991 resultados para 23-10
Resumo:
A manganese molybdenum phosphate, (NH3CH2CH2NH3)(10)(H3O)(3)(H5O)Na-2[MnMo12O24(OH)(6) (PO4)(4)(PO3OH)(4)][MnMo12O24 (OH)(6)(PO4)(6)(PO3OH)(2)]. 9H(2)O, has been hydrothermally synthesized and structurally characterized by single crystal X-ray diffraction. The structure of this compound may be considered to be two [Mo6O12(OH)(3)(PO4)(2)(HPO4)(2)](7-) units bonded together by a manganese atom, although several P-O groups are not protonated on account of coordination to a Na+ cation. One-dimensional tunnels were formed in the solid. A probe reaction of the oxidation of acetaldehyde with H2O2 using this compound as catalyst was carried out in a liquid-solid system, showing that the manganese molybdenum phosphate has high catalytic activity in the reaction.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Because of the growing life expectancy in developed countries and the exponential increase in vision loss with increasing age, a growing number of elderly persons will eventually suffer from visual impairment and blindness. This paper describes the association between self-reported vision and well-being in individuals aged 50 years and older and their families. METHODS: Using binary logistic regressions on data from the 2004 Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE), we analysed the association between self-reported corrected vision in general, corrected distance vision and corrected reading vision on 11 variables capturing emotional well-being, future hopes and perspectives, and concentration on daily activities. RESULTS: For 22,486 individuals from 10 European countries, aged 64.23 +/- 10.52 years, lower vision was associated with a highly significant negative impact on all measured aspects of well-being. CONCLUSIONS: These data from a large population base in Europe provide evidence that persons with low vision have a higher probability of concentration problems during reading and entertainment; losing interest and enjoyment in their activities; feeling fatigued, irritable, sad, and tearful; having less hope for the future; and wishing for death. Effective measures of early detection, prevention, rehabilitation, education and research, as well as a holistic view of a patient, could help counter these problems, thereby improving mental and physical health and reducing the economic impact of low vision.
Resumo:
9 Briefe und Beilage zwischen Alfred Sohn-Rethel und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1940 sowie Briefwechsel mit Joan M. Levi; 6 Briefe zwischen Joan M. Levi und Max Horkheimer, 1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Assistac Westcent, 25.06.1937; 1 Brief von John MacMurray an Walter Adams, 19.05.1937; 1 Brief von Walter Adams an Theodor W. Adorno, 01.06.1937; 2 Briefe zwischen Charles Somlo & Co und Max Horkheimer, 06.06.1939, 12.09.139; 1 Brief von Martin Sommerfeld an Max Horkheimer, 29.05.1934; 3 Briefe von Josef Sondek an Max Horkheimer, 1937, 1942; 3 Briefe zwischen Elsa Sontheimer, Max Sontheimer und Max Horkheimer, Februar 1940, 07.03.1940; 1 Drucksache von der The Southard School an Max Horkheimer; 1 Brief von der Soziologischen Verlagsanstalt an Gertrud Janosi, 20.07.1931; 9 Briefe zwsichen Maurice J. Speiser und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1948; 2 Briefe zwischen de Spengler und Max Horkheimer, 30.11.1936, 27.01.1937; 5 Briefe zwischen Sterling D. Spero und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1937; 1 Lebenslauf von Herbert Spielberg; 1 Brief und 2 Beilagen von René A. Spitz an Max Horkheimer, 23.06.1938; 2 Briefe von Elsa Spriesterbach an Max Horkheimer, Juli 1949; 1 Brief von Ida M. Stadie an Max Horkheimer, 21.05.1937; 20 Rechnungen von A. L. Stamm & Co an Max Horkheimer, 1938-1939; 1 Brief von Rose Horkheimer an A. L. Stamm und Co, 28.09.1938; 1 Betriebsanleitung und 1 Auslieferugnsschein für Max Horkheimer vom Standard Air Conditioning, 03.03.1936; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Standard Air Conditioning, 28.03.1936; 5 Briefe zwischen Taylor Starck und Max Horkheimer, 1943; 8 Briefe zwischen Hans Staudinger und Max Horkheimer, 1937, 1943; 1 Briefauszug und Beilage von Paul Stefan, 1940 sowie Briefwechsel mit Samuel R. Wachtell; 1 Brief von Samuel R. Wachtell an Gertrude Blitz, 23.10.