Desertification

IPCC SPECIAL REPORT ON CLIMATE CHANGE AND LAND (SRCCL) Chapter 3: Climate Change and Land: An IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystem

Red Queen Coevolution on Fitness Landscapes

Species do not merely evolve, they also coevolve with other organisms. Coevolution is a major force driving interacting species to continuously evolve ex- ploring their fitness landscapes. Coevolution involves the coupling of species fit- ness landscapes, linking species genetic changes with their inter-specific ecological interactions. Here we first introduce the Red Queen hypothesis of evolution com- menting on some theoretical aspects and empirical evidences. As an introduction to the fitness landscape concept, we review key issues on evolution on simple and rugged fitness landscapes. Then we present key modeling examples of coevolution on different fitness landscapes at different scales, from RNA viruses to complex ecosystems and macroevolution.Comment: 40 pages, 12 figures. To appear in "Recent Advances in the Theory and Application of Fitness Landscapes" (H. Richter and A. Engelbrecht, eds.). Springer Series in Emergence, Complexity, and Computation, 201

The handling of urinary incontinence in Danish general practices after distribution of guidelines and voiding diary reimbursement: an observational study

BACKGROUND: Though urinary incontinence (UI) is a bothersome condition for the individual patient, the patients tend not to inform their physician about UI and the physician tend not to ask the patient. Recently different initiatives have been established in Danish general practices to improve the management of UI. The aim of this study was to identify the handling of urinary incontinence (UI) in Danish general practices after distribution of clinical guidelines and reimbursement for using a UI diary. METHODS: In October 2001, a questionnaire was sent to 243 general practitioners (GPs) in Frederiksborg County following distribution of clinical guidelines in July 1999 (UI in general practice) and September 2001 (UI in female, geriatric, or neurological patients). A policy for a small reimbursement to GPs for use of a fluid intake/voiding diary in the assessment of UI in general practice was implemented in October 2001. Information concerning monthly reimbursement for using a voiding diary, prescribed drugs (presumably used for treating UI), UI consultations in outpatient clinics, and patient reimbursement for pads was obtained from the National Health Service County Registry. RESULTS: Of the 132 (54%) GPs who replied, 87% had read the guidelines distributed 2 years before, but only 47% used them daily. The majority (69%) of the responding GPs had read and appreciated 1–3 other UI guidelines distributed before the study took place. Eighty-three percent of the responding GPs sometimes or often actively asked their patients about UI, and 92% sometimes or often included a voiding diary in the UI assessment. The available registry data concerning voiding diary reimbursement, prescribed UI drugs, UI consultations in outpatient clinics, and patient reimbursement for pads were insufficient or too variable to determine significant trends. CONCLUSION: GPs management of UI in a Danish county may be reasonable, but low response rate to the questionnaire and insufficient registry data made it difficult to evaluate the impact of different UI initiatives

Estimating Conservation Needs for Rangelands Using USDA National Resources Inventory Assessments

This study presents (1) the overall concept of assessing non-federal western rangeland soil loss rates at a national scale for determining areas of vulnerability for accelerated soil loss using USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) National Resources Inventory (NRI) data and the Rangeland Hydrology and Erosion Model (RHEM) and (2) the evaluation of a risk-based vulnerability approach as an alternative to the conventional average annual soil loss tolerance (T) for assessment of rangeland sustainability. RHEM was used to estimate runoff and soil loss at the hillslope scale for over 10,000 NRCS NRI sample points in 17 western states on non-federal rangelands. The national average annual soil loss rate on non-federal rangeland is estimated to be 1.4 ton ha⁻¹ year⁻¹. Nationally, 20% of non-federal rangelands generate more than 50% of the average annual soil loss. Over 29.2 × 10⁶ ha (18%) of the non-federal rangelands might benefit from treatment to reduce 1559-1570 soil loss to below 2.2 ton ha⁻¹ year⁻¹. National average annual soil loss rates combine areas with low and accelerated soil loss. Evaluating data in this manner can misrepresent the magnitude of the soil loss problem on rangelands. Between 23% and 29% of U.S. non-federal rangelands are vulnerable to accelerated soil loss (≥ 2.2 ton ha⁻¹ event⁻¹) if assessed as a function of vulnerability to a runoff event with a return period of ≥ 25 years. The NRCS has not evaluated potential soil loss risk in national reports in the past, and adaptation of this technique will allow the USDA and its partners to be proactive in preventing accelerated soil loss on rangelands.Keywords: Soil erosion, Rangeland Hydrology and Erosion Model, Non-federal rangelands, Conservation Effects Assessment Project, Soil loss tolerance, Soil and water conservation, National resources inventor

