CORE
COnnecting
REpositories

    117 research outputs found

    Picus fuliginosus Reichenbach

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Picus fuliginosus Reichenbach Picus fuliginosus Lichtenstein, 1825 [Unpublished manuscript name.] Picus fuliginosus Lichtenstein, 1854: 75 [Nomen nudum; no description or indication.] Picus fuliginosus “Lichtst.” Reichenbach, 1854: 378, pl. DCXL, fig. 4269–4270. Now. Dendrocopos syriacus syriacus (Hemprich & Ehrenberg, 1833). See Hartert (1911: 911). Type series. Not specified by Reichenbach (1854). Lichtenstein (1825, 1854) studied both specimens upon which Hemprich and Ehrenberg (1833) based their Picus syriacus. The type series of Picus fuliginosus Reichenbach, 1854 is thus the same as for Picus syriacus Hemprich & Ehrenberg, 1833. Type locality. Same as for Picus syriacus. Remarks. Reichenbach (1854: 378) attributed this species name to Lichtenstein, but he is its author (ICZN 1999, Art. 51.1). Picus fuliginosus Reichenbach, 1854 is an objective junior synonym of Picus syriacus Hemprich & Ehrenberg, 1833 = Dendrocopos syriacus (Hemprich & Ehrenberg, 1833). See also under Picus syriacus Hemprich & Ehrenberg.Published as part of Mlíkovský, Jiří & Frahnert, Sylke, 2011, Type specimens and type localities of birds collected during the Hemprich and Ehrenberg expedition to Lebanon in 1824, pp. 1-29 in Zootaxa 2990 on page 5, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.27840
    ZENODO

    Are nurses superfluous in PICUs?

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Comments on an article What are PICUs for? by Len Bowers (2012). Len Bowers held that traditional psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs) are under threat due to organisational changes in the health care system. In addition, PICUs are often assessed when exploring cost-cutting measures, since a traditional 10-bed PICU is almost never occupied by ten patients with a need for PICU environment. The author argues that developing a PICU cultural-specific language and teaching nurses to become more self-reflective in their roles in the PICU care culture may not only justify the existence of PICU; it may also shift the view of PICU as a whole, from being 'the punitive ward' to becoming 'the elite ward' where competence flourishes.</p
    Crossref
    Swepub

    Archaic Features in the Image of Picus

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Автор выделяет в образе Пика ряд архаичных черт, связанных с мужскими инициационными сообществами и экстатическими практиками. The author identifies in the image of Picus a number of archaic features, associated with male initiation communities and ecstatic practices
    Elar at YarSU

