Molecular and serological studies on the recent seal virus epizootics in Europe and Siberia

The virus epizootics which occurred in seals in both Europe and Siberia during 1987/1988 were caused by two different morbillivirus, referred to as phocid distemper virus (PDV) 1 and 2, respectively. Molecular and serological studies have shown that the European virus is quite distinct from canine distemper virus (CDV), its closest relative in the morbillivirus group. Analysis of tissues obtained from infected seals from a wide geographical distrubution over Northern Europe showed that the infectious agent (PDV 1) was identical in all cases. Nucleotide sequence analysis of one of the virus genes suggested that this virus has evolved away from CDV over a long time period and is most probably an enzootic virus of marine mammals. In contrast, the virus (PDV 2) which caused the deaths of many Siberian seals was indistinguishable, both serologically and at the molecular level, from CDV and must have originated from a land source.

Evaluating competing theories of street entrepreneurship

Conventionally, street entrepreneurs were either seen as a residue from a pre-modern era that is gradually disappearing (modernisation theory), or an endeavour into which marginalised populations are driven out of necessity in the absence of alternative ways of securing a livelihood (structuralist theory). In recent years, however, participa-tioninstreetentrepreneurshiphas beenre-read eitherasa rationaleconomicchoice(neo-liberal theory) or as conducted for cultural reasons (post-modern theory). The aim of this paper is to evaluate critically these competing explanations for participation in street entrepreneurship. To do this, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 871 street entrepreneurs in the Indian city of Bangalore during 2010 concerning their reasons for participation in street entrepreneurship. The finding is that no one explanation suffices. Some 12 % explain their participation in street entrepreneurship as necessity-driven, 15 % as traditional ancestral activity, 56 % as a rational economic choice and 17 % as pursued for social or lifestyle reasons. The outcome is a call to combine these previously rival explanations in order to develop a richer and more nuanced theorisation of the multifarious motives for street entrepreneurship in emerging market economies.