Arabidopsis leucine-rich repeat receptor–like kinase NILR1 is required for induction of innate immunity to parasitic nematodes

Plant-parasitic nematodes are destructive pests causing losses of billions of dollars annually. An effective plant defence against pathogens relies on the recognition of pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) by surface-localised receptors leading to the activation of PAMP-triggered immunity (PTI). Extensive studies have been conducted to characterise the role of PTI in various models of plant-pathogen interactions. However, far less is known about the role of PTI in roots in general and in plant-nematode interactions in particular. Here we show that nematode-derived proteinaceous elicitor/s is/are capable of inducing PTI in Arabidopsis in a manner dependent on the common immune co-receptor BAK1. Consistent with the role played by BAK1, we identified a leucine-rich repeat receptor-like kinase, termed NILR1 that is specifically regulated upon infection by nematodes. We show that NILR1 is essential for PTI responses initiated by nematodes and nilr1 loss-of-function mutants are hypersusceptible to a broad category of nematodes. To our knowledge, NILR1 is the first example of an immune receptor that is involved in induction of basal immunity (PTI) in plants or in animals in response to nematodes. Manipulation of NILR1 will provide new options for nematode control in crop plants in future

Between history and values: A study on the nature of interpretation in international law

My thesis discusses the place of evaluative judgements in the interpretation of general international law. It concentrates on two questions. First, whether it is possible to interpret international legal practices without making an evaluative judgement about the point or value that provides the best justification of these practices. Second, whether the use of evaluative judgements in international legal interpretation threatens to undermine the objectivity of international law, the neutrality of international lawyers or the consensual and voluntary basis of the international legal system. I answer both questions in the negative. As regards the first, I argue that international legal practice has an interpretive structure, which combines appeals to the history of international practice with appeals to the principles and values that these practices are best understood as promoting. This interpretive structure is apparent not only in the claims of international lawyers about particular rules of international law (here I use the rule of estoppel as an example) but also in the most basic intuitions of international theorists about the theory and sources of general international law. I then argue that some popular concerns to the effect that the exercise of evaluation in the interpretation of international law will undermine the coherence or the usefulness of the discipline are generally unwarranted. The fact that international legal practice has an interpretive structure does not entail that propositions of international law are only subjectively true, that the interpreter enjoys license to manipulate their meaning for self-serving purposes, or that international law will collapse under the weight of irresolvable disagreements, divisions and conflicts about its proper interpretation

Erarbeitung einer Hardware-Konzeption fuer Bildschirmtextsysteme Abschlussbericht. Abschlussdatum: April 1979

SIGLEDEGerman

Provisional Measures under the African Human Rights System

This chapter discusses the legal characteristics of provisional measures under the African Human Rights System, partly with the aim to fill the gaps found in the works of the Rapporteur on provisional measures of the Institute of International Law. After a brief overview of the provisional measures issued by the African Commission, it examines the precautionary power of the African Court, reaching the conclusion that the Court is inconsistent in the use of such power. This conclusion derives from an analysis of three main and interrelated critical issues, namely: (i) the binding or recommendatory nature of the provisional measures of the African Court; (ii) their domestic implementation; and (iii) the potential responsibility of States that fail to implement them. These critical issues are introduced and observed through the lens of the paradigmatic Sa\ueff al-Islam Kadhafi case, where the African Court first stated that the provisional measures were binding on the State concerned but then, after ascertaining the lack of compliance with such measures, abstained from declaring any resulting international responsibility of that State