    Halyomorpha picus

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha picus&lt;/i&gt; (Fabricius, 1794) &lt;p&gt;(Figs 1&ndash;11)&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Cimex Picus&lt;/i&gt; Fabricius, 1794: 115‒116 (original description). Syntype (s): India orientalis [= East India] (1 specimen in coll. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark &mdash;see Zimsen 1964: 313).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Cimex Picus&lt;/i&gt;: Turton (1802): 646 (diagnosis, distribution); Zimsen (1964): 313 (types).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Edessa Picus&lt;/i&gt;: Fabricius (1803): 1543 (diagnosis); Herrich-Sch&auml;ffer (1853): 57 (list).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Edessa&lt;/i&gt; ? &lt;i&gt;picus&lt;/i&gt;: Herrich-Sch&auml;ffer (1853): 89 (&lsquo;gen. dub.&rsquo; [= genus dubious]; list); Dohrn (1859): 20 (catalogue).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Pentatoma Picus&lt;/i&gt;: Walker (1873): 19 (catalogue).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha picus&lt;/i&gt;: St&aring;l (1868): 24 (catalogue, new synonyms); Distant (1879): 45 (distribution); Atkinson (1882): 167 (distribution); Distant (1901a): 823 (synonymy); Distant (1901b): 102 (distribution); Distant (1902): 152 &ndash;153, Fig. 91 (redescription, illustrations, distribution); Distant (1903): 231 (catalogue, distribution); Breddin (1909): 268 (distribution); Maxwell-Lefroy (1909a): 308 (distribution); Maxwell-Lefroy (1909b): pl. LXXIII: fig. 7 (habitus illustration); Distant (1918): 129 (distribution, biology); Hutson (1920): Part IV: p. C10 (bionomics); Ayyar (1924): 267 (bionomics, distribution); Chatterjee (1934): 11 &ndash;12 (bionomics, distribution); Chandra (1953): 93 (distribution); Stichel (1961): 752 (catalogue); Stichel (1962): 233 (catalogue); Abbasi &amp; Ahmad (1974): 72, 75 (differential diagnosis); Josifov &amp; Kerzhner (1978): 172 (taxonomy, synonymy); Pajni &amp; Sidhu (1982): 178 (distribution); Ahmad &amp; Zaidi (1989): 239 (key), 243&ndash;245, 248&ndash;252 (redescription, figures, phylogenetic relationships, records from India and Sri Lanka); Zaidi &amp; Shaukat (1993): 59, 63&ndash;65 (phenetics); Chakraborty &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (1994): 471 (distribution); Chakraborty &amp; Ghosh (1999): 392, 398, 416 (differential diagnosis, distribution); Dolling &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (1999): 21, 57, 70 (catalogue); Biswas &amp; Bal (2007): 302, 313&ndash;314 (differential diagnosis, distribution); Azim (2011): 5 (distribution); Pathak &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2012): 474 (distribution); Chandra &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2014): 200 (distribution); Tembe &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2014): 739, 741, 743 (DNA barcoding, distribution); Salini &amp; Viraktamath (2015):17, 47: Fig. 64, 56: Fig. 115, 60: Fig. 138 (distribution, photos); Shrestha &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2017): 1433 (fungal parasite); Salini &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2021): 268&ndash;269 (differential diagnosis, photos, distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha picus&lt;/i&gt; [partim, incl. &lt;i&gt;H. halys&lt;/i&gt;]: St&aring;l (1876): 75 (catalogue, distribution); Atkinson (1888): 23 &ndash;24 (catalogue, redescription, new synonyms, distribution); Distant (1893): 393 &ndash;394 (new synonyms), Lethierry &amp; Severin (1893): 117 (catalogue); Distant (1899): 444 (synonymy); Oshanin (1906): 106 (catalogue, distribution); Kirkaldy (1909): 50 (catalogue, distribution); Oshanin (1912): 12 (catalogue, distribution); Bergroth (1914): 181 &ndash;182 (catalogue); Hoffmann (1935): 45 &ndash;45, 167 (catalogue, distribution); Tang (1935): 313 &ndash;314 (catalogue); P&eacute;neau (1957): 54 (distribution); Ueshima (1979): 81 (karyotype).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha piceus&lt;/i&gt; [incorrect subsequent spelling]: Kirby (1891): 83 &ndash;84 (catalogue, distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha pica&lt;/i&gt; [incorrect subsequent spelling]: Manna (1951): 5, 19&ndash;21, 44, 109 (karyotype, biology, distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomor phapicus&lt;/i&gt; [incorrect subsequent spelling]: Chandra &amp; Kushwaha (2013): 265 (distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; ? &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha picus, H. picas&lt;/i&gt; [incorrect subsequent spelling]: Sharif &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2020): 1342 &ndash;1343 (redescription, habitus photos, distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; ? &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha picus&lt;/i&gt; [? misidentifications]: Lethierry (1888): 460 (distribution); Breddin (1900): 296 (distribution); Distant (1912): 252 (distribution); Distant (1921): 3 (distribution); Schouteden (1933): 50 (distribution); Black (1968): 568 (distribution); Hasan (1993): 210, 213&ndash;214 (redescription, figures, key, records).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; = &lt;i&gt;Cimex marmoreus&lt;/i&gt; Fabricius, 1798: 534‒535 (original description). Syntypes: India orientalis [= East India] (3 specimens in coll. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark &mdash;see Zimsen 1964: 313). Synonymised by St&aring;l (1868: 24).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Cimex marmoreus&lt;/i&gt;: Zimsen (1964): 313 (types); Dolling &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (1999): 57 (catalogue).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Edessa marmorea&lt;/i&gt;: Fabricius (1803): 1543 (diagnosis).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Edessa&lt;/i&gt; ? &lt;i&gt;marmorea&lt;/i&gt;: Herrich-Sch&auml;ffer (1853): 88 (&lsquo;gen. dub.