document_title: Rock–paper–scissors

question_text: how do you say rock paper scissors in chinese

question_tokens: how do you say rock paper scissors in chinese

text: Rock–paper–scissors

text: Game play[edit]

text: The players usually count aloud to three, or speak the name of the game (e.g. "Rock! Paper! Scissors!" or "Ro Sham Bo!"), each time either raising one hand in a fist and swinging it down on the count or holding it behind. They then "throw" by extending it towards their opponent. Variations include a version where players use only three counts before throwing their gesture (thus throwing on the count of "Scissors!" or "Bo!"), or a version where they shake their hands three times before "throwing".

text: History[edit]

text: Origins[edit]

text: The first known mention of the game was in the book Wuzazu (zh) by the Chinese Ming-dynasty writer Xie Zhaozhi (zh) (fl. c. 1600), who wrote that the game dated back to the time of the Chinese Han dynasty (206 BC – 220 AD).[7] In the book, the game was called shoushiling. Li Rihua's book Note of Liuyanzhai  also mentions this game, calling it shoushiling (t. 手勢令; s. 手势令), huozhitou (t. 豁指頭; s. 豁指头), or huoquan (豁拳).

text: Throughout Japanese history there are frequent references to sansukumi-ken, meaning ken (fist) games where "the three who are afraid of one another" (i.e. A beats B, B beats C, and C beats A).[8] This type of game originated in China before being imported to Japan and subsequently also becoming popular among the Japanese.[8]

text: The earliest Japanese sansukumi-ken game was known as mushi-ken (虫拳), which was imported directly from China.[8][9] In mushi-ken the "frog" (represented by the thumb) is superseded by the "slug" (represented by the little finger), which, in turn is superseded by the "snake" (represented by the index finger), which is superseded by the "frog".[8] Although this game was imported from China the Japanese version differs in the animals represented. In adopting the game, the original Chinese characters for the poisonous centipede (蜈蜙) were apparently confused with the characters for the slug (蛞蝓).[9] The most popular sansukumi-ken game in Japan was kitsune-ken (狐拳). In the game, a supernatural fox called a kitsune (狐) defeats the village head, the village head (庄屋) defeats the hunter, and the hunter (猟師) defeats the fox. Kitsune-ken, unlike mushi-ken or rock–paper–scissors, is played by making gestures with both hands.[10]

text: Today, the best-known sansukumi-ken is called jan-ken (じゃんけん),[9] which is a variation of the Chinese games introduced in the 17th century.[11] Jan-ken uses the rock, paper, and scissors signs[8] and is the game that the modern version of rock–paper–scissors derives from directly.[9] Hand-games using gestures to represent the three conflicting elements of rock, paper, and scissors have been most common since the modern version of the game was created in the late 19th century, between the Edo and Meiji periods.[12]

text: By the early 20th century, rock–paper–scissors had spread beyond Asia, especially through increased Japanese contact with the west.[13] Its English-language name is therefore taken from a translation of the names of the three Japanese hand-gestures for rock, paper and scissors:[14] elsewhere in Asia the open-palm gesture represents "cloth" rather than "paper".[15] The shape of the scissors is also adopted from the Japanese style.[14]

text: Spread beyond Asia[edit]

text:
In Britain in 1924 it was described in a letter to The Times as a hand game, possibly of Mediterranean origin, called "zhot".[16]
A reader then wrote in to say that the game "zhot" referred to was evidently Jan-ken-pon, which she had often seen played throughout Japan.[17] Although at this date the game appears to have been new enough to British readers to need explaining, the appearance by 1927 of a popular thriller with the title Scissors Cut Paper,[18] followed by Stone Blunts Scissors (1929), suggests it quickly became popular.

text: In 1927 La Vie au patronage, a children's magazine in France, described it in detail,[19] referring to it as a "jeu japonais" ("Japanese game"). Its French name, "Chi-fou-mi", is based on the Old Japanese words for "one, two, three" ("hi, fu, mi").

text: A New York Times article of 1932 on the Tokyo rush hour describes the rules of the game for the benefit of American readers, suggesting it was not at that time widely known in the U.S.[20] The 1933 edition of the Compton's Pictured Encyclopedia described it as a common method of settling disputes between children in its article on Japan; the name was given as "John Kem Po" and the article pointedly asserted, "This is such a good way of deciding an argument that American boys and girls might like to practice it too."[21]

text: Strategies[edit]

text: It is impossible to gain an advantage over a truly random opponent. However, by exploiting the weaknesses of non-random opponents, it is possible to gain a significant advantage.[22][23] Indeed, human players tend to be non-random.[23][24] As a result, there have been programming competitions for algorithms that play rock–paper–scissors.[22][25][26]

text: In tournament play, some players employ tactics to confuse or trick the other player into making an illegal move, resulting in a loss. One such tactic is to shout the name of one move before throwing another, in order to misdirect and confuse their opponent. During tournaments, players often prepare their sequence of three gestures prior to the tournament's commencement.[27][28]

text: The "rock" move, in particular, is notable in that it is typically represented by a closed fist—often identical to the fist made by players during the initial countdown. If a player is attempting to beat their opponent based on quickly reading their hand gesture as the players are making their moves, it is possible to determine if the opponent is about to throw "rock" based on their lack of hand movement, as both "scissors" and "paper" require the player to reposition their hand. This can likewise be used to deceive an anticipating opponent by keeping one's fist closed until the last possible second, leading them to believe that you are about to throw "rock".

text: Algorithms[edit]

text: As a consequence of rock–paper–scissors programming contests, many strong algorithms have emerged.[22][25][26] For example, Iocaine Powder, which won the First International RoShamBo Programming Competition in 1999,[25] uses a heuristically designed compilation of strategies.[29] For each strategy it employs, it also has six metastrategies which defeat second-guessing, triple-guessing, as well as second-guessing the opponent, and so on. The optimal strategy or metastrategy is chosen based on past performance. The main strategies it employs are history matching, frequency analysis, and random guessing. Its strongest strategy, history matching, searches for a sequence in the past that matches the last few moves in order to predict the next move of the algorithm. In frequency analysis, the program simply identifies the most frequently played move. The random guess is a fallback method that is used to prevent a devastating loss in the event that the other strategies fail. More than ten years later, the top performing strategies on an ongoing rock–paper–scissors programming competition similarly use metastrategies.[30] However, there have been some innovations, such as using multiple history matching schemes that each match a different aspect of the history – for example, the opponent's moves, the program's own moves, or a combination of both.[30] There have also been other algorithms based on Markov chains.[31]

text: In 2012, researchers from the Ishikawa Watanabe Laboratory at the University of Tokyo created a robot hand that can play rock–paper–scissors with a 100% win rate. Using a high-speed camera the robot recognizes within one millisecond which shape the human hand is making, then produces the corresponding winning shape.[32][33]

text: Instances of use in real-life scenarios[edit]

text: American case[edit]

text: In 2006, American federal judge Gregory Presnell from the Middle District of Florida ordered opposing sides in a lengthy court case to settle a trivial (but lengthily debated) point over the appropriate place for a deposition using the game of rock–paper–scissors.[34][35] The ruling in Avista Management v. Wausau Underwriters stated:

text: Upon consideration of the Motion – the latest in a series of Gordian knots that the parties have been unable to untangle without enlisting the assistance of the federal courts – it is ORDERED that said Motion is DENIED. Instead, the Court will fashion a new form of alternative dispute resolution, to wit: at 4:00 P.M. on Friday, June 30, 2006, counsel shall convene at a neutral site agreeable to both parties. If counsel cannot agree on a neutral site, they shall meet on the front steps of the Sam M. Gibbons U.S. Courthouse, 801 North Florida Ave., Tampa, Florida 33602. Each lawyer shall be entitled to be accompanied by one paralegal who shall act as an attendant and witness. At that time and location, counsel shall engage in one (1) game of "rock, paper, scissors." The winner of this engagement shall be entitled to select the location for the 30(b)(6) deposition to be held somewhere in Hillsborough County during the period July 11–12, 2006.[36]

text: The public release of this judicial order, widely circulated among area lawyers,[citation needed] was seemingly intended to shame the respective law firms regarding their litigation conduct by settling the dispute in a farcical manner.

