|
August 2005
|
       |
Tools of the TradeMore Tips: What If a Cooperative Extension Professional Must Work With Two or More Institutional Review Boards?Sherry C. Betts Donna J. Peterson Daniel A. McDonald The University of Arizona IntroductionThis is the first follow-up to a series of four recent articles designed to help Extension Professionals navigate the university Institutional Review Board (IRB) process (Brown, Martin, & Weigel, 2004; Martin, Weigel, & Brown, 2005; Weigel, Brown, & Martin, 2004; Weigel, Martin, & Brown, 2005). In this article the focus is on working with more than one IRB at a time regarding one project. The authors of this article have had many years of experience with multiple IRBs in and outside of the university. There are several situations that may necessitate application to, approval from, and compliance with IRBs in addition to the Extension Professional's own university IRB such as when:
When a second or third IRB enters the picture, the situation becomes more complex due to different forms and protocols, sometimes contradictory expectations and rulings, and timelines that may not coincide. The authors use their experience with a project funded by a federal government agency to illustrate some of the issues and tips for success. All IRBs have instructions for developing a protocol for review. While the content of university protocols and third-party IRB protocols will be similar, there will be differences in specific details requested. This means you will have to prepare multiple documents. Below are some general issues that may arise when working with third-party IRBs and tips that may ease the process. Issues and TipsDiffering Protocol RequirementsWhen you understand what your university IRB requires and have successfully navigated a review, the requirements from a third-party IRB may seem daunting. It can be helpful to talk to someone who has gone through the process with the particular agency or organization. They may have suggestions for helping you navigate that system. Instructions may be written to apply to a variety of disciplines, from laboratory and basic science studies, to epidemiologic studies, to behavioral and social science studies. Because some pieces may not apply to your project, you will not have to address every topic. Differing Policies Among IRBsClarify each IRB's position on the relationship between IRB approval and program implementation. Some IRBs are concerned only with data collection, while others govern all contact with participants. On our project, we planned to do focus groups with potential participants prior to implementing the project to assess what types of information would be most useful. Our university IRB would have permitted this without IRB approval because the data was for programming purposes only; it would not have been shared publicly. However, our funder's IRB would not allow any contact prior to approval, even for planning purposes. Therefore, our planning process was significantly delayed. Consent FormsMultiple IRBs may differ in requirements for consent forms. Work with IRB staff to develop something that is acceptable to all. Our university IRB required a standard authorization paragraph. However, our funding agency's IRB required the consent form to be written at a 5th-grade reading level. The language in the authorization paragraph is at a 12th-grade reading level. It took a great deal of discussion to find language our university would accept and yet was at a reading level our funder would approve. The language requirements in consent forms may also differ. Our university IRB requires the consent form to be written in first-person, while our funding agency's IRB mandates the use of third-person. We initiated discussion with the two IRBs again to agree. Timing of SubmissionsIt may be most efficient to submit protocols to both IRBs simultaneously. Although both will likely require revisions, you will be able to address everyone's concerns at the same time and will have documentation from each to help with justifying your revisions. Simultaneous approval becomes a problem when one IRB takes significantly longer to review a protocol. For example, for the first round of reviews, our university took 4 weeks, while our funding agency took 3 months. Approval ProcessFeedback from your IRB reviews will require changes to your protocols followed by resubmission for another review. The comments from each review panel may ask you to change different pieces and may even contradict one another. For example, our university IRB requires the standard introductory and authorization paragraphs on the consent form to be entirely in bold, but our funder's IRB does not allow emphasis anywhere. We resolved this by explaining to each IRB the policies of the other and attaching written documentation to justify the final format. Approval from both your university and third-party IRBs will be needed before your project can begin. Be prepared for a lengthy process until approval is finally received. It may take several protocol revisions before the multiple IRBs clear your project. On our project, we received final university IRB approval in 10 weeks. However, final approval from our funding agency took one and a half years. Human Subjects Training and CertificationTraining for staff involved in data collection with human subjects is required by most IRBs. If you received certification from one IRB, check with the other IRB(s) to see if your certification is acceptable before completing the protocols or additional training. In our project, both our university and funder accepted the other's certification. CommunicationLet each IRB know that you are also submitting a protocol to another IRB for review. Contact IRB panel members or other IRB staff. They often have suggestions for preparing the initial protocol, how to best address issues raised during the reviews, and how to come to a reasonable resolution when comments from multiple IRBs are conflicting. ConclusionAlthough this process can be confusing and somewhat intimidating, the goal of protection of human subjects is shared by all agencies involved. Close attention to detail and communication are the keys to successful reviews. A future article will share tips for working specifically with Tribal Nations. Here are some good resources for preparing IRB protocols for third-party organizations: U.S. Department of Agriculture--Research, Education, and Economics--ARS,
CSREES, ERS, and NASS Policies and Procedures The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office for Human
Research Protection is the largest federal government office dealing with human
subjects issues and thus guides most policies. National Institutes of Health--Office of Behavioral and Social
Sciences Research--Funding and Training Centers for Disease Control and Prevention--Office of the Chief