&rsquo; [= genus dubious]; list); Dohrn (1859): 20 (catalogue).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha marmorea&lt;/i&gt;: Vidyasagar &amp; Bhat (1986): 1096&ndash;1097 (biology, host plant, distribution); Daniel &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2003): 57&ndash;58 (parasitoid, distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; = &lt;i&gt;Cimex cinnamomeus&lt;/i&gt; Wolff, 1802a: 99, pl. 10: fig. 93 (original description, habitus figures). Syntype (s): India orientalis (probably lost). Synonymised by St&aring;l (1868: 24).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Cimex cinnamomeus&lt;/i&gt;: Wolff (1802b): 99, pl. 10: fig. 93 (original description, German translation); Dolling &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (1999): 21 (catalogue).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Pentatoma cinnamomea:&lt;/i&gt; Herrich-Sch&auml;ffer (1853): 48 (list).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; = &lt;i&gt;Pentatoma trivialis&lt;/i&gt; Dohrn, 1860: 400‒401 (original description). Syntypes: Ceylon [= Sri Lanka] (coll. Zoological Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warszawa, Poland). Synonymised by Atkinson (1888: 23).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Cappaea trivialis&lt;/i&gt;: St&aring;l (1865): 170 (new combination).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Pentatoma trivialis&lt;/i&gt;: Walker (1867b): 300 (distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; ? = &lt;i&gt;Dalpada proxima&lt;/i&gt; Walker, 1867a: 227‒228 (original description). Syntypes: 2 &male;, Indonesia: Java (coll. Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom). Synonymised by Distant (1893: 394).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Dalpada proxima&lt;/i&gt;: Lethierry &amp; Severin (1893): 99 (catalogue).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; = &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha punjabensis&lt;/i&gt; Ahmad &amp; Kamaluddin, 1977: 72&ndash;74 (original description, figures). Holotype: &female;, Pakistan: Punjab: Cheechawatni forest (coll. Natural History Museum, Department of Zoology, University of Karachi, Pakistan; not examined). &lt;b&gt;New junior subjective synonym.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha punjabensis&lt;/i&gt;: Ahmad (1980): 136 (checklist); Ahmad (1981): 49 (host plant, distribution); Ahmad &amp; Zaidi (1989): 239 (key), 245&ndash;246, 249&ndash;252 (comparative note, phylogenetic relationships); Zaidi &amp; Shaukat (1993): 59, 63&ndash;65 (phenetics).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; = &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha azhari&lt;/i&gt; Ahmad &amp; Zaidi, 1989: 239 (key), 240&ndash;241, 249&ndash;252 (original description, figures, phylogenetic relationships). Holotype: &male;, Pakistan: Islamadad, Shakarparian (coll. Natural History Museum, Department of Zoology, University of Karachi, Pakistan; not examined). &lt;b&gt;New junior subjective synonym.&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha azhari&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;H. azahari&lt;/i&gt; [incorrect subsequent spelling]: Zaidi &amp; Shaukat (1993): 59, 63&ndash;65 (phenetics).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha brevis&lt;/i&gt; [misidentification]: Parshad (1957a): 402, 404&ndash;405, 407&ndash;408, 412&ndash;413 (karyotype, distribution); Ueshima (1979): 81 (karyotype).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha brevia&lt;/i&gt; [misidentification, subsequent incorrect spelling]: Parshad (1957b): 125 (karyotype).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha halys&lt;/i&gt; [misidentification; see Salini &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2021]: Nikam &amp; More (2016): 210 (distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Pentatoma timorensis&lt;/i&gt; [misidentification]: Dallas (1851): 242 (distribution); Dohrn (1859): 15 (catalogue, distribution); Motschulsky (1863): 74 (distribution); Walker (1867b): 299 (distribution).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Material examined.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;b&gt;PAKISTAN: Islamabad Capital Territory:&lt;/b&gt; Islamabad, National Institute of Health colony, 33&deg;40&prime;48&Prime;N, 73&deg;08&prime;49&Prime;E, 7.ix.2020, 1 &male; 2 &female;, Z. Ahmed lgt., P. Kment det. (1 &male; 1 &female; in coll. Z. Ahmed, Pakistan; 1 &female; in coll. National Museum, Prague, Czech Republic).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Diagnosis.&lt;/b&gt; Coppery brown or dark brown insects, body length 15&ndash;21 mm. Legs usually with alternate bands of black and white elongate rings and ventral side of the body usually bright yellow, especially abdomen. The ventral rim of genital capsule with deep concavity (Figs 7, 10), apical margin of caudal lobes slightly concave (Figs 8&ndash;10); the dorsal rim broadly concave with a median emargination (Fig. 9). Paramere with crown scoop-like or spatulate (Fig. 11). For detailed redescription see Salini &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (in prep.).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt; &lt;i&gt;Measurements.&lt;/i&gt; Male&lt;/i&gt; (n = 1). Body length 14.31 mm; head: length 2.84 mm, width 3.04 mm, interocular width 1.76 mm; lengths of antennomeres: scape (I) 0.78 mm, basipedicellite (IIa) 1.37 mm, distipedicellite (IIb) 2.45 mm, basiflagellum (III) 2.75 mm, distiflagellum (IV) 2.55 mm; pronotum: length 2.84 mm, width 7.65 mm; scutellum: length 5.10 mm, width 4.61 mm.