ASU Scholarship Showcase
This growing collection consists of scholarly works authored by ASU-affiliated faculty, staff, and community members, and it contains many open access articles. ASU-affiliated authors are encouraged to Share Your Work in KEEP.
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Charles Austen
- All Subjects: genomic library
- Status: Published
Agassiz’s desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) is a long-lived species native to the Mojave Desert and is listed as threatened under the US Endangered Species Act. To aid conservation efforts for preserving the genetic diversity of this species, we generated a whole genome reference sequence with an annotation based on deep transcriptome sequences of adult skeletal muscle, lung, brain, and blood. The draft genome assembly for G. agassizii has a scaffold N50 length of 252 kbp and a total length of 2.4 Gbp. Genome annotation reveals 20,172 protein-coding genes in the G. agassizii assembly, and that gene structure is more similar to chicken than other turtles. We provide a series of comparative analyses demonstrating (1) that turtles are among the slowest-evolving genome-enabled reptiles, (2) amino acid changes in genes controlling desert tortoise traits such as shell development, longevity and osmoregulation, and (3) fixed variants across the Gopherus species complex in genes related to desert adaptations, including circadian rhythm and innate immune response. This G. agassizii genome reference and annotation is the first such resource for any tortoise, and will serve as a foundation for future analysis of the genetic basis of adaptations to the desert environment, allow for investigation into genomic factors affecting tortoise health, disease and longevity, and serve as a valuable resource for additional studies in this species complex.
Data Availability: All genomic and transcriptomic sequence files are available from the NIH-NCBI BioProject database (accession numbers PRJNA352725, PRJNA352726, and PRJNA281763). All genome assembly, transcriptome assembly, predicted protein, transcript, genome annotation, repeatmasker, phylogenetic trees, .vcf and GO enrichment files are available on Harvard Dataverse (doi:10.7910/DVN/EH2S9K).
![162019-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2021-11/162019-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=ggwmCoJwMmPn_etoBvZ0I7CwloJLYXDG&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240503/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240503T060005Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=0a5c9f0bf0d62554b4551acac62d6e69d85549f516ecdf90e6f089670bc1766d&itok=lUNu23V-)
Cities in the Global South face rapid urbanization challenges and often suffer an acute lack of infrastructure and governance capacities. Smart Cities Mission, in India, launched in 2015, aims to offer a novel approach for urban renewal of 100 cities following an area‐based development approach, where the use of ICT and digital technologies is particularly emphasized. This article presents a critical review of the design and implementation framework of this new urban renewal program across selected case‐study cities. The article examines the claims of the so‐called “smart cities” against actual urban transformation on‐ground and evaluates how “inclusive” and “sustainable” these developments are. We quantify the scale and coverage of the smart city urban renewal projects in the cities to highlight who the program includes and excludes. The article also presents a statistical analysis of the sectoral focus and budgetary allocations of the projects under the Smart Cities Mission to find an inherent bias in these smart city initiatives in terms of which types of development they promote and the ones it ignores. The findings indicate that a predominant emphasis on digital urban renewal of selected precincts and enclaves, branded as “smart cities,” leads to deepening social polarization and gentrification. The article offers crucial urban planning lessons for designing ICT‐driven urban renewal projects, while addressing critical questions around inclusion and sustainability in smart city ventures.`
![128158-Thumbnail Image.png](https://d1rbsgppyrdqq4.cloudfront.net/s3fs-public/styles/width_400/public/2021-04/128158-Thumbnail%20Image.png?versionId=9thCmHsKqy3AgHD99BaniVTdWQOed4ai&X-Amz-Content-Sha256=UNSIGNED-PAYLOAD&X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIASBVQ3ZQ42ZLA5CUJ/20240503/us-west-2/s3/aws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240503T060016Z&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Expires=120&X-Amz-Signature=98d586e3d8a2a2cc8deeccc44f99d261c1a02aa981508e2c8745592179378812&itok=tL-mCwT4)
Jane Austen’s beloved naval brother, Charles Austen (1779–1852), had a significant impact on her literary career.We find probable traces of him in the male characters appearing in Mansfield Park (1814) and Persuasion (1818), and he is said to have offered naval vocabulary to help his sister revise the second edition of Mansfield Park (1816). In addition to his impact during Jane’s lifetime (1775–1817), Charles played a role in sustaining her posthumous celebrity, modest as it was at first. Two previously unpublished brief letters by him—and references to him in other correspondence—offer an opportunity to speculate about his role in supporting his late sister’s literary reputation.