text: Auction house match[edit]

text: In 2005, when Takashi Hashiyama, CEO of Japanese television equipment manufacturer Maspro Denkoh, decided to auction off the collection of Impressionist paintings owned by his corporation, including works by Paul Cézanne, Pablo Picasso, and Vincent van Gogh, he contacted two leading auction houses, Christie's International and Sotheby's Holdings, seeking their proposals on how they would bring the collection to the market as well as how they would maximize the profits from the sale. Both firms made elaborate proposals, but neither was persuasive enough to get Hashiyama's business. Unwilling to split up the collection into separate auctions, Hashiyama asked the firms to decide between themselves who would hold the auction, which included Cézanne's Large Trees Under the Jas de Bouffan, worth $12–16 million.

text: The houses were unable to reach a decision. Hashiyama told the two firms to play rock–paper–scissors to decide who would get the rights to the auction, explaining that "it probably looks strange to others, but I believe this is the best way to decide between two things which are equally good".

text: The auction houses had a weekend to come up with a choice of move. Christie's went to the 11-year-old twin daughters of the international director of Christie's Impressionist and Modern Art Department Nicholas Maclean, who suggested "scissors" because "Everybody expects you to choose 'rock'." Sotheby's said that they treated it as a game of chance and had no particular strategy for the game, but went with "paper".[38]

text: Christie's won the match and sold the $20 million collection, with millions of dollars of commission for the auction house.

text: Play by chimpanzees[edit]

text: In Japan, researchers have taught chimpanzees to play rock–paper–scissors.[39]

text: Analogs in game design[edit]

text: In many games, it is common for a group of possible choices to interact in a rock–paper–scissors style, where each selection is strong against a particular choice, but weak against another. Such mechanics can make a game somewhat self-balancing, and prevent gameplay from being overwhelmed by a single dominant strategy.[40]

text: Many card-based video games in Japan use the rock–paper–scissors system as their core fighting system, with the winner of each round being able to carry out their designated attack. Sega Master System's Alex Kidd in Miracle World has a level where the player has to win a rock-paper-scissors game to go ahead. Others use simple variants of rock–paper–scissors as subgames like Mario Party Advance and Paper Mario: Color Splash.

text: In Pokémon, there is a rock–paper–scissors element in the type effectiveness system. For example, a Grass-type Pokémon is weak to Fire, Fire is weak to Water, and Water is weak to Grass.[41]

text: Analogs in nature[edit]

text: Lizard mating strategies[edit]

text: The common side-blotched lizard (Uta stansburiana) exhibits a rock–paper–scissors pattern in its mating strategies. Of its three color types of males, "orange beats blue, blue beats yellow, and yellow beats orange" in competition for females, which is similar to the rules of rock-paper-scissors.[42][43]

text: Bacteria[edit]

text: Some bacteria also exhibit a rock-paper-scissors dynamic when they engage in antibiotic production. The theory for this finding was demonstrated by computer simulation and in the laboratory by Benjamin Kerr, working at Stanford University with Brendan Bohannan.[44] Additional in vitro results demonstrate rock-paper-scissors dynamics in additional species of bacteria.[45] Biologist Benjamin C. Kirkup, Jr. demonstrated that these antibiotics, bacterioicins, were active as Escherichia coli compete with each other in the intestines of mice, and that the rock-paper-scissors dynamics allowed for the continued competition among strains: antibiotic-producers defeat antibiotic-sensitives; antibiotic-resisters multiply and withstand and out-compete the antibiotic-producers, letting antibiotic-sensitives multiply and out-compete others; until antibiotic-producers multiply again.[46]

text: Rock–paper–scissors is the subject of continued research in bacterial ecology and evolution. It is considered one of the basic applications of game theory and non-linear dynamics to bacteriology.[47] Models of evolution demonstrate how intragenomic competition can lead to rock-paper-scissors dynamics from a relatively general evolutionary model.[48] The general nature of this basic non-transitive model is widely applied in theoretical biology to explore bacterial ecology and evolution.[49][50]

text: Tournaments[edit]

text: Various competitive rock–paper–scissors tournaments have been organised by different groups.

text: World Rock Paper Scissors Society[edit]

text:
Starting in 2002, the World Rock Paper Scissors Society standardized a set of rules for international play[51] and has overseen annual International World Championships. These open, competitive championships have been widely attended by players from around the world and have attracted widespread international media attention.[52][53][54][55][56] WRPS events are noted for their large cash prizes, elaborate staging, and colorful competitors.[57]
In 2004, the championships were broadcast on the U.S. television network Fox Sports Net, with the winner being Lee Rammage, who went on to compete in at least one subsequent championship.[58][59] The 2007 tournament was won by Andrea Farina.[60] The last tournament hosted by the World Rock Paper Scissors Society was in Toronto, Canada, on November 14, 2009.[61]

text: UK championships[edit]

text:
Several RPS events have been organised in the United Kingdom by Wacky Nation.
The 1st UK Championship took place on 13 July 2007, and then again on 14 July 2008, in Rhayader, Powys.[citation needed]

text: The 3rd UK Championships took place on 9 June 2009, in Exeter, Devon. Nick Hemley, from Woking, Surrey, won the contest just beating Chris Grimwood.[62]

text: The 4th UK Championships took place on 13 November 2010, at the Durell Arms in West London. Paul Lewis from Woking beat Ed Blake in the final and collected the £100 first prize and UK title. Richard Daynes Appreciation Society won the team event. 80 competitors took part in the main contest and 10 entries in the team contest.[citation needed]

text: The 5th UK Rock Paper Scissors Championships took place in London on Saturday 22 October 2011.[63] The event was open to 128 individual competitors. There was also a team contest for 16 teams. The 2011 singles tournament was won by Max Deeley and the team contest won by The Big Faces (Andrew Bladon, Jamie Burland, Tom Wilkinson and Captain Joe Kenny).[64]

text: The 6th UK Rock Paper Scissors Championships[65] took place at Crosse Keys Pub, London on Saturday 13 October 2012 with over 200 competitors.[65]

text: The 8th UK Rock Paper Scissors Championships took place at the Green Man Pub in London on Saturday 4 October 2014, and was won by Dan Tinkler of Leicester.[66]

text: The 9th UK Rock Paper Scissors Championships took place at the Green Man Pub in London on Saturday 4 November 2015, and was won by Loic Zimou of London.[66]

text: The 10th UK Rock Paper Scissors Championships took place at the Green Man Pub in London on Saturday 19 November 2016, and was won by Ronak Kansagra of Ealing.[66]

text: The 11th UK Rock Paper Scissors Championships took place at the Crutched Friar pub in London on Saturday 18 November 2017.[66]

text: USARPS tournaments[edit]

text: USA Rock Paper Scissors League is sponsored by Bud Light. Leo Bryan Pacis was the first commissioner of the USARPS.[citation needed] Cody Louis Brown was elected as the second commissioner of the USARPS in 2014.[citation needed]

text: In April 2006, the inaugural USARPS Championship was held in Las Vegas. Following months of regional qualifying tournaments held across the US, 257 players were flown to Las Vegas for a single-elimination tournament at the House of Blues where the winner received $50,000. The tournament was shown on the A&E Network on 12 June 2006.

text: The $50,000 2007 USARPS Tournament took place at the Las Vegas Mandalay Bay in May 2007.

text: In 2008, Sean "Wicked Fingers" Sears beat 300 other contestants and walked out of the Mandalay Bay Hotel & Casino with $50,000 after defeating Julie "Bulldog" Crossley in the finals.

text: The inaugural Budweiser International Rock, Paper, Scissors Federation Championship was held in Beijing, China after the close of the 2008 Summer Olympic Games at Club Bud. A Belfast man won the competition.[67]

text: Team Olimpik Championships 2012[edit]

text: The international tournament was held in London 2012. UK Champions Team GB (Andrew Bladon, Jamie Burland, Tom Wilkinson and Stephen Preston) went in as overwhelming favorites, but after a "domestic incident" team captain and UK Team Champion Joe Kenny was forced to pull out, allowing Stephen Preston to take his place. Great Britain came a respectable third to achieve the Bronze Medal, while the crowd favorite Vatican City got the Silver and Lapland A took the prestigious Gold Medal. British team captain Tom Wilkinson commented "after a 4-0 whitewash of hot favorites Vatican City we thought we had it. A simple lapse of concentration lost it for us, but we are happy with our bronze medal. We'll come back from this and look to take the title back again next year. The support was immense, and we are thankful of everyone who came out to support us".[68]

text: National XtremeRPS Competition 2007–2008[edit]

text: The XtremeRPS National Competition is a US nationwide RPS competition with Preliminary Qualifying contests that started in January 2007 and ended in May 2008, followed by regional finals in June and July 2008. The national finals were to be held in Des Moines, Iowa in August 2008, with a chance to win up to $5,000.

