The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 6 pt. 2 (1905)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 5 pt. 4 (1913)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 5 pt. 5 (1914)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 5 pt. 6 (1916)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 5 pt. 7 (1918)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 5 pt. 9 (1921)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 3 pt. 1 (1899)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 2 pt. 4 (1904)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 6 pt. 1 (1902)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 4 pt. 4 (1917)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 4 pt. 3 (1914)

The Danish Ingolf-Expedition.

v. 3 pt. 2 (1908)

Correlation of wear in vivo and six laboratory wear methods.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the correlation between clinical wear rates of restorative materials and enamel (TRAC Research Foundation, Provo, USA) and the results of six laboratory test methods (ACTA, Alabama (generalized, localized), Ivoclar (vertical, volumetric), Munich, OHSU (abrasion, attrition), Zurich). METHODS: Individual clinical wear data were available from clinical trials that were conducted by TRAC Research Foundation (formerly CRA) together with general practitioners. For each of the n=28 materials (21 composite resins for intra-coronal restorations [20 direct and 1 indirect], 5 resin materials for crowns, 1 amalgam, enamel) a minimum of 30 restorations had been placed in posterior teeth, mainly molars. The recall intervals were up to 5 years with the majority of materials (n=27) being monitored, however, only for up to 2 years. For the laboratory data, the databases MEDLINE and IADR abstracts were searched for wear data on materials which were also clinically tested by TRAC Research Foundation. Only those data for which the same test parameters (e.g. number of cycles, loading force, type of antagonist) had been published were included in the study. A different quantity of data was available for each laboratory method: Ivoclar (n=22), Zurich (n=20), Alabama (n=17), OHSU and ACTA (n=12), Munich (n=7). The clinical results were summed up in an index and a linear mixed model was fitted to the log wear measurements including the following factors: material, time (0.5, 1, 2 and 3 years), tooth (premolar/molar) and gender (male/female) as fixed effects, and patient as random effect. Relative ranks were created for each material and method; the same was performed with the clinical results. RESULTS: The mean age of the subjects was 40 (±12) years. The materials had been mostly applied in molars (81%) and 95% of the intracoronal restorations were Class II restorations. The mean number of individual wear data per material was 25 (range 14-42). The mean coefficient of variation of clinical wear data was 53%. The only significant correlation was reached by OHSU (abrasion) with a Spearman r of 0.86 (p=0.001). Zurich, ACTA, Alabama generalized wear and Ivoclar (volume) had correlation coefficients between 0.3 and 0.4. For Zurich, Alabama generalized wear and Munich, the correlation coefficient improved if only composites for direct use were taken into consideration. The combination of different laboratory methods did not significantly improve the correlation. SIGNIFICANCE: The clinical wear of composite resins is mainly dependent on differences between patients and less on the differences between materials. Laboratory methods to test conventional resins for wear are therefore less important, especially since most of them do not reflect the clinical wear.

Permanent Genetic Resources added to Molecular Ecology Resources Database 1 August 2010-30 September 2010

This article documents the addition of 229 microsatellite marker loci to the Molecular Ecology Resources Database. Loci were developed for the following species: Acacia auriculiformis x Acacia mangium hybrid, Alabama argillacea, Anoplopoma fimbria, Aplochiton zebra, Brevicoryne brassicae, Bruguiera gymnorhiza, Bucorvus leadbeateri, Delphacodes detecta, Tumidagena minuta, Dictyostelium giganteum, Echinogammarus berilloni, Epimedium sagittatum, Fraxinus excelsior, Labeo chrysophekadion, Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi, Paratrechina longicornis, Phaeocystis antarctica, Pinus roxburghii and Potamilus capax. These loci were cross-tested on the following species: Acacia peregrinalis, Acacia crassicarpa, Bruguiera cylindrica, Delphacodes detecta, Tumidagena minuta, Dictyostelium macrocephalum, Dictyostelium discoideum, Dictyostelium purpureum, Dictyostelium mucoroides, Dictyostelium rosarium, Polysphondylium pallidum, Epimedium brevicornum, Epimedium koreanum, Epimedium pubescens, Epimedium wushanese and Fraxinus angustifolia.

The lesser cotton leafworm, Anomis impasta (Guenée) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), in cotton

Anomis impasta (Guenée) is a species that shows remarkable morphological and behavioral similarities with the cotton leafworm Alabama argillacea (Hübner). During two growing cotton seasons, A. impasta was observed feeding on leaves and flower bracts of cotton and monitored. Furthermore, a study was conducted under laboratory conditions to generate biological information about this species with larvae feeding cotton squares and leaves. Larvae fed on cotton squares exhibited delayed development (18.5 ± 0.18 days) and lower pupal weight (140.8 ± 2.26 mg) compared to larvae fed on cotton leaves (14.0 ± 0.07 days and 169.3 ± 2.06 mg). Thus, one generation cycle of A. impasta was obtained by feeding the larvae with cotton leaves. The mean (minimum-maximum) values for the duration of eggs, larvae and pupae were: 3.0 (3-4), 14.8 (14-18), and 9.7 (7-14) days, respectively. The viability of the eggs, larvae, and pupae were 43.7, 98.3, and 94.7%, respectively. Females lived on average 25.2 days (ranging from 15 to 37 days) and produced 869 eggs (from 4 to 1,866 eggs). The successful development and reproduction of A. impasta on cotton, especially, on the cotton leaves, suggest the potential of this species to reach a pest status in cotton. The similarities with A. argillacea, as discussed in this study, can be one of the reasons for low reference to A. impasta in the field. Therefore, the information provided here will allow researchers and growers to distinguish these two cotton defoliators.