We compiled macroinvertebrate assemblage data collected from 1995 to 2014 from the St. Louis River Area of Concern (AOC) of western Lake Superior. Our objective was to define depth-adjusted cutoff values for benthos condition classes (poor, fair, reference) to provide tool useful for assessing progress toward achieving removal targets for the degraded benthos beneficial use impairment in the AOC. The relationship between depth and benthos metrics was wedge-shaped. We therefore used quantile regression to model the limiting effect of depth on selected benthos metrics, including taxa richness, percent non-oligochaete individuals, combined percent Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera, and Odonata individuals, and density of ephemerid mayfly nymphs (Hexagenia). We created a scaled trimetric index from the first three metrics. Metric values at or above the 90th percentile quantile regression model prediction were defined as reference condition for that depth. We set the cutoff between poor and fair condition as the 50th percentile model prediction. We examined sampler type, exposure, geographic zone of the AOC, and substrate type for confounding effects. Based on these analyses we combined data across sampler type and exposure classes and created separate models for each geographic zone. We used the resulting condition class cutoff values to assess the relative benthic condition for three habitat restoration project areas. The depth-limited pattern of ephemerid abundance we observed in the St. Louis River AOC also occurred elsewhere in the Great Lakes. We provide tabulated model predictions for application of our depth-adjusted condition class cutoff values to new sample data. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Angradi, T., W. Bartsch, A. Trebitz, V. Brady, and J. Launspach. A depth-adjusted ambient distribution approach for setting numeric removal targets for a Great Lakes Area of Concern beneficial use impairment: Degraded benthos. JOURNAL OF GREAT LAKES RESEARCH. International Association for Great Lakes Research, Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 43(1): 108-120, (2017).

This package contains two files designed to help read individual level DHS data into Stata. The first file addresses the problem that versions of Stata before Version 7/SE will read in only up to 2047 variables and most of the individual files have more variables than that. The file will read in the .do, .dct and .dat file and output new .do and .dct files with only a subset of the variables specified by the user. The second file deals with earlier DHS surveys in which .do and .dct file do not exist and only .sps and .sas files are provided. The file will read in the .sas and .sps files and output a .dct and .do file. If necessary the first file can then be run again to select a subset of variables.

Output from programming code written to summarize data describing 2018 MCSP Trial monitoring sites acquired using a SOP 1 (see ServCat reference 103364) of FWS Legacy Regions 2 and 3. Monitoring sites were selected using a custom GRTS draw conducted by USGS in 2017, within monitoring areas associated with select NWRS stations. Areas monitored included Balcones Canyonlands (TX), Hagerman (TX), Washita (OK), Neal Smith (IA) NWRs and several locations near the town of Lamoni, Iowa and private lands in northern Missouri.

