OSU_SnowCourse Summary: Manual snow course observations were collected over WY 2012-2014 from four paired forest-open sites chosen to span a broad elevation range. Study sites were located in the upper McKenzie (McK) River watershed, approximately 100 km east of Corvallis, Oregon, on the western slope of the Cascade Range and in the Middle Fork Willamette (MFW) watershed, located to the south of the McKenzie. The sites were designated based on elevation, with a range of 1110-1480 m. Distributed snow depth and snow water equivalent (SWE) observations were collected via monthly manual snow courses from 1 November through 1 April and bi-weekly thereafter. Snow courses spanned 500 m of forested terrain and 500 m of adjacent open terrain. Snow depth observations were collected approximately every 10 m and SWE was measured every 100 m along the snow courses with a federal snow sampler. These data are raw observations and have not been quality controlled in any way. Distance along the transect was estimated in the field. OSU_SnowDepth Summary: 10-minute snow depth observations collected at OSU met stations in the upper McKenzie River Watershed and the Middle Fork Willamette Watershed during Water Years 2012-2014. Each meterological tower was deployed to represent either a forested or an open area at a particular site, and generally the locations were paired, with a meterological station deployed in the forest and in the open area at a single site. These data were collected in conjunction with manual snow course observations, and the meterological stations were located in the approximate center of each forest or open snow course transect. These data have undergone basic quality control. See manufacturer specifications for individual instruments to determine sensor accuracy. This file was compiled from individual raw data files (named "RawData.txt" within each site and year directory) provided by OSU, along with metadata of site attributes. We converted the Excel-based timestamp (seconds since origin) to a date, changed the NaN flags for missing data to NA, and added site attributes such as site name and cover. We replaced positive values with NA, since snow depth values in raw data are negative (i.e., flipped, with some correction to use the height of the sensor as zero). Thus, positive snow depth values in the raw data equal negative snow depth values. Second, the sign of the data was switched to make them positive. Then, the smooth.m (MATLAB) function was used to roughly smooth the data, with a moving window of 50 points. Third, outliers were removed. All values higher than the smoothed values +10, were replaced with NA. In some cases, further single point outliers were removed. OSU_Met Summary: Raw, 10-minute meteorological observations collected at OSU met stations in the upper McKenzie River Watershed and the Middle Fork Willamette Watershed during Water Years 2012-2014. Each meterological tower was deployed to represent either a forested or an open area at a particular site, and generally the locations were paired, with a meterological station deployed in the forest and in the open area at a single site. These data were collected in conjunction with manual snow course observations, and the meteorological stations were located in the approximate center of each forest or open snow course transect. These stations were deployed to collect numerous meteorological variables, of which snow depth and wind speed are included here. These data are raw datalogger output and have not been quality controlled in any way. See manufacturer specifications for individual instruments to determine sensor accuracy. This file was compiled from individual raw data files (named "RawData.txt" within each site and year directory) provided by OSU, along with metadata of site attributes. We converted the Excel-based timestamp (seconds since origin) to a date, changed the NaN and 7999 flags for missing data to NA, and added site attributes such as site name and cover. OSU_Location Summary: Location Metadata for manual snow course observations and meteorological sensors. These data are compiled from GPS data for which the horizontal accuracy is unknown, and from processed hemispherical photographs. They have not been quality controlled in any way.

Analyzing sales data is essential for any business looking to make informed decisions and optimize its operations. In this project, we will utilize Microsoft Excel and Power Query to conduct a comprehensive analysis of Superstore sales data. Our primary objectives will be to establish meaningful connections between various data sheets, ensure data quality, and calculate critical metrics such as the Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) and discount values. Below are the key steps and elements of this analysis:

1- Data Import and Transformation:

• Gather and import relevant sales data from various sources into Excel.
• Utilize Power Query to clean, transform, and structure the data for analysis.
• Merge and link different data sheets to create a cohesive dataset, ensuring that all data fields are connected logically.

2- Data Quality Assessment:

• Perform data quality checks to identify and address issues like missing values, duplicates, outliers, and data inconsistencies.
• Standardize data formats and ensure that all data is in a consistent, usable state.

3- Calculating COGS:

• Determine the Cost of Goods Sold (COGS) for each product sold by considering factors like purchase price, shipping costs, and any additional expenses.
• Apply appropriate formulas and calculations to determine COGS accurately.

4- Discount Analysis:

• Analyze the discount values offered on products to understand their impact on sales and profitability.
• Calculate the average discount percentage, identify trends, and visualize the data using charts or graphs.

