The power of NMR.: in two and three dimensions

Soon after its discovery in the 1950s, NMR had become an indispensable tool fr chemists. In the 1970s and 1980s, the power of the technique was extended from one dimension to two and even three dimensions, opening up exciting applkications in both chemistry and biochemistry. the success of one dimensional. high-resolution NMR stems from the unique insights that it can provide about molecular structure. The chemical shift of a nucleus gives invaluable information abut the chemical environment in which that nucleus is located, Coupling interactions between hydorgen nuclei, as revealed by characteristic splitting patterns inthe 1H-NMR spectrum, provide informaton about the loaction of one group of hydorgen atoms relative to others inthe molecule. And the nuclearf Overhauser effect (nOe) can shed light on molecular stereochemistry.

Considering the normative, systemic and procedural dimensions in indicator-based sustainability assessments in agriculture

This paper develops a framework for evaluating sustainability assessment methods by separately analyzing their normative, systemic and procedural dimensions as suggested by Wiek and Binder [Wiek, A, Binder, C. Solution spaces for decision-making – a sustainability assessment tool for city-regions. Environ Impact Asses Rev 2005, 25: 589-608.]. The framework is then used to characterize indicator-based sustainability assessment methods in agriculture. For a long time, sustainability assessment in agriculture has focused mostly on environmental and technical issues, thus neglecting the economic and, above all, the social aspects of sustainability, the multifunctionality of agriculture and the applicability of the results. In response to these shortcomings, several integrative sustainability assessment methods have been developed for the agricultural sector. This paper reviews seven of these that represent the diversity of tools developed in this area. The reviewed assessment methods can be categorized into three types: (i) top-down farm assessment methods; (ii) top-down regional assessment methods with some stakeholder participation; (iii) bottom-up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods with stakeholder participation throughout the process. The results readily show the trade-offs encountered when selecting an assessment method. A clear, standardized, top-down procedure allows for potentially benchmarking and comparing results across regions and sites. However, this comes at the cost of system specificity. As the top-down methods often have low stakeholder involvement, the application and implementation of the results might be difficult. Our analysis suggests that to include the aspects mentioned above in agricultural sustainability assessment, the bottomup, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods are the most suitable ones.