Description of the experiment setting: location, influential climatic conditions, controlled conditions (e.g. temperature, light cycle) In 1986, the Congress enacted Public Laws 99-500 and 99-591, requiring a biennial report on the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). In response to these requirements, FNS developed a prototype system that allowed for the routine acquisition of information on WIC participants from WIC State Agencies. Since 1992, State Agencies have provided electronic copies of these data to FNS on a biennial basis. FNS and the National WIC Association (formerly National Association of WIC Directors) agreed on a set of data elements for the transfer of information. In addition, FNS established a minimum standard dataset for reporting participation data. For each biennial reporting cycle, each State Agency is required to submit a participant-level dataset containing standardized information on persons enrolled at local agencies for the reference month of April. The 2016 Participant and Program Characteristics (PC2016) is the thirteenth data submission to be completed using the WIC PC reporting system. In April 2016, there were 90 State agencies: the 50 States, American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the American Virgin Islands, and 34 Indian tribal organizations. Processing methods and equipment used Specifications on formats (“Guidance for States Providing Participant Data”) were provided to all State agencies in January 2016. This guide specified 20 minimum dataset (MDS) elements and 11 supplemental dataset (SDS) elements to be reported on each WIC participant. Each State Agency was required to submit all 20 MDS items and any SDS items collected by the State agency.   Study date(s) and duration The information for each participant was from the participants’ most current WIC certification as of April 2016. Due to management information constraints, Connecticut provided data for a month other than April 2016, specifically August 16 – September 15, 2016. Study spatial scale (size of replicates and spatial scale of study area) In April 2016, there were 90 State agencies: the 50 States, American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the American Virgin Islands, and 34 Indian tribal organizations. Level of true replication Unknown Sampling precision (within-replicate sampling or pseudoreplication) State Agency Data Submissions. PC2016 is a participant dataset consisting of 8,815,472 active records. The records, submitted to USDA by the State Agencies, comprise a census of all WIC enrollees, so there is no sampling involved in the collection of this data. PII Analytic Datasets. State agency files were combined to create a national census participant file of approximately 8.8 million records. The census dataset contains potentially personally identifiable information (PII) and is therefore not made available to the public. National Sample Dataset. The public use SAS analytic dataset made available to the public has been constructed from a nationally representative sample drawn from the census of WIC participants, selected by participant category. The nationally representative sample is composed of 60,003 records. The distribution by category is 5,449 pregnant women, 4,661 breastfeeding women, 3,904 postpartum women, 13,999 infants, and 31,990 children. Level of subsampling (number and repeat or within-replicate sampling) The proportionate (or self-weighting) sample was drawn by WIC participant category: pregnant women, breastfeeding women, postpartum women, infants, and children. In this type of sample design, each WIC participant has the same probability of selection across all strata. Sampling weights are not needed when the data are analyzed. In a proportionate stratified sample, the largest stratum accounts for the highest percentage of the analytic sample. Study design (before–after, control–impacts, time series, before–after-control–impacts) None – Non-experimental Description of any data manipulation, modeling, or statistical analysis undertaken Each entry in the dataset contains all MDS and SDS information submitted by the State agency on the sampled WIC participant. In addition, the file contains constructed variables used for analytic purposes. To protect individual privacy, the public use file does not include State agency, local agency, or case identification numbers. Description of any gaps in the data or other limiting factors Due to management information constraints, Connecticut provided data for a month other than April 2016, specifically August 16 – September 15, 2016.   Outcome measurement methods and equipment used None Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: WIC Participant and Program Characteristics 2016. File Name: wicpc_2016_public.csvResource Description: The 2016 Participant and Program Characteristics (PC2016) is the thirteenth data submission to be completed using the WIC PC reporting system. In April 2016, there were 90 State agencies: the 50 States, American Samoa, the District of Columbia, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the American Virgin Islands, and 34 Indian tribal organizations.Resource Software Recommended: SAS, version 9.4,url: https://www.sas.com/en_us/software/sas9.html Resource Title: WIC Participant and Program Characteristics 2016 Codebook. File Name: WICPC2016_PUBLIC_CODEBOOK.xlsxResource Software Recommended: SAS, version 9.4,url: https://www.sas.com/en_us/software/sas9.html Resource Title: WIC Participant and Program Characteristics 2016 - Zip File with SAS, SPSS and STATA data. File Name: WIC_PC_2016_SAS_SPSS_STATA_Files.zipResource Description: WIC Participant and Program Characteristics 2016 - Zip File with SAS, SPSS and STATA data

