17 research outputs found
Considerações taxonômicas e novas combinações em Ardisia Swartz (Myrsinaceae) do sudeste do Brasil Taxonomic considerations and new combinations in Ardisia Swartz (Myrsinaceae) from Southeastern Brazil
Os tipos de placentação e de pré-floração têm sido utilizados para a distinção dos gêneros Ardisia Swartz, ao qual tem sido atribuído placentação plurisseriada e pré-floração imbricada ou quincuncial, e Stylogyne A.DC., ao qual tem sido atribuído placentação unisseriada e pré-floração contorta. Entretanto, a análise de dez espécies destes gêneros revelou a inconsistência destes caracteres. Também foi constatada a impossibilidade de observar diferenças no tipo de placentação em espécimes com poucos óvulos. Propõe-se, portanto, o restabelecimento da circunscrição de Ardisia, incluindo o gênero Stylogyne, conforme adotado por Miquel, em 1856 e Handro, em 1969. Desta forma, Ardisia ambigua Mart. é o nome válido para S. ambigua (Mart.) Mez e Ardisia martiana Miq. o é para S. laevigata (Mart.) Mez. Duas novas combinações são necessárias: Ardisia depauperata (Mez) Bernacci & Jung-Mendaçolli e Ardisia warmingii (Mez) Bernacci & Jung-Mendaçolli.<br>Placentation and aestivation have traditionally been used as diagnostic features to separate the genera Ardisia Swartz and Stylogyne A.DC. While Ardisia has pluriseriate placentation and imbricate or quincuncial aestivation, Stylogyne has uniseriate placentation and contorted aestivation. However, careful examination of ten species of these genera revealed the inconsistency of these characters in the distinction of the two genera. Also, we noticed the impossibility of observation of placentation types in few-ovuled specimens. Therefore, we propose the re-establishment of the circumscription of Ardisia adopted by Miquel, in 1856, and Handro, in 1969 which includes the genus Stylogyne. In this way Ardisia ambigua Mart. is the valid name for S. ambigua (Mart.) Mez as Ardisia martiana Miq. is for S. laevigata (Mart.) Mez. Two new combinations are necessary: Ardisia depauperata (Mez) Bernacci & Jung-Mendaçolli and Ardisia warmingii (Mez) Bernacci & Jung-Mendaçolli
Early Construction of a Maya Sacred Landscape: The Sector Y “E-Group” of Nixtun-Ch’ich’ (Petén, Guatemala)
Forests of History: Satellite Remote Sensing and Archaeological Survey in Southern Ghana
Comparison of Serotype Prevalence of Pneumococci Isolated from Middle Ear, Lower Respiratory Tract and Invasive Disease Prior to Vaccination in Iceland
Archaeology and Maya writing
Recent decipherments underscore the relevance of Maya writing to archaeology. Textual references assist in dating archaeological features and help identify rulers that commissioned architecture. Maya script also touches on matters as diverse as Classic Maya folk classification, the average life spans of the elite, and the attribution of provenance to looted monuments. More generally, decipherments reveal the composition and spatial organization of Classic Maya polities, now shown to be smaller than previously supposed
Systematic review of tests to identify the disc, SIJ or facet joint as the source of low back pain
Clinical practice guidelines state that the tissue source of low back pain cannot be specified in the majority of patients. However, there has been no systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests used to identify the source of low back pain. The aim of this systematic review was therefore to determine the diagnostic accuracy of tests available to clinicians to identify the disc, facet joint or sacroiliac joint (SIJ) as the source of low back pain. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched up to February 2006 with citation tracking of eligible studies. Eligible studies compared index tests with an appropriate reference test (discography, facet joint or SIJ blocks or medial branch blocks) in patients with low back pain. Positive likelihood ratios (+LR) > 2 or negative likelihood ratios (-LR) < 0.5 were considered informative. Forty-one studies of moderate quality were included; 28 investigated the disc, 8 the facet joint and 7 the SIJ. Various features observed on MRI (high intensity zone, endplate changes and disc degeneration) produced informative +LR (> 2) in the majority of studies increasing the probability of the disc being the low back pain source. However, heterogeneity of the data prevented pooling. +LR ranged from 1.5 to 5.9, 1.6 to 4.0, and 0.6 to 5.9 for high intensity zone, disc degeneration and endplate changes, respectively. Centralisation was the only clinical feature found to increase the likelihood of the disc as the source of pain: +LR = 2.8 (95%CI 1.4–5.3). Absence of degeneration on MRI was the only test found to reduce the likelihood of the disc as the source of pain: −LR = 0.21 (95%CI 0.12–0.35). While single manual tests of the SIJ were uninformative, their use in combination was informative with +LR of 3.2 (95%CI 2.3–4.4) and −LR of 0.29 (95%CI 0.12–0.35). None of the tests for facet joint pain were found to be informative. The results of this review demonstrate that tests do exist that change the probability of the disc or SIJ (but not the facet joint) as the source of low back pain. However, the changes in probability are usually small and at best moderate. The usefulness of these tests in clinical practice, particularly for guiding treatment selection, remains unclear