School of Nursing Class of 1991

Top Row: Lisa A. Anton, Karen M. Banish, Sherry L. Bendele, Lori Bishop, Rossana Biundo, Jennifer Brooks, Stefanie J. Brown, Kimberly J. Coleman, Christine M. Decker, Mary Jo Diebold, Molly Donohue, Mary C. Dubois, Meggan C. Ebert

Row 2: Michelle Fox, Ann Marie Gergely, Nina N. Giglio, Stephen Gniewek, Jennifer K. Gollon, Laura E. Gregorius, Shiree A. Hamilton, Corinne R. Hardecki, Yoline M. Hargrave, Raina C. Hartitz, Dana M. Hocking, Andrea E. Jarrett

Row 3: Nancy Johnson, Harjot Kaur, Doreen M. Kinney, Kristine Boyle, Michele Phillips, Anthony Stewart, Pamela Blumson, Lisa Rudin, Lisa Eby, Christina Koehlmann, Julie A. Kolar, Shelly M. Kraiza

Row 4: Cindy Kvarnberg, Beth Anne Lannan, Martha Lasley, James A. Lowery

Row 5: Eileen M. Lucier, Anne Marie Lutostanski, Crystal Tchoryk, Kathy Kline, Donna L. Marshall, Mary C. Maxim

Row 6: Melinda J. Mc Calla, Carolyn Mclean, Molly B. Meyersohn, Christine L. Nersesian, Ann-Marie Nosotti

Row 7: Darlene D. Osemlak, Francine D. Paglia, Danee L. Paullin, Shake Ketefian, Janice B. Lindberg, Rhetaugh G. Dumas, Violet Barkauskas, Beverly Jones, Elisabeth Pennington, Jill L. Pierpont, Marie E. Rosenburg, Rebecca L. Rotole

Row 8: Carla D. Rouse, Merilynne H. Rush, Bernadette Michelle Santos, Stephanie A. Schaltz, Colleen M. Seastrom, Anita M. Shedlock, Judith A. Skonieczny, Alice Skumautz, Nancy A. Standler, Kristine Stoetzer, Annaflor O. Suan, Lynn E. Taylo

Row 9: Renee M. Thibodeau, Kirsten M. Thornquist, Lisa A. Treash, Lisa Marie Warriner, Miriam Beth Weiner, Teresa Wen, Martha Hill Wenzler, Melissa K. White, Denise M. Williams, Christina L. Wroubel, Jamie K. Yeulett, Sarah Jo York, Jennifer Zolinski

School of Nursing Class of 1997

Top Row: Shelly Adkins, Nikki Alexadner, Amy L. Ancona, Adem Arslani, Noel Baldwin, Lea Bell, Michelle Bellah, Nicole Bills, Sarah Boyle, Rebekah Brandstatter, Margitt Brigant, Matthew Brooks, Julie Campbell, Lea Clemmons

Row 2: Iracema M. Crawford, Amy Decker, Danielle Terry, Jennifer McGeown, Megan Lindsey Tvaska, Molly McIntyre, Sharon M. Hoover, Mary Beth Pohanka, Jennifer Nelson, Jennifer Carney, Katheryn E. Huffman, Toria Dial, Mary Dooley

Row 3: Pamela Earl, Stacy Ekelman, Jennfier Emery, Robert Farrell, Stephanie R. Faudel, Amy Fischer, Rochelle Fountain, Diane Fox

Row 4: Tina Garcia, Monica Gatica, Meredith Giles, Karla Giminez, Emily Goodsell, Barbara Gurd, Keren Kay Hahn, Beth Hosmer, Shana N. Howard, Cina Jackson-Hanner

Row 5: Kristy Jakubiak, Rebekah Johnson, Stephanie T. Johnson, Jennifer Jorissen, Richard W. Redman, Beverly Jones, Ada Sue Hinshaw, Nola Pender, Susan Boehm, Renee Kaplan, Angela Kendrick-Newing, Emily Kerschbaum, Donulae Knuckles

Row 6: Diane Kramer, Alyce Krause, Krista L. Kuczewski, Lori LaCrone, Melissa E. Lorencen, Sarah Lyons, Melissa Magante, Kathleen Mahon, Christy Mayes, Joseph Morris, Elizabeth Morrow, Tamala Myers, Michele Nextico