Do you need to accelerate the performance of your mixed use applications?HPE 12 Gb Value SAS Mixed Use (MU) SSDs optimize your enterprise with faster data transfer rates and near price parity compared to 6 Gb SATA SSDs. HPE Value SAS MU SSDs deliver enterprise features at an affordable price for applications requiring a balanced mix of read and write performance, and are ideal for database, transactional applications and virtualization workloads.HPE 12 Gb Value SAS MU SSDs transfer data at full duplex (bidirectional) allowing greater I/O bandwidth to alleviate bottlenecks at twice the 6 Gb interface of SATA SSDs. A single-ported version of enterprise 12 Gb SAS, HPE Value SAS MU SSDs provide slightly reduced performance in exchange for being price competitive to enterprise SATA SSDs.HPE 12 Gb Value SAS SSDs are presented as an HPE Multi Vendor SKU offering which provides customers with the shortest lead time to available supply on preferably priced HPE Value SAS SSDs.FeaturesValue SAS SSDs Deliver Twice the Interface Speed of SATA SSDs at a Lower Cost than SAS SSDs- HPE Value SAS Solid State Drives support full-duplex 12 Gb, versus SATA SSDs that are bottlenecked by the simplex 6 Gb SATA interface specification.- Featuring similar price points to 6 Gb SATA SSDs and capacities ranging from 960 GB to 3.84 TB, HPE 12 Gb Value SAS MU SSDs deliver significantly more performance per dollar and are designed to easily replace enterprise SATA SSDs in server applications.- HPE Value SAS Solid State Drives offer a significant random IOPS performance boost over 6 Gb SATA SSDs with 1.94x[1] more random read IOPS and 1.75x[1] more random mixed IOPS performance.- HPE Value SAS SSDs also deliver sequential bandwidth performance gains of 1.5x[1] more read bandwidth and 1.27x[1] more write bandwidth than SATA SSDs.- Built on robust enterprise 12 Gb SAS protocol, Value SAS SSDs offer more enhanced management, error recovery, and error reporting features than the Serial ATA feature set utilized on 6 Gb SATA SSDs.Value SAS SSDs Run More Data Analytic Workloads in Less Time and with Lower Latency than SATA SSDs- HPE Value SAS Solid State Drives offer faster connection rates that can improve the performance of decision support system applications than SATA SSDs.- Value SAS SSDs delivers faster, lower latency storage performance than SATA SSDs which enables data retrieval sooner with up to 25%[2] less time needed to complete query sets than SATA SSDs.- Value SAS SSDs save time executing data analytic workloads with up to 30%[2] lower read latency needed to access and pull data compared to 6 Gb SATA SSDs.- By improving performance at similar price points, Value SAS SSDs deliver up to 22%[2] better data analytics performance per dollar than 6 Gb SATA SSDs.HPE Multi Vendor Offering for Value SAS SSDs Help Simplify Purchasing Decisions While Improving TCO- HPE Multi Vendor offering provides shorter lead times to best available HPE 12 Gb Value SAS SSD supply.- Preferable pricing on HPE qualified Value SAS SSDs and extended SKU lifecycles simplifies the procurement process.- Assurance that the HPE Value SAS Solid State Drives selected delivers the minimum performance published or better.

Output from programming code written to summarize data describing 2017 MCSP Trial monitoring sites acquired using a SOP 1 (see ServCat reference 103364) of FWS Legacy Regions 2 and 3. 2017 monitoring sites were selected using a custom GRTS draw conducted by USGS, within monitoring areas associated with select NWRS stations. Areas monitored included Balcones Canyonlands (TX), Hagerman (TX), Washita (OK), Neal Smith (IA), Necedah (WI) NWRs and several locations near the town of Lamoni, Iowa and private lands in northern Missouri.