Konfliktfeld Informationstechnik Innovation als Managementproblem. Abschlussbericht

SIGLEAvailable from TIB Hannover: T93B2639 / FIZ - Fachinformationszzentrum Karlsruhe / TIB - Technische InformationsbibliothekDEGerman

Evaluation of USLE and RUSLE estimated soil loss on rangeland

The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE 1.06) were evaluated with rainfall simulation data from a diverse set of rangeland vegetation types (8 states, 22 sites, 132 plots). Dry, wet, and very-wet rainfall simulation treatments were applied to the study plots within a 2-day period. The rainfall simulation rate was 65mm/hr for the dry and wet simulation treatments and alternated between 65-130 mm/hr for the very-wet treatment. Average soil loss for all plots for the representative simulation runs were: 0.011 kg/m2, 0.007 kg/m2, and 0.035 kg/m2 for the dry, wet, and very-wet simulation treatments, respectively. The Nash-Sutcliffe Model efficiencies (R2eff) of the USLE for the dry, wet, very-wet simulation treatments and sum of all soil loss measured in the three composite simulation treatments (pooled data) were negative. This indicates that the observed mean measured soil loss from the field rainfall simulations is better than predicted USLE soil loss. The USLE tended to consistently overpredict soil loss for all 3 rainfall simulation treatments. As the USLE predicted values increased in magnitude, the error variance between predicted and observed soil loss increased. Nash-Sutcliffe model efficiency for the RUSLE was also negative, except for the dry run simulation treatment [R2eff = 0.16 using RUSLE cover management (C) subfactor parameters from the RUSLE manual (C(table)), NRCS soil erodibility factor (K); and R2eff = 0.17 with C(table) and K estimated from the soil-erodibility nomograph]. In comparison to the USLE, there was less error between observed and RUSLE predicted soil loss. The RUSLE error variances showed a consistent trend of underpredicted soil loss among the 3 rainfall simulation treatments. When actual field measured root biomass, plant production and soil random roughness values were used in calculating the RUSLE C subfactors: the R2eff values for the dry, wet, very-wet rainfall simulation treatments and the pooled data were all negative.The Journal of Range Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform August 202

Hydrologic response of diverse western rangelands

There are several generalizations or assumptions concerning rangeland hydrology and erosion relationships found in the literature and in the management arena. These generalizations have found their way into rangeland models, where modelers have assumed that diverse rangeland types can be lumped or averaged together in some way to develop one algorithm or equation to describe a process or relationship across the entire spectrum of rangeland types. These assumptions and modeling approaches based on the universal concept may not be appropriate for diverse rangeland types. This paper presents a comprehensive data set of vegetation, soils, hydrology, and erosion relationships of diverse western rangelands, and utilizes the data to assess the validity of the various assumptions/generalizations for rangelands. The data set emphasizes the difficulty in understanding hydrologic responses on semiarid rangelands, where the relationship between plant/soil characteristics and infiltration/erosion is not well established. When all sites were pooled together, infiltration and sediment production were not correlated with any measured vegetation or soil characteristic. A myriad group of factors determine infiltration and erosion, and is dependent on rangeland type and site conditions. The infiltration and erosion responses and correlation/regression analyses presented highlight the risk of using generalized assumptions about rangeland hydrologic response and emphasize the need to change the current modeling approach. Universal algorithms to represent the response of all rangeland types, such as the pooled multiple regression equations presented, will not provide sufficient accuracy for prediction or assessment of management. We need to develop a rationale to organize rangeland types/vegetation states according to similarities in relationships and responses. These functional rangeland units would assist in the development of more accurate predictive equations to enhance model performance and management of rangelands.The Journal of Range Management archives are made available by the Society for Range Management and the University of Arizona Libraries. Contact [email protected] for further information.Migrated from OJS platform August 202

Humanisierung der Arbeitsbedingungen im Schreibdienst des Kraftfahrt-Bundesamtes Schlussbericht. Abschlussdatum: Dezember 1981

TIB: RN 7543 (85-016) / FIZ - Fachinformationszzentrum Karlsruhe / TIB - Technische InformationsbibliothekSIGLEDEGerman