196,519 research outputs found
Protonemura bispina Vincon, Ravizza & Reding 2021, sp. n.
No full text<i>Protonemura bispina</i> Vinçon, Ravizza & Reding sp. n. <p>(Figs. 13–22)</p> <p> <b>Morphological diagnosis.</b> A medium-sized <i>Protonemura</i> species. Body length of males 5–7 mm, females 7–9 mm. Males and females macropterous. General color light reddish-brown; head dark; antennae and legs light-colored. Forewings smoky brown. Cervical gills short, without pre-apical constriction (cf. Figs. 9, 32). Sclerotized base of the median lobe of the paraprocts of adult males small and nearly square; sclerotized stem short and thick (Figs. 16–18). Tip of epiproct with two small spines (Fig. 13, arrow).</p> <p> <b>Type material.</b> Holotype male: <b>ITALY: Carnic Alps</b>: S.E. Auronzo di Cadore,> Passo di Rezzo, below Sella Ciampigotto, spring and brook, 1750 m, 46.487N, 12.589E, 22.06.2018, leg. G. Vinçon (deposited in the MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00660505).</p> <p>Paratypes: same locality (Fig. 40) and date, 3♂, 3♀, leg. G. Vinçon (deposited in the MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00660506).</p> <p> <b>Additional material.</b> <b>ITALY: Carnic Alps.</b> S.W. Feltre, Séren del Grappa, 650–750 m, 45.923N, 11.811E, 8.06.2008, 1♂, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); S.E. Ampezzo,> Préone, Casali Cjampon, W. slope of Verzegnis Mount, big spring, 750–800 m, 46.355N, 12.875E, 11.10.2008, 3♀; 14.05.2010, 1♂, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN), 22.06.2018, 3♂, 2♀, leg. G. Vinçon (RED); S.E. Auronzo di Cadore,> Passo di Rezzo, below Sella Ciampigotto, spring and brook, 1750 m, 46.487N, 12.589E, 22.06.2018, 2♂, leg. G. Vinçon (RED); 21.09.1980, 1♂, 1♀, leg. C. Ravizza (MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00967670); Moggio Udinese, Loc Saps, torrent Aupa, 800 m, 46.495N, 13.22E, 15.06.1994, 2♂, 1♀, leg. C. Ravizza (VIN); 2♂, 2♀, leg. C. Ravizza (MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00967665); Studena Alta, rio Bianco, 830m, 46.508N, 13.27E, 15.06.1994, 1♂, leg. C. Ravizza (VIN); 2♂, 1♀, leg. C. Ravizza (MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00967669); 02.12.1979, 1♀, leg. C. Ravizza (MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00967668); NE Belluno, Passo Mauria, eastern slope, brook and spring, 1100 m, 46.446N, 12.539E, 14.05.2010, 1♂, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Belluno, before Levego, Sagrogna, artificial brook, 400 m, 46.154N, 12.266E, 24.04.1999, 3♂, 3♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); W. Belluno, N.E. Feltre, Canzoi Valley, above the dam, spring and brook, 800 m, 46.143N, 11.951E, 5.04.2009, 1♂, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN).</p> <p> <b>ITALY: Julian Alps.</b> N.E. Cividale del Friuli, Cepletischis, near the Slovenia border, spring above the village, 600 m, 46.179N, 13.568E, 15.05.2010, 4♂, 2♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); E. Cividale del Friuli, below Stregna, below Zamir, 200 m, 46.122N, 13.55E, 21.04.2008, 1♂, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Resia, Valle dell’Uccea, torrent, 700 m, 46.306N, 13.378E, 14.07.1974, 3♂, leg. C. Ravizza (MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00967676).</p> <p> <b>SLOVENIA: Julian Alps.</b> Goriska region, tributary to Limarica river, Vršič Pass, 1400 m, 46.414N, 13.744E, 23.06.2018, 5♂, 4♀, leg. G. Vinçon (RED); Vršič Pass, S. slope, Limarica trib., Soca trib., 1400–1550 m, 46.431N, 13.743E, 23.06.2018, 4♂, 2♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Vršič Pass, S. slope, 1300 m, 46.411N, 13.749E, 15.05.2010, 2♂, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); N. Bovec, Passo del Predil, Slovenian slope of the Pass, 1100 m, 46.419N, 13.586E, 15.05.2010, 1♂, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN).