A Laboratory of Extremophiles: Iceland Coordination Action for Research Activities on Life in Extreme Environments (CAREX) Field Campaign

Existence of life in extreme environments has been known for a long time, and their habitants have been investigated by different scientific disciplines for decades. However, reports of multidisciplinary research are uncommon. In this paper, we report an interdisciplinary three-day field campaign conducted in the framework of the Coordination Action for Research Activities on Life in Extreme Environments (CAREX) FP7EU program, with participation of experts in the fields of life and earth sciences. In situ experiments and sampling were performed in a 20 m long hot springs system of different temperature (57 \ub0C to 100 \ub0C) and pH (2 to 4). Abiotic factors were measured to study their influence on the diversity. The CO2 and H2S concentration varied at different sampling locations in the system, but the SO2 remained the same. Four biofilms, mainly composed by four different algae and phototrophic protists, showed differences in photosynthetic activity. Varying temperature of the sampling location affects chlorophyll fluorescence, not only in the microbial mats, but plants (Juncus), indicating selective adaptation to the environmental conditions. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR), DNA microarray and denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE)-based analysis in laboratory showed the presence of a diverse microbial population. Even a short duration (30 h) deployment of a micro colonizer in this hot spring system led to colonization of microorganisms based on ribosomal intergenic spacer (RISA) analysis. Polyphasic analysis of this hot spring system was possible due to the involvement of multidisciplinary approaches

Technical summary

The Working Group III (WGIII) contribution to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) assesses literature on the scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigation of climate change. It builds upon the WGIII contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and previous reports and incorporates subsequent new findings and research. Throughout, the focus is on the implications of its findings for policy, without being prescriptive about the particular policies that governments and other important participants in the policy process should adopt. In light of the IPCC's mandate, authors in WGIII were guided by several principles when assembling this assessment: (1) to be explicit about mitigation options, (2) to be explicit about their costs and about their risks and opportunities vis-a-vis other development priorities, (3) and to be explicit about the underlying criteria, concepts, and methods for evaluating alternative policies. This summary offers the main findings of the report

Segmentierte Hohlkathodenentladungen fuer Kupferionenlaser

SIGLECopy held by FIZ Karlsruhe; available from UB/TIB Hannover / FIZ - Fachinformationszzentrum Karlsruhe / TIB - Technische InformationsbibliothekDEGerman

Impact of treatment on survival of patients with secondary glioblastoma

Data concerning treatment of secondary glioblastoma evolving from previously treated WHO II or III grade tumors are very scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of surgical resection and adjuvant treatment on survival in patients with secondary glioblastoma. Thirty-nine patients with secondary glioblastoma evolving from previously treated lower grade gliomas between 2004 and 2015 were included. We evaluated the extent of resection, pathological parameters, adjuvant treatment, as well as survival after malignant transformation. The primary tumor grade was WHO II in 16 (41.0%) and WHO III in 23 (59.0%) patients. Median age was 43 years (range 23-67). Median KPS was 80 (range 60-100) before surgery, and 70 (range 50-100) after surgery. Gross total resection (GTR) of contrast-enhancing disease was achieved in 19 (48.7%) patients. Adjuvant treatment was radio-chemotherapy in 23 (59.0%), radiotherapy in three (7.7%), chemotherapy in five (12.8%) and none in eight (20.5%) patients. Median survival was 11 months (range 1-35) in the entire group. Time since initial diagnosis and previous treatment did not correlate with survival after glioblastoma. Failed GTR, poor KPS after surgery, and no adjuvant treatment were prognostic factors for shorter survival in univariate analysis (p < 0.0001, p = 0.028 and p = 0.003). In selected patients, complete resection and adjuvant treatment may prolong survival in spite of multiple previous therapies