Effects of G a3 dosis associated with organosilicone on sweet oranges in Brazil

GA3 was tested in sweet oranges 'Pera' and 'Hamlin' for delay the picking time without loosening of fruit quality for processing. Hamlin is the firths cv processed in Brazil and Pera is a mid season cv and extending their period of processing is important. Two experiments were made at the Citrus Experimental Station during 1996 season. The treatments are 5 ppm of GA 3 + 0,05% Silwett L-77® (organosilicone), 10 ppm of GA 3 + 0,05% of Silwet L-77®, 20 ppm of GA3 + 0,1% Herbitensil® (Noniphenoloxietilate 40%m/v + isopropilic alcohol 15% m/v) and control, repeated 7 times for Hamlin and 8 times for Pera, with one tree each parcel. The treatments were applied in May 1996, at the stage of greenish yellow colour of the fruits. Evaluations were made each 20 days interval till the final picking, It was analysed fruit quality and retention force for picking and puncture resistance. The results showed no differences for fruit quality of Hamlin from July to mid September and for Pera till September. After some differences occurred. The GA3 treatments were effectives in maintain the fruit retention force for both cvs for 120 days after application. In relation to fruit puncture resistance the treatments with GA3 differed of the control for both cvs, accordingly with the doses and mixtures. The colour index was better maintained with 5ppm of GA3 plus 0,05% of Silwet L-77®. The total fruit production did not differ for both cultivars.

Efeito da vinhaça na membrana impermeabilizante usada nos tanques de armazenamento

This work evaluated the effect of vinasse (residue from sugar cane) in high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembranes having in mind that it is deposited at temperatures of 80-90˚C on the geomembrane in storage tanks. The objective was to evaluate the resistance of the geomembrane in contact with residue in a total period of 4 months. Physical and mechanical tests, and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) were used to determine degradation of polymer membranes after chemical immersion. In general, the results obtained show that the vinasse affected the geomembranes significantly in some aspects, for instance, the thickness of the material presented a variation of 7.8%. The average values in both directions at yielding showed a significant loss of tensile strength (34.13%) and strain (23.48%) and an increase in the modulus of elasticity (9.63%). At the rupture the behavior presented the same trend: a loss of 32% for tensile strength and 24.4% for the deformation were observed. Tear strength presented small decrease (4.72%) and puncture resistance a increase of 7.9% after immersion of geomembranes. The TGA tests were not efficient to detect evidence of degradation in samples of geomembranes after exposures, but identified problems in the quality of the supplied material.

Air versus saline in the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space

BackgroundThe success of epidural anaesthesia depends on correct identification of the epidural space. For several decades, the decision of whether to use air or physiological saline during the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space has been governed by the personal experience of the anaesthesiologist. Epidural block remains one of the main regional anaesthesia techniques. It is used for surgical anaesthesia, obstetrical analgesia, postoperative analgesia and treatment of chronic pain and as a complement to general anaesthesia. The sensation felt by the anaesthesiologist from the syringe plunger with loss of resistance is different when air is compared with saline (fluid). Frequently fluid allows a rapid change from resistance to non-resistance and increased movement of the plunger. However, the ideal technique for identification of the epidural space remains unclear.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of both air and saline in the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space.To evaluate complications related to the air or saline injected.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 9), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS) (from inception to September 2013). We applied no language restrictions. The date of the most recent search was 7 September 2013.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials (quasi-RCTs) on air and saline in the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.Main resultsWe included in the review seven studies with a total of 852 participants. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally ranked as showing low risk of bias inmost domains, with the exception of one study, which did not mask participants. We were able to include data from 838 participants in the meta-analysis. We found no statistically significant differences between participants receiving air and those given saline in any of the outcomes evaluated: inability to locate the epidural space (three trials, 619 participants) (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33 to 2.31, low-quality evidence); accidental intravascular catheter placement (two trials, 223 participants) (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.45, low-quality evidence); accidental subarachnoid catheter placement (four trials, 682 participants) (RR 2.95, 95% CI 0.12 to 71.90, low-quality evidence); combined spinal epidural failure (two trials, 400 participants) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.18, low-quality evidence); unblocked segments (five studies, 423 participants) (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.72 to 3.85); and pain measured by VAS (two studies, 395 participants) (mean difference (MD) -0.09, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.18). With regard to adverse effects, we found no statistically significant differences between participants receiving air and those given saline in the occurrence of paraesthesias (three trials, 572 participants) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.15); difficulty in advancing the catheter (two trials, 227 participants) (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.56); catheter replacement (two trials, 501 participants) (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.83); and postdural puncture headache (one trial, 110 participants) (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.12 to 5.71).Authors' conclusionsLow-quality evidence shows that results do not differ between air and saline in terms of the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space and reduction of complications. Applicability might be compromised, as most of the results described in this review were obtained from parturient patients. This review underlines the need to conduct well-designed trials in this field.