</p> <p> <b> Description of <i>Protonemura bispina</i> sp. n. Males</b> (Figs. 13–18). Tergites 8 and 7 with several rows of strong spines on each side, medially interrupted (Fig. 15); tergite 6 without spines. Hypoproct nearly square, terminated by a finger-shaped expansion (Fig. 16). Ventral vesicle ovoid-shaped (Fig. 16). Inner lobe of paraprocts hidden by hypoproct. In ventral and lateral view, sclerotized base of median lobe of the paraprocts small and nearly square; membranous field reduced, not extending over the length of the cercus (Figs. 16–18), often with a dark thorn. Sclerotized stem arising from the inner upper edge of the sclerotized median lobe short and thick, not extending over the membranous field, and with apical spines (Figs. 16–18). The sclerite of the outer lobe is trifurcated (Fig. 18), with a narrow basal branch turning around the cercus (= OLS1, Fig. 18), a second, thin and curled branch, located between the cercus and the membranous field of the median lobe (= OLS2, Fig. 18), and a third, thin sclerite, sometimes invisible because hidden by the cercus (cf. Fig. 8), that arises from the second branch (= OLS3, Fig. 18). Epiproct with a strong median widening (Figs. 13, 14). Tip of the epiproct very large and bent upwards, with a deep and narrow U-shaped notch between the tip and the upper median part of the epiproct (Figs. 13, 14). Tip of epiproct with two light-colored small protruding spines pointing forward (Figs. 13 (arrow), 14). Tip of epiproct with a dark tulip-shaped sclerite, in dorsal view (Fig. 15). Ventral sclerite of the epiproct with a median bulge bearing a row of short spines pointing backward (Figs. 13, 14).</p> <p> <b>Females</b> (Figs. 20–22). Pregenital plate of sternite 7 brightened, large and wide, with rounded margin slightly extending over sternite 8 (Figs. 20, 22). Subgenital plate with a narrow ribbon-shaped sclerotized band, slightly constricted in its middle and terminated by an acuminated edge on both sides (Figs. 20, 22). Vaginal lobes of the subgenital plate reniform, partly covering sternite 9, and extending almost to the edge of sternite 8 (Figs. 20, 22). Vaginal lobes medially separated by a deep V-shaped notch (Fig. 20). In lateral view, pregenital and genital plates prominent (Fig. 21). Paraprocts large and rounded at apex, acuminated laterally (Fig. 22).</p> <p> <b>Larvae</b>: unknown.</p> <p> <b>Morphological affinities. Males.</b> Adult males of <i>Protonemura bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> differ from those of <i>P. auberti</i> by the tip of the epiproct, which is much wider in <i>P. bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 13, 14) than in <i>P. auberti</i> (Figs. 1, 2). Moreover, the gap between the median part of the epiproct and its tip is very narrow and U-shaped in <i>Protonemura bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 13, 14), whereas this gap is much wider in <i>P. auberti</i> (Figs. 1, 2). Two clearly visible spines are protruding forward at the tip of the epiproct of <i>Protonemura bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 13, 14) while in <i>P. auberti</i> there is only a small, transparent, globulous extension, flanked by two short and thick dark thorns on each side which are visible only by transparency through the cuticle (Figs. 1, 2). In ventral and lateral views, the paraprocts median lobe and the sclerotized stem form a piriform structure in <i>Protonemura auberti</i> (Figs. 5–7), whereas both meet at a nearly right angle in <i>P. bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 16–18).</p> <p> <b>Females.</b> In female adults, the subgenital plate of <i>Protonemura bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> bears a narrow ribbon-shaped sclerotized band, slightly constricted in its middle and terminated by an acuminated edge on both sides (Figs. 20, 22), whereas this band is much wider in <i>P. auberti</i> (Figs. 10, 12). Vaginal lobes of <i>Protonemura auberti</i> are voluminous and bulbiform (Figs. 10, 12), whereas they are smaller and reniform in <i>P. bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 20, 22).</p> <p> <b>Distribution area and biogeographical notes.</b> This steno-endemic species inhabits the Carnic and Julian Alps (Figs. 39, 40). It is strongly crenophilic, mainly occurring in brooklets and springs in a wide altitudinal range (200– 1750 m a.s.l.). The flight period is mainly in spring (IV–VI) but exceptionally extends into late autumn (X–XII) at lower altitudes (<850 m).