Initial teacher education (ITE) impacts the preparedness of beginning teachers. A large scale mixed methods investigation (n = 2145) offers perceptions through surveys of beginning teachers in their first five years of teaching (n = 1362) and their school leaders (n = 736) and one-on-one semi-structured interviews (n = 47) with beginning teachers (n = 38) and school leaders (n = 9). The findings offer a deeper understanding of ITEs influence on beginning teachers’ preparedness. Qualitative analysis of survey open questions and the quantitative analysis of beginning teachers (n = 504) and school leaders’ (n = 306) completed Likert scale surveys items unveiled perceptions about ITEs impact on beginning teachers’ satisfaction levels, expectations and realities; professional support and mentoring offered at school level; and professional interrelationships within schools.

This paper reports on a collaborative project between educational industry and research partners, in Queensland, Australia with the aim of developing instruments to gather new information about beginning teacher workforce issues. The investigation stimulates deeper insight into beginning teachers' (n = 504) and school leaders' (n = 306) perceptions of specific factors influencing beginning teacher attrition and retention and beginning teacher workforce stability. The convergent mixed-method study includes demographic data and information derived from Likert scales and open questions and is underpinned by context-conscious understanding development theory. The initial scale validation and justification involves confirmatory factor analysis and reliability analysis. The findings offer a new lens to develop an in-depth, multi-layered understanding of beginning teacher workforce issues to inform future research and policy decisions.

Tensions between the perception and reality of scientific practice have produced significant problems, including the fact that high proportions of students do not view science as a creative endeavor. The resultant, systemic devaluation of science has significant implications for scientific research, and science education.

Problem and/or scenario-based learning is often deployed in preclinical education and training as a means of: (a) developing students' capacity to respond to authentic, real-world problems; (b) facilitating integration of knowledge across subject areas, and; (c) increasing motivation for learning. Six information and communication technology (ICT) supported, scenario-based learning (SBL) problems using case studies that integrated information across subject areas were implemented in a second-year genetics course for undergraduate veterinary science students and linked to educational outcomes. On a post-implementation questionnaire, students appreciated the use of authentic scenarios but login records indicated variable engagement among students. Comparison of learning outcomes from SBL-supported and non-SBL-supported content (within and across student cohorts) indicated that exposure to SBL generated quantifiable improvements in learning in both high and low ability students. Despite this, students did not perceive that the SBL activities improved their learning. Thus, ICT-supported SBL have the potential to reinforce connectivity of content across a range of pre-clinical courses, but to facilitate a genuine novice to expert transition may require consideration of students' perceptions of scenario relevance, their confidence, and how students of differing learning styles engage with such activities.

Many countries are reviewing science education programmes and implementing new pedagogical paradigms aimed at reversing a trend of declining enrolments. A key factor in this decline is a public perception that science is not a creative endeavour. Attempts to reframe public perception tend to focus on primary and secondary schooling, but do little to address ongoing declines in quality and originality of intellectual output beyond the highschool environment. To overcome systemic devaluation of science requires appreciation of the complex, dynamic, and often stochastic, interplay of sociocultural, psychological and cognitive factors that drive human creativity. Viewing creativity from this perspective reveals tensions between perception and practice that limit opportunities for students, science educators and scientists. Resolving the tension requires integration of developmental, psychometric and sociocultural discourses of creativity in ways that generate opportunities for individuals at all levels of education and practice to: 1) acquire a high level of domain-specific knowledge; 2) practise application of that knowledge in developing solutions to problems across a gradient of difficulty and; 3) be challenged to integrate their knowledge of science with their knowledge of other fields to pursue and solve problems with personal relevance.

The Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici (Pst) pathotype, 134 E16A+, detected in 2002 in Australia, produced relatively lower and higher adult plant stripe rust responses, respectively, on cultivars Kukri and Janz in comparison to the pre-2002 Pst pathotype 110 E143A+. Molecular mapping of adult plant stripe rust response variation among 180 Kukri/Janz-derived doubled haploid lines over 4 years, two each with Pst pathotypes 110 E143A+ and 134 E16A+, was performed. QYr.sun-7B and QYr.sun-7D were consistently contributed by Kukri and Janz, respectively. QYr.sun-7D corresponded to the genomic location of Yr18 and QYr.sun-7B remains to be formally named. QYr.sun-1B, QYr.sun-5B, and QYr.sun-6B were detected during more than one season irrespective of the Pst pathotypes used, whereas QYr.sun-3B was identified only during the 2003 crop season. QYr.sun-1A contributed by Janz, and QYr.sun-2A from Kukri, were detected only against Pst pathotypes 110 E143A+ and 134 E16A+, respectively. The DH lines showing better resistance than the either parent carried combinations of 4 to 6 QTL. These lines are currently being used as stripe rust resistance donors in wheat breeding programs.