Science Officer--Human Research Protection Program ReferencesBrown, R., Martin, S., & Weigel, D. (2004). What Cooperative Extension professionals need to know about institutional review boards: Recruiting participants. Journal of Extension [On-line], 42(6). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2004december/tt1.shtml Martin, S., Weigel, D., & Brown, R. (2005). What Cooperative Extension professionals need to know about institutional review boards: Obtaining consent. Journal of Extension [On-line], 43(2) Article 2TOT1. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2005april/tt1.shtml Weigel, D., Brown, R., & Martin, S. (2004). What Cooperative Extension professionals need to know about institutional review boards. Journal of Extension [On-line], 42(5). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2004october/tt1.shtml Weigel, D., Martin, S., & Brown, R. (2005). What Cooperative Extension professionals need to know about institutional review boards: Risks and benefits. Journal of Extension [On-line], 43(1) Article 1TOT1. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2005february/tt1.shtml
Voices from the Past, Wisdom for the Present and Future: Capturing and Learning from Oral HistoryLisa Phelps Introduction"I have been with Extension for most of my life. Extension has always been important to me and to my parents."--Extension Homemaker "Extension influenced and helped my family."--Extension Homemaker These quotes were captured through a recent oral history project I conducted with a local Extension homemakers group. A component of my Extension faculty role is to provide educational support and resources to Extension homemakers. The oral history project was inspired by my first meeting with the homemakers, who shared community history, their Extension history, and stories of the influence that Extension has had on their lives. As an added benefit, I found being part of this oral history project enhanced my Extension program development and impact reporting skills. What Is Oral History?Oral history can be defined as a series of interviews in a question-and-answer format, conducted by an interviewer with an interest in the subject matter. The interviewee is usually knowledgeable about the historical event or subject of interest. Information is then shared with others, usually in a written format (Roy, 1993). Why Oral History?Recording oral history not only provides a written account of past events, it offers opportunities to value, appreciate, and learn from the past. This is especially true in a primarily oral culture such as the United States (Payne & Lyman, 1994). Ritchie (1997) states that oral historians are no longer just preserving interviews, but increasingly are focusing on how the interviews can be used. Oral historians are now returning the information gathered back to the communities of origin. The stories gathered through the oral history process offer a rich, real-world context that connects with people at many levels. Using stories as a teaching method has its roots in experiential learning as defined by Dewey (Vozzola, 1998). Haight (2001) affirms that telling and sharing stories offers individuals an opportunity to establish connections with others based on memories. Stories allow for the discovery of patterns and meaning that may have been neglected or unrecognized. They also offer people the opportunity to connect with and be listened to by others, which creates a sense of caring. Through stories, people can reclaim the past and present in new ways. "Humans appear to embrace stories or narratives precisely because they find stories satisfyingly complex, in exact, and concrete. (Vozzola, 1998, p. 290)." How Do You Conduct an Oral History Project?Planning Is EssentialPlanning for your oral history project is crucial and begins by identifying an historical event or subject of interest. Researching this event or subject before beginning your interviews is central to the success of your project (Moyer, 1999). Identifying Interview ParticipantsUsing your research, begin to identify interview participants. A short questionnaire administered to potential participants can help you select appropriate and willing interviewees. Draw on your research to formulate the questions. The questionnaire responses will identify participants who will help you learn more about the event or subject you are researching as well as identify other interview participants. Preparing for the InterviewKvale (1996) refers to interviewing as a professional conversation with a structure and a specific purpose. Determine if individual or group interviews will be most beneficial for your project. This is usually determined by the nature of the project and the comfort level of the interview participant. The potential participants must understand that participating in the interview is optional and that if they agree to participate, a mutually agreed upon interview time and location will need to be determined. If confidentiality is an issue, then the participants will be asked to select pseudonyms for themselves. You will also need recording equipment for your interview. Make sure each interview participant is comfortable being recorded and possibly videotaped. Conducting the InterviewPrepare a list of questions based on your background research to serve as a guide for the interview. When capturing oral history, it is important to use an unstructured interview format in which the interview can evolve based on the responses to the questions (Moyer, 1999). Kvale (1996) refers to this as an "open interview." Usually 60 to 90 minutes is appropriate for a first interview. Once the interview has been completed, you will need to remind the participants that a follow-up interview may need to be scheduled to help clarify answers and responses from the first interview. After the InterviewEach interview must be transcribed. Share each transcript with the participant to verify accuracy. After the second, more in-depth interviews are completed, reports, programs, and publications can be created from the transcripts. You will need to identify an archive location for your project. How Is Oral History Useful to Extension Professionals?Once your project is completed, you can use what you have learned to:
For example, after I completed this oral history project I collaborated with the local historical society and facilitated a community program. As a result of this program more intergenerational programs are being developed in the community. SummaryCapturing the oral history of a group or organization can provide valuable insights into the present and assist in planning for the future. It is important to gather the history before it is lost. Storytelling can be a powerful way of connecting with people, and providing individuals the opportunity to tell their story can be extremely rewarding. It is a tool that Extension professionals can use to support their work in communities. ReferencesHaight, B. (2001). Sharing life stories: Acts of intimacy. Generations, 25 (2) June, 90-91. Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Moyer, J. (1999). Step-by-step guide to oral history. Available at: http://www.dohistory.org/on_your_own/toolkit/oralHistory.html Payne, E. M., & Lyman, B. G. (1994). Family and community oral history. Reading Improvement, 31 (4) Winter, 221-23. Ritchie, D. A. (1997). Oral history: From sound to print and back again. OAH Magazine of History, 11 (3) Spring, 6-8. Roy. L. (1993). Planning an oral history project. Journal of Youth Services in Libraries. 6 (4) Summer, 409-413. Vozzola, E. C. (1998). We dream, you do: "Great" grandmothers teach a lesson in women's changing roles. Teaching of Psychology, 25 (4), 289-291.