Pregnancy is a condition of broad interest across many medical and health services research domains, but one not easily identified in healthcare claims data. Our objective was to establish an algorithm to identify pregnant women and their pregnancies in claims data. We identified pregnancy-related diagnosis, procedure, and diagnosis-related group codes, accounting for the transition to International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) diagnosis and procedure codes, in health encounter reporting on 10/1/2015. We selected women in Merative MarketScan commercial databases aged 15–49 years with pregnancy-related claims, and their infants, during 2008–2019. Pregnancies, pregnancy outcomes, and gestational ages were assigned using the constellation of service dates, code types, pregnancy outcomes, and linkage to infant records. We describe pregnancy outcomes and gestational ages, as well as maternal age, census region, and health plan type. In a sensitivity analysis, we compared our algorithm-assigned date of last menstrual period (LMP) to fertility procedure-based LMP (date of procedure + 14 days) among women with embryo transfer or insemination procedures. Among 5,812,699 identified pregnancies, most (77.9%) were livebirths, followed by spontaneous abortions (16.2%); 3,274,353 (72.2%) livebirths could be linked to infants. Most pregnancies were among women 25–34 years (59.1%), living in the South (39.1%) and Midwest (22.4%), with large employer-sponsored insurance (52.0%). Outcome distributions were similar across ICD-9 and ICD-10 eras, with some variation in gestational age distribution observed. Sensitivity analyses supported our algorithm’s framework; algorithm- and fertility procedure-derived LMP estimates were within a week of each other (mean difference: -4 days [IQR: -13 to 6 days]; n = 107,870). We have developed an algorithm to identify pregnancies, their gestational age, and outcomes, across ICD-9 and ICD-10 eras using administrative data. This algorithm may be useful to reproductive health researchers investigating a broad range of pregnancy and infant outcomes.

Output from programming code written to summarize monarch butterfly abundance from monitoring data acquired using a modified Pollard walk at custom 2017 GRTS draw sites within select monitoring areas (see SOP 2 in ServCat reference 103367 for methods) of FWS Legacy Regions 2 and 3. Areas monitored included Balcones Canyonlands (TX), Hagerman (TX), Washita (OK), Neal Smith (IA), Necedah (WI) NWRs and several locations near the town of Lamoni, Iowa and private lands in northern Missouri.

The current data set presents the exercise file used in the book cited. From data set 0757 individual variables and 230 cases have been selected for exercise purposes.

Output from programming code written to summarize 2018 monarch butterfly abundance from monitoring data acquired using a modified Pollard walk at custom 2017 GRTS draw sites within select monitoring areas (see SOP 2 in ServCat reference 103367 for methods) of FWS Legacy Regions 2 and 3. Areas monitored included Balcones Canyonlands (TX), Hagerman (TX), Washita (OK), Neal Smith (IA) NWRs and several locations near the town of Lamoni, Iowa and northern Missouri. Input data file is named 'FWS_2018_MM_SOP2_for_SAS.csv' and is stored in ServCat reference 136485. See SM 5 (ServCat reference 103388) for dictionary of data fields in the input data file.

Output from programming code written to summarize immature monarch butterfly, milkweed and nectar plant abundance from monitoring data acquired using a grid of 1 square-meter quadrats at custom 2017 GRTS draw sites within select monitoring areas (see SOP 3 in ServCat reference 103368 for methods) of FWS Legacy Regions 2 and 3. Areas monitored included Balcones Canyonlands (TX), Hagerman (TX), Washita (OK), Neal Smith (IA) NWRs and several locations near the town of Lamoni, Iowa and northern Missouri. Input data file is named 'FWS_2018_MonMonSOP3DS1_forSAS.csv' and is stored in ServCat reference 137698. See SM 5 (ServCat reference 103388) for dictionary of data fields in the input data file.

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Complete Data Files from 1980 to 2023. Includes data file, STATA data file, SPSS program, SAS program, STATA program, and dictionary. All years compressed into one .zip file due to storage limitations.From IPEDS Complete Data File Help Page (https://nces.ed.gov/Ipeds/help/complete-data-files):Choose the file to download by reading the description in the available titles. Then, click on the link in that row corresponding to the column header of the type of file/information desired to download.To download and view the survey files in basic CSV format use the main download link in the Data File column.For files compatible with the Stata statistical software package, use the alternate download link in the Stata Data File column.To download files with the SPSS, SAS, or STATA (.do) file extension for use with statistical software packages, use the download link in the Programs column.To download the data Dictionary for the selected file, click on the corresponding link in the far right column of the screen. The data dictionary serves as a reference for using and interpreting the data within a particular survey file. This includes the names, definitions, and formatting conventions for each table, field, and data element within the file, important business rules, and information on any relationships to other IPEDS data.For statistical read programs to work properly, both the data file and the corresponding read program file must be downloaded to the same subdirectory on the computer’s hard drive. Download the data file first; then click on the corresponding link in the Programs column to download the desired read program file to the same subdirectory.When viewing downloaded survey files, categorical variables are identified using codes instead of labels. Labels for these variables are available in both the data read program files and data dictionary for each file; however, for files that automatically incorporate this information you will need to select the Custom Data Files option.