text: Guinness Book of World Records[edit]

text: The largest Rock-Paper-Scissors tournament is 2,950 and was achieved by Oomba, Inc. (USA) at Gen Con 2014 in Indianapolis, Indiana, USA, on 17 August 2014.[69]

text: World Series[edit]

text: Former Celebrity Poker Showdown host and USARPS Head Referee[70] Phil Gordon has hosted an annual $500 World Series of Rock, Paper, Scissors event in conjunction with the World Series of Poker since 2005.[71] The winner of the WSORPS receives an entry into the WSOP Main Event. The event is an annual fundraiser for the "Cancer Research and Prevention Foundation" via Gordon's charity Bad Beat on Cancer. Poker player Annie Duke won the Second Annual World Series of Rock, Paper, Scissors.[72] The tournament is taped by ESPN and highlights are covered during "The Nuts" section of ESPN's annual WSOP broadcast.[73][74][75] 2009 was the fifth year of the tournament.

text: Jackpot En Poy of Eat Bulaga![edit]

text: Jackpot En Poy is a game segment of the Philippines' longest running noontime show, Eat Bulaga!. The game is based on the classic children's game rock–paper–scissors where four players are paired to compete in the three-round segment. In the first round, the first pair plays against each other until one player wins three times. The next pair then plays against each other in the second round. The winners from the first two rounds then compete against each other to finally determine the ultimate winner. The winner of the game then moves on to the final round. In the final round, the player is presented with several Dabarkads, each holding different amounts of cash prize. The player will then pick three Dabarkads who he or she will play rock–paper–scissors against. The player plays against them one at a time. If the player wins against any of the Eat Bulaga! host, he or she will win the cash prize.[76][77][78]

text: Variations[edit]

text: Players have developed numerous cultural and personal variations on the game, from simply playing the same game with different objects, to expanding into more weapons and rules.

text: Adapted rules[edit]

text: In Korea, a two-player upgraded version exists by the name muk-jji-ppa.[79]

text: In Japan, a "strip-poker" variant of rock-paper-scissors is known as 野球拳 (Yakyuken). The loser of each round removes an article of clothing. The game is a minor part of porn culture in Japan and other Asian countries after the influence of TV variety shows and Soft On Demand.

text: In the Philippines, the game is called jak-en-poy, from one of the Japanese names of the game, transliterated as jan-ken-pon. In a longer version of the game, a four-line song is sung, with hand gestures displayed at the end of each (or the final) line: "Jack-en-poy! / Hali-hali-hoy! / Sino'ng matalo, / siya'ng unggoy!" ("Jack-en-poy! / Hali-hali-hoy! / Whoever loses is the monkey!") In the former case, the person with the most wins at the end of the song, wins the game. A shorter version of the game uses the chant "Bato-bato-pick" ("Rock-rock-pick [i.e. choose]") instead.

text: A multiple player variation can be played: Players stand in a circle and all throw at once. If rock, paper, and scissors are all thrown, it is a stalemate, and they rethrow. If only two throws are present, all players with the losing throw are eliminated. Play continues until only the winner remains.[80]

text: Different weapons[edit]

text: In the Malaysian version of the game, "scissors" is replaced by "bird," represented with the finger tips of five fingers brought together to form a beak. The open palm represents water. Bird beats water (by drinking it); stone beats bird (by hitting it); and stone loses to water (because it sinks in it).

text: Singapore also has a related hand-game called "ji gu pa," where "ji" refers to the bird gesture, "gu" refers to the stone gesture, and "pa" refers to the water gesture. The game is played by two players using both hands. At the same time, they both say, ji gu pa!" At "pa!" they both show two open-palmed hands. One player then changes his hand gestures while calling his new combination out (e.g., "pa gu!"). At the same time, the other player changes his hand gestures as well. If one of his hand gestures is the same as the other one, that hand is "out" and he puts it behind his back; he is no longer able to play that hand for the rest of the round. The players take turns in this fashion, until one player loses by having both hands sent "out." "Ji gu pa" is most likely a transcription of the Japanese names for the different hand gestures in the original jan-ken game, "choki" (scissors), "guu" (rock) and "paa" (paper).

text: Using the same tripartite division, there is a full-body variation in lieu of the hand signs called "Bear, Hunter, Ninja".[81] In this iteration the participants stand back-to-back and at the count of three (or ro-sham-bo as is traditional) turn around facing each other using their arms evoking one of the totems.[82] The players' choices break down as: Hunter shoots bear; Bear eats ninja; Ninja kills hunter.[83] The game was popularized with a FedEx commercial[84] where warehouse employees had too much free time on their hands.

text: Additional weapons[edit]

text: This section  possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (January 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: As long as the number of moves is an odd number and each move defeats exactly half of the other moves while being defeated by the other half, any combination of moves will function as a game. For example, 5-, 7-, 9-, 11-, 15-, 25-, and 101-weapon versions exist.[85] Adding new gestures has the effect of reducing the odds of a tie, while increasing the complexity of the game. The probability of a tie in an odd-number-of-weapons game can be calculated based on the number of weapons n as 1/n, so the probability of a tie is 1/3 in standard rock-paper-scissors, but 1/5 in a version that offered five moves instead of three.[86]

text: Similarly, the French game "pierre, papier, ciseaux, puits" (stone, paper, scissors, well) is unbalanced; both the stone and scissors fall in the well and lose to it, while paper covers both stone and well. This means two "weapons", well and paper, can defeat two moves, while the other two weapons each defeat only one of the other three choices. The rock has no advantage to well, so optimal strategy is to play each of the other objects (paper, scissors and well) one third of the time.[87]

text: One popular five-weapon expansion is "rock-paper-scissors-Spock-lizard", invented by Sam Kass and Karen Bryla,[88] which adds "Spock" and "lizard" to the standard three choices. "Spock" is signified with the Star Trek Vulcan salute, while "lizard" is shown by forming the hand into a sock-puppet-like mouth. Spock smashes scissors and vaporizes rock; he is poisoned by lizard and disproven by paper. Lizard poisons Spock and eats paper; it is crushed by rock and decapitated by scissors. This variant was mentioned in a 2005 article in The Times of London[89] and was later the subject of an episode of the American sitcom The Big Bang Theory in 2008 (as rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock).[90]

text: The majority of such proposed generalizations are isomorphic to a simple game of modular arithmetic, where half the differences are wins for player one. For instance, rock-paper-scissors-Spock-lizard (note the different order of the last two moves) may be modeled as a game in which each player picks a number from one to five. Subtract the number chosen by player two from the number chosen by player one, and then take the remainder modulo 5 of the result. Player one is the victor if the difference is one or three, and player two is the victor if the difference is two or four. If the difference is zero, the game is a tie.

text: Alternatively, the rankings in rock-paper-scissors-Spock-lizard may be modeled by a comparison of the parity of the two choices. If it is the same (two odd-numbered moves or two even-numbered ones) then the lower number wins, while if they are different (one odd and one even) the higher wins. Using this algorithm, additional moves can easily be added two at a time while keeping the game balanced:

text:
Declare a move N+1 (where N is the original total of moves) that beats all existing odd-numbered moves and loses to the others (for example, the rock (#1), scissors (#3), and lizard (#5) could fall into the German well (#6), while the paper (#2) covers it and Spock (#4) manipulates it).
Declare another move N+2 with the reverse property (such as a plant (#7) that grows through the paper (#2), poisons Spock (#4), and grows through the well (#6), while being damaged by the rock (#1), scissors (#3), and lizard (#5)).


document_title: Appointment and confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States

question_text: what percent of the senate is needed to confirm a supreme court justice

root

text: Nomination[edit]

text: This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

tag: table

text: Article Two of the United States Constitution requires the President of the United States to nominate Supreme Court Justices and, with Senate confirmation, requires Justices to be appointed. This was for the division of power between the President and Senate by the founders, who wrote:

tag: p

text: he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the supreme Court...