Selecting Recipes to Enhance Educational Programming--Application of Formative Research MethodsSharon Francey Robinson William Wong A. Shanna Wright Rodgers Mary Kinney Bielamowicz Karen Konzlemann IntroductionRecipe demonstration, sampling, and distribution often accompany client programming and are intended to reinforce educational messages (Reed & Schuster, 2002). Formative research, research that occurs during the design and implementation of a program (Brown & Gerhardt, 2002), can be used when selecting recipes to enhance an educational experience. Such an approach was used to select recipes to enhance the acceptance of soyfoods among Family and Consumer Science educators and their clients. MethodsSelection of Preliminary RecipesAs part of a professional development training workshop, soyfood product sampling was conducted. The purpose of the product sampling was to solicit educators' opinions about soyfood recipes in order to enhance education materials under development. To begin this process, several Internet sites dedicated to soyfood recipes and soyfood cookbooks were reviewed. Preliminary recipes were selected out of approximately 50 reviewed recipes. Once these recipes were selected, they were evaluated for food safety issues, transportability of the final product, and cost of the recipe. If any recipe posed a problem or concern in any of these areas, it was eliminated. Selection of Viable RecipesAfter the recipes were selected based on the aforementioned criteria, they were prepared in order to observe the complexity of the recipes and to evaluate the probable acceptance of the appearances and tastes of the final products. No major problems with the recipes were noted. Therefore, at this point, recipes were deemed viable. Permission to use these recipes as part of our professional development workshop and soy product sampling was obtained from the United Soybean Board. The recipes were divided into four categories, consistent with the educational goals of our program: similar recipe comparison, single soyfood item recipe, soyfood item as an ingredient recipe, and recipe modification using a soyfood item. Selection of Final RecipesAn evaluation instrument was developed based on the viable recipes. The goal of the evaluation instrument was to determine nutrition educators' attitudes toward soyfood products both before and after tasting recipes prepared with soy products. Also, the evaluation instrument asked the educators to rank which recipe category they felt was most effective in enhancing the acceptance of soy products. In order to use human subjects for our product sampling, we obtained Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval through the Office of Research Compliance, part of the Office of the Vice President for Research at Texas A&M University. Nutrition educators were consulted about the acceptability of using food sampling demonstrations as part of a nutrition education curriculum. During this consultation, the logistics of conducting food product sampling were addressed. Also, at this time the evaluation instrument was examined for appropriateness for the task of soliciting educators' opinions about soyfood recipes. No recipes were altered at this time, but the order in which each soyfood product was presented was changed based on feedback received during this consultation. As part of a professional development workshop, educator input was solicited from Family and Consumer Science Texas Cooperative Extension agents. During this workshop, the agents were each asked to complete an evaluation instrument. Prior to any product sampling, they were asked to answer questions regarding their attitudes toward soy products (Table 1).
Each agent was then given a sample product made from the aforementioned recipes. They were asked to rank how well they liked each sample on a Likert scale. They were also asked to rank how likely they thought each recipe category would enhance consumers' acceptance of soyfoods (Table 2). Last, after tasting the soyfood samples, the agents were each asked to answer the questions regarding their attitudes toward soy products again. At the end of the professional development workshop, the agents were given the recipes used for the product sampling to include in their nutrition lesson presentations.
