GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: Conservation Letters, Wiley, Vol. 6, No. 5 ( 2013-09), p. 387-388
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1755-263X , 1755-263X
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2013
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2430375-6
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Conservation Biology, Wiley, Vol. 27, No. 6 ( 2013-12), p. 1254-1264
    Abstract: Los negocios, gobiernos e instituciones financieras adoptan cada vez más una política de no pérdida neta de biodiversidad para el desarrollo de actividades. La meta de la no pérdida neta está enfocada en ayudar a aliviar la tensión entre la conservación y el desarrollo al permitir que se obtengan ganancias económicas sin pérdidas de biodiversidad acompañantes. Los balances de biodiversidad representan un componente necesario de una estrategia de mitigación mucho más amplia para obtener una no pérdida neta siguiendo la aplicación previa de evitación, minimización y medidas de remediación. Sin embargo, han surgido dudas sobre el uso apropiado de los balances de biodiversidad. Examinamos lo que implica una no pérdida neta como un resultado de conservación deseable y revisamos las condiciones que determinan si, y bajo cuales circunstancias, los balances de biodiversidad pueden ayudar a obtener dicha meta. Propusimos un marco de trabajo conceptual para sustituir las aproximaciones seguidas y ad hoc en muchas iniciativas de balances de biodiversidad. La relevancia de los balances de biodiversidad hacia la no pérdida neta yace sobre dos premisas fundamentales. Primero, los balances rara vez son adecuados para obtener la no pérdida neta por sí sola. Segundo, algunos efectos de desarrollo pueden ser muy difíciles o riesgosos, o incluso imposibles, para el balance. Para ayudar a obtener no pérdida neta a través de los balances de biodiversidad, las ganancias de biodiversidad deben ser comparables con las pérdidas, estar sumadas a las ganancias de conservación que pueden haber ocurrido en la ausencia de los balances y ser duraderas y estar protegidas del riesgo de fracaso. La adhesión a estas condiciones requiere una consideración del contexto de paisaje más amplio de desarrollo y de las actividades del balance, la sincronización de la obtención del balance, medida de la biodiversidad, procedimientos de aseguramiento y juegos de reglas usados para calcular las pérdidas y ganancias de biodiversidad y guías en el diseño de balances, y aproximaciones al manejo de riesgo. La adopción de este marco de trabajo hará más fuerte el potencial para que los balances proporcionen un mecanismo defendible ecológicamente que pueda ayudar a reconciliar a la conservación con el desarrollo.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0888-8892 , 1523-1739
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2013
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2020041-9
    SSG: 12
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Conservation Letters, Wiley, Vol. 6, No. 5 ( 2013-09), p. 376-384
    Abstract: Biodiversity offsetting is increasingly being used to reconcile the objectives of conservation and development. It is generally acknowledged that there are limits to the kinds of impacts on biodiversity that can or should be offset, yet there is a paucity of policy guidance as to what defines these limits and the relative difficulty of achieving a successful offset as such limits are approached. In order to improve the consistency and defensibility of development decisions involving offsets, and to improve offset design, we outline a general process for evaluating the relative offsetability of different impacts on biodiversity. This process culminates in a framework that establishes the burden of proof necessary to confirm the appropriateness and achievability of offsets, given varying levels of: conservation concern for affected biodiversity; residual impact magnitude; opportunity for suitable offsets; and feasibility of offset implementation in practice. Rankings for biodiversity conservation concern are drawn from existing conservation planning tools and approaches, including the IUCN Red List, Key Biodiversity Areas, and international bank environmental safeguard policies. We hope that the proposed process will stimulate much‐needed scientific and policy debate to improve the integrity and accountability of both regulated and voluntary biodiversity offsetting.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 1755-263X , 1755-263X
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2013
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2430375-6