Row 7: Jacquelyn Nino, Denise Noto, Catherine Orser, Elizabeth Palad, Ann Peterson, Joshua Pietsch, Pati Putt, Lisa Reinhart, Jamie C. Renken, Amy Robbins, Ernest Saxton, Amy Schafer, Joelle Schroeder, Matthew Seiler

Row 8: Sarah Bellestri Shih, Kristen Sisson, Shalonda Smith, Kathleen Stewart, Jeannine Sutter, Jamie Swan, Arita Ann Sywenkyj, Julie Talbott, Diana Thorrez, Natasha Tokarz, Whitney Tonkin, Rea Tsatsanifos, Tina Urbanski

Row 9: Maricar Uy, Dana Van Singel, Tanya D. Venton, Christina Vitucci, Samuel Walsh, Susan Warren, Tiana Washington, Yvette White, Judy M. Wilson, Cerise Wotorson, Bella Yagolkovskaya, Karen Zalenko, Susan M. Zucal

School of Nursing Class of 2003

Top Row: Melissa Alfaro, Dana Alguire, Jessica Ault, Joanna Bancroft, Lara Bankowski, Sarah Bauer, Andrew Bauman, Samantha Becker, Erin Blazo, Courtney Braddock, Alethea Brancheau, Anna Carr

Row 2: Jennifer Grady, Julie Humphries, Lindsey Jack, Kristin Kirby, Laura Marten, Cathy Fanone, Elizabeth Van Hall, Ewurabena Menyah, Veronica McGraw, Kierste Mundinger, Kortney Stewart, Elizabeth Walkowiak, Erin Wilson

Row 3: Rebekah Chamberlain, Jason T. Chambers, Julie Ciaravino, Amanda Corwin, Sarah Debri, Heidi DenBesten, Harmony Dickerson, Elise Erickson

Row 4: Elissa Erman, Stacey Falconer, Julia Feczko, Sarah Fedewa, Angela Fisher, Lisa Flaskamp-Shaft, Leigh Frinkle, Joy Garrett, Theresa Giachino, Laura Heilig

Row 5: Amy Henderiksma, Aimee Hermes, Ann Johnson, Margaret Calarco, Patricia Coleman-Burns, Jan lee, Ada Sue Hinshaw, Carol Loveland-Cherry, Judy Lynch-Sauer, Joanne Pohl, Carolyn Sampselle, Shelly Jones, Sandra Kelly, Lindsay Klein

Row 6: Krystal Kobasic, Bryan Krehnbrink, Kelly Krueger, Donna Lehnert, Nicole Leith, Rachel Luria, Phuong Ly, Sara Maksym, Ivana Malusev, Jennifer Matousek, sara Genova McCrea, Melissa Meier, Maria Mendoza, Joshua Miller, Jennifer Moran, Amanda Muiter, Danielle Oliverio, Cindy Overholser, Karen Parsons, Kelly Patrick, Amanda Star Phebus, Magdalena Pilarski, Natascha Pocsatko, Alexis Punches, Ella Rakitin, Susan Ramlow

Row 7: Yvette Reed, Bethena Ridley, Lori Riley, Megan Rooney, Rebecca Rubin, Kami Shelton, Renee Sliker, Kristine Snyder, Robyn Sorensen, Deborah Sorgen, Lauren Stringi, Cynthia Thelen

Row 8: Judy Tigay, Giosi Toldeo, Kristie Vanwieren, Kate Warner, Carolyn Washnock, Carla Watts, Sonya Weber, Christine Wiles, Vanessa Williams, Holly Wilson, Jordan Woltersom

School of Nursing Class of 2005

Top Row: Fonya Atabong, Aimee Austria, Holly Baier, Jayna Ballard, Stephanie Baranek, Karen Barron, Elizabeth Behnan, Jennifer Bohl, Sarah Bombery, Carissa Bonner, Emily Brady, Jennifer Bristol, Carrie Brown, Christine Brown, James Cahill, Katie Campbell, PMichelle Carley, Shandra Caylor, Maureen Cebula

Row 2: Jinhwa Chung, Pamela Clay, Erin Cockrell, Desiree Conyers, Sarah Crow, Kimberly Deblasis

Row 3: Melissa Donoran, Sarah Ehlke, Shelly Eizyk, Marianne Erwin, Lauren Feighner, Sara Fetzer