text: Upon the election of a new President, incoming White House staff prepare profiles of possible candidates for the Supreme Court, considering not only judges but also politicians and other individuals whom they consider appropriate for the role. Besides considering national figures whose views are well-known, they consider others who are less recognized. They go through published rulings, articles, speeches, and other background material to get an idea of candidates' values and views on constitutional issues. Age, health, race, gender, education, and likelihood of confirmation are also factored into considerations. Once a Supreme Court vacancy opens, the President discusses the candidates with advisors. Senators also call the President with suggestions. In turn, the White House lobbies key senators for their votes. After a first choice is decided, the candidate is contacted and called on by the President to serve on the highest court. Staffers send a vetting form for the candidate to fill out. They visit the candidate to go over tax records and payments to domestic help. A formal FBI background check is conducted. Candidates whom the President has never met are interviewed by White House officials before being sent to the White House to be interviewed in person by the President. After making a final decision, the President calls the candidate, who is told to prepare a statement for an appearance in front of the national press for the President's formal announcement. The nominee then meets with senators and prepares for confirmation hearings.

text: Most Presidents nominate individuals who broadly share their ideological views.[1] In many cases, however, a Justice's decisions may be contrary to what the nominating President anticipated. A famous instance was Chief Justice Earl Warren; President Dwight D. Eisenhower expected him to be a conservative judge, but his decisions are arguably among the most liberal in the Court's history. Eisenhower later called the appointment "the biggest damn fool mistake I ever made".[2]  Another Justice whose decisions ran contrary to what was believed to be his ideology was David Souter, who was nominated to the high court in 1990 by President George H. W. Bush.  Many pundits and politicians at the time expected Souter to be a conservative; however, after becoming a Justice, his opinions generally fell on the liberal side of the political spectrum.

text: Because the Constitution does not set any qualifications for service as a Justice, the President may nominate any individual to serve on the Court. However, that person must receive the confirmation of the Senate.

text: Confirmation[edit]

text: In modern times, the confirmation process has attracted considerable attention from special-interest groups, many of which lobby senators to confirm or to reject a nominee, depending on whether the nominee's track record aligns with the group's views.[citation needed] The Senate Judiciary Committee conducts hearings, questioning nominees to determine their suitability. By convention, nominees avoid revealing too much about their views on potential cases that may come before the Court.[citation needed] At the close of confirmation hearings, the Committee votes on whether the nomination should go to the full Senate with a positive, negative or neutral report.

text: The Committee's practice of personally interviewing nominees is relatively recent, beginning with Harlan Fiske Stone in 1925. Some western senators were concerned with his links to Wall Street and expressed their opposition when Stone was nominated. Stone proposed what was then the novelty of appearing before the Judiciary Committee to answer questions; his testimony helped secure a confirmation vote with very little opposition. The second nominee to appear before the Committee was Felix Frankfurter, who only addressed (at the Committee's request) what he considered to be slanderous allegations against him.[3] The modern practice of the Committee questioning nominees on their judicial views began with the nomination of John Marshall Harlan II in 1955; the nomination came shortly after the Court handed down the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, and several Southern senators attempted to block Harlan's confirmation, hence the decision to testify.[4][5]

text: Once the Committee reports out the nomination, the whole Senate considers it. A simple majority vote is required to confirm or to reject a nominee. Prior to 2017, a successful filibuster threat could add the requirement of a supermajority of 60 needed in favor of cloture, which would allow debate to end and force a final vote on confirmation. Rejections are relatively uncommon; the Senate has explicitly rejected twelve Supreme Court nominees in its history. The most recent rejection of a nominee by vote of the full Senate came in 1987, when the Senate refused to confirm Robert Bork.

text: Not everyone nominated by the President has received a floor vote in the Senate. Prior to 2017 a nominee could be filibustered once debate on the nomination had begun in the full Senate. A filibuster indefinitely prolongs the debate, preventing a final vote on the nominee. President Lyndon Johnson's nomination of sitting Associate Justice Abe Fortas to succeed Earl Warren as Chief Justice in 1968 was the first successful filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee. It included both Republican and Democratic senators concerned with Fortas's ethics. President Donald Trump's nomination of Neil Gorsuch to the seat left vacant by Antonin Scalia's death was the second. Unlike the Fortas filibuster, however, only Democratic Senators voted against cloture on the Gorsuch nomination, citing his perceived conservative judicial philosophy, and the Republican majority's prior refusal to take up Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy.[6][7][8] This led the Republican majority to change the rules[9] and eliminate the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations.[10]

text: Not every Supreme Court nominee has received a floor vote in the Senate. A president may withdraw a nomination before an actual confirmation vote occurs, typically because it is clear that the Senate will reject the nominee; this occurred most recently with the nomination of Harriet Miers in 2006 before Committee hearings had begun, citing concerns about Senate requests during her confirmation process for access to internal Executive Branch documents resulting from her position as White House Counsel. In 1987, President Ronald Reagan withdrew the nomination of Douglas H. Ginsburg because of news reports containing marijuana use allegations.

text: The Senate may also fail to act on the nomination, which expires at the end of the session. For example, President Dwight Eisenhower's first nomination of John Marshall Harlan II in November 1954 was not acted on by the Senate; Eisenhower re-nominated Harlan in January 1955, and Harlan was confirmed two months later. Most recently, the Senate failed to act on President Barack Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland in March 2016 to fill the vacancy left by the death of Antonin Scalia; the nomination expired in January 2017, and the vacancy was later filled by President Donald J. Trump's appointment of Neil Gorsuch.[11]

text: Before 1981 the approval process of Justices was usually rapid. From the Truman through Nixon administrations, Justices were typically approved within one month. From the Reagan administration to the present, however, the process has taken much longer. According to the Congressional Research Service, the average number of days from nomination to final Senate vote since 1975 is 67 days (2.2 months), while the median is 71 days (or 2.3 months).[12][13] Some believe this is because Congress sees Justices as playing a more political role than in the past.[14] The perceived politicization of the process has drawn criticism. For example, columnist George F. Will termed the defeat of Robert Bork's nomination "unjust" and, more generally, that the nomination process does "not delve deeply into the nominee's jurisprudential thinking."[15] Supreme Court nominations have caused media speculation about whether the judge leans to the left, middle, or right.[16] One indication of the politicized selection process is how much time each nominee spends being questioned under the glare of media coverage; before 1925, nominees were never questioned;[17] after 1955, every nominee has been required to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee and answer questions; and the hours spent being grilled have lengthened from single digits (before 1980) to double digits today.[18]

text: Following is a table of the approximate number of hours that media sources estimate were spent on the questioning of Supreme Court nominees since 1925:

text:
Year

Nominee

# Hours

1925

Harlan Fiske Stone

7000500000000000000♠5

1938

Felix Frankfurter

–

1955

John Marshall Harlan II

–

1957

William J. Brennan, Jr.

7000300000000000000♠3

1967

Thurgood Marshall

7000700000000000000♠7

1971

William H. Rehnquist

7000700000000000000♠7

1975

John Paul Stevens

7000600000000000000♠6

1981

Sandra Day O'Connor

7001120000000000000♠12

1987

Robert Bork (not confirmed)

7001300000000000000♠30

1987

Anthony Kennedy

7001110000000000000♠11

1990

David H. Souter

7001200000000000000♠20

1991

Clarence Thomas

7001250000000000000♠25

1993

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

7001200000000000000♠20

1994

Stephen G. Breyer

7001200000000000000♠20

2005

John G. Roberts, Jr.

