Landslide databases in the Geological Surveys of Europe

Acceso electrónico sólo desde el IGMELandslides are one of the most widespread geohazards in Europe, producing significant social and economic impacts. Rapid population growth in urban areas throughout many countries in Europe and extreme climatic scenarios can considerably increase landslide risk in the near future. Variability exists between European countries in both the statutory treatment of landslide risk and the use of official assessment guidelines. This suggests that a European Landslides Directive that provides a common legal framework for dealing with landslides is necessary. With this long-term goal in mind, this work analyzes the landslide databases from the Geological Surveys of Europe focusing on their interoperability and completeness. The same landslide classification could be used for the 849,543 landslide records from the Geological Surveys, from which 36% are slides, 10% are falls, 20% are flows, 11% are complex slides, and 24% either remain unclassified or correspond to another typology. Most of them are mapped with the same symbol at a scale of 1:25,000 or greater, providing the necessary information to elaborate European-scale susceptibility maps for each landslide type. A landslide density map was produced for the available records from the Geological Surveys (LANDEN map) showing, for the first time, 210,544 km2 landslide-prone areas and 23,681 administrative areas where the Geological Surveys from Europe have recorded landslides. The comparison of this map with the European landslide susceptibility map (ELSUS 1000 v1) is successful for most of the territory (69.7%) showing certain variability between countries. This comparison also permitted the identification of 0.98 Mkm2 (28.9%) of landslide-susceptible areas without records from the Geological Surveys, which have been used to evaluate the landslide database completeness. The estimated completeness of the landslide databases (LDBs) from the Geological Surveys is 17%, varying between 1 and 55%. This variability is due to the different landslide strategies adopted by each country. In some of them, landslide mapping is systematic; others only record damaging landslides, whereas in others, landslide maps are only available for certain regions or local areas. Moreover, in most of the countries, LDBs from the Geological Surveys co-exist with others owned by a variety of public institutions producing LDBs at variable scales and formats. Hence, a greater coordination effort should be made by all the institutions working in landslide mapping to increase data integration and harmonization.Earth Observation and Geohazards Expert Group (EOEG), EuroGeoSurveys, the Geological Surveys of Europe, BélgicaGeohazards InSAR Laboratory and Modeling Group, Instituto Geológico y Minero de España, EspañaRisk and Prevention Division, Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières, FranciaEngineering Geology Department, Institute of Geology and Mineral Exploration, GreciaGeoHazard team, Geological Institute of Romania, RumaníaGeological Survey of Slovenia, EsloveniaCroatian Geological Survey, CroaciaItalian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research, Geological Survey of Italy, ItaliaSwiss Federal Office for the Environment, SuizaGeological Survey of Austria, AustriaPolish Geological Institute, National Research Institute, PoloniaGeological Survey of Ireland, IrlandaCzech Geological Survey, República ChecaFederal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources, AlemaniaGeological Survey of Norway, NoruegaCyprus Geological Survey, ChipreGeological Survey of Sweden, SueciaInstitut Cartogràfic i Geològic de Catalunya, EspañaBritish Geological Survey, Reino UnidoGeological Survey of Slovakia, EslovaquiaGeological Survey of Lithuania, LituaniaFederalni zavod za geologiju, Bosnia y HerzegovinaGeological Survey of Estonia, EstoniaLaboratório Nacional de Energia e Geologia, PortugalGeological Survey of Hungary, HungríaNorwegian Water and energy Directorate of Norway, Norueg

ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN PUBLIC PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE. A NECESSITY IN THE REGIONAL CONTEXT OR A DIMINUTION OF COMPETENCES?

Given the possible multiple jurisdictions for cross-border offences falling under the competence of the European Public Prosecutor's Office, it is essential to underline the advantages and disadvantages of this new single, strong, independent institution. The opportunity of establishing the European Public Prosecutor's Office derives, ipso facto, from the prejudice of about 5 million EUR in the European budget and also from the ex nunc benefits of all member states due to effectively combat the border crime phenomenon and the frauds from the own member states systems

Customized 3D-Printed Titanium Mesh Developed for an Aesthetic Zone to Regenerate a Complex Bone Defect Resulting after a Deficient Odontectomy: A Case Report

Background and Objectives: Alveolar ridge augmentation in the complex bone defect is a popular topic in implantology. Guided bone regeneration (GBR) is one of the most commonly applied methods to reconstruct alveolar bone. The application of a membrane is the fundamental principle of GBR. There are many membrane types used in oral surgery, but the advantage of the titanium mesh is the rigidity which provides space maintenance and prevents contour collapse. The smooth surface also reduces bacterial contamination. Using computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) in dentistry allows us to obtain the perfect architecture form of the mesh, which covers and protects the bone reconstruction. Case presentation: We present a surgical case of a 27-year-old female patient with severe aesthetic bone atrophy after a deficient odontectomy. Based on the GBR clinical applications, the technique consists of bone reconstruction and a customized titanium mesh application. Using mesh titanium in this case presentation was a reliable alternative to perform a lateral alveolar bone augmentation and reconstruct ridge deformities before reaching an ideal implant placement. Conclusions: According to our case report, the customized titanium mesh could be a valuable option for guided bone regeneration in aesthetic maxillary defects

Mass spectrometric approaches for elucidation of antigen antibody recognition structures in molecular immunology