</p> <p> <b> Derivatio nominis of <i>Protonemura bispina</i> sp. n.</b> This species is named after the two spines located at the tip of the epiproct in adult males (Figs. 13, 14). The epithet is to be treated as a Latin adjective, feminine in gender combined with <i>Protonemura</i>.</p>Published as part of <i>Vinçon, Gilles, Reding, Jean-Paul G. & Ravizza, Carlalberto, 2021, Two new species of Protonemura Kempny, 1898 (Plecoptera: Nemouridae) from the Italian Alps, pp. 493-512 in Zootaxa 4985 (4)</i> on pages 494-501, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4985.4.4, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4964199">http://zenodo.org/record/4964199</a>
Shakespeare in dialogo con la letteratura caraibica contemporanea
No full textThis essay deals with how Shakespeare’s work can be re-read and re-written in
the light of contemporary, post-colonial perspectives. More specifically, it focu-
ses on the work of the Barbadian writer George Lamming, who considers Shake-
speare’s The Tempest (1610) an extraordinary text not only because it contains
and crystallizes the conflicts of the colonial enterprise at its outset, but also
because it somehow prefigures the very end of colonialism. Lamming discusses
the unwanted, unsearched encounter between Prospero and Caliban, the colo-
nizer and the colonized, in order to explore the mutual transformation of the two
characters. He explores the way hybrid subjectivities come into being within
the text, and he teaches us how, four centuries after his death, Shakespeare is
still able to talk about us and make us reflect on the paradoxes and complexity
of the world we live in
Protonemura pennina Vincon, Ravizza & Reding 2021, sp. n.
No full text<i>Protonemura pennina</i> Vinçon, Ravizza & Reding sp. n. <p>(Figs. 23–31)</p> <p> - <i>Protonemura auberti</i> (sequences PLEAA135-20, PLEAA190-20 and PLEAA147-20 on Boldsystems website, www.boldsystems.org)</p> <p> <b>Morphological diagnosis.</b> A medium-sized <i>Protonemura</i> species. Body length of males 6–7 mm, females 8–12 mm. Males and females macropterous. General color light reddish-brown; head dark; antennae and legs light-colored. Forewings smoky brown. Cervical gills very short, without pre-apical constriction (cf. Figs. 9, 32). Sclerotized base of the median lobe of the paraprocts of adult males very narrow and with a small, nearly triangular middle expansion; sclerotized stem long and slender, with a long apical thorn (Figs. 26–28).</p> <p> <b>Type material.</b> Holotype male: <b>ITALY: Pennine Alps.</b> Gressoney valley, Colombit, torrent and spring, 850 m, 45.655N, 7.864E, 16.10.2015, leg. G. Vinçon (deposited in the MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00660507).</p> <p>Paratypes: same locality and date, 2♂, 2♀, leg. G. Vinçon (deposited in the MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00660508).</p> <p> <b>Additional material.</b> <b>ITALY: Pennine Alps.</b> Gressoney valley: Pillaz, 1340–1380 m, brook and spring, 45.642N, 7.875E, 16.10.2015, 1♂; 17.10.2020, 2♂, 5♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Trovinasse, brook and spring (Fig. 41), 1600–1650 m, 45.579N, 7.868E, 13.08.2005, 3♂, 5♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); 1♂, leg. G. Vinçon (RED); 31.08.2012, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Colma di Mambarone, brook and spring, 1850–1900 m, 45.583N, 7.8815E, 8.08.2020, 1♂, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Carema, 500 m, 45.594N, 7.806E, 2.11.1990, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Andrate, Viona Valley, torrent and brook, 1120 m, 45.547N, 7.889E, 8.08.2020, 1♂, 3♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Biella, Oropa, 1850 m, 45.634N, 7.949E, 4.07.2020, 4♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Oropa, Gias Comune, brook, 1300 m, 5.06.1978, 1♂, 1♀, leg. C. Ravizza (VIN); Ailoche, <Noveis, 1000 m, 45.707N, 8.2E, 6.11.2015, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Civiasco, brook, 850 m, 45.822N, 8.313E, 13.08.2005, 1♂, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); 