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Female&lt;/i&gt; (n = 2; pale / dark specimen). Body length 15.69 / 16.46 mm; head: length 3.33 / 3.24 mm, width 3.33 / 3.14 mm, interocular width 1.76 / 1.76 mm; lengths of antennomeres: scape (I) 1.18 / 0.88 mm, basipedicellite (IIa) 1.76 / 1.86 mm, distipedicellite (IIb) 2.16 / 2.35 mm, basiflagellum (III) 2.94 / 2.84 mm, distiflagellum (IV) 2.75 / 2.65 mm; lengths of labiomeres: I&mdash;1.55 / 1.48 mm, II&mdash;2.68 / 2.56 mm, III&mdash;2.06 / 2.02 mm, IV&mdash;1.71 / 1.48 mm; pronotum: length 3.14 / 3.04 mm, width 8.43 / 8.14 mm; scutellum: length 5.69 / 5.59 mm, width 5.10 / 4.90 mm.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Distribution. Pakistan:&lt;/b&gt; Islamabad Capital Territory (Ahmad &amp; Zaidi 1989, as &lt;i&gt;H. azhari&lt;/i&gt;; this paper), Punjab (Ahmad &amp; Kamaluddin 1977, Ahmad &amp; Zaidi 1989, both as &lt;i&gt;H. punjabensis&lt;/i&gt;;? Sharif &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2020). &lt;b&gt;India:&lt;/b&gt; Andhra Pradesh (Ayyar 1924), Assam (Atkinson 1882, 1888), Bihar (Maxwell-Lefroy 1909a), Karnataka (Distant 1902; Chatterjee 1934; Vidyasagar &amp; Bhat 1986, as &lt;i&gt;H. marmorea&lt;/i&gt;; Daniel &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2003; Azim 2011), Kerala (Distant 1902), Madhya Pradesh (Chandra &amp; Kushwaha 2013, Chandra &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2014), Maharashtra (Distant 1902; Pathak &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2012; Tembe &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2014; Salini &amp; Viraktamath 2015; Nikam &amp; More 2016, as &lt;i&gt;H. halys&lt;/i&gt;), Meghalaya (Ahmad &amp; Zaidi 1989, Chakraborty &amp; Ghosh 1999), Nagaland (Atkinson 1882), Sikkim (Atkinson 1882, 1888); Tamil Nadu (Distant 1902, Chatterjee 1934, Chandra 1953), Telangana (Biswas &amp; Bal 2007), Uttarakhand (Distant 1918; Parshad 1957a, as &lt;i&gt;H. brevis&lt;/i&gt;; Pajni &amp; Sidhu 1982), Uttar Pradesh (Chandra 1953), West Bengal (Distant 1902, Manna 1951, Chakraborty &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 1994). &lt;b&gt;Sri Lanka&lt;/b&gt; (Dohrn 1860, as &lt;i&gt;P. trivialis&lt;/i&gt;; Walker 1867b, as &lt;i&gt;P. timorensis&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;P. trivialis&lt;/i&gt;; Kirby 1891, as &lt;i&gt;H. piceus&lt;/i&gt;; Distant 1902; Breddin 1909; P&eacute;neau 1957; Ahmad &amp; Zaidi 1989). &lt;b&gt;Myanmar&lt;/b&gt; (Distant 1901b, 1902; Hoffmann 1935).? &lt;b&gt;Indochina&lt;/b&gt; (Laos or Vietnam) (Distant 1921, Hoffmann 1935).? &lt;b&gt;Malaysia&lt;/b&gt;: Penang (Hoffmann 1935), Perak (Distant 1903), Selangor (Hasan 1993), Sarawak (Distant 1912).? &lt;b&gt;Indonesia&lt;/b&gt;: Java (Walker 1867a), Mentawai Islands: Nias (Lethierry 1888), Sumatra (Breddin 1900, Schouteden 1933).? &lt;b&gt;Philippines&lt;/b&gt;: Balabac (Black 1968).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Notes.&lt;/b&gt; Gadalla (2004) recorded &lt;i&gt;H. picus&lt;/i&gt; from Hurghada on Red Sea Coast of Egypt. In that paper, he referred only to the paper by Ahmad &amp; Zaidi (1989), not including &lt;i&gt;H. halys&lt;/i&gt; St&aring;l, 1855, and there is no evidence that the author considered the now widespread and invasive &lt;i&gt;H. halys&lt;/i&gt; at all. As a result, this record was doubted by Aukema &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2013), Hemala &amp; Kment (2017) and Kment &amp; B&rcaron;ez&iacute;kov&aacute; (2018). Indeed the illustrations of a dissected female specimen provided by Gadalla (2004) suggests that the examined specimen was &lt;i&gt;H. halys&lt;/i&gt;. This is evident by the pointed apex of the laterotergite IX (= paratergite 9) and the sessile ductuli present in the apical receptacle of spermathecal pump as shown in the illustration. The pointed apex of latertergite IX is also mentioned in the diagnosis of &lt;i&gt;H. picus&lt;/i&gt; provided by Gadalla (2004). The above diagnostics more closely fits &lt;i&gt;H. halys&lt;/i&gt; than &lt;i&gt;H. picus&lt;/i&gt;. In the case of &lt;i&gt;H. picus&lt;/i&gt;, the apex of laterotergite IX is rounded (see Salini &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; 2021: Fig. 1f) and the spermathcal ductuli are not sessile but elongate and usually twisted (Salini &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt;, in prep.). Moreover the nature of damage described by Gadalla (2004), resulting in the hardening of the fruit surface and taste quality loss of affected fruits, corresponds with known damage caused by &lt;i&gt;H. halys&lt;/i&gt;. Although &lt;i&gt;H. picus&lt;/i&gt; is known as a polyphagous pest, we are lacking reports of any serious damage or quality reduction of affected commodities by those species, except the isolated report of tender Arecanut drop by Vidyasagar &amp; Bhat (1986).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; The synonymy of &lt;i&gt;Dalpada proxima&lt;/i&gt; Walker as well as the records of &lt;i&gt;H. picus&lt;/i&gt; from Indochina (Laos or Vietnam) (Distant 1921, Hoffmann 1935), Malaysia (Distant 1903, 1912; Hoffmann 1935; Hasan 1993), Indonesia (Walker 1867a, Lethierry 1888, Breddin 1900, Schouteden 1933) and Philippines (Black 1968) require verification as they may belong to different species (see also Josifov &amp; Kerzhner 1978).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Halyomorpha timorensis&lt;/i&gt; (Westwood, 1837) was removed from synonymy with &lt;i&gt;H. picus&lt;/i&gt; by Kment &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt; (2021).&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Kment, Petr, Salini, S. &amp; Ahmed, Zubair, 2021, Halyomorpha picus (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Pentatomidae): first confirmed record from Pakistan and two new junior synonyms, pp. 429-438 in Zootaxa 5060 (3)&lt;/i&gt; on pages 430-434, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5060.3.8, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/5635991"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/5635991&lt;/a&gt
    ZENODO