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen Leo Löwenthal und Samuel R. Wachtell, September 1940, 23.10.1940; 1 Brief von Loe Löwenthal an Hermann Kesten, 01.10.1940; 7 Briefe und Beilage zwischen George Stefansky und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen dem Refugee Section of the American Friends Service Committee und Max Horkheimer, 16.05.1940, 28.05.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen dem Institute of International Education und Max Horkheimer, 09.04.1940, April 1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Friess, 01.03.1940; 1 Brief vom Institute of Sociology Malvern und Max Horkheimer, 31.01.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen Stein und Max Horkheimer, 30.11.1934, 1936, 1937; 7 Briefe von Estell A. Stein an Max Horkheimer, 1929, 1937; 1 Brief von Franz Stein an Max Horkheimer; 1 Brief von Friedrich Pollock an Gertrude R. Stein, 22.03.1939; 1 Brief von Leo Stein an Max Horkheimer, 25.07.1944; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Emilia Steinacher, 20.07.1937; 4 Briefe zwischen Friedrich Steinfeld und Max Horkheimer, 1941, 1945; 1 Brief und Beilage von Eugene G. Steinhof an Max Horkheimer; 3 Briefe zwischen Ernst Steinitz und Max Horkheimer, 25.04.1938, April 1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Theodor Steltzer und Eric E. Warburg, 07.03.1948; 4 Brief zwischen Hermine Sterler und Max Horkheimer, 11.09.1939, 1939, 1941; 4 Briefe zwischen Alfred K. Stern und Max Horkheimer, 1938, 1940 sowie 1 Brief und 1 Beilage von Max Gottschalk; 1 Brief von Max Gottschalk an Max Horkheimer; 2 Briefe und 1 Beilage zwischen Erich Stern und Max Horkheimer, 26.02.1937, 17.03.1937; 2 Briefe und Beilage von Eugene I. Stern an Max Horkheimer, 1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Joseph M. Weidberg und Max Horkheimer, 15.07.1938, 29.07.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Cooperative Bureau for Teachers, 03.02.1938; 12 Briefe zwischen Günther Stern und Max Horkheimer, 1936, 1938 sowie Briefwechsel mit John Guggenheim Memorial Foundation; 3 Briefe und 1 Beilage zwischen der John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation und Max Horkheimer, 1937; 1 Brief vom Social Research Quarterly an Max Horkheimer, 03.01.1937; 3 Briefe zwischen Hugo Stern und Max Horkheimer, 06.12.1937, Dezember 1937;
Resumo:
20 Briefe zwischen Alfred Haas und Max Horkheimer, 1935-1941; 2 Briefe von Willy Haas an Max Horkheimer, 1938; 3 Briefe zwischen Virginia Haber und Max Horkheimer, 12.09.1945, August 1945; 7 Briefe zwischen Hugo Hahn und Max Horkheimer, 1942-1946; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Charles G. Haines, 23.10.1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Hall, 02.07.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen H. Duncan Hall und Max Horkheimer, 04.08.1939, 24.07.1939; 2 Briefe zwsichen Herbert Berkerath und Max Horkheimer, 10.10.1939, 09.10.1939; 23 Briefe zwischen Wolfgang Hallgarten und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an die American Philosophic Society Philadelphia, 15.04.1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Betty Drury und Max Horkheimer, 29.02.1940, 20.02.1940; 6 Briefe zwischen Nina Almond und Max Horkheimer, 1939; 1 Brief von Ruth E. Hollander an Max Horkheimer, 08.09.1938; 1 Brief von dem Brooklyn College an Wolfgang Hallgarten, 29.04.1938; 4 briefe zwischen dem Brooklyn College und Max Horkheimer, 18.05.1938, 17.05.