Mass spectrometric approaches have recently gained increasing access to molecular immunology and several methods have been developed that enable detailed chemical structure identification of antigen-antibody interactions. Selective proteolytic digestion and MS-peptide mapping (epitope excision) has been successfully employed for epitope identification of protein antigens. In addition, affinity proteomics using partial epitope excision has been developed as an approach with unprecedented selectivity for direct protein identification from biological material. The potential of these methods is illustrated by the elucidation of a β- amyloid plaque-specific epitope recognized by therapeutic antibodies from transgenic mouse models of Alzheimer s disease. Using an immobilized antigen and antibody- proteolytic digestion and analysis by high resolution Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry has lead to a new approach for the identification of antibody paratope structures (paratope-excision; parexprot ). In this method, high resolution MS-peptide data at the low ppm level are required for direct identification of paratopes using protein databases. Mass spectrometric epitope mapping and determination of molecular antibody-recognition signatures offer high potential, especially for the development of new molecular diagnostics and the evaluation of new vaccine lead structures

Report of calibration of the tested technologies integrated in the DIGISOIL mapping tool

The DIGISOIL project (FP7-ENV-2007-1 N°211523) is financed by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development, Area “Environment”, Activity 6.3 “Environmental Technologies”.This deliverable is linked to the second task (2.2) of DIGISOIL's WP2 "Laboratory or field calibration in controlled conditions". The objective here are to report all the experiments that have been conducted under controlled conditions, either in the laboratory, or in the field, both at the calibrating sites Beauce (France), Roujan (France) or Telega (Romania), or in any other field site that has been thought to conditions, the experimental results and the costs of the experiments in terms of man-day are reported. After a general introduction that indicates the specific content of this deliverable in relationship with the deliverables of WP1 and other deliverables of WP2, each experiment is described in detail. The plan is organized by geophysical tool but several geophysical methods may have been run at the same site. The reader is suggested to refer to Table 9 for synthesis

Field measurements realized on selected test sites

This deliverable D3.2 (Site preparation) is linked to the first task (3.1) of DIGISOIL’s WP3 (Implementation, field testing and validation on selected test sites). The objectives are here to report all the experiments that have been conducted on real test sites to evaluate the proposed methodology. Test sites are identified as Luxembourg (LU), Mugello (IT) and Zala (HU). For each geophysical method, the experimental conditions, data acquisitions, validation points and produced maps are presented. The optimal combination of petrophysical parameters are used to describe the aforementioned soil properties. The inference functions and fusion techniques developed in WP 2 are applied to the field conditions of the different test sites. Where possible geo-referenced data sets and maps were used for calibration and validation of the geophysical techniques. In some cases, additional analyses can be required to fill the gaps in the datasets and cover the selected dynamic soil properties. The experimental conditions, the results and the costs of the experiments and measurements for each geophysical method (Hyperspectral, GPR, EMI, Geoelectric, Seismic), in terms of man-day, are reported. After a general introduction that indicates the specific content of this deliverable in relationship with the deliverables of WP2 and other deliverables of WP3, each experiment is described in detail. The plan is organized by experimentations but several geophysical methods may have been run at the same site

DIGISOIL: An Integrated System of Data Collection Technologies for Mapping Soil Properties

The multidisciplinary DIGISOIL consortium intends to integrate and improve in situ proximal measurement technologies for assessing soil properties and soil degradation indicators, moving from the sensing technologies themselves to their integration and application in (digital) soil mapping (DSM). The core objective of the project is to explore and exploit new capabilities of advanced geophysical technologies for answering this societal demand. To this aim, DIGISOIL addresses four issues covering technological, soil science, and economic aspects: (i) development and validation of hydrogeophysical technologies and integrated pedo-geophysical inversion techniques; (ii) the relation between geophysical parameters and soil properties; (iii) the integration of derived soil properties for mapping soil functions and soil threats; and (iv) the evaluation, standardisation, and industrialisation of the proposed methodologies, including technical and economic studies

Integration of geohazards into urban and land-use planning. Towards a Landslide Directive. The EuroGeoSurveys Questionnaire

Exposure to hazards is expected to increase in Europe, due to rapid population growth in urban areas and the escalation of urbanization throughout many countries. In the framework of the European Geological Surveys (EGS), the Earth Observation and Geohazards Expert Group (EOEG) has carried out a survey based enquiry regarding the integration of geohazards (earthquakes, volcanoes, landslides, ground subsidence, floods and others) into urban and land-use planning. Responses from 19 European countries and 5 regions reveal heterogeneous policies across national borders. 17% of the countries have not yet implemented any legal measures to integrate geohazards into urban and land-use plans and half of the participating countries have no official methodological guides to construct geohazard maps. Additionally, there is a scarce knowledge about real social impacts of geohazards and resulting disasters in many of the countries, although they have a significant impact on their national economies. This overview stresses the need for a common legislative framework and homogenization of the national legislations as well as mutual guidelines which adopt the principles applicable to the management of geohazards and explain the process to be followed in the production of hazard documentation. This is especially relevant in case of landslide and subsidence hazards; although those are of great importance in Europe, there are no common guidelines and practices similar to Directive 2007/60/EC on the assessment and management of flood risk. Based on their expertise, EuroGeoSurveys (EGS) have the potential to coordinate this activity in European geohazard guidelines and to promote the interaction among stakeholders