    Outcome of children admitted to adult intensive care units in Italy between 2003 and 2007

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Background: Centralisation of critically ill children to paediatric intensive care units is supported by a strong rationale, but evidence is not overwhelming. Objective: To compare the outcome of children admitted to adult intensive care units (ICUs) in Italy between 2003 and 2007 with that of children admitted to paediatric intensive care units (PICUs) in Italy between 1994 and 1995. Methods: Prospective, multicenter cohort study and historical controls. Risk of ICU mortality was assessed with the PRISM score in both study and historical control groups. Descriptive statistics, standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) with their 95% confidence intervals, and the calibration plots were reported. Results: A total of 1,265 children admitted to 124 adult ICUs between 2003 and 2007 were compared with an historical control group formed by 1,533 children admitted to 26 PICUs between 1994 and 1995. The PRISM score slightly underestimated hospital deaths for low-risk patients in both groups. The overall SMR was 1.11 (95% CI 0.91-1.31) for adult ICUs and 1.04 (95% CI: 0.88-1.19) for PICUs. Conclusions: The level of care provided nowadays to children admitted to adult ICUs in Italy is similar to that provided by Italian PICUs 10 years earlier. On the other hand, there is evidence that Italian PICUs have improved the level of care in the same period. These findings, if confirmed, suggest a better quality of care for children admitted to PICUs as compared to adult ICUs and support the indication, when possible, of early referral to more specialized units in countries where paediatric intensive care is not centralised
    Archivio istituzionale della ricerca - Università degli Studi di Udine
    AIR Universita degli studi di Milano