Row 4: Miranda Finn, Lora Fisaga, Sarah Fortman, Sarah Gattis, Nicole Grace, Gail Grigsby

Row 5: Sandra Hakeos, Stephanie Hanchak, Kacee Harris, Nicole Hawkins, Molly Hedges, Jennifer Heeren

Row 6: Mary Herndon, Valerie Hintz, Holly Hopkins, Julie Houslander, Kaitlyn Jakubec, Kathryn Jannausch

Row 7: Lisa Kantor, Amy Kaplan, Jennifer Kinch, Patricia Coleman-Burns, Carol Loveland-Cherry, Ada Sue Hinshaw, Judith Lynch-Sauer, Barbara Guthrie, Sarah Knapp, May Kuo, Deanna Kurtz

Row 8: Mary Lambert, Erin Lowen, Anahid Magar, Lindsey Balzhiser, Monique Grinnell, Julie Heringhausen, Rachel Karwick, Jane MaCaulay, Samantha Peck, Kelli Stewart, Ngan Thai, Erin Tuttle, Julie Wilner, Jill McCarty, Caitlin McClellan, Jessica McEntee

Row 9: Kelli McGee, Katrina Melonakos, Kimberley Munn, Inder Narula, Lauren Nielsen, Kristin O'Mara, Pamela Obriot, Kate Organ, Kelly Owens, Mindy Pallas, Debbie Lynn Paylor, Johanna Phillips, Jamie Pikus, Krista Ponagai, Kristin Putnam, Corinne Quinlan, Megan Rathburn, Tina Rayburn, Natalie Render

Row 10: Jennifer Riske, Rebecca Robison, Monica Rochman-Wallace, Amanda Ross, Lindsey Rubritius, Katherine Russell, Julie Sarkesian, Teya Schoening, Gabrielle Schultz, Margaret Secor, John Seeburger, James Shannon, Suzanne Smith, Mary Catherine Steer, Erin Stevens, Margaret Stilec, Carolynne Suveg

Row 11: Jesse Szczak, Angela Szydlek, Salisa Thompson, Kristin Toyofuku, Prescilla Tshiamala, Vickey Vaclavek, Karen Van Eck, Julie VanHammersveld, Jennifer Ventimiglia, Sarah Wachler, Rachel Walts, John Weeks, Amber Williams, Melody Williston, Jessica Woolworth

School of Nursing Class of 2010

Top Row: Jocelyn Aden, Rachel Ades, Katrina Allen, Kayla Ashcraft, Kristie Baker, Amy Beaudoin, Heidi Beck, Beth Bentrum, Amber Blake, Lee Anna Braden, Dan Burd, Meaghan Burke, Mallory Calus, Irene Casillas, Veronica Cherney, Samantha Cholewa, Molly Conlen

Row 2: Wendy Corriveau, Meaghan Cotter, Kara DeGlopper, Colleen DeVoe, Hadley Dobbs, Kimberly Drury-Wallace, Hyesun Eitel, Sarah Elner, Douglas E. Elsey, Alyssa Fallot, Folake Famoye, Kristen Farr, Christine Fleck, Jennifer Fleming, Soncerae Gardner, Sarah Gilley, Joelle Gilmet

Row 3: Sara Goss, Amy Guffey, Taylor Griglak, Bridget Belvitch, Jaclyn Janks, Andrea Engles, Cassandra Smith, Lyndsy Brenner, Mallorie Patterson, Kristen Oltersdorf, Laura Kokx, Ross Zoet, Mary Osbach, Courtney Norman, Monica Habeck, Erica Hadley

Row 4: Amanda Hanert, Dayna Hasty, Nicole Heller, Ashley Howard, Robert Humburg, Andrew Humes, Grace Hwang, Amira Jackson, Kathryn Jipping, Shelly Johnson

Row 5: Lindsey Kappler, Jacqueline Klaiman, Sarah Knoedler, Jessica Kopicki, Kathryn Kovanda, Sarah Kovats, Emily Krogel, Kellie Kunkel, Kristin Lakatos, Chelsea Lazaroff, Bo Hwa Lee, Kelly Leja

Row 6: Kelli Littlejohn, Emilee Losey, Patricia Luna, Wilma MacKenzie, Matt Malkowski, Rachel Mallas, Emily McCallister, Diane McDonald, Dorian Michelson, Mary Miller, Nicole Miller, Kristen Muehlhauser