BioEssaysVolume 32, Issue 12 p. 1016-1019 Insights & PerspectivesFree Access The battle for creativity: Frontiers in science and science education Adele L. Schmidt, Corresponding Author Adele L. Schmidt aschm65@eq.edu.au Science Education, School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia Holland Park State High School, PO Box 197, Holland Park Qld 4121, AustraliaScience Education, School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.Search for more papers by this author Adele L. Schmidt, Corresponding Author Adele L. Schmidt aschm65@eq.edu.au Science Education, School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia Holland Park State High School, PO Box 197, Holland Park Qld 4121, AustraliaScience Education, School of Education and Professional Studies, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.Search for more papers by this author First published: 15 October 2010 https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201000092Citations: 3AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Perceptions and practice: Creativity Creativity is a highly contested social construct 1-3 that occupies a unique place in the scientific arena as both a requirement for innovation and a personal characteristic that can be developed through quality education 4, 5. Psychologists and social scientists recognise two forms: (a) big C creativity (BC), which describes development of transformative performances or products; and (b) little C creativity (LC), which is concerned with construction of novel solutions to problems of limited relevance 2. Within this framework, LC may be combinatorial (establishing new connections between old ideas) or exploratory (operating within a limited domain, or limiting set of rules) 1. In recent decades, some practitioners of science have claimed that increasing emphasis on collaborative, multidisciplinary research means the historical stereotype of the BC scientist working alone on a research project of their own devising is no longer functionally viable 6. Others argue that corporatisation and commercialisation of funding and facilities is a greater threat to creativity and innovation 4 because it leads to ineffective, unfocussed experimentation and research 7. Lexicographic studies provide historical insights into the battle for control over perceptions of scientific creativity. The word 'genius', for example, originally served as a collective noun relating to a communal state of transcendental insight, but has been reified as a result of processes concerned with establishing and defending a system of intellectual stratification based on quantitation of comparative ability or attainment 8. Although the reification may have been conceived with the innocuous intention of overturning post-Darwinian reservations regarding the moral and social value(s) of science and scientists 8, it has insidious ramifications in contemporary contexts. To view scientific creativity as an ephemeral, nebulous trait personified in a subset of élite individuals is dysfunctional at a societal level because there is no singularly creative archetype: creativity correlates with a wide range of personal traits 1, 2, 9-14 and its actualisation is a product of dynamic interplay between personal and societosocial factors 15. As long as a fundamental level of proficiency is attained, the capacity for creativity exists within all individuals 16. The crucial ingredient for realisation is not possession of innately superior neurochemical or neurobiological schemata, but access to opportunities to refine cognitive speed and processing capacity 16. Perceptions and practices: Science Any given domain of scientific practice occupies a nexus between sub-fields and the current pace of scientific and technological progress means that new disciplines are continually emerging 6, 10, 17. Despite projected increases in employment opportunities within science and technology sectors 3, 17 however, enrolments in science subjects are in decline 3, 18. Surveys of student and community attitudes identify rote learning and rigid, dogmatic thinking as traits seen as essential for success 5, 18. Although many individuals recognise that science has delivered benefits in the form of medical, technological and industrial innovation 5, 17-19, they appear unable to appreciate the creativity required to extend the boundaries of scientific knowledge 5, 17, 18, 20. Individuals draw their understanding of science and scientists from a diverse array of sources; educators, peers, employers, the media, prominent journals, weblogs and popular-science books. Iconic, mimetic examples are Professor Peter Medawar's The Art of the Soluble (1967) and Advice to a Young Scientist (1979), which propose that the secret of success is to focus on a pseudomathematical zone of optimal difficulty (The Medawar Zone) because those who solve problems that are either too simple or too difficult will not be recognised and rewarded for their achievements. Medawar's contribution is historically and culturally significant because it reflects the widespread acceptance that, for scientists, the real currency is not quality and originality of work per se, but the value attributed to it by one's peers. The notion of knowledge as valid only when canonised through publication is enforced early in scientific education and training 21, 22 and the operational reality of science is one where antithetic achievements are exulted and rewarded (fiscally and socioculturally) more readily than creativity 4, 7, 10, 17. This is, however, inconsistent with the true nature of science. Scientific progress occurs through systematic identification and extension of the limits of existing theory 23. Anomalies