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 122, No. 21 ( 2013-11-15), p. 1614-1614
    Abstract: In chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), genomic aberrations identify subgroups of patients with distinct treatment outcomes. In particular, patients with deletion of chromosome 17p and/or TP53 gene mutations have inferior prognosis with standard therapy. Hence, screening for these abnormalities is mandatory prior to enrolling patients in clinical trials (CT) and can be also useful in general practice (GP). Recent studies suggest that aberrant p53 function (p53ab), due to TP53 gene mutations and/or del(17p), is only one of several mechanisms underlying clinical aggressiveness. Indeed, mutations in the NOTCH1, SF3B1 and BIRC3 genes have been reported as recurrent in CLL and correlated to poor outcome which is in contrast to mutations in MYD88. An important caveat stemming from published studies is the relative small and hetereogeneous sample size thus making it difficult to draw conclusions regarding the actual incidence and prognostic relevance of these mutations in CLL. The European Research Initiative on CLL (ERIC) is pursuing several studies to shed light on these issues in large and well-annotated CLL series, comprising both GP CLL and CT CLL cases, and here we report the initial results of this project. To date, a total of 3185 patients have been included in the analysis; 596 (18.7%) are CT cases and 2589 (81.3%) GP cases. Mutational screening provided data on NOTCH1 (entire exon 34 or targeted analysis for del7544-45), TP53 (exons 4-9), SF3B1 (exons 14-16), BIRC3 (exons 6-9) and MYD88 (exon 5). For each gene, almost two-thirds of the cases were analyzed within a year of diagnosis. Overall, BIRC3 and MYD88 mutations were relatively rare [25/923 (2.7%) and 24/1085 (2.2%) respectively] , however: (i) BIRC3 mutations were significantly (p 〈 0.05) more frequent in cases with (a) unmutated IGHV genes (U-CLL), (b) del(11q) and (c) trisomy 12; (ii) all MYD88 mutations were found in cases with mutated IGHV genes. Regarding the other genes analyzed: (i) NOTCH1 mutations: 246/3038 (8%) cases, with a clear bias (p 〈 0.01) to CT cases; (ii) TP53 mutations: 217/2154 (10.1%) cases, with no significant differences between GP vs. CT cases, likely reflecting the policy of some institutions to routinely screen only U-CLL; (iii) SF3B1 mutations: 225/2028 (11%) cases (K700E: 39%), enriched among CT cases (p 〈 0.00001). Co-existing mutations were very infrequent: TP53+SF3B1: 28/1756, 1.6%; NOTCH1+TP53: 24/1978, 1.2%; NOTCH1+SF3B1: 15/1983, 0.7%. Overall, the prevalence of mutations differed significantly between institutions, probably due to differences in the composition of the respective cohorts and/or the detection method: (i) TP53: 4.5-39%; (ii) NOTCH1: 4-13.4%; SF3B1: 3.6-20.6%. Taking this into account, no clear geographical differences in the prevalence of different mutations were observed. For all three genes, mutations were significantly (p 〈 0.05) associated with Binet stages B/C, shorter lymphocyte doubling time and U-CLL. For each gene, mutant cases displayed significantly (p 〈 0.05) different profiles of genomic aberrations: (i) NOTCH1: high frequency of +12, low frequency of del(13q); (ii) TP53: high frequency of del(17p), low frequency of +12 and del(11q); (iii) SF3B1: high frequency of del(11q), low frequency of +12. The clinical impact of NOTCH1 and SF3B1 mutations as well as p53ab on time-to-first treatment (TTFT) was assessed in 647 treatment-naïve Binet A cases. In univariate analysis, mutations in NOTCH1 or SF3B1 and p53ab were significantly associated (p 〈 0.001) with shorter TTFT. In multivariate analysis (tested variables: IGHV mutational status, p53ab, +12, del(11q), NOTCH1 mutations, SF3B1 mutations), significant independent factors for shorter TTFT were SF3B1 mutations (p=0.01), p53ab (p 〈 0.0001), del(11q) (p=0.048) and U-CLL (p 〈 0.0001). In conclusion, despite some caveats (e.g. retrospective nature of the study, patient selection biases, and differences in laboratory methods), this study offers information on the prevalence and prognostic impact of recurrent gene mutations in CLL based on the largest series of patients examined thus far. This study also indicates that novel mutations are likely to be integrated into a prognostic biomarker index in CLL. Nevertheless, to achieve this goal, important pre-requisites must be met including the standardization/harmonization of laboratory methods and the prospective evaluation of these markers in clinical trials. Disclosures: Stamatopoulos: Roche: Research Funding.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2013
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...