Approximately 10 weeks after the professional development workshop in which the educators' inputs were captured, follow-up structured interviews were conducted via telephone to determine if the agents were using soyfood product sampling as part of their pilot testing of the related curriculum. The educators reported using the recipes provided for their consumer education presentations. Some educators were continuing to modify certain recipes to their and the consumers' needs. Agents commented that the consumers enjoyed the product sampling demonstrations and seemed very engaged in the nutrition lessons when product sampling was used. Discussion and ConclusionThe use of recipes and food demonstrations should be consistent with identified educational goals and objectives. Our goal was to enhance the acceptance of soyfoods among educators and their clients. Our process resulted in a stepwise culling of recipes. Also, we identified recipe categories that supported our learning goal: recipes that compare similar products for acceptability, recipes for the preparation of a soyfood, recipes using soyfood as an ingredient, and recipe modifications/substitutions using soy ingredients. We enabled input from diverse members of the education team, peer educators, Cooperative Extension Agents, and clients, by soliciting informal and formal feedback through methods such as survey instruments, informal discussions, and structured interviews. This and similar approaches to recipe selection may engage educators in the judicious use of recipes to augment educational programming. Acknowledgments Funding for this project was provided by the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture pursuant to a grant, 2001-52102-11255, entitled Safety, Efficacy and Optimal Dosage of Soy Isoflavones to Prevent Osteoporosis. ReferencesBrown, K. G., & Gerhardt, M. W. (2002). Formative evaluation: An integrative practice model and case study. Personnel Psychology, 55, 951. Reed, D. B., & Schuster, E. (2002). Recipe checklist: A tool to aid development of recipes for audiences with limited resources. Journal of Extension [On-line]. 40(6). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2002december/tt4.shtml
An Affirmative Approach to Parental Involvement in Youth ProgramsAlayne Torretta Laura Bovitz Difficult ParentsI pledge my HEAD to force my ideas on others whether they are welcome or not, my HEART to meet my needs over the needs of others, my HANDS to do the work for my kids so they will be a positive reflection of me, and my HEALTH to self-righteous living because I know what is best for my club, my community, my country and my world. This mock pledge speaks volumes to youth development professionals struggling to incorporate positive parental support from parents with whom they have difficulty getting along. It is well documented that ample parental support and involvement have a positive effect on psychosocial youth development and increased school performance (Riley, 1996; Wickrama, Lorenz, & Conger, 1997). Likewise, parents deficient in positive coping strategies, provide little in the way of role modeling appropriate behavior to their offspring, resulting in acting out behavior in youth (Patterson & Capaldi, 1991; Nichtor, 2002). In youth development programs, it is preferred that any involvement of parents be child oriented. Parental support of a child's autonomy and self-directed behavior while maintaining an emotionally intimate relationship results in competent children (Anonymous, 2004). Dix, Gershoff, Meunier, and Miller (2004) found that when parents face emotional issues, such stress or depression, their actions are more parent oriented, whereby they look to meet their needs over that of their child's. Adults stuck in parent-oriented behavior result in inhibition of their child from having a positive experience in the program. While it is not within the realm of Extension professionals to psychoanalyze parents, it is important for professionals find a way to work with them, within the boundaries of the program. Understand and ApplyBy taking a holistic approach and viewing all the attributes of an individual, the professional can spin overt negative behaviors to a positive that benefits youth and the program. Professionals can use understanding as a way to open communication with these "difficult" people. By understanding the 4-A's of motivation, acceptance, affiliation, achievement, and altruism in the following parent examples, the professional can assist in shifting from parent-oriented behaviors to more child-oriented behaviors. Vicarious ParentThis parent meets his or her emotional needs by re-living childhood through his or her own child. In general, this parent seeks affiliation, the need to belong--even if it is through the child. Behaviors include the overextending of the child's time in several different project areas or pushing the child to be successful in whatever the parent enjoyed in childhood. Their strengths of such parents are they are hard workers and have much knowledge of project areas. The professional can involve this type of parent by engaging them to work with other children, which will take the focus away from just their own child. Abusive ParentWhile Extension professionals are not equipped to counsel child abusers, they are required to report abuse to local youth protection agencies. The abusive parent described in this article is subtler. On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being physical harming of a child), this parent scores a 2. In general, these parents seek achievement, the need to succeed--even if they have to bully the child into it. Behaviors include speaking negatively of the child either to others or the child, openly discounting the child's contribution to the club, or being overly critical of the child's efforts. Their strengths are they are involved with their child and attend events. They would support the program best behind the scenes, such as in food booths or barn management where they can hear others compliment their child. This may allow them to see their child in a positive light. Neglectful ParentOverextended parents with little time to spare for their own children describe these parents. They are either coming or going from one activity to the next. These parents seek ultimate altruism, the selfless idea that they can be all things to all people. Their strengths are they are hard workers, extremely organized, reliable, and can multitask. Tasks for this type of parent would have a limited duration and a minimal commitment, such as working a short shift at a fair or carpooling for an event--as long as there is ample notice far in advance. Competitive ParentThis parent likes to win. Energized by the competition, they seek achievement, the desire to succeed. 4-H is about winning. Their strengths are familiarity with the rules and the project area. The professional can use these parents behind the scenes away from the show ring. With in-depth knowledge of the project area, they make excellent candidates to support activities where cooperation, education, and life skill development is the goal, such as an educational horse camp. Parents' Window of WorkThe New Jersey Leader Training Series (2001) cites 10 ways to engage parents in healthy involvement in a 4-H youth development program.