and contradictions are important because they signal that existing schemata require reconfiguration, or abandonment 24. Fouccalt's idea of heterotopian loci as initially independent intellectual positions beyond the realm of accepted practice, which are colonised by an increasing number of individuals if the meme takes hold 25, is useful in this context because it allows success in science to be seen in terms of assimilation of heterotopian perspectives, or reinforcement of a self-authenticating status quo. Ostracism of those who operate on the periphery of accepted theory and/or practice is generally justified by the contention that skepticism is a hallmark of quality science 26. However, this means that any individual(s) who articulates or occupies a heterotopian locus (loci) is vulnerable. A resultant tendency to dismiss, or ignore, the work of those who do not conform to accepted norms impedes progress not only in science, but also in science education. Perceptions and practices: Science education Rhetoric surrounding new pedagogical paradigms aimed at reversing the trend of declining enrolments in science subjects tends to focus on the need to generate a technologically competent workforce and the economic, environmental and social benefits associated with initiation and development of novel technologies and industries 6, 17, 27. Although this implies that reform will assure sustained quality and originality of scientific output, long-term results require an overhaul of policies and practices that oppose and suppress creative teaching. Surveys of science educators reveal a deep conviction that creativity should be a central focus of education programs 19, 28-30. In practice, however, many feel constrained by pragmatic issues 7, 19, 31. At a tertiary level, a tendency to approach teaching positions as opportunities to avoid the perils of funding-dependent salaries, or obtain academic merit points 32, 33, means that teaching positions tend to be filled by scientific personnel nominally reclassified as teaching staff 34. This reinforces exclusionary, hegemonic perceptions of science as incomprehensible and inaccessible to all but a select(ed) few of the most gifted individuals 35 because it assumes that scientific knowledge alone is sufficient to ensure quality teaching. The net effect, which flows through to secondary and primary levels, is positioning of science education, and science educators, as distinct from (at best) and subordinate to (at worst) science and scientists. The assertion that scientific knowledge is an innate, bivariate (present or not) trait expressed in a single (validated/canonised) dialect is also inconsistent with evidence from creativity studies. The likelihood of any given individual generating creative output is dependent on a complex combination of social, psychological and intellectual traits and events 36, 37. This means that, regardless of their status as gifted or non-gifted in childhood, all individuals are capable of reaching at least an LC stage of development. To understand how and why educational outcomes differ within and among cohorts requires appreciation of teaching and learning theory. In general terms, learning theory is an extension of psychological theories of personality/character development, which include: (a) psychoanalytical theories that emphasise internal cognitive/emotional processes; (b) psychometric theories that focus on quantification of specific personality traits/learning styles and (c) social learning theories that emphasise situational influences and the tendency for individuals to alter their personality and behaviour in response to changes in their social environment 38. For the education professional, the utility of these theories lies in design and implementation of effective teaching strategies governed by the developmental/constructivist notion of situating all students (regardless of current ability) within a zone of proximal development that provides opportunities for extension 21, 39. This is why contextualised, inquiry-based approaches have a long history in science education 20: science educators are aware that presentation of complex tasks based on real-world questions or problems encourages higher-order cognition 19, 20, 30 and facilitates transition from LC to BC 3. It is important to note, however, that implementation of any learning programme in a manner that is incompatible with the prior knowledge and experience of the student population leads to disengagement and confusion 19, 31, 40. Towards learner-centred practice Although it does not prove that current policies and practices fail to cater for variation in student ability and interest, widespread disengagement and confusion of students in science education programmes 5, 17-19 certainly justifies a more inclusive, learner-centred approach. This is not incompatible with the mandated content (national curriculum) approach currently favoured by many countries, but it does demand acknowledgement that appropriate, differentiated instruction requires: (a) high levels of pedagogical and content knowledge; (b) adequate preparation and planning time and (c) access to a diverse range of resources and support options. For most science educators, however, the reality of practice is that their ability to integrate pedagogical and content knowledge remains underappreciated and/or underdeveloped; the time available for preparation and planning is far from adequate; and access to resource and support options is limited. To overcome these obstacles and make creativity a core goal of science education programmes, arguments for reform must be based on more than a perceived mismatch between educational practice and workforce requirements 