Listening test materials for 'Human vs Machine Spoofing Detection on Wideband and Narrowband data.' They include lists of the speech material selected from the SAS spoofing database and the listeners' responses. The main data file has been split into five smaller files (labelled 'aa' to 'ae') for ease of download.

Carcinogenicity is an important toxicological endpoint that poses high concern to drug discovery. In this study, we developed a method to extract structural alerts (SAs) and modulating factors of carcinogens on the basis of statistical analyses. First, the Gaston algorithm, a frequent subgraph mining method, was used to detect substructures that occurred at least six times. Then, a molecular fragments tree was built and pruned to select high-quality SAs. The p-value of the parent node in the tree and that of its children nodes were compared, and the nodes that had a higher statistical significance in binomial tests were retained. Finally, modulating factors that suppressed the toxic effects of SAs were extracted by three self-defining rules. The accuracy of the 77 SAs plus four SA/modulating factor pairs model for the training set, and the test set was 0.70 and 0.65, respectively. Our model has higher predictive ability than Benigni’s model, especially in the test set. The results highlight that this method is preferable in terms of prediction accuracy, and the selected SAs are useful for prediction as well as interpretation. Moreover, our method is convenient to users in that it can extract SAs from a database using an automated and unbiased manner that does not rely on a priori knowledge of mechanism of action.

Abstract

The main objective of the new agricultural statistics program is to provide timely, accurate, credible and comprehensive agricultural statistics to describe the structure of agriculture in Rwanda in terms of land use, crop production and livestock; which can be used for food and agriculture policy formulation and planning, and for the compilation of national accounts statistics.

In this regard, the National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda (NISR) conducted the Seasonal Agriculture Survey (SAS) from November 2015 to October 2016 to gather up-to-date information for monitoring progress on agriculture programs and policies in Rwanda, including the Second Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy (EDPRS II) and Vision 2020. This 2016 RSAS covered three agricultural seasons (A, B and C) and provides data on background characteristics of the agricultural operators, farm characteristics (area, yield and production), agricultural practices, agricultural equipments, use of crop production by agricultural operators and by large scale farmers.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Agricultural holdings

Universe

The 2016 RSAS targeted agricultural operators and large scale farmers operating in Rwanda.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Seasonal Agriculture Survey (SAS) sample is composed of two categories of respondents: agricultural operators1 and large-scale farmers (LSF).

For the 2016 SAS, NISR used as the sampling method a dual frame sampling design combining selected area frame sample3 segments and a list of large-scale farmers.

NISR used also imagery from RNRA with a very high resolution of 25 centimeters to divide the total land of the country into twelve strata. A total number of 540 segments were spread throughout the country as coverage of the survey with 25,346 and 23,286 agricultural operators in Season A and Season B respectively. From these numbers of agricultural operators, sub-samples were selected during the second phases of Seasons A and B.

It is important to note that in each of agricultural season A and B, data collection was undertaken in two phases. Phase I was mainly used to collect data on demographic and social characteristics of interviewees, area under crops, crops planted, rainfall, livestock, etc. Phase II was mainly devoted to the collection of data on yield and production of crops.

Phase I serves at collecting data on area under different types of crops in the screening process, whereas the Phase II is mainly devoted to the collection of data on demographic, social characteristics of interviewees, together with yields of the different crops produced. Enumerated large-scale farmers (LSF) were 558 in both 2015 Season A and B. The LSF were engaged in either crop farming activities only, livestock farming activities only, or both crop and livestock farming activities.