11.10.2014, 2♀, leg. G. Vinçon (MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00279864, used for molecular studies, Boldsystems item PLEAA147-20); Cervarolo, brook, 1200 m, 45.874N, 8.264E, 2.06.1991, 11♂, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Cervarolo, brook, 750 m, 45.843N, 8.2585E, 6.11.2015, 3♂, 2♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Colma Pass, brook, 850 m, 45.819N, 8.333E, 13.08.2005, 1♂, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Graglia, rivulet, 900 m, 45.568N, 7.953E, 24.06.1978, 1♂, 3 mature larvae, leg. C. Ravizza (MZL, catalogue number: GBIFCH00967667).</p> <p> <b>ITALY: Graian Alps.</b> Aosta Valley: Scalaro, 1500 m, 45.548N, 7.762E, 9.10.1999, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); Scalaro, spring, 1375 m, 45.549N, 7.772E, 17.09.2009, 3♂, 1♀; 31.08.2012, 6♂, 8♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN); 3♂, 3♀ leg. G. Vinçon (RED); 11.10.2014, 2♀, leg. G. Vinçon (MZL, catalogue numbers: GBIFCH00279852 and GBIFCH00279954, used for molecular studies; Boldsystems items PLEAA135-20 and PLEAA190-20); above Quincinetto, 1000 m, 45.555N, 7.792E, 9.10.1999, 1♀, leg. G. Vinçon (VIN).</p> <p> <b> Description of <i>Protonemura pennina</i> sp. n. Males</b> (Figs. 23–28). Tergites 8 and 7 with two rows of strong spines on each side and medially interrupted (Fig. 25); tergite 6 without spines. Hypoproct terminated by a fingershaped expansion (Figs. 26, 27). Ventral vesicle ovoid-shaped (Figs. 26–28). Inner lobe of paraprocts hidden by hypoproct. In ventral and lateral view, sclerotized base of median lobe of the paraprocts very narrow and with a small, nearly triangular middle expansion (Figs. 26–28); membranous field not extending over the length of the cercus (Figs. 26–28) often with several dark thorns. Sclerotized stem arising from the inner posterior edge of the sclerotized median lobe, long and slender, largely extending over the membranous field, and with subapical spines and long apical tooth (Figs. 26–28). Sclerotized stem barely bent in lateral view (Figs. 27, 28). Sclerite of the outer lobe very large in its middle part (Figs. 27, 28), from where arise two smaller outer sclerites, one with a narrow basal branch turning around the cercus (OLS1) and a second located between the cercus and the membranous field of the median lobe (OLS2), and a third sclerite (OLS3) that arises from the second branch (Figs. 27, 28; cf. Figs. 8, 18). Epiproct with a median widening in lateral view (Figs. 23, 24). Tip of the epiproct large and swollen, bent upwards, with a wide notch between the tip and the upper median part of the epiproct (Figs. 23, 24). Tip of epiproct with a dark circular sclerite, in dorsal view (Fig. 25). Ventral sclerite of epiproct with a median bulge bearing a row of short spines pointing backward (Fig. 23).</p> <p> <b>Females</b> (Figs. 29–31). Pregenital plate of sternite 7 grained, with rounded margin slightly extending over sternite 8 (Fig. 31). Subgenital plate with a narrow ribbon-shaped sclerotized band, with blunt edges, covering at most two thirds of the total width of sternite 8 (Figs. 29, 31). Vaginal lobes of the subgenital plate rather small, nearly square, not extending to the edge of sternite 8 (Figs. 29, 31). Vaginal lobes medially separated by a notch (Figs. 29, 31). In lateral view, pregenital and genital plates prominent (Fig. 30). Paraprocts large and axe-shaped, with straight sides, acuminated laterally (Fig. 29).</p> <p> <b>Larvae</b>: unknown.</p> <p> <b>Morphological affinities. Males.