Row 7: Renee Muller, Katherine Mulvaney, Eugene Ngala, Christine Novotny, Colleen O'Connor, Cassey Parrish, Kimberly Peters, Kathleen Potempa, Bonnie Hagerty, Heather Poucher, Charles Reisdorf, Eric Retzbach, Sarah Rhem, Shannon Rice, Amy Roberts, Christie Schonsheck

Row 8: Franciska Schuett, Rhonda Schultz, Kristina Seidl, Teresa Semaan, Shelley Sibbold, Stacy Slater, Mary Snell, Mallory Stanton, Dennis Stevens, Miranda Stoddard, Tatiana Tafla, Priscilla Tang, Bethany Thelen, Jessica Thibert, Rebecca Thurk, Lauren Tormoehlen, Chinasa Uwandu

Row 9: Margaret van Buitenen, Stacey Victor, Jennifer Waag, Kirstyn Wade, Ariel Warren, Elizabeth White, Natalie Wierenga, Jessica Wihowski, Wendy Witkowski, Aliza Wolfe, DaShaunn Woolard, Ting Wan Yip, Alexander Young, Kellie Zenz, Kristen Ziulkowski, Jessica Zmierski

Scabies mite inactivated serine protease paralogues are present both internally in the mite gut and externally in feces

The scabies mite, Sarcoptes scabiei, is the causative agent of scabies, a disease that is common among disadvantaged populations and facilitates streptococcal infections with serious sequelae. Previously, we encountered large families of genes encoding paralogues of house dust mite protease allergens with their catalytic sites inactivated by mutation (scabies mite inactivated protease paralogues [SMIPPs]). We postulated that SMIPPs have evolved as an adaptation to the parasitic lifestyle of the scabies mite, functioning as competitive inhibitors of proteases involved in the host–parasite interaction. To propose testable hypotheses for their functions, it is essential to know their locations in the mite. Here we show by immunohistochemistry that SMIPPs exist in two compartments: 1) internal to the mite in the gut and 2) external to the mite after excretion from the gut in scybala (fecal pellets). SMIPPs may well function in both of these compartments to evade host proteases.

The development of a symptom questionnaire for assessing virtual reality viewing using a head-mounted display

ABSTRACT: Purpose. Virtual reality devices, including virtual reality head-mounted displays, are becoming increasingly accessible to the general public as technological advances lead to reduced costs. However, there are numerous reports that adverse effects such as ocular discomfort and headache are associated with these devices. To investigate these adverse effects, questionnaires that have been specifically designed for other purposes such as investigating motion sickness have often been used. The primary purpose of this study was to develop a standard questionnaire for use in investigating symptoms that result from virtual reality viewing. In addition, symptom duration and whether priming subjects elevates symptom ratings were also investigated. Methods. A list of the most frequently reported symptoms following virtual reality viewing was determined from previously published studies and used as the basis for a pilot questionnaire. The pilot questionnaire, which consisted of 12 nonocular and 11 ocular symptoms, was administered to two groups of eight subjects. One group was primed by having them complete the questionnaire before immersion; the other group completed the questionnaire postviewing only. Postviewing testing was carried out immediately after viewing and then at 2-min intervals for a further 10 min. Results. Priming subjects did not elevate symptom ratings; therefore, the data were pooled and 16 symptoms were found to increase significantly. The majority of symptoms dissipated rapidly, within 6 min after viewing. Frequency of endorsement data showed that approximately half of the symptoms on the pilot questionnaire could be discarded because <20% of subjects experienced them. Conclusions. Symptom questionnaires to investigate virtual reality viewing can be administered before viewing, without biasing the findings, allowing calculation of the amount of change from pre- to postviewing. However, symptoms dissipate rapidly and assessment of symptoms needs to occur in the first 5 min postviewing. Thirteen symptom questions, eight nonocular and five ocular, were determined to be useful for a questionnaire specifically related to virtual reality viewing using a head-mounted display.

