2 resultados para REVISION

em Digital Commons at Florida International University


Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mangrove forests are highly productive but globally threatened coastal ecosystems, whose role in the carbon budget of the coastal zone has long been debated. Here we provide a comprehensive synthesis of the available data on carbon fluxes in mangrove ecosystems. A reassessment of global mangrove primary production from the literature results in a conservative estimate of ∼218 ± 72 Tg C a−1. When using the best available estimates of various carbon sinks (organic carbon export, sediment burial, and mineralization), it appears that >50% of the carbon fixed by mangrove vegetation is unaccounted for. This unaccounted carbon sink is conservatively estimated at ∼112 ± 85 Tg C a−1, equivalent in magnitude to ∼30–40% of the global riverine organic carbon input to the coastal zone. Our analysis suggests that mineralization is severely underestimated, and that the majority of carbon export from mangroves to adjacent waters occurs as dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC). CO2 efflux from sediments and creek waters and tidal export of DIC appear to be the major sinks. These processes are quantitatively comparable in magnitude to the unaccounted carbon sink in current budgets, but are not yet adequately constrained with the limited published data available so far.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Jane Smiley retells the tale of “King Lear” through the perspective of one of the evil sisters, in her novel “A Thousand Acres”. While the literary canon places William Shakespeare and his plays at the top of the list, I disagree that the canon should denote what is considered “classic” and what would be disregarded. Jane Smiley's novel is not canonized, but why? Her feminist revision of “King Lear” answers why Goneril and Regan were so evil. I argue that “King Lear” (both the text and the play) does not provide the evidence of dysfunction that Smiley's novel exhibits. “A Thousand Acres” opens up questions about gender formation, issues that are misrepresented and occluded in Shakespeare's “King Lear”. By bringing the trauma of incest to the forefront of the novel, its reverse emotional structures allow the reader to obtain a new perspective to a complex four-century-old play.