</b> <i>Protonemura pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> is morphologically close to <i>P. auberti</i> and to <i>P. bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> In ventral view, the paraprocts median lobe and sclerotized stem form a piriform structure in <i>Protonemura auberti</i> (Figs. 5, 6, 7), whereas both meet at an acute angle in <i>P. pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 27, 28) and a right angle in <i>P. bispina</i>. (Figs. 16–18). The sclerotized stem of <i>Protonemura pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> is long and thin, nearly rectilinear in lateral view (Figs. 26, 27), whereas it is shorter, thicker and curved in <i>P. auberti</i> (Fig. 7; Aubert 1959, fig. 69) and shorter and thicker in <i>P. bispina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 16, 17). The tip of the epiproct of <i>Protonemura auberti</i> bears a small globulous extension flanked by two short and thick, dark, thorns visible by transparency (Figs. 1, 2), whereas the epiproct of <i>P. pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> is large and swollen, without a globulous extension and without any thorns (Figs. 23, 24). <i>Protonemura pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> is also easily separable from <i>P. aestiva</i> Kis, 1965. The sclerotized base of the median lobe of the paraprocts of <i>Protonemura aestiva</i> (Fig. 34; Kis 1974, fig. 100C) is much wider than the one of <i>P. pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 27, 28); and its blade shaped middle expansion (Fig. 34; Kis 1974, fig. 100C) is nearly twice as large as the one of <i>P. pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 27, 28). The tip of the epiproct of <i>Protonemura pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> exhibits a dark circular sclerite, in dorsal view (Fig. 25), whereas the one of <i>P. aestiva</i> has two comma-shaped stripes (Kis 1965, fig. 5).</p> <p> <b>Females.</b> In female adults, the subgenital plate of <i>Protonemura pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> bears a narrow ribbon-shaped sclerotized band (Figs. 29, 31), whereas this band is much wider in <i>P. auberti</i> (Figs. 10, 12). Vaginal lobes of <i>Protonemura auberti</i> are voluminous and bulbiform (Figs. 10, 12), whereas they are small and nearly square in <i>P. pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 29, 31) and reniform in <i>P. bispina</i> (Figs. 20, 22). The vaginal lobes of <i>Protonemura aestiva</i> are large and outward pointing (Fig. 33; Kis 1965, fig. 3), whereas they are small and nearly square in <i>P. pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> (Figs. 29, 31).</p> <p> <b>Distribution area and biogeographical notes.</b> <i>Protonemura pennina</i> <b>sp. n.</b> is a steno-endemic species that occurs widely across the Pennine Alps and in the eastern part of the Graian Alps (Figs. 39, 41). It is a strongly crenophilic species. Its altitudinal range is very large (500–1900 m). The flight period is extended, lasting from late spring to autumn (VI–XI).</p> <p> <b> Derivatio nominis of <i>Protonemura pennina</i> sp. n.</b> This species is named after the region in which it mainly occurs, namely the Pennine Alps. The epithet is to be treated as a Latin adjective, feminine in gender combined with <i>Protonemura</i>.</p>Published as part of <i>Vinçon, Gilles, Reding, Jean-Paul G. & Ravizza, Carlalberto, 2021, Two new species of Protonemura Kempny, 1898 (Plecoptera: Nemouridae) from the Italian Alps, pp. 493-512 in Zootaxa 4985 (4)</i> on pages 501-502, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4985.4.4, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/4964199">http://zenodo.org/record/4964199</a>
Resilience and Reconnection in European Immigrant Communities: Literary Representations of the Windrush Generation in the Work of George Lamming
No full textRubella susceptibility profile in pregnant women with HIV
No full textData on susceptibility, assessed through serological testing or personal history, were analyzed with respect to several demographic and HIV-related characteristics. Following exclusion of 93 women with rubella status reported as unknown, 1146 pregnancies with a live birth were analyzed.
Overall, between 2001 and 2009, 303 women (26.4%) were reported as susceptible. Among the 843 nonsusceptible women, 163 (19.3%) were reported as previously vaccinated, with a significant increase during the study period in the proportion of vaccinated women, from 3.4% in 2001 to 25.0% in 2009 (χ2 for trend: P < .001). During the same period, the proportion of susceptible women decreased significantly, from 26.9% in 2001 (36.2% in 2002) to 18.8% in 2009 (P = .002).