7001200000000000000♠20

2017

Neil Gorsuch

7001200000000000000♠20

Sources: The New York Times (2005, 2009), MSNBC (2005)[3][4][18]

text: Once the Senate confirms the nomination by an affirmative vote, the Secretary of the Senate attests to a resolution of confirmation and transmits it to the White House.[19]  The President then prepares and signs a commission, and causes the Seal of the United States Department of Justice to be affixed to the document before the new Justice can take office.[20] The date of commission determines a Justice's seniority.[21] A ceremony is held in which the Justice must take the Constitutional Oath, which is used for every federal and state officeholder below the President, and the Judicial Oath used for federal judges before entering into the execution of their office.

text: Recess appointments[edit]

text: Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides that:

text: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

text: Thus, when the Senate is in recess, the President may make a temporary appointment to any office requiring Senate approval, including filling vacancies on the Supreme Court, without the Senate's advice and consent. Such a recess appointee to the Supreme Court holds office only until the end of the next Senate session (always less than two years). To continue to serve thereafter and be compensated for his or her service, the nominee must be formally nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Of the ten Justices who have received recess appointments - two Chief Justices and eight Associate Justices - only Chief Justice John Rutledge was not subsequently confirmed for a regular appointment. No president since Dwight Eisenhower (who made three such appointments) has made a recess appointment to the Supreme Court and the practice has become highly controversial even when applied to lower federal courts. During the 110th Congress, the Democratic leadership of the Senate specifically blocked Republican President George W. Bush from making any recess appointments with the use of pro forma sessions.

text:
In 1960 the Senate passed a resolution stating that it was the sense of the Senate that recess appointments to the Supreme Court should not be made except under unusual circumstances.[22] Being a resolution, it has no legally binding effect, but was intended as an expression of the position of the Senate and as a guide to executive actions. The resolution passed by a vote of 48 to 37, mainly along party lines.[22]
[23]

text: Following is a list of recess appointments that have been made to the Supreme Court:[24]

text:
Justice
Appointed by
Date ofAppointment
Date ofNomination
Date ofSenate action
Senateaction

Thomas Johnson
Washington
August 5, 1791
October 31, 1791
November 7, 1791
Confirmed

John Rutledge(as Chief Justice)
Washington
July 1, 1795
December 10, 1795
December 15, 1795
Rejected

Bushrod Washington
J. Adams
September 29, 1798
December 19, 1798
December 20, 1798
Confirmed

Henry Brockholst Livingston
Jefferson
November 10, 1806
December 15, 1806
December 17, 1806
Confirmed

Smith Thompson
Monroe
September 1, 1823
December 5, 1823
December 9, 1823
Confirmed

John McKinley
Van Buren
April 22, 1837
September 18, 1837
September 25, 1837
Confirmed

Levi Woodbury
Polk
September 20, 1845
December 23, 1845
January 3, 1846
Confirmed

Benjamin Robbins Curtis
Fillmore
September 22, 1851
December 11, 1851
December 20, 1851
Confirmed

David Davis
Lincoln
October 17, 1862
December 1, 1862
December 8, 1862
Confirmed

Earl Warren(as Chief Justice)
Eisenhower
October 2, 1953
March 1, 1954
March 1, 1954
Confirmed

William J. Brennan, Jr.
Eisenhower
October 15, 1956
January 14, 1957
March 19, 1957
Confirmed

Potter Stewart
Eisenhower
October 14, 1958
January 17, 1959
December 5, 1959
Confirmed

text: Tenure and vacancies[edit]

text: The ability of a president to appoint new justices depends on the occurrence of a vacancy on the Court.  In practice, such vacancies normally occur as the result of an incumbent justices' death, resignation, or retirement.

text: The Constitution provides that justices "shall hold their offices during good behavior", which is understood to mean that confirmed justices may serve for the remainder of their lives, until death.  Justices may also resign or retire from their offices, and any of these circumstances results in a vacancy which must be filled.  Because justices have indefinite tenure, the timing of future vacancies is unpredictable.  Sometimes vacancies arise in quick succession: in September 1971, associate justices Hugo Black and John Marshall Harlan II both retired, producing two vacancies which were filled in January 1972 by Lewis Powell and William Rehnquist, respectively.  On the other hand, sometimes several years pass between consecutive vacancies.  In August 1994, Harry Blackmun's retirement created a vacancy which was filled by Stephen Breyer.  No further vacancy would occur on the Court until September 2005 when Rehnquist, since promoted to chief justice, died.  This vacancy was filled by current chief justice John Roberts.

text: Less commonly, though with historical precedent, vacancies may occur as a result of Congress changing the size of the Court.  Because the Constitution does not specify the Court's size, it was left to Congress to determine the matter through law, and a small number of statutes have legally changed the size of the Court throughout its history.  Changing the Court's size can have the effect of changing the seats on the Court; a newly created seat brings with it a vacancy which must be filled by an initial officeholder.  The original Judiciary Act of 1789 called for six justices, vacancies promptly filled by the appointments of George Washington, resulting in the Court's first complete composition.  An 1801 act called for the Court to be reduced to five justices upon its next vacancy, but was swiftly obviated by an 1802 act which restored the Court's legal size to six before any such vacancy occurred.  In 1807, the Court's size was increased to seven, creating one new vacancy filled by Thomas Todd.  Again in 1837, the Court's size was increased to nine, the two new vacancies being filled by John Catron and John McKinley.  An 1863 act increased the Court's size to ten, the vacancy being filled by Stephen Johnson Field.  Although an 1866 act provided that the Court's size would be thinned from ten to seven through attrition (and which did result in the elimination of two seats while in effect), a final 1869 act[25] interrupted the plan set forth in 1866: the Court's size shall be nine, the legally prescribed full strength which has stood ever since.  Consequently, one final seat was created and filled by Joseph Bradley.

text: President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to expand the Court in 1937, seeking to appoint an additional justice for each incumbent justice who reached the age of 70 years and 6 months and refused retirement; under Roosevelt's proposal, such appointments would continue until the Court reached a maximum size of 15 justices. Ostensibly, the proposal was made to ease the burdens of the docket on the elderly justices, but Roosevelt's actual purpose was to pack the Court with justices who would support New Deal policies and legislation.[26] This plan, usually called the "Court-packing Plan", failed in Congress and proved a political disaster for Roosevelt.[27] The balance of the Court shifted with the retirement of Willis Van Devanter and the confirmation of Hugo Black in August 1937. By the end of 1941, Roosevelt had appointed seven Supreme Court justices and elevated Harlan Fiske Stone to chief justice.[28]

text: It is constitutionally possible for a justice to be removed from office through Congressional impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate, another possible situation creating a vacancy.  Only one justice—Samuel Chase, late 1804-early 1805—has ever been impeached; however, Chase was acquitted by the Senate, and thus not removed from office.  Removal of a justice through an impeachment process has therefore never taken place.  Less substantial efforts towards impeachment of a sitting justice, not reaching a House vote, have occurred more recently: William O. Douglas was twice the subject of hearings, first in 1953 and again in 1970.  No mechanism presently exists for removing a justice who is permanently incapacitated by illness or injury, both unable to resign and unable to resume service.[29]

text: Despite the unpredictability of vacancies, most presidents have successfully appointed at least one justice. The four exceptions are William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, Andrew Johnson, and Jimmy Carter. Harrison died a month after taking office, though his successor John Tyler made an appointment during that presidential term. Taylor likewise died early in his term, although his successor Millard Fillmore also made a Supreme Court nomination before the end of that term. Johnson was denied the opportunity to appoint a justice by the 1866 act which reduced the Court's size, mentioned above.  Jimmy Carter is the only president who completed one full term in office without making a nomination to the Court during his presidency.


document_title: Down in the River to Pray

question_text: let's go down to the river and pray alison krauss

question_tokens: let 's go down to the river and pray alison krauss

text: Down in the River to Pray

text: Lyrics and versions[edit]

text: The earliest known version of the song, titled "The Good Old Way," was published in Slave Songs of the United States in 1867.[1] The song (#104) is credited to "Mr. G. H. Allan" of Nashville, Tennessee, who was likely the transcriber rather than the author.

text: According to some sources, the song was published in The Southern Harmony and Musical Companion in 1835, decades before the effort to gather and publish Negro spirituals gained momentum in the Reconstruction Era.[2] There is in fact a song called "The Good Old Way" in the Southern Harmony Hymnal.[3] That song, however, is a Manx hymn with a completely different melody and lyrics.[4] The lyrics begin as follows:

text:
Lift up your heads, Immanuel's friends
And taste the pleasure Jesus sends
Let nothing cause you to delay
But hasten on the good old way

text: Another version, titled "Come, Let Us All Go Down," was published in 1880 in The Story of the Jubilee Singers; With Their Songs, a book about the Fisk Jubilee Singers.[5] That version also refers to a valley rather than a river.

text: In some versions, "in the river" is replaced by "to the river". The phrase "in the river" is significant, for two reasons. The more obvious reason is that the song has often been sung at outdoor baptisms (such as the full-immersion baptism depicted in O Brother, Where Art Thou?).[2] Another reason is that many slave songs contained coded messages for escaping. When the slaves escaped, they would walk in the river because the water would cover their scent from the bounty-hunters' dogs.[6] Similarly, the "starry crown" could refer to navigating their escape by the stars.[7] And "Good Lord, show me the way" could be a prayer for God's guidance to find the escape route, commonly known as "the Underground Railroad."

