The History, Relevance, and Applications of the Periodic System in Geochemistry

Geochemistry is a discipline in the earth sciences concerned with understanding the chemistry of the Earth and what that chemistry tells us about the processes that control the formation and evolution of Earth materials and the planet itself. The periodic table and the periodic system, as developed by Mendeleev and others in the nineteenth century, are as important in geochemistry as in other areas of chemistry. In fact, systemisation of the myriad of observations that geochemists make is perhaps even more important in this branch of chemistry, given the huge variability in the nature of Earth materials – from the Fe-rich core, through the silicate-dominated mantle and crust, to the volatile-rich ocean and atmosphere. This systemisation started in the eighteenth century, when geochemistry did not yet exist as a separate pursuit in itself. Mineralogy, one of the disciplines that eventually became geochemistry, was central to the discovery of the elements, and nineteenth-century mineralogists played a key role in this endeavour. Early “geochemists” continued this systemisation effort into the twentieth century, particularly highlighted in the career of V.M. Goldschmidt. The focus of the modern discipline of geochemistry has moved well beyond classification, in order to invert the information held in the properties of elements across the periodic table and their distribution across Earth and planetary materials, to learn about the physicochemical processes that shaped the Earth and other planets, on all scales. We illustrate this approach with key examples, those rooted in the patterns inherent in the periodic law as well as those that exploit concepts that only became familiar after Mendeleev, such as stable and radiogenic isotopes

Rates and predictors of seizure freedom in resective epilepsy surgery: an update

Epilepsy is a debilitating neurological disorder affecting approximately 1 % of the world’s population. Drug-resistant focal epilepsies are potentially surgically remediable. Although epilepsy surgery is dramatically underutilized among medically refractory patients, there is an expanding collection of evidence supporting its efficacy which may soon compel a paradigm shift. Of note is that a recent randomized controlled trial demonstrated that early resection leads to considerably better seizure outcomes than continued medical therapy in patients with pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy. In the present review, we provide a timely update of seizure freedom rates and predictors in resective epilepsy surgery, organized by the distinct pathological entities most commonly observed. Class I evidence, meta-analyses, and individual observational case series are considered, including the experiences of both our institution and others. Overall, resective epilepsy surgery leads to seizure freedom in approximately two thirds of patients with intractable temporal lobe epilepsy and about one half of individuals with focal neocortical epilepsy, although only the former observation is supported by class I evidence. Two common modifiable predictors of postoperative seizure freedom are early operative intervention and, in the case of a discrete lesion, gross total resection. Evidence-based practice guidelines recommend that epilepsy patients who continue to have seizures after trialing two or more medication regimens should be referred to a comprehensive epilepsy center for multidisciplinary evaluation, including surgical consideration