Along with understanding strengths and motivations, an inventory of parents' interests is important. Parents can be motivated to participate in their children's programs if their role meets their needs and interests. Understanding what parents like to do or do well can result in positive relationships among all. A Parents' Window of Work (Rutgers, 2001) (Figure 1) is a useful tool for volunteers and staff to use when working with new families in youth programs.
ConclusionIn youth development programs, it is preferred that any involvement of parents be child oriented. The result of parent-oriented behavior is that it inhibits a child from having a positive experience in the program. Adults stuck in parent-oriented behavior can be motivated to shift to child-oriented behavior within the boundaries of the program using the tool provided by Rutgers Cooperative Research and Extension. This holistic approach views all the attributes of parents, whereby professionals can spin negative behaviors positively to support the program. ReferencesAnonymous (2004). Fathers' and mothers' parenting behavior and beliefs as predictors of children's social adjustment in the transition to school. Journal of Family Psychology, Vol. 18(4). P 628-638 Dix, T., Gershoff, E. T., Meunier, L. N., Miller, P. C., (2004). The affective structure of supportive parenting: Depressive symptoms, immediate emotions, and child-oriented motivation. Developmental Psychology. Vol. 40(6). p 1212-1227 New Jersey 4-H Leader Training Series (2001) Rutgers Cooperative Research and Extension, E148. Available on line at http://www.nj4h.rutgers.edu/volunteering/lts/ Nichtor, M. (2002). Families that fight. ASCA School Counselor. Vol. 40(1). p 24-27 Patterson, G. R., & Capaldi, D.M. (1991). Antisocial parents: Unskilled and vulnerable. In P.A.Cowan & E.M. Hetherington (Eds.), Family transitions (pp. 196-217). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Riley, R. W. (1996). Promoting family involvement in learning. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol. 27(1). p 3-4 Wickrama, K. A., Lorenz, F. O. & Conger, R. D. (1997). Parental support and adolescent physical health status: A latent growth curve analysis. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 38, 149-163
Agriculture Environmental Management System Baseline ProtocolsJohn D. Harrison Aditya H. Toney Utah State University IntroductionUniversity researchers and Extension specialist in 11 states are currently evaluating the impact of voluntary environmental management systems (EMS) for agricultural operations. This evaluation is being conducted through a series of studies with a wide variety of agriculture production operations that voluntarily choose to participate and share information on the design and implementation of their EMSs (Harrison, 2002; Partnership for Livestock Environmental Management Systems, 2004). BackgroundThe Utah State University Extension Agriculture Environmental Management Systems (AEMS) protocols were adapted from National Database on Environmental Management Systems (NDEMS) that were developed by the University of North Carolina (UNC) and the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) (2004). State regulatory managers, numerous facility managers, EPA offices, and several academic institutions reviewed them extensively. The remainder of this article describes the purpose and intended use of the data protocols and gives an overview of their content and structure. Identification of operation's existing management systems begins when a producer logs into the USU Agriculture Environmental Management Information System (AEMIS) on the USU AEMS Web site (http://aems.aste.usu.edu) as a guest or cooperator (Harrison, Kanade, & Toney, 2004). Once into the system, the user can find all the capabilities associated with this very powerful tool meeting the needs. Figure 1 shows the user interface for AEMIS. The producer can then click on the link "Develop AEMS" on the menu that appears on the left hand side of the screen, which reveals a three-step process for developing an AEMS. Figure 1.
By clicking on the "Baseline Protocols," the producer begins his first step in eliciting a detailed description of the facility's baseline performance (Figure 2). The Demographics and Baseline Study pages are an electronic version of the National Database on Environmental Management Systems (Environmental Law Institute, 2000) adapted to the agriculture industry. Cooperator Program Protocol I.0 and I.1 are one-time studies, and are implemented as soon as an operation decides to participate in the AEMS program (Figure 2). The purpose of Protocol I.0 is to describe some basic characteristics of the operation. After completing Protocol I.0, the operation should immediately complete I.1. The purpose of this Protocol I.1 is to describe in detail the information the operation is asked to submit as part of its participation in the AEMS program. Figure 2.