It takes an institution's village to retain a student: A comprehensive look at two early warning system undergraduate retention programs and administrators' perceptions of students' experiences and the retention services they provide students in the early warning system retention programs

Institutions have implemented many campus interventions to address student persistence/retention, one of which is Early Warning Systems (EWS). However, few research studies show evidence of interventions that incorporate noncognitive factors/skills, and psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes in the EWS. A qualitative study (phenomenological interview and document analysis) of EWS at both a public and private 4-year Florida university was conducted to explore EWS through the eyes of the administrators of the ways administrators make sense of students' experiences and the services they provide and do not provide to assist students. Administrators' understanding of noncognitive factors and the executive skills subset and their contribution to retention and the executive skills development of at-risk students were also explored. Hossler and Bean's multiple retention lenses theory/paradigms and Perez's retention strategies were used to guide the study. Six administrators from each institution who oversee and/or assist with EWS for first time in college undergraduate students considered academically at-risk for attrition were interviewed. Among numerous findings, at Institution X: EWS was infrequently identified as a service, EWS training was not conducted, numerous cognitive and noncognitive issues/deficits were identified for students, and services/critical departments such as EWS did not work together to share students' information to benefit students. Assessment measures were used to identify students' issues/deficits; however, they were not used to assess, track, and monitor students' issues/deficits. Additionally, the institution's EWS did address students' executive skills function beyond time management and organizational skills, but did not address students' psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes. Among numerous findings, at Institution Y: EWS was frequently identified as a service, EWS training was not conducted, numerous cognitive and noncognitive issues/deficits were identified for students, and services/critical departments such as EWS worked together to share students' information to benefit students. Assessment measures were used to identify, track, and monitor students' issues/deficits; however, they were not used to assess students' issues/deficits. Additionally, the institution's EWS addressed students' executive skills function beyond time management and organizational skills, and psychotherapy/psycho-educational processes. Based on the findings, Perez's retention strategies were not utilized in EWS at Institution X, yet were collectively utilized in EWS at Institution Y, to achieve Hossler and Bean's retention paradigms. Future research could be designed to test the link between engaging in the specific promising activities identified in this research (one-to-one coaching, participation in student success workshops, academic contracts, and tutoring) and student success (e.g., higher GPA, retention). Further, because this research uncovered some concern with how to best handle students with physical and psychological disabilities, future research could link these same promising strategies for improving student performance for example among ADHD students or those with clinical depression.

Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus 16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine in women older than 25 years : 7-year follow-up of the phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled VIVIANE study

Acknowledgments The VIVIANE study was funded and coordinated by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA, which also covered all costs associated with development and publication of this report. We thank all study participants and their families. We gratefully acknowledge the work of the central and local study coordinators, and staff members of the sites who participated in this study. Writing support services were provided by Mary Greenacre (An Sgriobhadair, Isle of Barra, UK), on behalf of GSK Vaccines; editing and publication coordination services were provided by Jérôme Leemans (Keyrus Biopharma, Lasne, Belgium), Stéphanie Delval (XPE Pharma and Science, Wavre, Belgium), and Matthieu Depuydt (Business Decision Life Sciences, Brussels, Belgium), on behalf of GSK Vaccines

18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the management of aggressive non-Hodgkin's B-cell lymphoma

18-Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET/CT) is an established imaging modality that has been proven to be of benefit in the management of aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, such as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and advanced stage follicular lymphoma. The combination of anatomic and functional imaging afforded by FDG-PET/CT has led to superior sensitivity and specificity in the primary staging, restaging, and assessment of response to treatment of hematological malignancies when compared to FDG-PET and CT alone. The use of FDG-PET/CT for post treatment surveillance imaging remains controversial, and further study is needed to ascertain whether this modality is cost effective and appropriate for use in this setting.

