• Korean Journal of Breeding Science
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.136-142
• /
• 2008

We conducted this study to compare physiological response according to growing conditions between superior and inferior family of Pinus densiflora. In 1981, open-pollinated (OP) progenies of P. densiflora were planted in Chuncheon (CC) and Naju (NJ). We selected KW2 as a superior family and KW23 as a inferior family based on volume index among 30 OP progenies. We calculated general combining ability of each 30 OP progenies in each sites, and compared family growth rank. We collected needles of selected families in CC and NJ, and analyzed chlorophyll content, nitrated reductase (NR) activity, nitrogen content, and superoxide dismutase (SOD) acitivity. In CC, chlorophyll content and nitrogen content were more in needles of KW2 than those of KW23. In NJ, KW2 showed higher NR activity than KW23, and according to site, families in CC showed higher NR activity than those in NJ. SOD activities of both families were higher in NJ, and KW23 showed higher activity than KW2 in both sites. Consequently, inconsistency of the growth performance of two families was caused by different genetic and physiological responses.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.332-339
• /
• 2010

We aimed to setup an adaptive radiation therapy platform using cone-beam CT (CBCT) and multileaf collimator (MLC) log data and also intended to analyze a trend of dose calculation errors during the procedure based on a phantom study. We took CT and CBCT images of Catphan-600 (The Phantom Laboratory, USA) phantom, and made a simple step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan based on the CT. Original plan doses were recalculated based on the CT ($CT_{plan}$) and the CBCT ($CBCT_{plan}$). Delivered monitor unit weights and leaves-positions during beam delivery for each MLC segment were extracted from the MLC log data then we reconstructed delivered doses based on the CT ($CT_{recon}$) and CBCT ($CBCT_{recon}$) respectively using the extracted information. Dose calculation errors were evaluated by two-dimensional dose discrepancies ($CT_{plan}$ was the benchmark), gamma index and dose-volume histograms (DVHs). From the dose differences and DVHs, it was estimated that the delivered dose was slightly greater than the planned dose; however, it was insignificant. Gamma index result showed that dose calculation error on CBCT using planned or reconstructed data were relatively greater than CT based calculation. In addition, there were significant discrepancies on the edge of each beam while those were less than errors due to inconsistency of CT and CBCT. $CBCT_{recon}$ showed coupled effects of above two kinds of errors; however, total error was decreased even though overall uncertainty for the evaluation of delivered dose on the CBCT was increased. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate dose calculation errors separately as a setup error, dose calculation error due to CBCT image quality and reconstructed dose error which is actually what we want to know.