The general characteristics of susceptible and nonsusceptible women are reported in Table 1. Rubella susceptibility was not associated with any particular HIV-related or demographic characteristic, but appeared to be significantly associated with susceptibility to Toxoplasma infection (odds ratio [OR]: 3.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.24–4.29, P < .001) and with susceptibility to cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection (OR, 6.90; 95% CI, 5.06–9.14; P < .001), with a borderline-significance association (P = .063) with a negative history of sexually transmitted infections [STI] (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, .98–2.29).
View this table:
In this windowIn a new windowTable 1.
Characteristics Of Pregnant Women With and Without Rubella Susceptibility
Overall, among 1011 children with available information on birth defects, no cases of CRS were observed. The overall birth defect rate (3.4%; 95% CI, 2.3–4.5) was similar to other studies on HIV infection [4, 5]. Only 2 women (.19%) were positive for rubella IgM antibodies during pregnancy (at 16 and 30 wk of pregnancies, respectively). In both cases, children had no birth defects or functional abnormalities.
In our cohort, which collects, based on HIV seroprevalence data [6], no less than 40% of deliveries in HIV-infected women in Italy, about 20% of HIV-infected pregnant women appear to be currently susceptible to rubella infection. This proportion is high compared with other studies on rubella seroprevalence in Italy [7] and suggests higher susceptibility rate and lower frequency of vaccination among women with HIV. It is unknown to what extent concerns about using a live attenuated vaccine in women with HIV may be responsible for the low frequency of vaccination observed. However, in our sample, only a limited proportion of women had low CD4 count or clinically relevant immunosuppression that may have prevented vaccination. The significant reduction in the rate of susceptibility during the last decade, coupled with the concurrent significant increase in the proportion of vaccinated women, is encouraging and suggests that a further decline in rubella susceptibility can be obtained in this population using appropriate vaccination strategies. Our data also suggest that susceptibility to rubella is associated to susceptibility to other infections that may be responsible for congenital syndromes or newborn infections (Toxoplasma, CMV, or sexually transmitted infection), and as such reinforce the need for an appropriate preconception counseling and care in this particular population.
Next SectionAcknowledgments
The Italian Group on Surveillance on Antiretroviral Treatment in Pregnancy
Project coordinators: M. Floridia, M. Ravizza, E. Tamburrini.
Investigators: M. Ravizza, E. Tamburrini, F. Mori, P. Ortolani, E.R. dalle Nogare, G. Sterrantino, M. Meli, S. Polemi, J. Nocentini, M. Baldini, G. Montorzi, M. Mazzetti, B. Borchi, F. Vichi, E. Pinter, E. Anzalone, R. Marocco, C. Mastroianni, V.S. Mercurio, A. Carocci, E. Grilli, A. Maccabruni, B. Mariani, A. Moretti, G. Natalini, G. Guaraldi, K. Luzi, G. Nardini, C. Stentarelli, A. Degli Antoni, A. Molinari, P. Rogasi, M.P. Crisalli, A. Donisi, M. Piepoli, V. Cerri, A. Viganò, V. Giacomet, V. Fabiano, S. Stucchi, C. Cerini, G. Placido, M. D'Alessandro, A. Vivarelli, P. Castelli, F. Savalli, V. Portelli, F. Sabbatini, D. Francisci, S. Alberico, G. Maso, M. Tropea, A. Meloni, D. Gariel, C. Cuboni, F. Ortu, P. Piano, A. Citernesi, I. Vicini, E. Periti, A. Spinillo, M. Roccio, A. Vimercati, E. Bassi, B. Guerra, F. Cervi, E. Tridapalli, G. Brighi, M. Stella, G. Faldella, C. Puccetti, M. Sansone, P. Martinelli, A. Agangi, C. Tibaldi, L. Trentini, S. Marini, G. Masuelli, I. Cetin, A. Crepaldi, M.L. Muggiasca, E. Ferrazzi, C. Giaquinto, M. Fiscon, R. Rinaldi, E. Rubino, A. Bucceri, R. Matrone, G. Scaravelli, G. Anzidei, C. Fundarò, O. Genovese, C. Cafforio, C. Pinnetti, G. Liuzzi, V. Tozzi, P. Massetti, M. Anceschi, A.M. Casadei, F. Montella, A.F. Cavaliere, V. Finelli, C. Riva, L. Lazier, M. Cellini, S. Garetto, G. Castelli Gattinara, A.M. Marconi, S. Foina, S. Dalzero, M. Moneta, F. Di Lorenzo, C. Polizzi, A. Mattei, M.F. Pirillo, R. Amici, C.M. Galluzzo, S. Donnini, S. Baroncelli, M. Floridia.
