A Souvenir of the Niagara Falls, showing Summer and Winter views of Niagara Falls and their surroundings. --

Cover title: Niagara Falls illustrated, Summer and Winter.

Niagara and vicinity : views of the world's greatest wonder and its nearby cities. --

Cover title: Beauty spots of Niagara & vicinity.

Summer resorts reached by the Grand Trunk Railway and its connections : Including Niagara Falls, The Thousand Islands, Rapids of the St. Lawrence River, The White Mountains, Montreal, Quebec, The Saquenay River, and the seashore. --

Compliments of Passenger Department.

Physical volcanology, sedimentology, stratigraphy and petrochemistry of the Berry Creek metavolcanics: an Archean calc-alkaline complex, Lake of the Woods, Ontario

The steeply dipping, isoclinally folded early Precambrian (Archean) Berry Creek Metavolcanic Complex comprises primary to resedimented pyroclastic, epiclastic and autoclastic deposits. Tephra erupted from central volcanic edifices was dumped by mass flow mechanisms into peripheral volcanosedimentary depressions. Sedimentation has been essentially contemporaneous with eruption and transport of tephra. The monolithic to heterolithic tuffaceous horizons are interpreted as subaerial to subaqueous pumice and ash flows, secondary debris flows, lahars, slump deposits and turbidites. Monolithic debris flows, derived from crumble breccia and dcme talus, formed during downslope collapse and subsequent gravity flowage. Heterolithic tuff, lahars and lava flow morphologies suggest at least temporary emergence of the edifice. Local collapse may have accompanied pyroclastic volcanism. The tephra, produced by hydromagmatic to magmatic eruptions, were rapidly transported, by primary and secondary mechanisms, to a shallow littoral to deep water subaqueous fan developed upon the subjacent mafic metavolcanic platform. Deposition resulted from traction, traction carpet, and suspension sedimentation from laminar to turbulent flows. Facies mapping revealed proximal (channel to overbank) to distal facies epiclastics (greywackes, argillite) intercalated with proximal vent to medial fan facies crystal rich ash flows, debris flows, bedded tuff and shallow water to deep water lava flows. Framework and matrix support debris flows exhibit a variety of subaqueous sedimentary structures, e.g., coarse tail grading, double grading, inverse to normal grading, graded stratified pebbly horizons, erosional channels. Pelitic to psammitic AE turbidites also contain primary stru~tures, e.g., flames, load casts, dewatering pipes. Despite low to intermediate pressure greenschist to amphibolite grade metamorphism and variably penetrative deformation, relicts of pumice fragments and shards were recognized as recrystallized quartzofeldspathic pseudomorphs. The mafic to felsic metavolcanics and metasediments contain blasts of hornblende, actinolite, garnet, pistacitic epidote, staurolite, albitic plagioclase, and rarely andalusite and cordierite. The mafic metavolcanics (Adams River Bay, Black River, Kenu Lake, Lobstick Bay, Snake Bay) display _holeiitic trends with komatiitic affinities. Chemical variations are consistent with high level fractionation of olivine, plagioclase, amphibole, and later magnetite from a parental komatiite. The intermediate to felsic (64-74% Si02) metavolcanics generally exhibit calc-alkaline trends. The compositional discontinuity, defined by major and trace element diversity, can be explained by a mechanism involving two different magma sources. Application of fractionation series models are inconsistent with the observed data. The tholeiitic basalts and basaltic andesites are probably derived by low pressure fractionation of a depleted (high degree of partial melting) mantle source. The depleted (low Y, Zr) calc-alkaline metavolcanics may be produced by partial melting of a geochemically evolved source, e.g., tonalitetrondhjemite, garnet amphibolite or hydrous basalt.