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Robert Maynard Hutchins und Max Horkheimer, 02.11.1937, 28.10.1937; 2 Briefe zwsichen Hardt und Max Horkheimer, 01.10.1943; 4 Briefe zwischen Gertrude Hardt und Max Horkheimer, 1947-1948; 4 Briefe zwischen den Harper & Brothers New York und Max Horkheimer, 24.10.1950, 1950; 1 Brief von Friedrich Pollock an Margot von Mendelssohn, 13.09.1950; 1 Brief von Hartoch an Max Horkheimer, 09.06.1937; 4 Briefe zwischen dem Harvard College Cambridge Massachusetts und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1940; 3 Briefe zwischen Felix Hase und Max Horkheimer, 1936, 13.03.1936; 1 Brief von Freda E. Hecht an Max Horkheimer, 01.03.1947; 1 Brief von Ernest S. Hediger an Max Horkheimer, 02.09.1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Agnes Heilbut und Max Horkheimer, 18.07.1938,; 7 Briefe zwischen Eduard Heimann und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1939; 1 Brief von Fritz Hein an Max Horkheimer, 14.06.1949; 2 Briefe zwischen Walter Heinemann und Max Horkheimer, 15.02.1945, 12.03.1945; 2 Briefe zwischen Philipp Heller und Max Horkheimer, 16.09.1944, 09.10.1944; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Hellmann, 23.03.1939; 4 Briefe zwischen L. E. Hellmann und Max Horkheimer, 1939; 4 Briefe zwischen P. A. Hemerijk und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1937, 03.02.1936; 5 Briefe zwischen Carl G. Hempel und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1941; 1 Lebenslauf von Hans Henning; 1 Brief von Else Henschke an Max Horkheimer, 24.07.1940; 1 Briefe von Isi Hepner an Max Horkheimer, 23.01.1941; 1 Brief von Leo Löwenthal an Isi Hepner, 03.02.1941; 1 Brief von Gertrude E. Herman anMax Horkheimer, 10.12.1949; 1 Brief von Wilhelm G. Hertz an Max Horkheimer, 29.09.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Wieland Herzfelde und der National City Bank of New York, 28.11.1939, 30.11.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Karl Hess und Max Horkheimer, 14.08.1935, 25.10.1934; 4 Briefe zwischen Karl Heymann und Max Horkheimer, 1947, 1949; 19 Briefe zwischen Robert Hilb und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 2 Briefe zwischen Joseph Rosenthal und Max Horkheimer, 12.11.1940, 25.10.1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Henry Church und Max Horkheimer, 14.12.1940, 18.12.1940; 1 Brief von Ellen Hilb an Max Horkheimer, 11.03.1938; 1 Brief von Emil Hilb an Max Horkheimer, 15.04.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Yoshitaro Hirano und Max Horkheimer, 1936, 23.01.1936; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an Hirsch, 1938; 1 Brief von Arnold Hirsch an Max Horkheimer, 14.07.1949; 4 Briefe zwischen Charles Hirsch und Max Horkheimer, 1937, 1938; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an Ernst Hirsch, Oktober 1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Julius Hirsch, 24.02.1942;
Resumo:
This study evaluated effects of defensive pressure on running velocity in footballers during the approach to kick a stationary football. Approach velocity and ball speed/accuracy data were recorded from eight football youth academy participants (15.25, SD=0.46 yrs). Participants were required to run to a football to cross it to a receiver to score against a goal-keeper. Defensive pressure was manipulated across three counterbalanced conditions: defender-absent (DA); defender-far (DF) and defender-near (DN). Pass accuracy (percentages of a total of 32 trials with 95% confidence limits in parenthesis) did not significantly reduce under changing defensive pressure: DA, 78% (55–100%); DF, 78% (61–96%); DN, 59% (40–79%). Ball speed (m·s−1) significantly reduced as defensive pressure was included and increased: DA, 23.10 (22.38–23.83); DF, 20.40 (19.69–21.11); DN, 19.22 (18.51–19.93). When defensive pressure was introduced, average running velocity of attackers did not change significantly: DA versus DF (m·s−1), 5.40 (5.30–5.51) versus 5.41 (5.34–5.48). Scaling defender starting positions closer to the start position of the attacker (DN) significantly increased average running velocity relative to the DA and DF conditions, 5.60 (5.50–5.71). In the final approach footfalls, all conditions significantly differed: DA, 5.69 (5.35–6.03); DF, 6 .22 (5.93–6.50); DN, 6.52 (6.23–6.80). Data suggested that approach velocity is constrained by both presence and initial distance of the defender during task performance. Implications are that the expression of kicking behaviour is specific to a performance context and some movement regulation features will not emerge unless a defender is present as a task constraint in practice.