Pharmacokinetics: M. Regazzi, P. Villani, M. Cusato.
Advisory Board: A. Cerioli, M. De Martino, P. Mastroiacovo, M. Moroni, F. Parazzini, E. Tamburrini, S. Vella.
SIGO-HIV Group National Coordinators: P. Martinelli, M. Ravizza.
We thank all the women who participated in the study, Cosimo Polizzi and Alessandra Mattei for technical support to the project, and Maria Cristina Rota and Pierpaolo Mastroiacovo for their help in discussing the manuscript and the data.
Financial support. This work was supported by the Italian National Program on Research on AIDS (public grants 39C/A, 31D55, and 31D56); and the Italian Medicines Agency (AIFA; public research grants). No funding was received for this work from any of the following organizations: National Institutes of Health (NIH); Wellcome Trust; and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI).
Potential conflicts of interest. All authors: no conflicts.
© The Author 2011. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: [email protected].
Previous Section References
1.↵Duszak RS. Congenital rubella syndrome-major review. Optometry 2009;80:36-43.
Medline2.↵Nardone A, Tischer A, Andrews N, et al. Comparison of rubella seroepidemiology in 17 countries: Progress towards international disease control targets. Bull World Health Organ 2008;86:118-25.
CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science3.↵Floridia M, Ravizza M, Tamburrini E, et al. Diagnosis of HIV infection in pregnancy: Data from a national cohort of pregnant women with HIV in Italy. Epidemiol Infect 2006;134:1120-7.
Medline4.↵Antiretroviral Pregnancy Registry Steering Committee. Antiretroviral pregnancy Registry international Interim Report for 1 January 1989 – 31 January 2010. Wilmington, NC: Registry Coordinating Center; 2010. Available at: www.APRegistry.com. Accessed 19 November 2010.
5.↵Townsend C, Willey B, Cortina-Borja M, Peckham C, Tookey P. Antiretroviral therapy and congenital abnormalities in infants born to HIV-infected women in the UK and Ireland, 1990–2007. AIDS 2009;23:519-24.
CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science6.↵Girardi E, Vanacore P, Costa F, et al. Trends in HIV prevalence among pregnant women in Italy, 1994 to 2002. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2006;41:361-4.
CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science7.↵Rota MC, Bella A, Gabutti G, et al. Rubella seroprofile of the Italian population: An 8-year comparison. Epidemiol Infect 2007;135:555-62.
Medline« Previous | Next Article »
Table of Contents
This Article
Clin Infect Dis. (2011) 52 (7): 960-962.
doi: 10.1093/cid/cir040
ExtractFree
» Full Text (HTML)Free
Full Text (PDF)Free
- Classifications
CORRESPONDENCE
- ServicesAlert me when cited
Alert me if corrected
Alert me if commented
Find similar articles
No Web of Science related articles
Similar articles in PubMed
Add to my archive
Download citation
Request Permissions
+ Citing ArticlesNo citing articlesCiting articles via CrossRefNo Scopus citing articlesNo Web of Science citing articlesCiting articles via Google Scholar
+ Google ScholarArticles by Floridia, M.Articles by Tamburrini, E.Search for related content
+ PubMedPubMed citationArticles by Floridia, M.Articles by Pinnetti, C.Articles by Ravizza, M.Articles by Tibaldi, C.Articles by Sansone, M.Articles by Fiscon, M.Articles by Guaraldi, G.Articles by Guerra, B.Articles by Alberico, S.Articles by Spinillo, A.Articles by Castelli, P.Articles by Dalzero, S.Articles by Cavaliere, A. F.Articles by Tamburrini, E.