text: Notable recordings[edit]

text:
1927: Price Family Sacred Singers (Okeh 40796)[8]
1929: Delta Big Four from Screamin' and Hollerin' the Blues: The Worlds of Charley Patton (Gennett Records)
1940: Lead Belly from Let It Shine On Me -- The Library Of Congress Recordings, V. 3 (New Rounder)[9]
1966: Doc Watson from Home Again! (Vanguard Records)
1970: Arlo Guthrie, single, Reprise Records 0951
2000: Alison Krauss from O Brother, Where Art Thou? (Lost Highway/Mercury)
2002: Alison Krauss from Live (Rounder)
2003: Doc Watson, Ricky Skaggs and Alison Krauss from The Three Pickers (Rounder / Umgd)
2005: The King's Singers from Six (Signum UK)
2005: Jill Johnson from The Christmas in You (Lionheart Records)
2009: Mormon Tabernacle Choir from Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing: American Folk Hymns & Spirituals (Mormon Tabernacle Choir)
2012: Sonya Isaacs from Hymns from the Old Country Church (Spring Hill Music Group)
2014: Nia Frazier performed a solo to a version of the song on Lifetime's Dance Moms
2014: Noah Gundersen partially covered the song on his 2014 album "Ledges". It was titled "Poor Man's Son."
2015: DeAnna Johnson performed on The Voice (U.S. season 8).

tag: ul


document_title: Haematopoiesis

question_text: where does myeloid hemopoiesis take place in adults

text: Haematopoiesis

text: Haematopoietic stem cells (HSCs)[edit]

text: Haematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) reside in the medulla of the bone (bone marrow) and have the unique ability to give rise to all of the different mature blood cell types and tissues.[1] HSCs are self-renewing cells: when they differentiate, at least some of their daughter cells remain as HSCs, so the pool of stem cells is not depleted.This phenomenon is called asymmetric division.[4]   The other daughters of HSCs (myeloid and lymphoid progenitor cells) can follow any of the other differentiation pathways that lead to the production of one or more  specific types of blood cell, but cannot renew themselves. The pool of progenitors is heterogeneous and can be divided into two groups; long-term self-renewing HSC and only transiently self-renewing HSC, also called short-terms.[5]  This is one of the main vital processes in the body.

text: All blood cells are divided into three lineages.[6]

text:
Red blood cells, also called erythrocytes, are the oxygen-carrying cells. Erythrocytes are functional and are released into the blood. The number of reticulocytes, immature red blood cells, gives an estimate of the rate of erythropoiesis.
Lymphocytes are the cornerstone of the adaptive immune system. They are derived from common lymphoid progenitors. The lymphoid lineage is composed of T-cells, B-cells and natural killer cells.  This is lymphopoiesis.
Cells of the myeloid lineage, which include granulocytes, megakaryocytes and macrophages, are derived from common myeloid progenitors, and are involved in such diverse roles as innate immunity and blood clotting.  This is myelopoiesis.

text: Granulopoiesis (or granulocytopoiesis) is haematopoiesis of granulocytes, except of mast cells which are granulocytes but with an extramedullar maturation.[7]

text: Megakaryocytopoiesis is haematopoiesis of megakaryocytes.

text: Locations[edit]

text: In developing embryos, blood formation occurs in aggregates of blood cells in the yolk sac, called blood islands. As development progresses, blood formation occurs in the spleen, liver and lymph nodes. When bone marrow develops, it eventually assumes the task of forming most of the blood cells for the entire organism.[1] However, maturation, activation, and some proliferation of lymphoid cells occurs in the spleen, thymus, and lymph nodes.  In children, haematopoiesis occurs in the marrow of the long bones such as the femur and tibia.  In adults, it occurs mainly in the pelvis, cranium, vertebrae, and sternum.[8]

text: Extramedullary[edit]

text:
In some cases, the liver, thymus, and spleen may resume their haematopoietic function, if necessary. This is called extramedullary haematopoiesis. It may cause these organs to increase in size substantially.
During fetal development, since bones and thus the bone marrow develop later, the liver functions as the main haematopoetic organ. Therefore, the liver is enlarged during development.[9]

text: Other vertebrates[edit]

text: In some vertebrates, haematopoiesis can occur wherever there is a loose stroma of connective tissue and slow blood supply, such as the gut, spleen or kidney.[10]

text: Maturation[edit]

text: As a stem cell matures it undergoes changes in gene expression that limit the cell types that it can become and moves it closer to a specific cell type (cellular differentiation). These changes can often be tracked by monitoring the presence of proteins on the surface of the cell. Each successive change moves the cell closer to the final cell type and further limits its potential to become a different cell type.

text: Cell fate determination[edit]

text: Two models for hematopoiesis have been proposed: determinism and stochastic theory.[11] For the stem cells and other undifferentiated blood cells in the bone marrow, the determination is generally explained by the determinism theory of haematopoiesis, saying that colony stimulating factors and other factors of the haematopoietic microenvironment determine the cells to follow a certain path of cell differentiation.[1] This is the classical way of describing haematopoiesis. In stochastic theory, undifferentiated blood cells differentiate to specific cell types by randomness. This theory has been supported by experiments showing that within a population of mouse haematopoietic progenitor cells, underlying stochastic variability in the distribution of Sca-1, a stem cell factor, subdivides the population into groups exhibiting variable rates of cellular differentiation. For example, under the influence of erythropoietin (an erythrocyte-differentiation factor), a subpopulation of cells (as defined by the levels of Sca-1) differentiated into erythrocytes at a sevenfold higher rate than the rest of the population.[12]  Furthermore, it was shown that if allowed to grow, this subpopulation re-established the original subpopulation of cells, supporting the theory that this is a stochastic, reversible process. Another level at which stochasticity may be important is in the process of apoptosis and self-renewal. In this case, the haematopoietic microenvironment prevails upon some of the cells to survive and some, on the other hand, to perform apoptosis and die.[1] By regulating this balance between different cell types, the bone marrow can alter the quantity of different cells to ultimately be produced.[13]

text: Growth factors[edit]

text:
Red and white blood cell production is regulated with great precision in healthy humans, and the production of leukocytes is rapidly increased during infection. The proliferation and self-renewal of these cells depend on growth factors. One of the key players in self-renewal and development of haematopoietic cells is stem cell factor (SCF),[16] which binds to the c-kit receptor on the HSC.  Absence of SCF is lethal. There are other important glycoprotein growth factors which regulate the proliferation and maturation, such as interleukins IL-2, IL-3, IL-6, IL-7. Other factors, termed colony-stimulating factors (CSFs), specifically stimulate the production of committed cells. Three CSFs are granulocyte-macrophage CSF (GM-CSF), granulocyte CSF (G-CSF) and macrophage CSF (M-CSF).[17]
These stimulate granulocyte formation and are active on either progenitor cells or end product cells.

text:
Erythropoietin is required for a myeloid progenitor cell to become an erythrocyte.[14] On the other hand, thrombopoietin makes myeloid progenitor cells differentiate to megakaryocytes (thrombocyte-forming cells).[14]
The diagram to the right provides examples of cytokines and the differentiated blood cells they give rise to.[18]

text: Transcription factors[edit]

text: Growth factors initiate signal transduction pathways, which lead to activation of transcription factors. Growth factors elicit different outcomes depending on the combination of factors and the cell's stage of differentiation. For example, long-term expression of PU.1 results in myeloid commitment, and short-term induction of PU.1 activity leads to the formation of immature eosinophils.[19] Recently, it was reported that transcription factors such as NF-κB can be regulated by microRNAs (e.g., miR-125b) in haematopoiesis.[20]

text: The first key player of differentiation from HSC to a multipotent progenitor (MPP) is transcription factor CCAAT-enhancer binding protein α (C/EBPα). Mutations in C/EBPα are associated with acute myeloid leukaemia.[21]  From this point, cells can either differentiate along the Erythroid-megakaryocyte lineage or lymphoid and myeloid lineage, which have common progenitor, called lymphoid-primed multipotent progenitor. There are two main transcription factors. PU.1 for Erythroid-megakaryocyte lineage and GATA-1, which leads to a lymphoid-primed multipotent progenitor.[22]

text: Other transcription factors include Ikaros[23] (B cell development), and Gfi1[24] (promotes Th2 development and inhibits Th1) or IRF8[25] (basophils and mast cells). Significantly, certain factors elicit different responses at different stages in the haematopoiesis. For example, CEBPα in neutrophil development or PU.1 in monocytes and dendritic cell development. It is important to note that processes are not unidirectional: differentiated cells may regain attributes of progenitor cells.