Opening Basement Membrane Gaps During C. elegans Uterine-Vulval Attachment

The basement membrane (BM) is a highly conserved form of extracellular matrix that underlies or surrounds and supports most animal tissues. BMs are crossed by cells during various remodeling events in development, immune surveillance, or during cancer metastasis. Because BMs are dense and not easily penetrable, most of these cells must open a gap in order to facilitate their migration. The mechanisms by which cells execute these changes are poorly understood. A developmental event that requires the opening of a BM gap is C. elegans uterine-vulval connection. The anchor cell (AC), a specialized uterine cell, creates a de novo BM gap. Subsequent widening of the BM gap involves the underlying vulval precursor cells (VPCs) and the π cells, uterine neighbors of the AC through non-proteolytic BM sliding. Using forward and reverse genetic screening, transcriptome profiling, and live-cell imaging, I investigated how the cells in these tissues accomplish BM gap formation. In Chapter 2, I identify two potentially novel regulators of BM breaching, isolated through a large-scale forward genetic screen and characterize the invasion defect in these mutants. In Chapter 3, I describe single-cell transcriptome sequencing of the invasive AC. In Chapter 4, I describe the role of the π cells in opening the nascent BM gap. A complete developmental pathway for this process has been elucidated: the AC induces the π fate through Notch signaling, after which the π cells upregulate the Sec14 family protein CTG-1, which in turn restricts the trafficking of DGN-1 (dystroglycan), a laminin receptor, allowing the BM to slide. Chapter 5 outlines the implications of these discoveries.

The CCRUSH Study: Coarse and fine particulate matter measurements in northeastern Colorado 2009-2012

Coarse (PM10-2.5) and fine (PM2.5) particulate matter in the atmosphere adversely affect human health and influence climate. While PM2.5 is relatively well studied, less is known about the sources and fate of PM10-2.5. The Colorado Coarse Rural-Urban Sources and Health (CCRUSH) study measured PM10-2.5 and PM2.5 mass concentrations, as well as the fraction of semi-volatile material (SVM) in each size regime (SVM2.5, SVM10-2.5), for three years in Denver and comparatively rural Greeley, Colorado. Agricultural operations east of Greeley appear to have contributed to the peak PM10-2.5 concentrations there, but concentrations were generally lower in Greeley than in Denver. Traffic-influenced sites in Denver had PM10-2.5 concentrations that averaged from 14.6 to 19.7 µg/m**3 and mean PM10-2.5/PM10 ratios of 0.56 to 0.70, higher than at residential sites in Denver or Greeley. PM10-2.5 concentrations were more temporally variable than PM2.5 concentrations. Concentrations of the two pollutants were not correlated. Spatial correlations of daily averaged PM10-2.5 concentrations ranged from 0.59 to 0.62 for pairs of sites in Denver and from 0.47 to 0.70 between Denver and Greeley. Compared to PM10-2.5, concentrations of PM2.5 were more correlated across sites within Denver and less correlated between Denver and Greeley. PM10-2.5 concentrations were highest during the summer and early fall, while PM2.5 and SVM2.5 concentrations peaked in winter during periodic multi-day inversions. SVM10-2.5 concentrations were low at all sites. Diurnal peaks in PM10-2.5 and PM2.5 concentrations corresponded to morning and afternoon peaks of traffic activity, and were enhanced by boundary layer dynamics. SVM2.5 concentrations peaked around noon on both weekdays and weekends. PM10-2.5 concentrations at sites located near highways generally increased with wind speeds above about 3 m/s. Little wind speed dependence was observed for the residential sites in Denver and Greeley.

Gravity collapse structures in the Central Precordillera fold-andthrust belt, Argentina

Several landforms found in the fold-and-thrust belt area of Central Precordillera, Pre-Andes of Argentina, which were often associated with tectonic efforts, are in fact related to non-tectonic processes or gravitational superficial structures. These second-order structures, interpreted as gravitational collapse structures, have developed in the western flank of sierras de La Dehesa and Talacasto. These include rock-slides, rock falls, wrinkle folds, slip sheets and flaps, among others; which together constitute a monoclinal fold dipping between 30º and 60º to the west. Gravity collapse structures are parallel to the regional strike of the Sierra de la Dehesa and are placed in Ordovician limestones and dolomites. Their sloping towards the west, the presence of bed planes, fractures and joints; and the lithology (limestone interbedded with incompetent argillaceous banks) would have favored their occurrence. Movement of the detached structures has been controlled by lithology characteristics, as well as by bedding and joints. Detachment and initial transport of gravity collapse structures and rockslides in the western flank of the Sierra de la Dehesa were tightly controlled by three structural elements: 1) sliding surfaces developed on parallel bedded strata when dipping >30° in the slope direction; 2) Joint’s sets constitute lateral and transverse traction cracks which release extensional stresses and 3) Discontinuities fragmenting sliding surfaces.  Some other factors that could be characterized as local (lithology, structure and topography) and as regional (high seismic activity and possibly wetter conditions during the postglacial period) were determining in favoring the steady loss of the western mountain side in the easternmost foothills of Central Precordillera.