The questions in the protocols address the operation's existing management systems and its current and historical environmental and economic performance. Because the overall objective of the program is to assess how (if at all) the adoption of an agriculture environmental management system (AEMS) affects an operation's performance, it is critical to measure a pre-AEMS baseline from which changes in performance can be measured. Furthermore, recognition must be made of operations that have made substantial progress in implementing agriculture environmental management systems prior to joining the program, because it is likely that these operations will have already made environmental and economic performance advances in the past and thus may show less significant improvements after joining the program. The Demographics Protocol contains only one part and will take a few minutes to complete. The Baseline Protocol is divided into the following six major sections:
Figure 3. Management Systems Baseline  Figure 4. Environmental Performance Baseline  Figure 5. Compliance Baseline  Figure 6. Pollution Prevention Baseline  Figure 7. Interested Party Involvement Baseline  Figure 8. Cost/Benefit Baseline  SummaryThe operation and the AEMS staff select a program "start date" that will define the baseline period. The suggested start date is January 1, but an operation may choose a different start date if appropriate. To the best of the operator's abilities, baseline measurements should refer to the program start date, 1 year prior to the start date, and 2 years prior to the start date. The objective in the baseline study is to understand how the operation has performed in each of these categories over the last 3 years. For user/producer convenience, each of the keywords used in the protocols is defined in a glossary found in a set of electronically linked Appendix. The data called for in the protocols represent the kinds of information that facilities seeking to establish an EMS based on ISO 14001 would generally need to collect. As such, the protocols have been constructed so as to minimize any additional reporting burden that participating facilities might face. To assure completeness and true comparability of the data across facilities included in the database, it is important that participating facilities do their best to provide answers to all questions asked in the protocols and to participate in all six stages of the protocols. Only in this way can the AEMS program succeed in its effort to provide systematic and reliable information to facilities themselves and to the public on the impacts of EMS adoption. ReferencesEnvironmental Law Institute. (n.d.). National database on environmental management systems. Available at http://www.eli.org/ Harrison, J. D., Kanade, S. & Toney, A. (2004). Agriculture environmental management information system: An online decision support tool. Journal of Extension [On-line], 42(1). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2004february/tt4.shtml Harrison, J. D. (2002). Managing for sustainable agriculture. Journal of Extension [On-line], 40(4). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2002august/a5.shtml Partnership for Livestock Environmental Management Systems. (n.d.). Available at: http://www.uwex.edu/AgEMS/livestock/
An Extension Perspective on Monitoring Pesticide ResistanceJohn L. Petersen IntroductionPesticides play an important role in public health as part of sustainable integrated mosquito management (Rose, 2001). However, insecticide resistance is a threat to any long-term control program (Brogdon & McAllister, 1998a). Recently, McAbee et al. (2004) reported pyrethroid resistance in Culex pipiens,the northern house mosquito from California, being the first report of genetic resistance to this class of pesticides in North American mosquitoes. Therefore, periodic evaluation of insecticide susceptibility is a necessary part of good pest management practice. We describe here outreach activities with mosquito control programs focusing on measuring insecticide susceptibility of mosquito populations. BackgroundSince 1964, the Public Health Entomology Research & Education Center (PHEREC) has been providing Extension services to Florida mosquito control programs. In 1992, PHEREC became a research center of the College of Engineering Sciences Technology and Agriculture at Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University, an 1890 land-grant institution. In Florida, mosquito control has evolved from over-reliance on insecticide application for control of adult mosquitoes (adulticides) to integrated pest management programs (Florida Coordinating Council on Mosquito Control, 1998). Our goal is to empower mosquito control programs to monitor the efficacy of adulticides. The main defense against resistance is close surveillance of mosquito susceptibility to pesticides. Program directors must make timely management decisions based on current susceptibility data. Such information allows rational consideration of alternatives to adulticides, such as larvicides, biological control, and source reduction by mechanical means. In 1998, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) registered d-phenothrin, a synthetic pyrethroid, for use as a mosquito control adulticide. McAllister and Brogdon (1999) introduced the bottle bioassay, simplifying the procedure for monitoring insecticide susceptibility of adult mosquitoes. Although they provided the concentration of active ingredient of pesticide per bottle for most organophosphate and pyrethroid pesticides, no information was provided for d-phenothrin. September 2001, three Florida mosquito control programs requested assistance in evaluating the efficacy of d-phenothrin. MethodsThere are two different methods commonly used for the detection of insecticide resistance (Cochran, 1997; Brogdon & McAllister, 1998b):
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
