Simple fence modification increases floodplain land movement prospects for freshwater turtles

Feral pigs predate on freshwater turtles and damage wetland habitats in the process. Installing fences successfully averts access and damage, however, they become a barrier for freshwater turtles requiring land access during migration. We collected 161 turtles (Chelodina rugosa, Emydura subglobosa worrelli, Myuchelys latisternum) from twenty floodplain and riverine wetlands during post-wet (June-August) and late-dry season (November-December) surveys (2015-2018) in northern Australia. Wetlands were either fenced (150 × 150mm square, 1.05m high wire mesh) or not around the wet perimeter. Nine-seven percent of individuals caught in either fenced or unfenced wetlands had a shell carapace width greater than mesh width, of these 44 (46%) were captured inside fenced wetlands, while 50 were caught in unfenced wetlands. The remaining 35 were smaller than 150mm and would easily pass through fence mesh. Sixty-five turtles partook in a fencing manipulative experiment. Turtles with carapace widths wider than mesh often successfully escaped through fences by lifting one side of their shell and passing diagonally. In a second experiment where a piece of vertical wire (1500mmx300mm) was removed, turtles located gates after prospecting and trying to fit through meshing areas that were too small to pass through. Nine-two percent of turtles were able to locate and pass through gates, while 8% failed to locate a gate after 2 hours. Three turtles that did not use gates, and seemed to ‘give up’ and dug into the grass. Gates applied every 4m showed an 83% passage rate, every 2m was 91%, and while every 1m was 100%. Combing field and manipulative experiments revealed that large turtles will prospect and move along a fence until they find suitable passage. Applying turtle gates every 1–4m allows almost 100% passage, and if strategically applied in travel corridors, would minimize the need for large-scale clipping efforts around entire wetlands.

Design and Implementation of Hybrid-Climbing Legged Robot

In this paper, the hybrid-climbing legged robot is designed, implemented, and practically tested. The robot has four legs arranged symmetrically around the body were designed for climbing wire mesh fence. Each leg in robot has 3DOF which makes the motion of the robot is flexible. The robot can climb the walls vertically by using a unique design of gripper device included metal hooks. The mechanism of the movement is a combination of two techniques, the first is the common way for the successive movement like gecko by using four limbs, and the second depending on the method that used by cats for climbing on the trees using claws, for this reason, the robot is named hybrid-climbing legged robot. The movement mechanism of the climbing robot is achieved by emulating the motion behavior of the gecko, which helped to derive the kinematic equations of the robot. The robot was practically implemented by using a microcontroller for the mainboard controller while the structure of the robot body is designed by AutoCAD software. Several experiments performed in order to test the success of climbing on the vertical wire mesh fence.

Percutaneous transolecranon pinning and lateral pinning Vs lateral pinning in displaced supracondylar fractures of humerus in children: an observative study

Background: Supracondylar fracture (humerus) is type of extra-articular fracture occurring in the distal metaphyseal site of humerus. It is almost exclusively a fracture of the immature skeleton, seen in children and young teenagers. Fractures around the elbow are a great challenge to orthopaedic surgeons. Clinical diagnosis may be difficult due to noncooperative patient and massive swelling around the elbow. Displaced type of supracondylar fractures poses problem not only in reduction but also in maintenance of reduced fracture and rapid inclusion of nerves and vessels.Methods: The present study was conducted on 30 cases of displaced supracondylar fracture humerus in children, aged 2-14 years, who were treated by CRPP with either lateral entry of k-wires or a lateral wire and a vertical wire through olecranon (transolecranon).Results: Both the Groups achieved 90% satisfactory results, but 10% unsatisfactory results recorded in Group A only rather than in Group B.Conclusions: Although the transolecranon wire has the disadvantage of limiting the flexion and extension of the elbow, this does not influence the final-outcome much as the elbow is fixed in a POP splint for minimum 3 weeks-in all patients in both groups.