Boron dilution benchmark using COBAYA3/FLICA4 coupled codes within the NURISP European Project

Within the subproject 3 of the NURISP project three neutron kinetic codes have been implemented into the NURESIM platform. For all three codes (CRONOS2, COBAYA3 and DYN3D) the coupling with the thermal hydraulic code FLICA4 was accomplished using the features of the NURESIM platform. This paper contains the results obtained with COBAYA3/FLICA4 coupled codes for the PWR boron dilution benchmark defined within the sub project 3 of the NURISP project. Results are provided for all the scenarios.

Avaliação de oleuropeína e de sanitizantes químicos, isolados ou associados, para eliminação de biofilmes de Staphylococcus aureus, Listeria monocytogenes e Escherichia coli em superfícies inertes

Este estudo avaliou a eficiência da oleuropeína (OLE) (composto fenólico extraído das folhas de Oliveira) isolada e associada aos sanitizantes comerciais ácido peracético 2% (APA), hipoclorito de sódio 2% (HS), peróxido de hidrogênio 3% (PH), digluconato de clorexidina 2% (DC), cloreto de benzalcônio 1% (CB) e iodofor 2% (IO), para inativação de células em suspensão e biofilmes monoespécie e multiespécie formados em superfícies de aço inoxidável ou microplaca de poliestireno por Listeria monocytogenes (ATCC 7644), Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 25923) e Escherichia coli (ATCC 25922), todas classificadas como fortes produtores de biofilmes. Os isolados foram semeados em caldo TSB (caldo tripticase soja), incubados (37°C/24h) e corrigidos a ~108células/mL (escala 0,5 McFarland). Para bactérias em suspensão, a resistência a sanitizantes foi determinada pela Concentração Inibitória Mínima (CIM) em tubos e pelo método de Disco Difusão em Ágar (DDA), no qual as bactérias foram plaqueadas em ágar TSA contendo discos de 6mm de papel filtro embebidos nos sanitizantes. Após a incubação, a medição dos halos de inibição foi feita com paquímetro. Para os ensaios de resistência dos biofilmes aos compostos sanitizantes, foram utilizadas microplacas de poliestireno 96 poços, as quais foram preparadas para incubação-fixação dos biofilmes e submetidas à leitura em espectrofotômetro de ELISA (600 nm). Em seguida, as placas foram lavadas com solução salina tamponada (PBS, pH 7.4) e os sanitizantes inseridos por 1 minuto. Após neutralização com tiossulfato de sódio (5 minutos), as placas foram lavadas com PBS e metanol, coradas com cristal violeta 1% e coradas com ácido acético glacial (33%) para nova leitura a 570nm. A eficácia da remoção do biofilme pelos sanitizantes foi comparada pelo índice de formação de biofilme (IFB). As imagens do aço inoxidável após tratamento com sanitizante foram feitas através de Microscopia Eletrônica de Varredura (MEV) e Microscopia Confocal, para visualizar a persistência dos biofilmes. Os valores de CIM (diluição 1:2) mostraram que OLE não teve atividade bactericida. No método DDA, L. monocytogenes, foi resistente à OLE, enquanto E. coli e S. aureus apresentaram resistência intermediária. Os sanitizantes comerciais apresentaram boa atividade bactericida nos ensaios de CIM e DDA, sendo que as associações de OLE aos sanitizantes comerciais aumentaram o efeito germicida. Nos ensaios com biofilmes em monoespécie, somente os sanitizantes comerciais, isolados ou associados com OLE, foram eficazes de reduzir o valor de BFI em microplaca de poliestireno. Em biofilmes multiespécie, OLE apresentou efeito antimicrobiano, sobretudo sobre a associação de L. monocytogenes + E. coli + S. aureus (redução: 91,49%). Nenhum dos compostos avaliados foi capaz de inativar completamente os biofilmes nas superfícies de aço inoxidável, uma vez que células viáveis foram observadas após os tratamentos com os sanitizantes, indicando persistência dos biofilmes. Os resultados indicam que a oleuropeína apresentou potencial para incrementar o efeito bactericida de sanitizantes comerciais para eliminação de biofilmes em superfícies inertes, sendo necessários estudos para compreender os mecanismos de ação dessas combinações.

Do Too Many Chefs Really Spoil the Broth? The European Commission, Bureaucratic Politics and European Integration, CES Germany & Europe Working Papers, No. 09.2, 5 August 1999

There is a puzzling, little-remarked contradiction in scholarly views of the European Commission. On the one hand, the Commission is seen as the maestro of European integration, gently but persistently guiding both governments and firms toward Brussels. On the other hand, the Commission is portrayed as a headless bunch of bickering fiefdoms who can hardly be bothered by anything but their own in­ ternecine turf wars. The reason these very different views of the same institution have so seldom come into conflict is quite apparent: EU studies has a set of relatively autonomous and poorly integrated sub­ fields that work at different levels of analysis. Those scholars holding the "heroic" view of the Com­ mission are generally focused on the contest between national and supranational levels that character­ ized the 1992 program and subsequent major steps toward European integration. By contrast, those scholars with the "bureaucratic politics" view are generally authors of case studies or legislative his­ tories of individual EU directives or decisions. However, the fact that these twO images of the Commis­ sion are often two ships passing in the night hardly implies that there is no dispute. Clearly both views cannot be right; but then, how can we explain the significant support each enjoys from the empirical record? The CommiSSion, perhaps the single most important supranational body in the world, certainly deserves better than the schizophrenic interpretation the EU studies community has given it. In this paper, I aim to make a contribution toward the unraveling of this paradox. In brief, the argument I make is as follows: the European Commission can be effective in pursuit of its broad integration goals in spite of, and even because of, its internal divisions. The folk wisdom that too many chefs spoil the broth may often be true, but it need not always be so. The paper is organized as follows. 1 begin with an elaboration of the theoretical position briefly out­ lined above. 1 then tum to a case study from the major Commission efforts to restructure the computer industry in the context of its 1992 program. The computer sector does not merely provide interesting, random illustrations of the hypothesis 1 have advanced. Rather, as Wayne Sandholtz and John Zysman have stressed, the Commission's efforts on informatics formed one of the most crucial parts of the en­ tire 1992 program, and so the Commission's success in "Europeanizing" these issues had significant ripple effects across the entire European political economy. I conclude with some thoughts on the fol­ lowing question: now that the Commission has succeeded in bringing the world to its doorstep, does its bureaucratic division still serve a useful purpose?

(Table 2B) Geochemistry of Ariadne II sediments corrected for dilution by salt from pore waters and are carbonate free in the eastern South Pacific

Sediment depth is given in mbsf.

The effect of adsorption, filter material and point of dilution on antibiotic elimination by haemofiltration - An in vitro study of levofloxacin

We studied an in vitro model of continuous venous-venous haemofiltration (CVVH), into which levofloxacin 100 mg was infused, to determine levofloxacin adsorption and to determine the effect of filter material and point of dilution (pre- or post-filter) on sieving coefficient. Mean (standard deviation; S.D.) adsorption was 18.7 (5.3) mg for the polyamide filter and 40.2 (2.0) mg for the polyacrylonitrile (PAN) filter (P < 0.001). Post-dilution resulted in a minor, but statistically significant, decrease in sieving coefficient (pre-dilution 0.96 (S.D. 0.10), post-dilution 0.88 (S.D. 0.11) with the PAN filter. These data indicate that the variability in published values for levofloxacin sieving coefficient are not due to variation in point of dilution or membrane type (PAN or polyamide). Significant adsorption of levofloxacin onto PAN filters occurs. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. and the International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.