Agricultural operators are the small scale farmers within the sample segments. Every selected segment was firstly screened using the appropriate materials such as the segment maps, GIS devices and the screening form. Using these devices, the enumerators accounted for every plot inside the sample segments. All Tracts6 were classified as either agricultural (cultivated land, pasture, and fallow land) or non-agricultural land (water, forests, roads, rocky and bare soils, and buildings).

During Phase I, a complete enumeration of all farmers having agricultural land and operating within the 540 selected segments was undertaken and a total of 25,495 and 24,911 agricultural operators were enumerated respectively in Seasons A and B. Season C considered only 152 segments, involving 3,445 agricultural operators.

In phase II, 50% of the large-scale farmers were undertaking crop farming activities only and 50% of the large-scale farmers were undertaking both crop and livestock farming and were selected for interview. A sample of 199 and 194 large-scale farmers were interviewed in Seasons A and B, respectively, using a farm questionnaire.

From the agricultural operators enumerated in the sample segments during Phase I, a sample of the agricultural operators was designed for Phase II as follows: 5,502 for Season A, 5,337 for Season B and 644 for Season C. The method of probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling at the national level was used. Furthermore, the total number of enumerated large-scale farmers was 774 in 2016 Season A and 622 in Season B.

The Season C considered 152 segments counting 8,987 agricultural operators from which 963 agricultural operators were selected for survey interviews.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face paper [f2f]

Research instrument

There were two types of questionnaires used for this survey namely Screening questionnaire and farm questionnaires.

A Screening Questionnaire was used to collect information that enabled identification of an Agricultural Operator or Large Scale Farmer and his or her land use.
Farm questionnaires were of two types: a) Phase I Farm Questionnaire was used to collect data on characteristics of Agricultural Operators, crop identification and area, inputs (seeds, fertilizers, labor, …) for Agricultural Operators and large scale farmers. b) Phase 2 Farm questionnaire was used in the collection of data on crop production and use of production.

It is important to mention that all these Farm Questionnaires were subjected to two/three rounds of data quality checking. The first round was conducted by the enumerator and the second round was conducted by the team leader to check if questionnaires had been well completed by enumerators. For season C, after screening, an interview was conducted for each selected tract/Agricultural Operator using one consolidated Farm questionnaire. All the surveys questionnaires used were published in both English and Kinyarwanda languages.

Cleaning operations

Data editing took place at different stage. Firstly, the filled questionnaires were repatriated at NISR for office editing and coding before data entry started. Data entry of the completed and checked questionnaires was undertaken at the NISR office by 20 staff trained in using the CSPro software. To ensure appropriate matching of data in the completed questionnaires and plot area measurements from the GIS unit, a LOOKUP file was integrated in the CSPro data entry program to confirm the identification of each agricultural operator or LSF before starting data entry. Thereafter, data were entered in computers, edited and summarized in tables using SPSS and Excel.

Response rate

The response rate for Seasonal Agriculture Survey is 98%.

Data appraisal

All Farm questionnaires were subjected to two/three rounds of data quality checking. The first round was conducted by the enumerator and the second round was conducted by the team leader to check if questionnaires had been well completed by enumerators. And in most cases, questionnaires completed by one enumerator were peer-reviewed by another enumerator before being checked by the Team leader.

The HP Smart Array P431 Controller is a low profile, PCIe3 x8, 12 Gb/s capable Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) RAID controller that provides enterprise class storage performance, increased external scalability, and data protection for select HP ProLiant Gen8 rack and tower servers. It features eight external physical links and delivers increased server uptime by providing advanced storage functionality, including online RAID level migration (between any RAID levels) with Flash Backed Write Cache (FBWC), global online spare, and pre-failure warning. Data compatibility between HP Smart Array Controllers means customers can easily upgrade to future Smart Array Controllers.