Resumo:
The polyphagous moth Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) is one of the world's most important agricultural pests. A number of existing approaches and future designs for management of H. armigera rely on the assumption that moths do not exhibit either genetically and/or non-genetically based variation for host plant utilization. We review recent empirical evidence demonstrating that both these forms of variation influence host plant use in this moth. The significance of this variation in H. armigera in relation to current and future pest management strategies is examined. We provide recommendations on future research needs and directions for sustainable management of H. armigera, under a framework that includes consideration of intra-specific variation for host use relevant in this and other similar pest species.
Resumo:
Small-angle neutron scattering (SANS) and ultra-small-angle neutron scattering (USANS) measurements of the structure of two Australian bituminous coals (particle size of 1-0.5 mm) before, during, and after exposure to 155 bar of helium were made to identify any effects of pressure alone on the pore size distribution of coal and any irreversible effects upon exposure to high pressures of helium in the pore size range from 3 nm to 10 μm. No irreversible effects upon exposure were identified for any pore size. No effects of pressure on pore size distribution were observed, except for a small effect at a pore size of about 2 μm for one coal. This study provides a convenient baseline for SANS and USANS investigations on sorption of gases at elevated pressures on coals, by distinguishing between the effect of pressure alone on coal pore size distribution and against the effect of the gas to be investigated.
Resumo:
Objective To determine whether locally applied tobramycin influences the ability of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2) to heal a segmental defect in the rat femur. Methods The influence of tobramycin on the osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells was first evaluated in vitro. For the subsequent, in vivo experiments, a 5-mm segmental defect was created in the right femur of each of 25 Sprague-Dawley rats and stabilized with an external fixator and four Kirschner wires. Rats were divided in four groups: empty control, tobramycin (11 mg)/absorbable collagen sponge, rhBMP-2 (11 μg)/absorbable collagen sponge, and rhBMP-2/absorbable collagen sponge with tobramycin. Bone healing was monitored by radiography at 3 and 8 weeks. Animals were euthanized at 8 weeks and the properties of the defect were compared with the intact contralateral femur. Bone formation in the defect region was assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, microcomputed tomography, histology, and mechanical testing. Results Tobramycin exerted a dose-dependent inhibition of alkaline phosphatase induction and calcium deposition by mesenchymal stem cells cultured under osteogenic conditions. The inhibition was reversed in the presence of 500 ng/mL of rhBMP-2. Segmental defects in the rat femora failed to heal in the absence of rhBMP-2. Tobramycin exerted no inhibitory effects on the ability of rhBMP-2 to heal these defects and increased the bone area of the defects treated with rhBMP-2. Data obtained from all other parameters of healing, including dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, microcomputed tomography, histology, and mechanical testing, were unaffected by tobramycin. Conclusions Although our in vitro results suggested that tobramycin inhibits the osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells, this could be overcome by rhBMP-2. Tobramycin did not impair the ability of rhBMP-2 to heal critical-sized femoral defects in rats. Indeed, bone area was increased by nearly 20% in the rhBMP-2 group treated with tobramycin. This study shows that locally applied tobramycin can be used in conjunction with rhBMP-2 to enhance bone formation at fracture sites.