    Economic impacts of climate change on forests: a PICUS-LANDIS-CGE modeling approach

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Climate change is expected to alter both forest stand- and landscape-level dynamics through a change in environmental characterises. While numerous studies have employed models to assess the ecological and/or economic impacts of such changes on forests throughout the world, there is need to further refine such analyses. In this paper, we contribute to this literature by coupling an ecological (PICUS-LANDIS II) modeling framework with an economic (CGE) model to better account for the economic impact associated with climate-induced impacts on forest stand and landscape-level structure and composition dynamics. Applying this framework to a case-study region of New Brunswick, Canada, we estimate that climate change will reduce softwood supply by 16-73% and impact hardwood supply in the range of -2% to +4% by 2150. The change in wood supply is estimated to reduce the value of the softwood and hardwood forestry and logging sector output by up to 51% and 17%, respectively, by 2150. These sector-level impacts may lead to a 0.08-0.88% reduction in annual GDP by 2150. The methodological advances established in this study can be used to better inform future forest management and economic plans that aim to lessen both the ecological and economic impact of climate change.The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the pdf file of the accepted manuscript may differ slightly from what is displayed on the item page. The information in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript reflects the original submission by the author
    TSpace (University of Toronto)

    Pain and sedation management and monitoring in pediatric intensive care units across Europe: An ESPNIC survey

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Correction published on 16 May 2022. Corrections can be found at https://ccforum.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13054-022-03992-4.Background: Management and monitoring of pain and sedation to reduce discomfort as well as side effects, such as over- and under-sedation, withdrawal syndrome and delirium, is an integral part of pediatric intensive care practice. However, the current state of management and monitoring of analgosedation across European pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) remains unknown. The aim of this survey was to describe current practices across European PICUs regarding the management and monitoring of pain and sedation. Method(s): An online survey was distributed among 357 European PICUs assessing demographic features, drug choices and dosing, as well as usage of instruments for monitoring pain and sedation. We also compared low- and high-volume PICUs practices. Responses were collected from January to April 2021. Result(s): A total of 215 (60% response rate) PICUs from 27 European countries responded. Seventy-one percent of PICUs stated to use protocols for analgosedation management, more frequently in high-volume PICUs (77% vs 63%, p = 0.028). First-choice drug combination was an opioid with a benzodiazepine, namely fentanyl (51%) and midazolam (71%) being the preferred drugs. The starting doses differed between PICUs from 0.1 to 5 mcg/kg/h for fentanyl, and 0.01 to 0.5 mg/kg/h for midazolam. Daily assessment and documentation for pain (81%) and sedation (87%) was reported by most of the PICUs, using the preferred validated FLACC scale (54%) and the COMFORT Behavioural scale (48%), respectively. Both analgesia and sedation were mainly monitored by nurses (92% and 84%, respectively). Eighty-six percent of the responding PICUs stated to use neuromuscular blocking agents in some scenarios. Monitoring of paralysed patients was preferably done by observation of vital signs with electronic devices support. Conclusion(s): This survey provides an overview of current analgosedation practices among European PICUs. Drugs of choice, dosing and assessment strategies were shown to differ widely. Further research and development of evidence-based guidelines for optimal drug dosing and analgosedation assessment are needed. Copyright © 2022, The Author(s).https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-022-03957-
    Midlands Evidence Repository

    Mortality risk factors among critically ill children with MIS-C in PICUs: a multicenter study

