Organic vs. Conventional Grassland Management: Do N-15 and C-13 Isotopic Signatures of Hay and Soil Samples Differ?

Distinguishing organic and conventional products is a major issue of food security and authenticity. Previous studies successfully used stable isotopes to separate organic and conventional products, but up to now, this approach was not tested for organic grassland hay and soil. Moreover, isotopic abundances could be a powerful tool to elucidate differences in ecosystem functioning and driving mechanisms of element cycling in organic and conventional management systems. Here, we studied the delta N-15 and delta C-13 isotopic composition of soil and hay samples of 21 organic and 34 conventional grasslands in two German regions. We also used Delta delta N-15 (delta N-15 plant - delta N-15 soil) to characterize nitrogen dynamics. In order to detect temporal trends, isotopic abundances in organic grasslands were related to the time since certification. Furthermore, discriminant analysis was used to test whether the respective management type can be deduced from observed isotopic abundances. Isotopic analyses revealed no significant differences in delta C-13 in hay and delta C-13 in both soil and hay between management types, but showed that delta C-13 abundances were significantly lower in soil of organic compared to conventional grasslands. delta C-15 values implied that management types did not substantially differ in nitrogen cycling. Only delta C-13 in soil and hay showed significant negative relationships with the time since certification. Thus, our result suggest that organic grasslands suffered less from drought stress compared to conventional grasslands most likely due to a benefit of higher plant species richness, as previously shown by manipulative biodiversity experiments. Finally, it was possible to correctly classify about two third of the samples according to their management using isotopic abundances in soil and hay. However, as more than half of the organic samples were incorrectly classified, we infer that more research is needed to improve this approach before it can be efficiently used in practice.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: a putative add-on treatment for major depression in elderly patients.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a recent putative treatment for affective disorders. Several studies have demonstrated antidepressant effects of rTMS in younger patients; we aimed to assess its effect in older outpatients with treatment-resistant major depression. Twenty-four outpatients (mean age=62 years, S.D.=12) with major depression were randomized for sham or real stimulation and received 10 daily rTMS sessions (20 Hz, 2-s trains, 28-s intertrain intervals, 100% of motor threshold) in addition to the antidepressant medication. For sham stimulation, the coil was tilted 90 degrees. Depression severity was assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Beck Depression Inventory, items from the NIMH self-rated symptom scale, and a visual analog depression scale. Mini-Mental Status Examination performance, memory, and executive and attentional functions were measured to control for cognitive side effects. Depression ratings revealed significant antidepressant effects within 2 weeks in both sham and real stimulation groups; however, there were no between-group differences. Treatment with rTMS was safe; adverse events were rare and not more prevalent in either group, and cognitive assessment did not show any deterioration. We were unable to demonstrate any additional antidepressant effects of real stimulation in elderly patients with treatment-resistant major depression. Therapeutic effects of rTMS in this clinically challenging patient group remain to be demonstrated.