cover of TIME magazine displayed a small photo of an unsmiling Jimmy Carter against the full page backdrop of a scowling Ayatollah Khomeini. The caption read: THE TEST OF WILLS.  Khomeini and Ronald Reagan won that test.  Our adversaries would test a President Obama if they perceived him as weak.  How? Imagine these ways:

  • A company-sized, elite unit of North Korean commandos infiltrates across the 38th parallel, decimates a platoon-sized American unit, then hurries back across the border, taking their own casualties and a few captured U.S. soldiers with them.  Democrats in Congress ask: Why are we still in Korea anyway?  The U.S. protests the incursion to the U.N. Security Council. Then, as a condition of our gradual withdrawal from the Korean peninsula, the N. Koreans blandly apologize and blame the incident on a maverick military commander. Tensions between the two Koreas are eased in favor of N. Korean dominance as a formal end to the Korean War is negotiated.
  • Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez denies any involvement when several hundred lightly-armed students, shouting anti-American slogans, spontaneously invade the U.S. Embassy in Caracas and hold the occupants captive.  Obama and Chavez meet face-to-face in Havana to ease tensions.  Subsequent discussions designed to resolve the crisis are assigned to a three-party Crisis Resolution Commission that includes the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC), since they claim involvement in the embassy take-over. Eventually, the future of the Organization of American States is called into question as Nicaragua, Ecuador, and a reluctant Bolivia begin talks to form a new regional alliance.
  • Late one morning, several of the new U.S. Consulates that the Obama Administration had recently opened in Africa, fulfilling a specific campaign pledge, are targets of suspected Iranian-sponsored Hezbollah terrorists, leaving hundreds dead.  A few African nations immediately ask the U.S. to downscale its diplomatic presence in order to lessen the danger to their citizens.  Kenya demands an increase in American aid to better fend off the threat from Islamic insurgents.

 If you discount these as fanciful and impossible, remember: The last president to flirt with conducting foreign policy from a theological perspective was Jimmy Carter.   Here’s the hub of matter.  In his speech to the Democrat convention in 2004, then Candidate for the U.S. Senate Barack Obama said, “It is that fundamental belief — I am my brother’s keep, I am my sister’s keeper — that makes this country work.” That’s not so. While that may express Obama’s theological worldview, and is an ageless, altruistic principle behind countless good works, it is not what makes this country work.  What makes this country work is the fundamental belief that we are born with the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The two beliefs – keepers of each other and inalienable rights – live independent lives.  And that’s why we should be very wary of a Neoliberal Theocracy, or any theocracy for that matter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this:


text:
About the Company
PONAR Pressure is a brand of ultra-high pressure water hydraulics systems of PONAR Wadowice SA. We offer modular and individual solutions utilising ultra high pressure water technology. Our solutions are efficient, effective, customised to meet Customer’s expectations and environmentally friendly.

PONAR Pressure brand stands for experience, creativity in approach towards applications of high pressure water hydraulics. Our services find a variety of applications in all industries requiring precision of work and reliability of the systems. Moreover, our systems can be used in areas exposed to a risk of explosion and no-man entry areas.

We are a member of the European Water Jetting Institute, an organisation bringing together business entities, carrying out research on using highly pressurised water in the industry.

The quality of the product is guaranteed by PONAR Wadowice SA, a company that for more than 50 years has been one of the largest producer of oil hydraulics elements and systems in Poland, supplying its products not only on the domestic but also on the foreign markets, cooperating with reliable Partners, the leaders in their field.

Catalogue PONAR pressure

Catalogue PONAR pressure

© Copyrights by PONAR Wadowice 2020


text:
Indigenous Resistance

MOVE Africa: Oppressed Peoples Herstory Final

Just to start off, Philadelphia is one of the most racist states in the U.S now. Imagine how racist it was in the middle of the Civil Rights movement.

Shack Dwellers Movement in South Africa: Oppressed People Herstory Final

UN-Habitat, The UN’s human settlements program, states that the number of people living in slum conditions is now estimated at 863 million, which was only a couple hundred million less in the 1990’s.

Homeless to Yale

Homeless to Yale

And Then Back Again.

On purpose.

By Choice.

Because it Makes More Sense.

Read one woman’s story of why we all should be paying attention to Lisa Tiny Gray-Garcia and POOR Magazine.

Valerie Klokow

May 12, 2017

   I used to think that the worst thing

No Liberal Costume On The East Coast:Stolen Land/Hoarded Resources Tour

I travel for gigs, Krip-Hop Nation and other projects however at this time facing a lawsuit against my landlord and helping another Black disabled friend who is facing illegal eviction. So being deeply involved in POOR magàzine's East Coast Stolen Land/Hoarded Resources Tour was more than just a project.

Poor People on Park Avenue???? Black, Brown, Indigenous and Poor People Lead Tour of Stolen Land and Hoarded Wealth in Eastern Turtle Island

“We are stopping you because some of the residents feel like they were targeted because you didn’t go to their doors, so they called the police,” The Connecticut poLice officers flanked our rental van at a stoplight in the wealth-hoarding neighborhood known as West Hartford, Ct, filled with acre-long lawns and plantation-like mansions and more stolen land than the wealth-hoarders even knew what to do with .

Love is Work in Action: Earth-Feather Sovereign, Activator

With photo and video journalism from ‘Washington Rise with Standing Rock’ in Olympia, WA

Water protectors from DAPL and beyond.

When I was a little boy growing up in the 60’s and 70’s, the mainstream media had just started talking about or admitting that pollution was a problem. But we barely heard anything about water pollution, mostly air pollution and littering.

Sign-up for POOR email!