+ Related ContentNo related web pages
- ShareCiteULikeConnoteaDeliciousFacebookGoogle+MendeleyTwitterWhat's this?
Navigate This Article
Top
Acknowledgments
References
Search this journal:
Advanced »Current Issue
August 1, 2012 55 (3)
Alert me to new issues
Published on behalf of
Infectious Diseases Society of America
HIV Medicine Association
Society Members: For your free access to this journal, log in via the IDSA members area.
Impact Factor: 9.154
Editor-in-Chief
Sherwood L. Gorbach, M.D.
View full editorial board
Contact the Editorial Office
IDSA Conflict of Interest policy
Archival Material
Browse the archive
Supplement archive
Cover archive
For Authors
Instructions to Authors
ICMJE Form
Submit Now!
OUP Services for Authors
Rights & Permissions
Self-archiving Policy
For Reviewers
CME Information
Conflict of Interest disclosure form
For the Media
Press Room
Alerting Services
Email table of contents
CiteTrack
XML RSS feed
MostMost ReadMost CitedMost Read
Measurement of Airborne Influenza Virus in a Hospital Emergency Department
The Clinical Assessment, Treatment, and Prevention of Lyme Disease, Human Granulocytic Anaplasmosis, and Babesiosis: Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America
Smallpox Vaccination: A Review, Part II. Adverse Events
Shining Light on "Dark Winter"
Tularemia with Vesicular Skin Lesions May Be Mistaken for Infection with Herpes Viruses
» View all Most Read articles
Most CitedPharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Parameters: Rationale for Antibacterial Dosing of Mice and MenDefining Opportunistic Invasive Fungal Infections in Immunocompromised Patients with Cancer and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplants: An International ConsensusInvolvement of Panton-Valentine Leukocidin--Producing Staphylococcus aureus in Primary Skin Infections and PneumoniaNosocomial Bloodstream Infections in US Hospitals: Analysis of 24,179 Cases from a Prospective Nationwide Surveillance StudyPractice Guidelines for the Management of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Adults» View all Most Cited article
Denoising corrupted structural vibration response: critical comparison and assessment of related methods
No full textVibration-based Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) is receiving increasing attention due to the high technological level that the developed methodologies are nowadays reaching, together with the increasing quest for the implementation of effective, but ideally of low-cost, monitoring instrumentation. The latter is relatively easy to deploy and allows for the recording of the structural vibration response at multiple locations, which, for large strategical infrastructures, such as high-rise buildings, bridges, wind farms, etc. may be of critical importance. On the other hand, low-cost instrumentation may typically be accompanied by high Noise-to-Signal (N/S) ratios, contaminating the structural response, increasing the induced uncertainties and rendering the implementation of SHM methods more difficult. This calls for appropriate and effective denoising processes. In tackling such an associated denoising problem, several methods have been proposed and are currently under further development. Among specific variants, the utilization of multi-rate filter banks, especially the one based on Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT), as well as the application of Singular Value Decomposition (SVD), have revealed to be rather effective. Yet, they have mostly been applied to problems where structural vibration response signals originate from specific behavioral classes, as, e.g., in monitoring applications of rotating machinery. In this study, the aforementioned methods are reconsidered and reimplemented; then, assessed on noise-corrupted vibration response signals related to civil engineering applications. Different Noise-to-Signal (N/S) ratios and excitation types are considered, i.e. earthquake and ambient vibration input. Advantages and limitations of both denoising approaches are presented and discussed, with a critical comparison. The outcomes prove the effectiveness of the considered methods in clarifying earthquake response signals, yet also their difficulty in purifying ambient vibration signals, motivating further specific research on the filtering of this latter common class of structural response
Neural Regions Associated With Categorical Speech Perception and Production *While writing this chapter, Susan M. Ravizza was affiliated to University of California.
No full textDr. Duane M. Jackson, Morehouse College, July 2011
No full textThis video is a conversation with Dr. Duane M. Jackson. Dr. Jackson talks about his paper, "Recall and the Serial Position Effect: The Role of Primacy and Recency on Accounting Students' Performance." Jackie Daniel, AUC Woodruff Library, is the interviewer
- …
