Adjuvant doxorubicin-based chemotherapy did not benefit this population of dogs with HGSTSs. Outcome for visceral HGSTSs was similar to that of nonvisceral HGSTSs in these cases.

This is a peer-reviewed, post-print (final draft post-refereeing) version of the following published document, Conditions of use Articles published within the Springer Nature group of companies which are made available through academic repositories remain subject to copyright. The following restrictions on use of such articles apply: Academic research only 1. Archived content may only be used for academic research. Any content downloaded for text based experiments should be destroyed when the experiment is complete. Use must not be for Commercial Purposes 2. Archived content may not be used for purposes that are intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation by means of sale, resale, licence, loan, transfer or any other form of commercial exploitation ("Commercial Purposes"). Wholesale re-publishing is prohibited 3. Archived content may not be published verbatim in whole or in part, whether or not this is done for Commercial Purposes, either in print or online. 4. This restriction does not apply to reproducing normal quotations with an appropriate citation. In the case of text-mining, individual words, concepts and quotes up to 100 words per matching sentence may be used, whereas longer paragraphs of text and images cannot (without specific permission from Springer Nature). Moral rights 5. All use must be fully attributed. Attribution must take the form of a link-using the article DOI-to the published article on the journal's website. 6. All use must ensure that the authors' moral right to the integrity of their work is not compromised. Third party content 7. Where content in the document is identified as belonging to a third party, it is the obligation of the user to ensure that any use complies with copyright policies of the owner. Use at own risk 8.

Nitrogen management for corn (Zea mays L.) may be improved by applying a portion of N in-season. Th is investigation was conducted to evaluate crop modeling (Maize-N) and active crop canopy sensing approaches for recommending in-season N fertilizer rates. Th ese approaches were evaluated during 2012-2013 on 11 fi eld sites, in Missouri, Nebraska, and North Dakota. Nitrogen management also included a no-N treatment (check) and a non-limiting N reference (all at planting). Nitrogen management treatments were assessed for two hybrids and at low and high seeding rates, arranged in a randomized complete block design. In 9 of 11 site-years, the sensor-based approach recommended lower in-season N rates than the model (collectively 59% less N), resulting in trends of higher partial factor productivity of nitrogen (PFP N ) and higher agronomic effi ciency (AE) than the model. However, yield was better protected by the model-based approach. In some situations, canopy sensing excelled at optimizing the N rate for localized conditions. With abnormally warm and moist soil conditions for the 2012 Nebraska sites and presumed high levels of inorganic N from mineralization, N application was appropriately reduced, resulting in no yield decrease and N savings compared to the non-limiting N reference. Depending on the site, both recommendation approaches were successful; a combination of model and sensor information may optimize in-season decision support for N recommendation.

On‐farm research is a method for transferring technology to farmers, validating small plot research, generating new discovery, and evaluating field‐scale, site‐specific management techniques. Little has been done to understand what motivates farmers to participate in on‐farm research and what the impact of their participation is on their decision making and farm profitability. This study evaluated the University of Nebraska‐Lincoln's over 25 yr‐old on‐farm research program using a semi‐structured, in‐depth interview tool to complete interviews with a stratified sample of 40 of the 140 past‐participants. The focus of this qualitative study was obtaining rich descriptions of farmer participants to better understand motivation for involvement in an on‐farm research program, participant research experiences, and the economic impacts of an on‐farm research program. Quantitative statistical analyses of the qualitative data are included for informational purposes; however, our conclusions focus on the qualitative analysis. Farmers participated in an on‐farm research program for a variety of reasons, most commonly for economic gain. Positive experiences were largely credited to the interactions with university faculty and other farmers. The participating farmers’ perception regarding whether or not the project took too much time was unrelated to whether weigh wagons or yield monitors were used. Farmers were interested in many aspects of research, including project ideation, experimental design, and statistical analysis. Participating farmers’ satisfaction in their experience and implementation of research results was not dependent on the farmers independently generating their research topic. The most impassioned suggestion from the farmer research participants was to develop innovative research projects. Core Ideas In‐depth interviews with participants in an on‐farm research program generated insights into motivation for participation and program impact. Farmers participated in the program for a variety of reasons including economic gain, seeking answers to a specific questions, general curiosity, and a desire for reliable and unbiased research results. Positive experiences in the on‐farm research program were largely credited to interactions with university faculty and other farmers. The origin of the research topic or idea did not influence participant satisfaction in their experience or implementation of the results. Seventy‐five percent of interviewees had put their research results into practice in their farm operation, either by making a change based on results or by not making a change as the research confirmed their current practice.

No abstract