In the former, a range of concentrations of the active ingredient is tested and percent mortality, at a pre-determined time, is recorded. In the latter, a diagnostic dose of active ingredient is tested and time to mortality is recorded. The diagnostic dose is the lowest concentration of insecticide that gives 100% mortality over the shortest achievable time (WHO 1998; Petersen, Floore, & Brogdon, 2004). Each method has its advantages and disadvantages. An advantage of the concentration-mortality method is that statistical testing by probit analysis can be used. This procedure is widely accepted (Robertson & Preisler, 1991). Concentration-mortality is the preferred method for studies in which statistical confidence limits are desired. No standard statistical test is available for analyzing time-mortality data. Based on observations made during client/service visits throughout the state, Florida mosquito control programs use time-mortality data, rather than dose-mortality data to evaluate susceptibility of target mosquito species. The advantages of the time-mortality method are that it is simple, rapid, and uses a single discriminating concentration of active ingredient that is compared to the response of known susceptible mosquitoes (Brogdon & McAllister, 1998b; McAllister & Brogdon, 1999; Petersen, 2002; Petersen et al., 2004; WHO 1963, 1970, 1981). Program DescriptionThe objectives of the PHEREC extension program are to:
The procedure we teach is the bottle bioassay in which insects are exposed to the insecticide by tarsal contact as they walk on an insecticide-treated surface (Cochran, 1997; Brogdon & McAllister, 1998b). An advantage of our program is that the pesticide to be tested is off-the-shelf product actually used by the mosquito control program in contrast to reagent grade chemicals that would be purchased from a chemical supply company. Extension Documents--PHEREC Technical MemorandaAs part of our Extension program we published a series of protocols detailing the preparation and execution of insecticide susceptibility bioassays. The memoranda are "how to" guides providing step-by-step instructions for preparing off-the-shelf pesticides for the resistance tests and are available online at http://www.pherec.org/bottleassay/technicalmemoranda.html. These technical memoranda have been included in the most recent edition of the Florida Mosquito Control Handbook that is produced and distributed by the Florida Mosquito Control Association. Online version available at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/BODY_IN050 Recent WorkshopsThe concepts presented in this article were the core of two recent workshops:
To evaluate the impact of the workshops and the technical memoranda a survey, http://www.pherec.org/bottleassay/survey2004.html, was conducted during August 2004. Each of the 57 mosquito control programs recognized by the Bureau of Entomology and Pest Control of the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services was faxed a survey form. Twenty-six replies were received. We then followed up by telephone, contacting every one of the 57 programs, thus achieving 100% response. Forty-one programs had received training, and 37 programs were actually performing the resistance testing. Insecticide resistance to organophosphates was reported by 7, but none reported resistance to pyrethroids. We have identified mosquito control programs that acknowledge that they need training. We will program future training to meet these recognized needs. Conclusions and Future DirectionThis article presents a description of an extension program that provides simple, reliable, and inexpensive methods of evaluating insecticide susceptibility in a manner deemed appropriate for mosquito control programs. The program uses off-the-shelf insecticides that are readily at hand and familiar to mosquito control workers as opposed to reagent grade chemicals. Future work will focus on developing additional technical memoranda for pesticides used in Florida that are not included in the Florida Mosquito Control Handbook. Expected impacts include early warning of reduced efficacy of pesticides and reduced cost to mosquito control districts when ineffective products are discontinued. Acknowledgment This work was funded in part by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services grant number 5491. ReferencesBrogdon, W. G., & McAllister, J. C. (1998a). Insecticide resistance and vector control. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 4:605-613. Brogdon, W. G., & J.C. McAllister, J. C. (1998b). Simplification of adult mosquito bioassays through the use of time-mortality determination in glass bottles. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 14:159-165. Cochran, D. G. (1997). Misuse of the tarsal-contact method for detecting insecticide resistance in the German cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) J. Econ. Entomol. 90(6):1441-1444. Florida Coordinating Council on Mosquito Control. 1998. Florida Mosquito Control: The state of the mission as defined by mosquito controllers, regulators, and environmental managers. University of Florida. Available at: http://fmel.ifas.ufl.edu/whitep/whitep.htm McAbee, R. D., Kang, K-D., Stanich, M. A., Christiansen, J. A., Wheelock, C. E., Inman, A. D. Hammock, B. D. & Cornel, A. J. (2004). Pyrethroid tolerance in Culex pipiens pipiens var molestus from Marin County, California. Pest Management Science 60(4):359-368. McAllister, J. C., & Brogdon, W. G. (1999). The bottle bioassay for measuring resistance. Wing Beats 10:18-21. Petersen, J. L. (2002). International entomology: Insecticide resistance workshop in the Republic of Panama. Wing Beats 13(2)4-5. Petersen, J. L., Floore, T. G. & Brogdon, W. G. (2004). Diagnostic dose of synergized d-phenothrin for insecticide susceptibility testing by bottle bioassay. J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc. 20(2):183-188. Robertson, J. L., & Preisler, H. K. (1991). Pesticide bioassays with arthropods. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Rose, R. I. (2001). Pesticides and public health: Integrated methods of mosquito management. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 7(1):17-23. [WHO] World Health Organization. (1963). Criteria and meaning of tests for determining susceptibility or resistance of insects to insecticides. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Technical Report Series 265. [WHO] World Health Organization. (1970). Criteria and meaning of tests for determining susceptibility or resistance of insects to insecticides. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Technical Report Series 443. [WHO] World Health Organization. (1981). Instructions for determining the susceptibility or resistance of adult mosquitoes to organochlorine, organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. Establishment of the base-line. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO/VBC/81.805. [WHO] World Health Organization. (1998). Test procedures for insecticide resistance monitoring in malaria vectors, bio-efficacy and persistence of insecticides on treated surfaces. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO/CDS/CPC/MAL/98.12.