Social comparison and body image in non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers

Body image refers to an individual's internal representation ofhis/her outer self (Cash, 1994; Thompson, Heinberg, Altabe, & Tantleff-Dunn, 1999). It is a multidimensional construct which includes an individual's attitudes towards hislher own physical characteristics (Bane & McAuley, 1998; Cash, 1994; Cash, 2004; Davison & McCabe, 2005; Muth & Cash, 1997; Sabiston, Crocker, & Munroe-Chandler, 2005). Social comparison is the process of thinking about the self in relation to others in order to determine if one's opinions and abilities are adequate and to assess one's social status (Festinger, 1954; Wood, 1996). Research investigating the role of social comparisons on body image has provided some information on the types and nature of the comparisons that are made. The act of making social comparisons may have a negative impact on body image (van den Berg et ai., 2007). Although exercise may improve body image, the impact of social comparisons in exercise settings may be less positive, and there may be differences in the social comparison tendencies between non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers. The present study examined the nature of social comparisons that female collegeaged non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers made with respect to their bodies, and the relationship of these social comparisons to body image attitudes. Specifically, the frequency and direction of comparisons on specific tal-gets and body dimensions were examined in both non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers. Finally, the relationship between body-image attitudes and the frequency and direction with which body-related social comparisons were made for non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers were examined. One hundred and fifty-two participants completed the study (n = 70 non or ill infrequent exercisers; n = 82 exercisers). Participants completed measures of social physique anxiety (SPA), body dissatisfaction, body esteem, body image cognitions, leisure time physical activity, and social comparisons. Results suggested that both groups (non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers) generally made social comparisons and most frequently made comparisons with same-sex friends, and least frequently with same-sex parents. Also, both groups made more appearance-related comparisons than non-appearance-related comparisons. Further, both groups made more negative comparisons with almost all targets. However, non or infrequent exercisers generally made more negative comparisons on all body dimensions, while exercisers made negative comparisons only on weight and body shape dimensions. MANOV As were conducted to examine if any differences on social comparisons between the two groups existed. Results of the MANOVAs indicated that frequency of comparisons with targets, the frequency of comparisons on body dimensions, and direction of comparisons with targets did not differ based on exercise status. However, the direction of comparison of specific body dimensions revealed a significant (F (7, 144) = 3.26,p < .05; 1]2 = .132) difference based on exercise status. Follow-up ANOVAs showed significant differences on five variables: physical attractiveness (F (1, 150) = 6.33,p < .05; 1]2 = .041); fitness (F(l, 150) = 11.89,p < .05; 1]2 = .073); co-ordination (F(I, 150) = 5.61,p < .05; 1]2 = .036); strength (F(I, dO) = 12.83,p < .05; 1]2 = .079); muscle mass or tone (F(l, 150) = 17.34,p < .05; 1]2 = 1.04), with exercisers making more positive comparisons than non or infrequent exercisers. The results from the regression analyses for non or infrequent exercisers showed appearance orientation was a significant predictor of the frequency of social comparisons N (B = .429, SEB = .154, /3 = .312,p < .01). Also, trait body image measures accounted for significant variance in the direction of social comparisons (F(9, 57) = 13.43,p < .001, R2adj = .68). Specifically, SPA (B = -.583, SEB = .186, /3 = -.446,p < .01) and body esteem-weight concerns (B = .522, SEB = .207, /3 = .432,p < .01) were significant predictors of the direction of comparisons. For exercisers, regressions revealed that specific trait measures of body image significantly predicted the frequency of comparisons (F(9, 71) = 8.67,p < .001, R2adj = .463). Specifically, SPA (B = .508, SEB = .147, /3 = .497,p < .01) and appearance orientation (B = .457, SEB = .134, /3 = .335,p < .01) were significant predictors of the frequency of social comparisons. Lastly, for exercisers, the results for the regression of body image measures on the direction of social comparisons were also significant (F(9, 70) = 14.65,p < .001, R2adj = .609) with body dissatisfaction (B = .368, SEB = .143, /3 = .362,p < .05), appearan.ce orientation (B = .256, SEB = .123, /3 = .175,p < .05), and fitness orientation (B = .423, SEB = .194, /3 = .266,p < .05) significant predictors of the direction of social comparison. The results indicated that young women made frequent social comparisons regardless of exercise status. However, exercisers m,a de more positive comparisons on all the body dimensions than non or infrequent exercisers. Also, certain trait body image measures may be good predictors of one's body comp~son tendencies. However, the measures which predict comparison tendencies may be different for non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers. Future research should examine the effects of social comparisons in different populations (i.e., males, the obese, older adults, etc.). Implications for practice and research were discussed.