41. Criticisms of this nature are often dismissed as misguided political correctness or resistance to change, but this is an ill-informed view that fails to recognise that, regardless of the field of endeavour, the pace of social and technological change means what is taught or learned in education and training will be irrelevant to workplace practice within five years 42. Any prescriptive reform of educational policy and practice will therefore only ever meet the needs of a relatively small number of individuals, for a limited period of time 43. Success in science does depend on acquisition of subject-specific knowledge 40, but expertise and proficiency develop via processes that are paralleled across all domains of human activity, as individuals navigate through a dynamic landscape of physiocognitive, psychological and sociocultural challenges 38. Distinction between non-creative and creative individuals is meaningless because domain knowledge and higher-order procedural/strategic knowledge develop in tandem 40, 44 as individuals develop personalised awareness of the recursive, evolving status of all knowledge 45-47. Quality education demands activation of intrinsic motivation through deployment of learning and assessment tasks that support acquisition and development of deeper understanding, as well as obvious skills and abilities 41, 48, 49. To this end, science educators often seek opportunities to collaborate with scientists 30, but collaborations based on perceptions of science educators as possessing limited, or limiting, skills and abilities simply undermines the long-term goal of developing and maintaining a capacity for scientific creativity because they constrain: (a) content knowledge of science educators; (b) pedagogical development of scientists and (c) the quality of education and development opportunities offered to students at all levels. Recommendations Surveys of student and public perception consistently indicate a lack of appreciation of science as a creative endeavour. This is a deterrent to students and is inconsistent with the nature of science as a dynamic, multidisciplinary undertaking where ideas and concepts are non-static entities that can, and should, change when contradicted by experimental evidence. Current focus on national curricula supported by inquiry-based methodology has pedagogical potential, but effective implementation requires: (1) Validation of science education as a significant field of endeavour that requires a dynamic, flexible range of skills and knowledge. (2) Attenuation of outmoded, dysfunctional perceptions of scientists as an elite subset of the population in possession of a unique, and entirely innate, form of intelligence. (3) Equitable and ethical approaches to establish and maintain positions at the interface of educational and scientific culture and practice. Only when this is achieved will it be possible to respond to the abilities and interests of individual students through design and implementation of learning programmes that provide numerous, diverse opportunities to: (1) Acquire a high level of domain-specific knowledge; (2) practise application of that knowledge in a range of situations and (3) be challenged to link domain-specific knowledge to other fields by solving problems with personal relevance. References 1 Boden M. 2001. Creativity and knowledge. In A Craft, B Jeffrey, M Leibling, ed; Creativity in Education. London: Continuum Publishing. p. 95– 102. Google Scholar 2 Csikszentmihalyi M. 1990. Theories of Creativity. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Google Scholar 3 McWilliam E, Poronnik P, Taylor PG. 2008. Re-designing science pedagogy: reversing the flight from science. J Sci Educ Technol 17: 226– 35. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 4 Braben D. 2004. Pioneering Research: A Risk Worth Taking. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Web of Science®Google Scholar 5 Lunn M, Noble A. 2008. Re-visioning science "love and passion in the scientific imagination": art and science. Int J Sci Educ 30: 793– 805. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 6 Culross RR. 2004. Individual and contextual variables among creative scientists: the new work paradigm. Roeper Rev 26: 126. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 7 Bore A. 2006. Bottom-up for creativity in science? a collaborative model for curriculum and professional development. J Educ Teach Int Res Pedag 32: 413– 22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 8 Heilbron JL. 1992. Creativity and big science. Phys Today 45: 42. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 9 Kleiman P. 2008. Towards transformation: conceptions of creativity in higher education. Innov Educ Teach Int 45: 209– 17. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 10 Medina MÁ. 2006. The pursuit of creativity in biology. BioEssays 28: 1151– 2. Wiley Online LibraryPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 11 Davis RM. 2005. Creativity in science: chance, logic, genius, and zeitgeist. Choice 42: 874. Google Scholar 12 Gilbert DM. 2007. Creativity: ethics and excellence in science. Choice 45: 118. Google Scholar 13 Miller AI. 2000. Insights of Genius: Imagery and Creativity in Science and Art. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Google Scholar 14 Simonton DK. 2003. Scientific creativity as constrained stochastic behavior: the integration of product, person, and process perspectives. Psychol Bull 129: 475– 94. CrossrefPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 15 Chandler R. 1999. Creative parallel spaces in science and art: knowledge in the information age. J Arts Manage Law Soc 29: 163– 76. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 16 Simon HA. 2001. Creativity in the arts and the sciences. Kenyon Rev 23: 203– 20. Web of Science®Google Scholar 17 Jackson SA. 2004. Ahead of the curve: future shifts in higher education. EDUCAUSE Rev 39: 10– 8. Google Scholar 18 Kessels U, Rau M, Hannover B. 2006. What goes well with physics? measuring and altering the image of science. Br J Educ Psychol 76: 761– 80. Wiley Online LibraryPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar 19 Endler LC, Bond TG. 2008. Changing science outcomes: cognitive acceleration in a US setting. Res Sci Educ 38: 149– 66. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 20 Barrow LH. 2006. A brief history of inquiry: from Dewey to standards. J Sci Teach Educ 17: 265– 78. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 21 Newton DP, Newton LD. 2009. Some student teachers' conceptions of creativity in school science. Res Sci Technol Educ 27: 45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 22 Russ RS, Coffey JE, Hammer D, Hutchison P. 2009. Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking. Sci Educ 93: 875– 91. Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar 23 Popper K. 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 24 Kuhn TS. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar 25 Barnes TJ. 2004. Placing ideas: genius loci, heterotopia and geography's quantitative revolution. Prog Hum Geogr 28: 585– 95. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 26 Ramachandran VS. 2006. Creativity versus Skepticism within science. Skeptical Inquirer 30: 48. Google Scholar 27 Florida R. 2006. The flight of the creative class: the new global competition for talent. Liberal Educ 92: 22– 9. Google Scholar 28 Park-Rogers MA, Abell SK. 2008. The design, enactment, and experience of inquiry-based instruction in undergraduate science education: a case study. Sci Educ 92: 591– 607. Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar 29 Erez R. 2004. Freedom and creativity: an approach to science education for excellent students and its realization in the Israel arts and science academy's curriculum. J Second Gifted Educ 15: 133– 40. Google Scholar 30 Kind PM, Kind V. 2007. Creativity in science education: perspectives and challenges for developing school science. Stud Sci Educ 43: 1– 37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 31 Settlage J. 2007. Demythologizing science teacher education: conquering the false ideal of open inquiry. J Sci Teach Educ 18: 461– 7. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 32 Reising D. 2008. Nursing education research-how to use it to build your promotion and tenure case. J Nurs Educ 47: 387. CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar 33 Anonymous. 2010. Postdoc Diary Chem Aust 77: 39. Google Scholar 34 Kean R, Mitchell N, Wilson D. 2008. Towards intentionality and transparency: analysis and reflection on the process of general education reform. Peer Rev 10: 4. Google Scholar 35 Loehle C. 1990. A guide to increased creativity in research – inspiration or perspiration? Bioscience 40: 123. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 36 Pugh KJ, Linnenbrink-Garcia L, Koskey KLK, Stewart VC, et al.2010. Motivation, learning, and transformative experience: a study of deep engagement in science. Sci Educ 94: 1– 28. Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar 37 Treffinger DJ, Isaksen SG. 2005. Creative problem solving: the history, development, and implications for gifted education and talent development. Gifted Child Quart 49: 342. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 38 Sigelman CK. 1999. Life-Span Human Development. 3rd edn. Boston: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company. Google Scholar 39 Hamza KM, Wickman P-O. 2009. Beyond explanations: what else do students need to understand science? Sci Educ 93: 1026– 49. Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar 40 Haigh M. 2007. Can investigative practical work in high school biology foster creativity? Res Sci Ed 37: 123– 40. CrossrefWeb of Science®Google Scholar 41 Dewey J. 1916. Chapter 23: Vocational Aspects of Education. Democracy and Education. New York: The Free Press. Google Scholar 42 Kilpatrick S, Allen K. 2001. Review of Research: Factors Influencing Demand for Vocational Education and Training Courses. Adelaide: Australian National Training Authority. p 68. Google Scholar 43 Bélanger P. 1999. Adult learning and the transformation of work. In M Singh, ed; Adult Learning and the Future of Work. Hamburg: UNESCO Institute for Education. p 19– 28. Google Scholar 44 Skrok K. 2007. Formations of pupils' attitudes and behaviours in chemistry teaching/Formación de valores y actitudes de los estudiantes en educación química. J Sci Educ 8: 107. CASGoogle Scholar 45 Marshall J. 2005. Connecting art, learning, and creativity: a case for curriculum integration. Stud Art Educ 46: 227– 41. Google Scholar 46 Otto S. 2007. Beneath and beyond truth: studying literary narratives to research human phenomena. Int J Res Method Educ 30: 73– 87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar 47 Dahlman Y. 2007. Towards a theory that links experience in the arts with the acquisition of knowledge. Int J Art Des Educ 26: 274– 84. Wiley Online LibraryWeb of Science®Google Scholar 48 Stevenson JC, McKavanagh CW. 1993. Practice 10, Theory 5: an examination of the depth of learning. SET (Research Information for Teachers), No 1, Item 4. Google Scholar 49 Falk I. 1999. Critical theory and practice in adult education: towards implementation of critical education. Aust N Z J Vocat Educ Res 7: 13– 29. Google Scholar Citing Literature Volume32, Issue12December 2010Pages 1016-1019 ReferencesRelatedInformation

