Glyphosate is the world's most widely used herbicide. It is nonselective and has been used to control a broad range of weed species for the past 20 yr, without the appearance of resistant weed biotypes. However, a biotype ofLolium rigidumfrom a field in Northern Victoria, Australia, in which glyphosate had been used for the past 15 yr, failed to be controlled by label recommended rates. Based on LD50values from pot dose-response experiments, this biotype exhibited resistance to glyphosate and was nearly 10-fold more resistant compared to the susceptible biotypes tested. The biotype was resistant to three different salts of glyphosate. The biotype was also nearly threefold more resistant to diclofop-methyl but was susceptible to other commonly used selective and broad-spectrum herbicides. Between the two-leaf and tillering stages of development, a susceptible biotype exhibited a small but significant decrease in tolerance to glyphosate, whereas tolerance of the resistant biotype remained unchanged with age. The resistant phenotype was verified in experiments in which seed was germinated in the presence of glyphosate. Observations on shoot and root growth of seedlings in these experiments suggested that the resistance mechanism might be associated more with the shoot than with the root.

Formative assessment benefits both students and teaching academics. In particular, formative assessment in mathematics subjects enables both students and teaching academics to assess individual performance and understanding through students’ responses. Over the last decade, educational technologies and learning management systems (LMSs) are used to support formative assessment design. In mathematics, this is problematic because of the inflexibility of LMS and educational technology tools.  Automating formative assessment generation and marking to support mathematics learning is made possible by utilising specific software and technologies in new ways. This paper proposes a new method of creating mathematics formative assessments using LaTeX and PDF forms in conjunction with a computer algebra system (e.g., Maple), independent of an LMS.  This method is implemented in undergraduate mathematics subjects servicing non-mathematics–focused higher education courses. The method generates individualised assessments that are automatically marked. Results show that the method provides the teaching academic with a more efficient way of designing formative mathematics assessments without compromising the effectiveness of the assessment task. This study contributes to the growing research on mathematics in higher education. The implication is an increased understanding of how existing technology, implemented in new ways, can potentially benefit both mathematics students and teaching academics.

The primary aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that, when making written submissions to the accounting standard setting bodies, lobbyists place the same level of importance, on: 1) the ASRB Release 100 accounting standard evaluative criteria, 2) differential reporting, 3) the ‘relevance’ of the proposed financial reporting disclosures, and 4) the ‘reliability’ of those disclosures to general purpose financial statement users. The secondary aim was to determine if these qualitative factors are afforded different levels of importance by different lobbying groups, viz., public practitioners, corporate accountants, government accountants, and academics/individuals. The responses to a survey of formal lobbyists were examined using a proportional odds model which utilises the ordinal nature of the responses and employs an analysis of deviance between responses. The results showed that the sampled lobbyists, as a whole, considered the four qualitative factors of ‘evaluative criteria’, ‘differential reporting’, ‘relevance’, and ‘reliability’ of financial information, to be of equal importance to their lobbying position. In addition, the ranking in importance was not consistent across the different lobbying groups. That is, company and government accountants rated the ‘reliability’ of the proposed reporting disclosures as the most important factor influencing the nature of their lobbying submissions, while the public practitioner and academic groups perceived the ‘relevance’ of the proposed disclosures as the most important. Testing the effects of the financial reporting issues underlying each of these four factors on the relative importance of those factors, revealed 1) a concern by all lobbyists that the thrust of an Exposure Draft matches the lobbyists' views on the ‘relevance’ of the disclosures proposed, and 2) a desire by all lobbyists that the proposed financial reports faithfully represent the underlying transactions of the entity.