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Background: This study evaluated of clinical characteristics, outcomes, and mortality risk factors of a severe multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children admitted to a the pediatric intensive care unit. Methods: A retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted between March 2020 and April 2021 at 41 PICUs in Turkey. The study population comprised 322 children diagnosed with multisystem inflammatory syndrome. Results: The organ systems most commonly involved were the cardiovascular and hematological systems. Intravenous immunoglobulin was used in 294 (91.3%) patients and corticosteroids in 266 (82.6%). Seventy-five (23.3%) children received therapeutic plasma exchange treatment. Patients with a longer duration of the PICU stay had more frequent respiratory, hematological, or renal involvement, and also had higher D-dimer, CK-MB, and procalcitonin levels. A total of 16 patients died, with mortality higher in patients with renal, respiratory, or neurological involvement, with severe cardiac impairment or shock. The non-surviving group also had higher leukocyte counts, lactate and ferritin levels, and a need for mechanical ventilation. Conclusions: In cases of MIS-C, high levels of D-dimer and CK-MB are associated with a longer duration of PICU stay. Non-survival correlates with elevated leukocyte counts and lactate and ferritin levels. We were unable to show any positive effect of therapeutic plasma exchange therapy on mortality. Impact: MIS-C is a life-threatening condition.Patients need to be followed up in the intensive care unit.Early detection of factors associated with mortality can improve outcomes.Determining the factors associated with mortality and length of stay will help clinicians in patient management.High D-dimer and CK-MB levels were associated with longer PICU stay, and higher leukocyte counts, ferritin and lactate levels, and mechanical ventilation were associated with mortality in MIS-C patients.We were unable to show any positive effect of therapeutic plasma exchange therapy on mortality. © 2023, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to the International Pediatric Research Foundation, Inc
    Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Akademik Arşiv Sistemi

    Experimental verification of threshold quantum state tomography on a fully-reconfigurable photonic integrated circuit

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Abstract Reconstructing the state of a quantum system represents a pivotal task for quantum information applications. The standard approach based on quantum state tomography requires a number of measurements that scales exponentially with the number of qubits. Other methods have been proposed and tested to reduce the number of measurements, or to focus on specific properties of the output state rather than on its complete reconstruction. Here, we show experimentally the application of an approach, called threshold quantum state tomography, in an advanced hybrid photonic platform with states up to n = 4 qubits. This method does not require prior knowledge and selects only the informative projectors starting from the measurement of the density matrix diagonal. We demonstrate its effectiveness by showing that a consistent reduction in the number of measurements is obtained for relevant states, with only very limited loss of information. These results open perspective for its application in larger systems
    Archivio della ricerca - Fondazione Bruno Kessler

    Salida de campo a Villarmentero de Esgueva (Valladolid) el 18 de junio de 1956

    Author
    Publication venue
    Publication date
    Field of study
    No full text
    Salida de campo a Villarmentero de Esgueva (Valladolid) el 18 de junio de 1956, de la que se anotaron observaciones sobre el anfibio Epidalea calamita (Sapo corredor, llamado Bufo calamita por el autor), y las siguientes aves: Calandrella sp. (Terrera), Carduelis cannabina (Pardillo común, llamada Colorín y Acanthis cannabina por el autor), Coturnix coturnix (Codorniz común), Falco tinnunculus (Cernícalo vulgar), Galerida malabarica (Cogujada malabar), Melanocorypha calandra (Calandria), Miliaria calandra (Triguero, llamada Emberiza calandra por el autor), Motacilla flava (Lavandera boyera), Oenanthe oenanthe (Collalba gris), Perdiz (Alectoris sp. o Perdix sp.), Picus viridis (Pito real), Pterocles alchata (Ganga ibérica) y Tetrax tetrax (Sisón común, llamado Otis tetrax por el autor).Field trip to Villarmentero de Esgueva (Valladolid) the 18th of June of 1956, of which there were noted observations about the amphibian Epidalea calamita (Natterjack Toad, refered as Bufo calamita by the author), and the following birds: Calandrella sp. (Lark), Carduelis cannabina (Eurasian Linnet, refered as Acanthis cannabina by the author), Coturnix coturnix (Common Quail), Falco tinnunculus (Common Kestrel), Galerida malabarica (Malabar Lark), Melanocorypha calandra (Calandria Lark), Miliaria calandra (Corn Bunting, refered as Emberiza calandra by the author), Motacilla flava (Yellow Wagtail), Oenanthe oenanthe (Northern Wheatear), Partridge (Alectoris sp. or Perdix sp.), Picus viridis (Eurasian Green Woodpecker), Pterocles alchata (Pin-tailed Sandgrouse) and Tetrax tetrax (Little Bustard, refered as Otis tetrax by the author)
    Gestion del Repositorio Documental de la Universidad de Salamanca
    • …
    corecore