5- Sales Metrics:

• Calculate and analyze various sales metrics, such as total revenue, profit margins, and sales growth.
• Utilize Excel functions to compute these metrics and create visuals for better insights.

6- Visualization:

• Create visualizations, such as charts, graphs, and pivot tables, to present the data in an understandable and actionable format.
• Visual representations can help identify trends, outliers, and patterns in the data.

7- Report Generation:

• Compile the findings and insights into a well-structured report or dashboard, making it easy for stakeholders to understand and make informed decisions.

Throughout this analysis, the goal is to provide a clear and comprehensive understanding of the Superstore's sales performance. By using Excel and Power Query, we can efficiently manage and analyze the data, ensuring that the insights gained contribute to the store's growth and success.

Categorical scatterplots with R for biologists: a step-by-step guide

Benjamin Petre1, Aurore Coince2, Sophien Kamoun1

1 The Sainsbury Laboratory, Norwich, UK; 2 Earlham Institute, Norwich, UK

Weissgerber and colleagues (2015) recently stated that ‘as scientists, we urgently need to change our practices for presenting continuous data in small sample size studies’. They called for more scatterplot and boxplot representations in scientific papers, which ‘allow readers to critically evaluate continuous data’ (Weissgerber et al., 2015). In the Kamoun Lab at The Sainsbury Laboratory, we recently implemented a protocol to generate categorical scatterplots (Petre et al., 2016; Dagdas et al., 2016). Here we describe the three steps of this protocol: 1) formatting of the data set in a .csv file, 2) execution of the R script to generate the graph, and 3) export of the graph as a .pdf file.

Protocol

• Step 1: format the data set as a .csv file. Store the data in a three-column excel file as shown in Powerpoint slide. The first column ‘Replicate’ indicates the biological replicates. In the example, the month and year during which the replicate was performed is indicated. The second column ‘Condition’ indicates the conditions of the experiment (in the example, a wild type and two mutants called A and B). The third column ‘Value’ contains continuous values. Save the Excel file as a .csv file (File -> Save as -> in ‘File Format’, select .csv). This .csv file is the input file to import in R.

• Step 2: execute the R script (see Notes 1 and 2). Copy the script shown in Powerpoint slide and paste it in the R console. Execute the script. In the dialog box, select the input .csv file from step 1. The categorical scatterplot will appear in a separate window. Dots represent the values for each sample; colors indicate replicates. Boxplots are superimposed; black dots indicate outliers.

• Step 3: save the graph as a .pdf file. Shape the window at your convenience and save the graph as a .pdf file (File -> Save as). See Powerpoint slide for an example.

Notes

• Note 1: install the ggplot2 package. The R script requires the package ‘ggplot2’ to be installed. To install it, Packages & Data -> Package Installer -> enter ‘ggplot2’ in the Package Search space and click on ‘Get List’. Select ‘ggplot2’ in the Package column and click on ‘Install Selected’. Install all dependencies as well.

• Note 2: use a log scale for the y-axis. To use a log scale for the y-axis of the graph, use the command line below in place of command line #7 in the script.

7 Display the graph in a separate window. Dot colors indicate

replicates

graph + geom_boxplot(outlier.colour='black', colour='black') + geom_jitter(aes(col=Replicate)) + scale_y_log10() + theme_bw()

References

Dagdas YF, Belhaj K, Maqbool A, Chaparro-Garcia A, Pandey P, Petre B, et al. (2016) An effector of the Irish potato famine pathogen antagonizes a host autophagy cargo receptor. eLife 5:e10856.

Petre B, Saunders DGO, Sklenar J, Lorrain C, Krasileva KV, Win J, et al. (2016) Heterologous Expression Screens in Nicotiana benthamiana Identify a Candidate Effector of the Wheat Yellow Rust Pathogen that Associates with Processing Bodies. PLoS ONE 11(2):e0149035

Weissgerber TL, Milic NM, Winham SJ, Garovic VD (2015) Beyond Bar and Line Graphs: Time for a New Data Presentation Paradigm. PLoS Biol 13(4):e1002128