While the genetic control of wheat processing characteristics such as dough rheology is well understood, limited information is available concerning the genetic control of baking parameters, particularly sponge and dough (S&D) baking. In this study, a quantitative trait loci (QTL) analysis was performed using a population of doubled haploid lines derived from a cross between Australian cultivars Kukri x Janz grown at sites across different Australian wheat production zones (Queensland in 2001 and 2002 and Southern and Northern New South Wales in 2003) in order to examine the genetic control of protein content, protein expression, dough rheology and sponge and dough baking performance. The study highlighted the inconsistent genetic control of protein content across the test sites, with only two loci (3A and 7A) showing QTL at three of the five sites. Dough rheology QTL were highly consistent across the 5 sites, with major effects associated with the Glu-B1 and Glu-D1 loci. The Glu-D1 5 + 10 allele had consistent effects on S&D properties across sites; however, there was no evidence for a positive effect of the high dough strength Glu-B1-al allele at Glu-B1. A second locus on 5D had positive effects on S&D baking at three of five sites. This study demonstrated that dough rheology measurements were poor predictors of S&D quality. In the absence of robust predictive tests, high heritability values for S&D demonstrate that direct selection is the current best option for achieving genetic gain in this product category.

The tree nut crop known as macadamia includes two cultivated species that readily hybridize. This Australian native from subtropical rainforests was domesticated recently, and cultivated trees are very few generations from their wild progenitors. A genomic understanding of the crop has the potential to deliver massive genetic improvements to a worldwide industry, and reveal the genetic changes that have occurred through the domestication process. The bulk of research efforts in this field have focused on the development of molecular marker technology and its various applications in assessing both cultivated and wild germplasm. Markers were also used as the basis of genetic linkage mapping for macadamia’s chromosomes, but regions controlling important traits have not yet been localized. Gene sequence information for macadamia is very limited, although two genes encoding proteins with antimicrobial properties have been described. Macadamia is the most economically valuable member of the ancient Proteaceae family, and has few cultivated relatives. This crop is the obvious target within the family for developing further genomics resources. Comparing the structure of the macadamia genome and its functional components with those of crops from other plant families, particularly nut, fruit, and tree species, should provide insights for understanding the evolution and genomic regulation of many important biological and agronomic traits.

