A multidisciplinary critical review of ecosystem services studies in Greece: approaches, shortcomings and the pathway to implementation

During the last two decades, ecosystem services (ES) research is used to inform the various steps of decision- and policy- making process, regarding environmental management, spatial planning and natural capital accounting. In the EU, this vast and rapid publication boom was triggered by the enactment of Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020, urging Member States to implement Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystem and their Services (MAES); few countries pioneered, while others are still lagging behind. In Greece, the implementation of MAES started in 2014 and since then an impressive progress has been made, with Greece now being among the countries with the most rapid progress. However, there are still major knowledge and data gaps on ecosystem services in Greece; know-how on specific methods, tools and practices is still to be developed. This poses obstacles in integrative efforts to identify and/or interpret the various co-variates affecting ecosystems and their services in space and time and hinders the incorporation of the ES generated information into the decision-making process. Making the first steps towards overcoming these hurdles, the present study aims to (i) synthesize the ecosystem services literature relevant to the ES implementation in Greece, (ii) validate and classify each literature source to the relevant ecosystem services categories, (iii) identify shortcomings in terms of ES assessed and data available, and (iv) critically review the variety of approaches to ES assessments that are followed. The outcomes of this study will facilitate the efficient implementation of ecosystem services assessments in Greece

Development of hardware sensors for the online monitoring of SBR used for the treatment of industrial wastewaters

Conference Information: International Conference on Mathematical Modelling - MATHMOD 2006 Vienna, AUSTRIA, 2006International audienceThe main challenge in the management of a sequencing batch reactor, for the biological treatment of urban and industrial wastewaters, is to ensure stable treatment efficiency under highly variable influent quality and quantity. To cope with this challenge, online instrumentation is fundamental, since it allows to characterize both influent variability and process efficiency. The more the online data are closely correlated with influent quality and SBRs treatment capacity, the more straightforward is the implementation of control strategies based on these data. In this paper, two monitoring techniques are described, which allow to obtain influent-related and process-related data: set-point titration and UV spectrophotometry. Despite the very different measuring principles, both techniques were successfully applied to SBRs monitoring and control leading to comparable results

Cystinuria: clinical practice recommendation

Cystinuria (OMIM 220100) is an autosomal recessive hereditary disorder in which high urinary cystine excretion leads to the formation of cystine stones because of the low solubility of cystine at normal urinary pH. We developed clinical practice recommendation for diagnosis, surgical and medical treatment, and follow-up of patients with cystinuria. Elaboration of these clinical practice recommendations spanned from June 2018 to December 2019 with a consensus conference in January 2019. Selected topic areas were chosen by the co-chairs of the conference. Working groups focusing on specific topics were formed. Group members performed systematic literature review using MEDLINE, drafted the statements, and discussed them. They included geneticists, medical biochemists, pediatric and adult nephrologists, pediatric and adult urologists experts in cystinuria, and the Metabolic Nephropathy Joint Working Group of the European Reference Network for Rare Kidney Diseases (ERKNet) and eUROGEN members. Overall 20 statements were produced to provide guidance on diagnosis, genetic analysis, imaging techniques, surgical treatment (indication and modalities), conservative treatment (hydration, dietetic, alkalinization, and cystine-binding drugs), follow-up, self-monitoring, complications (renal failure and hypertension), and impact on quality of life. Because of the rarity of the disease and the poor level of evidence in the literature, these statements could not be graded. This clinical practice recommendation provides guidance on all aspects of the management of both adults and children with cystinuria, including diagnosis, surgery, and medical treatment.status: Published onlin

Cystinuria: clinical practice recommendation.

Cystinuria (OMIM 220100) is an autosomal recessive hereditary disorder in which high urinary cystine excretion leads to the formation of cystine stones because of the low solubility of cystine at normal urinary pH. We developed clinical practice recommendation for diagnosis, surgical and medical treatment, and follow-up of patients with cystinuria. Elaboration of these clinical practice recommendations spanned from June 2018 to December 2019 with a consensus conference in January 2019. Selected topic areas were chosen by the co-chairs of the conference. Working groups focusing on specific topics were formed. Group members performed systematic literature review using MEDLINE, drafted the statements, and discussed them. They included geneticists, medical biochemists, pediatric and adult nephrologists, pediatric and adult urologists experts in cystinuria, and the Metabolic Nephropathy Joint Working Group of the European Reference Network for Rare Kidney Diseases (ERKNet) and eUROGEN members. Overall 20 statements were produced to provide guidance on diagnosis, genetic analysis, imaging techniques, surgical treatment (indication and modalities), conservative treatment (hydration, dietetic, alkalinization, and cystine-binding drugs), follow-up, self-monitoring, complications (renal failure and hypertension), and impact on quality of life. Because of the rarity of the disease and the poor level of evidence in the literature, these statements could not be graded. This clinical practice recommendation provides guidance on all aspects of the management of both adults and children with cystinuria, including diagnosis, surgery, and medical treatment.status: Published onlin

Cystinuria: clinical practice recommendation.

Cystinuria (OMIM 220100) is an autosomal recessive hereditary disorder in which high urinary cystine excretion leads to the formation of cystine stones because of the low solubility of cystine at normal urinary pH. We developed clinical practice recommendation for diagnosis, surgical and medical treatment, and follow-up of patients with cystinuria. Elaboration of these clinical practice recommendations spanned from June 2018 to December 2019 with a consensus conference in January 2019. Selected topic areas were chosen by the co-chairs of the conference. Working groups focusing on specific topics were formed. Group members performed systematic literature review using MEDLINE, drafted the statements, and discussed them. They included geneticists, medical biochemists, pediatric and adult nephrologists, pediatric and adult urologists experts in cystinuria, and the Metabolic Nephropathy Joint Working Group of the European Reference Network for Rare Kidney Diseases (ERKNet) and eUROGEN members. Overall 20 statements were produced to provide guidance on diagnosis, genetic analysis, imaging techniques, surgical treatment (indication and modalities), conservative treatment (hydration, dietetic, alkalinization, and cystine-binding drugs), follow-up, self-monitoring, complications (renal failure and hypertension), and impact on quality of life. Because of the rarity of the disease and the poor level of evidence in the literature, these statements could not be graded. This clinical practice recommendation provides guidance on all aspects of the management of both adults and children with cystinuria, including diagnosis, surgery, and medical treatment

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field