https://cran.r-project.org/

http://ggplot2.org/

Here are six files that provide details for all 44,120 identified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or the 215 outlier SNPs associated with the evolution of rapid character displacement among replicate islands with (2Spp) and without competition (1Spp) between two Anolis species. On 2Spp islands, A. carolinensis occurs higher in trees and have evolved larger toe pads. Among 1Spp and 2Spp island populations, we identify 44,120 SNPs, with 215-outlier SNPs with improbably large FST values, low nucleotide variation, greater linkage than expected, and these SNPs are enriched for animal walking behavior. Thus, we conclude that these 215-outliers are evolving by natural selection in response to the phenotypic convergent evolution of character displacement. There are two, non-mutually exclusive perspective of these nucleotide variants. One is character displacement is convergent: all 215 outlier SNPs are shared among 3 out of 5 2Spp island and 24% of outlier SNPS are shared among all five out of five 2Spp island. Second, character displacement is genetically redundant because the allele frequencies in one or more 2Spp are similar to 1Spp islands: among one or more 2Spp islands 33% of outlier SNPS are within the range of 1Spp MiAF and 76% of outliers are more similar to 1Spp island than mean MiAF of 2Spp islands. Focusing on convergence SNP is scientifically more robust, yet it distracts from the perspective of multiple genetic solutions that enhances the rate and stability of adaptive change. The six files include: a description of eight islands, details of 94 individuals, and four files on SNPs. The four SNP files include the VCF files for 94 individuals with 44KSNPs and two files (Excel sheet/tab-delimited file) with FST, p-values and outlier status for all 44,120 identified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with the evolution of rapid character displacement. The sixth file is a detailed file on the 215 outlier SNPs. Complete sequence data is available at Bioproject PRJNA833453, which including samples not included in this study. The 94 individuals used in this study are described in “Supplemental_Sample_description.txt” Methods Anoles and genomic DNA: Tissue or DNA for 160 Anolis carolinensis and 20 A. sagrei samples were provided by the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University (Table S2). Samples were previously used to examine evolution of character displacement in native A. carolinensis following invasion by A. sagrei onto man-made spoil islands in Mosquito Lagoon Florida (Stuart et al. 2014). One hundred samples were genomic DNAs, and 80 samples were tissues (terminal tail clip, Table S2). Genomic DNA was isolated from 80 of 160 A. carolinensis individuals (MCZ, Table S2) using a custom SPRI magnetic bead protocol (Psifidi et al. 2015). Briefly, after removing ethanol, tissues were placed in 200 ul of GH buffer (25 mM Tris- HCl pH 7.5, 25 mM EDTA, , 2M GuHCl Guanidine hydrochloride, G3272 SIGMA, 5 mM CaCl2, 0.5% v/v Triton X-100, 1% N-Lauroyl-Sarcosine) with 5% per volume of 20 mg/ml proteinase K (10 ul/200 ul GH) and digested at 55º C for at least 2 hours. After proteinase K digestion, 100 ul of 0.1% carboxyl-modified Sera-Mag Magnetic beads (Fisher Scientific) resuspended in 2.5 M NaCl, 20% PEG were added and allowed to bind the DNA. Beads were subsequently magnetized and washed twice with 200 ul 70% EtOH, and then DNA was eluted in 100 ul 0.1x TE (10 mM Tris, 0.1 mM EDTA). All DNA samples were gel electrophoresed to ensure high molecular mass and quantified by spectrophotometry and fluorescence using Biotium AccuBlueTM High Sensitivity dsDNA Quantitative Solution according to manufacturer’s instructions. Genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) libraries were prepared using a modified protocol after Elshire et al. (Elshire et al. 2011). Briefly, high-molecular-weight genomic DNA was aliquoted and digested using ApeKI restriction enzyme. Digests from each individual sample were uniquely barcoded, pooled, and size selected to yield insert sizes between 300-700 bp (Borgstrom et al. 2011). Pooled libraries were PCR amplified (15 cycles) using custom primers that extend into the genomic DNA insert by 3 bases (CTG). Adding 3 extra base pairs systematically reduces the number of sequenced GBS tags, ensuring sufficient sequencing depth. The final library had a mean size of 424 bp ranging from 188 to 700 bp . Anolis SNPs: Pooled libraries were sequenced on one lane on the Illumina HiSeq 4000 in 2x150 bp paired-end configuration, yielding approximately 459 million paired-end reads ( ~138 Gb). The medium Q-Score was 42 with the lower 10% Q-Scores exceeding 32 for all 150 bp. The initial library contained 180 individuals with 8,561,493 polymorphic sites. Twenty individuals were Anolis sagrei, and two individuals (Yan 1610 & Yin 1411) clustered with A. sagrei and were not used to define A. carolinesis’ SNPs. Anolis carolinesis reads were aligned to the Anolis carolinensis genome (NCBI RefSeq accession number:/GCF_000090745.1_AnoCar2.0). Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for A. carolinensis were called using the GBeaSy analysis pipeline (Wickland et al. 2017) with the following filter settings: minimum read length of 100 bp after barcode and adapter trimming, minimum phred-scaled variant quality of 30 and minimum read depth of 5. SNPs were further filtered by requiring SNPs to occur in > 50% of individuals, and 66 individuals were removed because they had less than 70% of called SNPs. These filtering steps resulted in 51,155 SNPs among 94 individuals. Final filtering among 94 individuals required all sites to be polymorphic (with fewer individuals, some sites were no longer polymorphic) with a maximum of 2 alleles (all are bi-allelic), minimal allele frequency 0.05, and He that does not exceed HWE (FDR <0.01). SNPs with large He were removed (2,280 SNPs). These SNPs with large significant heterozygosity may result from aligning paralogues (different loci), and thus may not represent polymorphisms. No SNPs were removed with low He (due to possible demography or other exceptions to HWE). After filtering, 94 individual yielded 44,120 SNPs. Thus, the final filtered SNP data set was 44K SNPs from 94 indiviuals. Statistical Analyses: Eight A. carolinensis populations were analyzed: three populations from islands with native species only (1Spp islands) and 5 populations from islands where A. carolinesis co-exist with A. sagrei (2Spp islands, Table 1, Table S1). Most analyses pooled the three 1Spp islands and contrasted these with the pooled five 2Spp islands. Two approaches were used to define SNPs with unusually large allele frequency differences between 1Spp and 2Spp islands: 1) comparison of FST values to random permutations and 2) a modified FDIST approach to identify outlier SNPs with large and statistically unlikely FST values. Random Permutations: FST values were calculated in VCFTools (version 4.2, (Danecek et al. 2011)) where the p-value per SNP were defined by comparing FST values to 1,000 random permutations using a custom script (below). Basically, individuals and all their SNPs were randomly assigned to one of eight islands or to 1Spp versus 2Spp groups. The sample sizes (55 for 2Spp and 39 for 1Spp islands) were maintained. FST values were re-calculated for each 1,000 randomizations using VCFTools. Modified FDIST: To identify outlier SNPs with statistically large FST values, a modified FDIST (Beaumont and Nichols 1996) was implemented in Arlequin (Excoffier et al. 2005). This modified approach applies 50,000 coalescent simulations using hierarchical population structure, in which demes are arranged into k groups of d demes and in which migration rates between demes are different within and between groups. Unlike the finite island models, which have led to large frequencies of false positive because populations share different histories (Lotterhos and Whitlock 2014), the hierarchical island model avoids these false positives by avoiding the assumption of similar ancestry (Excoffier et al. 2009). References Beaumont, M. A. and R. A. Nichols. 1996. Evaluating loci for use in the genetic analysis of population structure. P Roy Soc B-Biol Sci 263:1619-1626. Borgstrom, E., S. Lundin, and J. Lundeberg. 2011. Large scale library generation for high throughput sequencing. PLoS One 6:e19119. Bradbury, P. J., Z. Zhang, D. E. Kroon, T. M. Casstevens, Y. Ramdoss, and E. S. Buckler. 2007. TASSEL: software for association mapping of complex traits in diverse samples. Bioinformatics 23:2633-2635. Cingolani, P., A. Platts, L. Wang le, M. Coon, T. Nguyen, L. Wang, S. J. Land, X. Lu, and D. M. Ruden. 2012. A program for annotating and predicting the effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms, SnpEff: SNPs in the genome of Drosophila melanogaster strain w1118; iso-2; iso-3. Fly (Austin) 6:80-92. Danecek, P., A. Auton, G. Abecasis, C. A. Albers, E. Banks, M. A. DePristo, R. E. Handsaker, G. Lunter, G. T. Marth, S. T. Sherry, G. McVean, R. Durbin, and G. Genomes Project Analysis. 2011. The variant call format and VCFtools. Bioinformatics 27:2156-2158. Earl, D. A. and B. M. vonHoldt. 2011. Structure Harvester: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conservation Genet Resour 4:359-361. Elshire, R. J., J. C. Glaubitz, Q. Sun, J. A. Poland, K. Kawamoto, E. S. Buckler, and S. E. Mitchell. 2011. A robust, simple genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) approach for high diversity species. PLoS One 6:e19379. Evanno, G., S. Regnaut, and J. Goudet. 2005. Detecting the number of clusters of individuals using the software STRUCTURE: a simulation study. Mol Ecol 14:2611-2620. Excoffier, L., T. Hofer, and M. Foll. 2009. Detecting loci under selection in a hierarchically structured population. Heredity 103:285-298. Excoffier, L., G. Laval, and S. Schneider. 2005. Arlequin (version 3.0): An integrated software package for population genetics data analysis.