text: An example is PAX5 factor, which is important in B cell development and associated with lymphomas.[26]  Surprisingly, pax5 conditional knock out mice allowed peripheral mature B cells to de-differentiate to early bone marrow progenitors. These findings show that transcription factors act as caretakers of differentiation level and not only as initiators.[27]

text: Mutations in transcription factors are tightly connected to blood cancers, as acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) or acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). For example, Ikaros is known to be regulator of numerous biological events. Mice with no Ikaros lack B cells, Natural killer and T cells.[28]  Ikaros has six zinc fingers domains, four are conserved DNA-binding domain and two are for dimerization.[29] Very important finding is, that different zinc fingers are involved in binding to different place in DNA and this is the reason for pleiotropic effect of Ikaros and different involvement in cancer, but mainly are mutations associated with BCR-Abl patients and it is bad prognostic marker.[30]

text: Myeloid-based model[edit]

text: For a decade now, the evidence is growing that HSC maturation follows a myeloid-based model instead of the 'classical' schoolbook dichotomy model. In the latter model, the HSC first generates a common myeloid-erythroid progenitor (CMEP) and a common lymphoid progenitor (CLP). The CLP produces only T or B cells. The myeloid-based model postulates that HSCs first diverge into the CMEP and a common myelo-lymphoid progenitor (CMLP), which generates T and B cell progenitors through a bipotential myeloid-T progenitor and a myeloid-B progenitor stage. The main difference is that in this new model, all erythroid, T and B lineage branches retain the potential to generate myeloid cells (even after the segregation of T and B cell lineages). The model proposes the idea of erythroid, T and B cells as specialized types of a prototypic myeloid HSC.[31]


document_title: One Day at a Time

question_text: who played the grandmother on one day at a time

text: One Day at a Time

text: Background[edit]

text: The series was created by Whitney Blake and Allan Manings, a husband-and-wife writing duo who were both actors in the 1950s and 1960s. The series was based on Whitney Blake's own life as a single mother, raising her three children (Including future actress Meredith Baxter) after her divorce from her first husband.[1]

text: Plot[edit]

text: Ann Romano, a divorced mother, moves from their home in Logansport, Indiana to Indianapolis with her daughters, the rebellious Julie and the wisecracking Barbara. Ann frequently struggles with maintaining her role as mother while affording her daughters the freedom she never had as a young woman. Ann begins dating her divorce lawyer, David Kane. They become engaged and call it off on their wedding day when David says he wants kids but Ann doesn’t. Dwayne Schneider, the building's quirky superintendent (most often referred to only by his last name), provides usually unwanted advice to the tenants.

text: After David takes a job in Los Angeles, the focus squarely rests on Ann's dilemmas as a single mother and career woman as well as the girls' growing pains, with Schneider becoming a more welcomed part of the family. Ann's strained relationship with her ex-husband Ed slowly mends, as does the girls' relationship with his new wife, Vickie. Julie and Barbara advance through high school and into the working world, and Julie eventually marries flight attendant Max Horvath. Alex, the orphaned son of Ann's deceased boyfriend, moves in, changing the dynamics in the female-dominated apartment. Later in the series run, Julie gives birth to a daughter, "Little Annie" Horvath, Barbara marries dental student Mark Royer, and Ann's mother Katherine moves nearby.

text: In the penultimate episode, Ann decides to take a job in London, leaving her daughters in Indianapolis to raise families of their own. In the series finale, Schneider also leaves town, moving to Florida to take care of his niece and nephew.

text: Production[edit]

text: For its entire run, the series was taped in Hollywood before a studio audience. Originally, it was taped at CBS Television City. Shortly after its premiere, the series began taping at Metromedia Square, where it remained until 1982. From 1982 to 1984, the series was taped at Universal Studios Hollywood.

text: Like many sitcoms developed by Norman Lear, One Day at a Time often tackled serious issues in life and relationships, particularly those related to second wave feminism. Stories depicting such events as weddings, births, and other important milestones frequently stretched over two-, three-, and four-part episodes.

text: Theme song and opening credits[edit]

text: The theme song for One Day at a Time, "This is It", was composed by Brill Building songwriter Jeff Barry and his wife Nancy Barry, and performed by recording artist Polly Cutter. The opening credits were originally seen over a filmed sequence showing Ann, Julie, and Barbara excitedly moving into their new home. Later, the opening credits sequence mostly consisted of clips of each cast member taken from previous episodes.

text: Casting[edit]

text: Actors Bonnie Franklin, Pat Harrington, Jr., and Valerie Bertinelli were the only cast members to remain with the series throughout its entire run. Lead actress Mackenzie Phillips was fired after the fifth season due to growing problems with substance abuse. She later returned in a frequent recurring role. Original cast member Richard Masur was written out early in the second season but returned as a guest star in the sixth-season finale.

text: After Masur's departure, the producers tried going in a different direction. Instead of Ann Romano being romantically involved with a man, it was decided to give Ann a comedic foil. For that role, producer Norman Lear chose actress and comedienne Mary Louise Wilson, who had just completed a successful run on Broadway as "Tessie Tura" in a revival of Gypsy starring Angela Lansbury. Wilson was signed to play Ginny Wroblicki, a cocktail waitress who moves into Schneider's apartment building, and immediately becomes Ann's best friend and confidante. According to her memoir, My First Hundred Years in Show Business, prior to being cast as Ginny, Wilson had never seen One Day at a Time and immediately sat down and watched an episode one night in her apartment. She did not find the sitcom funny at all and was not given a script until the first read-through of her first episode. Wilson also did not take to Franklin "who took her role as arbiter over moral issues very seriously" and who considered herself "our foremost authority on Broadway". She also thought that Harrington's character of Schneider was not funny at all, although she admitted Harrington, himself, was hilarious offscreen. Wilson wrote that "aside from Lear, nobody thought I was funny...To make matters worse each character, according to the show's formula, had to have a 'serious' moral dilemma at some point, and I was given some problem about an illegitimate child to work out in these increasingly sentimental scenes that made my bowels shrink." At the end of the second season of One Day at a Time, Wilson begged her agent to ask Lear to release her from her contract. Wilson later admitted, "I felt terribly wrong to be so miserable. I knew this was the kind of break actors longed for." Wilson was also unaccustomed to working on a sitcom with four cameras in front of a live audience where "you said your line when the red light on the camera went on...and there follows a pause longer than the river Styx before the light on camera four goes on" at which the character you're speaking to says the next line. After the meeting with her agent, Wilson impulsively changed her mind and agreed to stay with the series but it was too late. Her agent had already informed Norman Lear of Wilson's unhappiness. As a result, Lear released Wilson from the show after she had completed 14 episodes, and Ginny Wroblicki was never seen, referred to, or heard from again[2] except in a fifth-season episode ("Retrospective") made up mainly of clips from earlier in the series..

text: For the next two seasons, the central cast of Ann, Julie, Barbara, and Schneider was supplemented by recurring characters, including William Kirby Cullen as Julie's boyfriend Chuck Butterfield; Howard Morton and K Callan as Chuck's parents; John Putch as Barbara's awkward friend Bob Morton; Scott Colomby as Barbara's boyfriend Cliff Randall; and John Hillerman and Charles Siebert as Ann's bosses, Mr. Connors and Mr. Davenport, respectively. Dick O'Neill and Nedra Volz made three appearances together as Orville and Emily, residents of the retirement home where the main characters put on a semi-regular variety show. Joseph Campanella also made several appearances as Ann's ex-husband and the girls' father, Ed Cooper.

