Browsing by Subject "protocol"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Effects of GnRH and Prostaglandin Combined with a Short Progestin Regimen on the Synchrony of Estrus and Ovulation in Ewes During the Breeding Season(2012-02-14) Dickison, James WilliamTwo trials were conducted to quantify the effects of GnRH and prostaglandin in conjunction with a 7-d CIDR on estrus and on pregnancy rate in comparison with a traditional synchronization protocol. In trial 1, ewes (n=12) were randomly allotted to one of three treatments: CIDR (7 d) with administration of GnRH (Cystorelin?, 50?g, im) at CIDR insertion and PGF2? (Lutalyse?, 20 mg, im) on d 6.5 (GnRH1); the GnRH1 protocol with a second injection of GnRH 30 h after CIDR removal (GnRH2); and CIDR (11 d) with administration of PGF2? at CIDR insertion and PMSG (400 iu) at CIDR removal (PMSG). A blood sample was obtained every 2 h for 42 h after CIDR removal for serum LH analysis. On d 8 after CIDR removal, blood samples were obtained at 12 h intervals for 36 h for serum P4 analysis. One ewe in the GnRH1 group did not retain the CIDR device and was excluded from the analysis. Mean LH concentration did not differ (P = 0.48) among groups. Time and time x treatment affected (P < 0.001) mean LH concentration. Mean P4 concentration was not affected (P = 0.26) by time, treatment or their interaction. In trial 2, ewes (n=72) were randomly allotted to one of the three treatments described in trial 1. At CIDR removal, three ewes per treatment were joined with a single ram fitted with a marking harness in each of 8 pens. Ewes were monitored every hour for estrus activity and ultrasounded transabdominally 60 d after CIDR removal for pregnancy. Estrus activity did not differ (P > 0.05) among the groups. Marking frequency was 92 percent, 75 percent, and 88 percent for GnRH1, GnRH2, and PMSG groups, respectively. Mean interval to estrus was shorter (P < 0.05) for the GnRH2 than for the PMSG group and tended to be reduced (P < 0.10) compared with the GnRH1 group. Pregnancy rate differed (P < 0.05) among treatments (79 percent, 58 percent and 38 percent for GnRH1, GnRH2, and PMSG groups, respectively). These results indicate that synchrony of estrus and pregnancy rate to natural service can be increased in response to a CIDR protocol when combined with administration of GnRH rather than PMSG.Item Topology management protocols in ad hoc wireless sensor networks(2009-05-15) Kim, HogilA wireless sensor network (WSN) is comprised of a few hundred or thousand au-tonomous sensor nodes spatially distributed over a particular region. Each sensornode is equipped with a wireless communication device, a small microprocessor, anda battery-powered energy source. Typically, the applications of WSNs such as habitatmonitoring, re detection, and military surveillance, require data collection, process-ing, and transmission among the sensor nodes. Due to their energy constraints andhostile environments, the main challenge in the research of WSN lies in prolongingthe lifetime of WSNs.In this dissertation, we present four dierent topology management protocols forK-coverage and load balancing to prolong the lifetime of WSNs.First, we present a Randomly Ordered Activation and Layering (ROAL) protocolfor K-coverage in a stationary WSN. The ROAL suggests a new model of layer cov-erage that can construct a K-covered WSN using the layer information received fromits previously activated nodes in the sensing distance. Second, we enhance the faulttolerance of layer coverage through a Circulation-ROAL (C-ROAL) protocol. Us-ing the layer number, the C-ROAL can activate each node in a round-robin fashionduring a predened period while conserving reconguration energy. Next, MobilityResilient Coverage Control (MRCC) is presented to assure K-coverage in the presence of mobility, in which a more practical and reliable model for K-coverage with nodalmobility is introduced. Finally, we present a Multiple-Connected Dominating Set(MCDS) protocol that can balance the network trac using an on-demand routingprotocol. The MCDS protocol constructs and manages multiple backbone networks,each of which is constructed with a connected dominating set (CDS) to ensure a con-nected backbone network. We describe each protocol, and compare the performanceof our protocols with Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) and/or existing K-coveragealgorithms through extensive simulations.The simulation results obtained by the ROAL protocol show that K-coverage canbe guaranteed with more than 95% coverage ratio, and signicantly extend networklifetime against a given WSN. We also observe that the C-ROAL protocol provides abetter reconguration method, which consumes only less than 1% of the recongura-tion energy in the ROAL protocol, with a greatly reduced packet latency. The MRCCprotocol, considering the mobility, achieves better coverage by 1.4% with 22% feweractive sensors than that of an existing coverage protocol for the mobility. The resultson the MCDS protocol show that the energy depletion ratio of nodes is decreasedconsequently, while the network throughput is improved by 35%.