Many proteins consist of folded domains connected by regions with higher flexibility. The details of the resulting conformational ensemble play a central role in controlling interactions between domains and with binding partners. Small-Angle Scattering (SAS) is well-suited to study the conformational states adopted by proteins in solution. However, analysis is complicated by the limited information content in SAS data and care must be taken to avoid constructing overly complex ensemble models and fitting to noise in the experimental data. To address these challenges, we developed a method based on Bayesian statistics that infers conformational ensembles from a structural library generated by all-atom Monte Carlo simulations. The first stage of the method involves a fast model selection based on variational Bayesian inference that maximizes the model evidence of the selected ensemble. This is followed by a complete Bayesian inference of population weights in the selected ensemble. Experiments with simulated ensembles demonstrate that model evidence is capable of identifying the correct ensemble and that correct number of ensemble members can be recovered up to high level of noise. Using experimental data, we demonstrate how the method can be extended to include data from Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) and structural energies of conformers extracted from the all-atom energy functions. We show that the data from SAXS, NMR chemical shifts and energies calculated from conformers can work synergistically to improve the definition of the conformational ensemble.

In 2020, Adidas was the third largest apparel brand in the world, with a brand value of ***** billion dollars. Adidas France SAS was also one of the companies with the highest revenue at the end of 2020. At the time, the firm generated revenues of over *** million euros, compared to less than *** million in 2019.

Do you need to accelerate the performance of your data-intensive applications? HPE Server Read Intensive (RI) Solid State Drives (SSDs) deliver high performance and endurance for applications requiring high random read IOPS performance.HPE (RI) SSDs are backed by over 3.35 million hours of testing and qualification1 ensuring reliable, high performing drives.HPE Value SAS SSDs offer a significant performance boost over SATA SSDs with roughly twice the IOPS of SATA SSDs, enabling you to improve transactional database workloads with affordable Value SAS SSDs.HPE Digitally Signed Firmware prevents unauthorized access to your data by providing the assurance that drive firmware comes from a trusted source. Icons on the HPE Smart Carrier take the guesswork out of a drive’s status, and a "do not remove" button prevents data loss from human error. You can also monitor the lifespan of your SSD with HPE SmartSSD Wear Gauge, allowing you to determine if any drives are at risk of failure.FeaturesHigh Performance, Exceptional Reliability, and Efficiency for Faster Business Results- HPE solid-state drives are ideal for big data analytics, cloud computing, active archiving, database applications, and data warehousing.- Achieve higher IOPs to enhance the performance of your data center.- Maintain data accuracy with full data-path error detection.- Choose from a broad portfolio of enhanced solutions in a wide variety of capacities.- 12 Gb/s SAS, 6 Gb/s SATA, NVMe, M.2, and M.2 Enablement Kits.HPE Value SAS SSDs Offer Twice the IOPS of SATA SSDs, Significantly Improving Workload Performance- HPE Value SAS solid-state drives (SSDs) support 12 Gbs, versus SATA SSDs at 6 Gbs.- Optimized for enterprise application workloads, HPE Value SAS SSDs allow you to do more work with fewer servers by improving and consolidating transactional database workloads.- HPE Value SAS SSDs allow you to reduce operating costs for storing, powering and maintaining servers, as well as reducing your data center footprint.- Available in a variety of storage capacities, HPE Value SAS SSDs are the perfect choice for supporting read-intensive and mixed-use applications.HPE Multi Vendor SSDs Offer Longer SKU Lifecycles and Immediate Availability on SATA SSDs- HPE enhanced its extensive SSD portfolio with a Multi Vendor SSD SKU offering that allows for extended SKU lifecycles, immediately available supply and preferably priced SATA SSDs.- HPE Multi Vendor SSD SKU offering ensures the SATA SSD selected, delivers the minimum level of performance published, or better.

Output (results) from programming code written to summarize red-imported fire ant (RIFA) abundance from monitoring along transects at custom 2017 GRTS draw sites within select monitoring areas (see SOP 6 in ServCat reference 103385 for methods) of FWS Legacy Regions 2 and 3. Areas monitored included Balcones Canyonlands (TX) and Hagerman (TX) NWRs. The spreadsheet labeled as SOP 6 Metrics displays the different estimates in different worksheets. Each worksheet can be used for additional analysis.