text: Michael Lembeck joined the series as Julie's husband, Max, in the fifth season, but he was written out as a consequence of Phillips' firing. (But later returned in Season 7 along with Philips) A steady stream of regulars was added in the ensuing seasons, including Ron Rifkin as Ann's boyfriend, Nick; Glenn Scarpelli as Nick's son, Alex; and Boyd Gaines as Barbara's boyfriend, later husband, Mark. Shelley Fabares, who'd previously guest starred as Ann's rival co-worker Francine Webster, appeared more frequently, eventually becoming a regular. Nanette Fabray, who played Ann's mother, also made more frequent appearances before becoming a regular cast member in the final season. Howard Hesseman joined the series for a short time as Mark's father, Sam, who would become Ann's second husband.

text: Notable guest stars throughout the series run include Norman Alden, Robby Benson, Carla Borelli, Charlie Brill, Dennis Burkley, Jack Dodson, Elinor Donahue, David Dukes, Greg Evigan, Conchata Ferrell, Corey Feldman, Alice Ghostley, Lee Grant, Mark Hamill, Jim Hutton, Terry Kiser, Richard Kline, Christopher Knight, Jay Leno, Robert Mandan, Robert Morse, Denise Nicholas, J. Pat O'Malley, Jo Ann Pflug, Eve Plumb, Susan Richardson, William Schallert, Suzanne Somers, Ellen Travolta, Dick Van Patten, and Keenan Wynn.

text: Main cast[edit]

text:
Actor
Character
Seasons

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Bonnie Franklin
Ann Romano
Main

Mackenzie Phillips
Julie Cooper Horvath
Main

Recurring

Richard Masur
David Kane
Main

Guest

Valerie Bertinelli
Barbara Cooper Royer
Main

Pat Harrington, Jr.
Dwayne Schneider
Main

Mary Louise Wilson
Ginny Wroblicki

Main

Michael Lembeck
Max Horvath

Main

Recurring
Main

Ron Rifkin
Nick Handris

Main

Glenn Scarpelli
Alex Handris

Main

Boyd Gaines
Mark Royer

Recurring
Main

Shelley Fabares
Francine Webster

Guest

Guest
Recurring
Main
Recurring

Nanette Fabray
Katherine Romano

Guest
Recurring
Main

Howard Hesseman
Sam Royer

Recurring
Main

text: Episodes[edit]

text:
Season
Episodes
Originally aired

First aired
Last aired

1
15
December 16, 1975
March 30, 1976

2
24
September 28, 1976
March 22, 1977

3
24
September 27, 1977
April 3, 1978

4
26
September 18, 1978
April 14, 1979

5
26
September 30, 1979
April 13, 1980

6
21
November 9, 1980
May 10, 1981

7
25
October 11, 1981
May 16, 1982

8
26
September 26, 1982
May 23, 1983

9
22
October 2, 1983
May 28, 1984

text: Reception[edit]

text: Ratings[edit]

text: One Day at a Time was best known in the 1980s as a staple of the CBS Sunday-night lineup, one of the most successful in TV history, along with Archie Bunker's Place, Alice, and The Jeffersons.

text: The series consistently ranked among the top twenty (if not the top ten) programs in the ratings. However, the network moved the show around on the prime time schedule eleven times. By the end of the 1982–83 season, viewership was beginning to slip and the series ended season eight ranking at No. 16. At this time, Bonnie Franklin and Valerie Bertinelli were anxious to move on, but agreed to do a ninth (and final) season. (Although both were offered contracts for two seasons: a ninth and a tenth according to Bertinelli in her autobiography Losing It: And Gaining My Life Back One Pound at a Time.)

text:
TV Season
Time slot (ET)
Nielsen ratings[3]

Rank
Rating

1975–76
Tuesday at 9:30 pm
12
23.1

1976–77
8
23.4 (Tied with The ABC Sunday Night Movie and Baretta)

1977–78
Tuesday at 9:30 pm (Episodes 1-15)
Monday at 9:30 pm (Episodes 16-24)
10
23.0

1978–79
Monday at 9:30 pm (Episodes 1-13)
Wednesday at 9:00 pm (Episodes 14, 16-23)
Wednesday at 9:30 pm (Episode 15)
Sunday at 8:30 pm (Episodes 24-26)
18
21.6

1979–80
Sunday at 8:30 pm (Episodes 1-17, 19-26)
Sunday at 8:00 pm (Episode 18)
10
23.0

1980–81
Sunday at 8:30 pm (Episodes 1-9, 11-16, 19-21)
Sunday at 8:00 pm (Episode 10)
Sunday at 9:00 pm (Episode 17)
Sunday at 9:30 pm (Episode 18)
11
22.0

1981–82
Sunday at 8:30 pm
10
22.0

1982–83
Sunday at 9:30 pm (Episodes 1-18)
Monday at 9:30 pm (Episodes 19-26)
16
19.1

1983–84
Sunday at 8:30 pm (Episodes 1-6, 8-13)
Sunday at 9:00 pm (Episode 7)
Wednesday at 8:00 pm (Episodes 14-19)
Monday at 9:00 pm (Episodes 20-22)
31
N/A

text: Awards and honors[edit]

text:
1981, 1982: Golden Globe Award for Best Supporting Actress – Series, Miniseries or Television Film to Valerie Bertinelli
1982: Outstanding Directing in a Comedy Series to Alan Rafkin[4]
1984: Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor – Comedy Series to Pat Harrington[5]

text: Syndication[edit]

text: CBS aired daytime reruns of the show for three years. From September 17, 1979, to February 1, 1980, it aired on the daytime schedule at 3:30 pm Eastern time; with the cancellation of Love of Life to accommodate the expansion of The Young and the Restless to one hour, it was moved on February 4, 1980, to 4 pm Eastern due to Guiding Light moving to 3 pm. On September 28, 1981, it moved to 10 am Eastern time, and on September 20, 1982, it was replaced by The $25,000 Pyramid.

text: Soon after, the show entered off-network syndication, airing on local stations around the country, and nationally on WGN, TBS, and the E! Network.

text: Logo TV started airing episodes in April 2017.

text: As of July 23, 2017, the series airs Sunday nights on the digital broadcast network Antenna TV.[6] It also can be seen on the satellite service FeTV.

text: Cast reunions[edit]

text: The One Day at a Time Reunion was a 60-minute CBS retrospective special which aired on Tuesday February 22, 2005, at 9:00 pm ET, reuniting Bonnie Franklin, Mackenzie Phillips, Valerie Bertinelli, and Pat Harrington to reminisce about the series and their characters. Regular cast members Richard Masur, Shelley Fabares, Nanette Fabray, Michael Lembeck, and Glenn Scarpelli shared their feelings about their time on the show in separate interviews. The special was included as a bonus on One Day at a Time: The Complete First Season DVD set.

text: On February 26, 2008, Franklin, Phillips, Bertinelli, and Harrington reunited once again to talk about life on the set, Phillips' drug problems, and the show's theme song on NBC's Today Show as part of a week-long segment titled "Together Again: TV's Greatest Casts Reunited".

text: Bertinelli, Harrington, and (on tape) Franklin appeared on the September 10, 2008, episode of Rachael Ray to celebrate Ray's 40th birthday.

text: In 2011, Franklin reunited again with Bertinelli on an episode of Hot in Cleveland which marked one of Franklin's last acting roles before her death in 2013. Mackenzie Phillips and Pat Harrington Jr. also made individual cameos on the series.

text: One Day at a Time was awarded the Innovation Award on the 2012 TV Land Award show on April 29. Accepting the award were Valerie Bertinelli, Bonnie Franklin, Pat Harrington Jr., Richard Masur, Mackenzie Phillips, and Glenn Scarpelli.

text: DVD release[edit]

text: On April 24, 2007, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment released the first season of One Day at a Time on DVD in Region 1.

text: On September 7, 2017, it was announced that Shout! Factory had acquired the rights to the series and released One Day at a Time - The Complete Series on DVD in Region 1 on December 5, 2017.[7] Season 2 is scheduled for release on March 27, 2018.[8]

text:
DVD Name
Ep #
Release Date

The Complete First Season
15
April 24, 2007

The Complete Second Season
24
March 27, 2018

The Complete Series
209
December 5, 2017

text: Remake[edit]

text: Gloria Calderon Kellett and Mike Royce developed a new version of the series, with a Latino cast, for Netflix, beginning in 2017. The ensemble is led by Justina Machado, with Rita Moreno, Stephen Tobolowsky, Isabella Gomez, Marcel Ruiz, and Todd Grinnell in supporting roles. Pam Fryman directed the pilot episode.[9][10][11][12][13]