Judging the significance and reproducibility of quantitative research requires a good understanding of relevant uncertainties, but it is often unclear how well these have been evaluated and what they imply. Reported scientific uncertainties were studied by analysing 41 000 measurements of 3200 quantities from medicine, nuclear and particle physics, and interlaboratory comparisons ranging from chemistry to toxicology. Outliers are common, with 5 σ disagreements up to five orders of magnitude more frequent than naively expected. Uncertainty-normalized differences between multiple measurements of the same quantity are consistent with heavy-tailed Student's t-distributions that are often almost Cauchy, far from a Gaussian Normal bell curve. Medical research uncertainties are generally as well evaluated as those in physics, but physics uncertainty improves more rapidly, making feasible simple significance criteria such as the 5 σ discovery convention in particle physics. Contributions to measurement uncertainty from mistakes and unknown problems are not completely unpredictable. Such errors appear to have power-law distributions consistent with how designed complex systems fail, and how unknown systematic errors are constrained by researchers. This better understanding may help improve analysis and meta-analysis of data, and help scientists and the public have more realistic expectations of what scientific results imply.

Sensitivity analysis results by outliers, small sample size, unspecified fistula type and surgical route.

Feline T4 2014 till July 2015 by RegionFeline Total T4 by Breed Excel

Excel spreadsheet with the data collected from a subjective, quantitative speech in noise test (SINT) conducted in the Listening Room at the University of Salford in March 2020.

The listening experiment tested how the psychoacoustic phenomenon of the precedence effect can be utilised with augmented loudspeaker arrays in an object-based audio paradigm to improve speech intelligibility in the home environment. A practical application of this research will be in the implementation of media device orchestration, i.e. the creation of low-cost, ad-hoc loud speaker arrays using commonly found devices, such as mobile phones, laptop computers, tablets, smart speakers, and so on, to spatialise audio in the home.

This speech-in-noise test was conducted under controlled conditions. With audio reproduced by one of three different arrays of loudspeakers in a given trial, subjects listened to spoken sentences played simultaneously with noise. They were tasked with correctly identifying target words. Correct word scores collated and converted to word recognition percentages act as a quantifiable proxy for speech intelligibility. After confirming that they fulfilled the criterion for use, data were statistically analysed using 2-way RMANOVA.

The three configurations of loudspeaker arrays were:

• L1R1_base (a two-loudspeaker control condition): a stereo pair of front left and front right loudspeakers at -/+30 degrees azimuth and 2m distance from the listener position; speech + noise reproduced by both loudspeakers.

• L1R1C2 (three loudspeakers): L1R1_base + an additional (AUX) loudspeaker in the true front centre position (0 degrees azimuth and 1.7m distance from listener position) reproducing just speech.

• L1R1R2 (three loudspeakers): L1R1_base + an AUX loudspeaker in the right-hand position (+90 degrees azimuth and 1.7m distance from listener position) reproducing just speech.

For the array configurations with the three loudspeakers, the precedence effect was initiated by applying a 10 ms delay to the speech signal reproduced by the AUX loudspeaker, such that the sound source (first arrivals) would still be perceived as being from the phantom centre between the L1 and R1 loudspeakers, but with a boost to the speech signal. The relevant equalisation (EQ) was applied to the speech signal for the C2 and R2 AUX loudspeakers though to maintain the same perceived comb filtering effects for all three loudspeaker array configurations.

Analysis of the results is provided in the PhD thesis by P. Demonte.

Spreadsheet pages:

• Read Me - provides a more in-depth explanation of the independent variables tested

• Raw data - as collected in the speech-in-noise test. The columns denote: subject number; trial number; audio files playing from each loudspeaker in a trial; loudspeaker array configuration; masking noise type; Harvard speech corpus list and sentence number; spoken sentence played; the five target words in each sentence; the sentence as heard and noted by the subject; correct word score applied (out of a total of 5 per trial); correct word ratio.

• CWR_all - correct word percentages collated for each subject for each combination of independent variables, and the corresponding studentized residuals as a quality check for outliers.

• NormalDistTest - criteria for normal distribution (Shapiro-Wilk test)

• 2-way RMANOVA_16subjects - Mauchley's test of Sphericity, and Tests of Wtihin-Subjects Effects (2-way RMANOVA)

• SimpleMainEffects - analysis of the conditional effects

• Participants_MainTest - anonymised data collated from the subjects via a short pre-screening questionnaire: age; gender, handedness (left or right); confirmation of subjects as native English speakers, and whether or not they are bi-/multilingual in case of outliers.