Using a Poster Contest to Educate Children About RadonKenneth R. Tremblay,
Jr. Michael P. Vogel Nancy H. Drennen IntroductionFor a third year Healthy Indoor Air for America's Homes, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture-Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (USDA-CSREES) jointly sponsored a middle school (grades 4-8) radon poster contest in 2004. This annual contest is intended to increase radon awareness and testing through a variety of community and media events. It can be implemented at a state or designated local level. Healthy Indoor Air for America's Homes <www.healthyindoorair.org> encourages 4-H clubs to participate in future Radon Action Month poster contests and community awareness campaigns, because radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer. It is estimated that nearly one in 15 U.S. homes has a high indoor radon level, and the U.S. Surgeon General and EPA recommend all homes be tested for radon. The theme of the poster contest is radon awareness and radon risk reduction, as well as the hazards associated with radon. Posters are judged on content accuracy, visual communication of topic, and reproducibility. It is important for 4-H clubs interested in participating in the contest to contact their State Radon Office (contacts at www.epa.gov/iaq/contacts.html) about this activity because these offices have information and resources useful for developing the contest. It also helps to discuss the level of involvement these offices are able to offer. A radon awareness PowerPoint presentation is available by contacting the national coordinator of the contest, Barbara Allen, with Montana State University Extension Service <blallen@montana.edu>. The State Radon Program office can offer state-specific information. Other partners can include a local county Extension office, schools, American Lung Association office, affiliates of the National Safety Council, and members of the American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists (AARST) <www.aarst.org>. The radon poster contest goals are to:
Poster Contest IdeasImplementationState poster contest leads are designated for each participating state. A 4-H leader can be the state lead or might decide to participate in other ways. Cooperation with a classroom having a teacher acting as the lead is a possibility. Each state lead is asked to carry out the following duties:
To help fund the poster contest, USDA-CSREES offers mini-grants. For more information about these mini-grants contact Barbara Allen. GuidelinesEntries may be submitted in either the hand-drawn or the computer-generated poster category. With assistance from the state radon directors and/or state Extension partners, 4-H club leaders and teachers are asked to aid students in the development of artwork. A radon presentation by an Extension educator, State Radon Program representative, or AARST member can provide students the knowledge they need for developing the poster. In order to qualify for the contest, it is required that one of the following radon topics be depicted in the artwork:
Artwork must be original and the work of one student only. Students need to focus on one of the seven topics and give their poster a title. This title and topic category should be listed on the artwork submission form, which is available on-line. Specifications for the posters are as follows. Size: 12" x 18" horizontal format only, with 1" borders. Materials: white drawing paper; crayon, marker, paint (watercolor, tempera, or acrylic), collage, photograph, or computer graphic. Lettering and messages must be large enough to reproduce well. The student's name must not appear on the front of the artwork. CeremoniesAward ceremonies and prizes can include awarding certificates (a template of the award certificate can be downloaded) and distributing free radon test kits and coupons (or information) to all in attendance to test their home for radon. Materials can be displayed and distributed at the ceremony. They are available from the State Radon Program office or from the Healthy Indoor Air for America's Homes Web site. After the ceremony, sponsors are encouraged to submit an article to a local newspaper about radon and the ceremony. Winning posters can be displayed at various community locations as part of Radon Action Month (January). ConclusionIn 2004 there were 28 posters submitted from 14 states for the national competition, judged at Montana State University. The 2004 winning posters were unveiled at an awards ceremony in Washington, DC, in January 2005 and nationally distributed. (Calendars produced using 2003 and 2004 winning posters are shown in Figure 1). The two national poster contest winners and their chaperones (sponsoring teacher, Cooperative Extension educator, or State Radon Program manager) each won an all-expense paid trip to participate in the ceremony. Figure 1.
An important goal is to expand involvement in the poster contest. Leaders of 4-H clubs and other Extension educators are encouraged to become involved. The timeline for the 2005 competition will be announced mid-summer. Visit the Healthy Indoor Air for America's Homes Web site for the radon poster contest timeline, materials, and additional information Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org. If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support. |