The semelparous dasyurids display a unique life history, in that all males die within a few weeks of the completion of the breeding season. Studies of several semelparous species have revealed that the male die-off is stress-related, and accompanied by increased plasma androgen and cortisol levels and decreased corticosteroid binding capacity, resulting in suppression of immune and inflammatory responses. This study examines the endocrine profile of male brush-tailed phascogales (Phascogale tapoatafa) that survive beyond the breeding season in captivity. Plasma cortisol, corticosteroid binding globulin and albumin levels were monitored in both males and females and steroid partitioning calculated. Captive males surviving beyond the breeding season did not show the elevation in plasma cortisol and decrease in corticosteroid binding capacity reported in wild males. Plasma albumin concentrations also remained constant during the sampling period. These data indicate that captive males do not undergo the same stress response described in wild populations.

Thirty-three microsatellite loci were isolated for the Australian rainforest tree Macadamia integrifolia. Genotyping across a test panel of 43 commercial cultivars generated an average polymorphic information content of 0.480. Five loci showed no polymorphism across cultivars. Significant linkage disequilibrium was detected in 10 pairwise comparisons, including two pairs of loci identified from the same clone sequence. The 33 microsatellite loci represent a significant tool for genome mapping and population genetic studies.

There is no logical or theoretical barrier to the proposition that organismal and cell signaling could transduce environmental signals into specific, beneficial changes in primary structure of noncoding DNA via repetitive element movement or mutation. Repetitive DNA elements, including transposons and microsatellites, are known to influence the structure and expression of protein-coding genes, and to be responsive to environmental signals in some cases. These effects may create fodder for adaptive evolution, at rates exceeding those observed for point mutations. In many cases, the changes are no doubt random, and fitness is increased through simple natural selection. However, some transposons insert at specific sites, and certain regions of the genome exhibit selectively and beneficially high mutation rates in a range of organisms. In multicellular organisms, this could benefit individuals in situations with significant potential for clonal expansion: early life stages or regenerative tissues in animals, and most plant tissues. Transmission of the change to the next generation could occur in plants and, under some circumstances, in animals.

Microsatellites are regions of DNA containing tandem repeats of a core 2–6 bp nucleotide sequence. To test the hypothesis that microsatellite mutation can be directed by exposure to specific external cues, control and treatment groups of resistant and susceptible wheat varieties were grown under controlled conditions and genotyped at a number of microsatellite loci that map to chromosomes known to contain Fusarium head blight (FHB) resistance/susceptibility loci. Genotyping was undertaken both prior to and following exposure to Fusarium graminearum, the FHB pathogen. Within a month of inoculation of inflorescences, 58% of experimental plants, and no control plants, had acquired a novel allele at the locus Xgwm112.1. This allele was detected only in head blight affected tissue. Uninoculated control plants, and leaf samples from inoculated plants, showed no mutation. Cloning and sequencing of PCR products indicates that the new allele was generated by contraction of the (CT)n repeat motif. Observation of the same deletion-based mutation in all varieties, its absence in control plants not exposed to the head blight pathogen, and the detection of no similar mutational events in a control panel of loci not expected to show mutation, indicates that this example of microsatellite mutation is induced and/or caused by FHB infection.

The wheat microsatellite XGWM261 is of interest to wheat breeders because of its linkage to a commercially significant reduced height gene ( Rht8 ). Previous studies have indicated that there are three major alleles at the XGWM261 locus and that the majority (90%) of varieties are homozygous, generating PCR products of 192,174, or 165 bp. As a preliminary investigation of heterozygosity and sequence variation at the XGWM261 locus in Australian wheat varieties, we cloned and sequenced PCR products from 24 hexaploid varieties of significance in Australian breeding programmes. Three major alleles of 192, 174 and 164 bp were found, but a165 bp allele was not detected. Prior genotyping via electrophoretic methods had indicated that 2 of the 24 (8%) varieties were heterozygous. Our results indicate that 6 varieties (25%) carry 2 or more of the major alleles. It is not clear whether this results from heterozygosity within individual seeds, or from heterogeneity of breeding stocks. With respect to the microsatellite region itself, we found that the 174 bp and 164 bp alleles actually represent (CT) 11 AG and (CT) 6 AG motifs (respectively) rather than(CT) 12 and (CT) 7 . This finding has diagnostic potential. A further 2 varieties also carry an interrupted (CT) n CC(CT) n microsatellite not previously recorded. It is unclear whether this represents a separate allelic lineage or is simply the result of replication error.