scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Lund University

EducationLund, Sweden
About: Lund University is a education organization based out in Lund, Sweden. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Cancer. The organization has 42345 authors who have published 124676 publications receiving 5016438 citations. The organization is also known as: Lunds Universitet & University of Lund.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is found that CD4+CD25+ T cells down‐regulated the expression of the co‐stimulatory molecules CD80 and CD86 on dendritic cells, suggesting that distinct mechanisms regulate theexpression of these molecules.
Abstract: CD4+CD25+ T cells have been shown to inhibit experimentally induced organ-specific autoimmune disease and depletion of these regulatory T cells from normal mice results in development of such conditions. Furthermore, CD4+CD25+ T cells suppress the IL-2 production and thereby the proliferation of polyclonally activated CD4+CD25- T cells in vitro. The suppression in vitro is independent of secreted factors but requires interactions between CD4+CD25- and CD4+CD25+ T cells and antigen-presenting cells (APC). We have now further investigated the function of CD4+CD25+ T cells in vitro and have focused on their interactions with APC. We found that CD4+CD25+ T cells down-regulated the expression of the co-stimulatory molecules CD80 and CD86 on dendritic cells. The steady-state level of CD80 mRNA was also decreased, while the steady-state level of CD86 mRNA was not, suggesting that distinct mechanisms regulate the expression of these molecules. The down-regulation occurred even in the presence of stimuli that would normally increase the expression of CD80 and CD86 molecules. Thus, down-regulation of co-stimulatory molecules may be an additional effector function of these regulatory T cells.

621 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is shown that non-bee insect pollinators play a significant role in global crop production and respond differently than bees to landscape structure, probably making their crop pollination services more robust to changes in land use.
Abstract: Wild and managed bees are well documented as effective pollinators of global crops of economic importance. However, the contributions by pollinators other than bees have been little explored despite their potential to contribute to crop production and stability in the face of environmental change. Non-bee pollinators include flies, beetles, moths, butterflies, wasps, ants, birds, and bats, among others. Here we focus on non-bee insects and synthesize 39 field studies from five continents that directly measured the crop pollination services provided by non-bees, honey bees, and other bees to compare the relative contributions of these taxa. Non-bees performed 25–50% of the total number of flower visits. Although non-bees were less effective pollinators than bees per flower visit, they made more visits; thus these two factors compensated for each other, resulting in pollination services rendered by non-bees that were similar to those provided by bees. In the subset of studies that measured fruit set, fruit set increased with non-bee insect visits independently of bee visitation rates, indicating that non-bee insects provide a unique benefit that is not provided by bees. We also show that non-bee insects are not as reliant as bees on the presence of remnant natural or seminatural habitat in the surrounding landscape. These results strongly suggest that non-bee insect pollinators play a significant role in global crop production and respond differently than bees to landscape structure, probably making their crop pollination services more robust to changes in land use. Non-bee insects provide a valuable service and provide potential insurance against bee population declines.

620 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Carbon-nitrogen interactions significantly influence the simulated response of carbon cycle to temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration, suggesting that nutrients limitations should be included in the next generation of terrestrial biosphere models.
Abstract: The purpose of this study was to evaluate 10 process-based terrestrial biosphere models that were used for the IPCC fifth Assessment Report. The simulated gross primary productivity (GPP) is compared with flux-tower-based estimates by Jung et al. [Journal of Geophysical Research 116 (2011) G00J07] (JU11). The net primary productivity (NPP) apparent sensitivity to climate variability and atmospheric CO2 trends is diagnosed from each model output, using statistical functions. The temperature sensitivity is compared against ecosystem field warming experiments results. The CO2 sensitivity of NPP is compared to the results from four Free-Air CO2 Enrichment (FACE) experiments. The simulated global net biome productivity (NBP) is compared with the residual land sink (RLS) of the global carbon budget from Friedlingstein et al. [Nature Geoscience 3 (2010) 811] (FR10). We found that models produce a higher GPP (133 � 15 Pg C yr � 1 ) than JU11 (118 � 6P g Cy r � 1 ). In response to rising atmospheric CO2 concentration, modeled

619 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A fluorimetric method for the determination of dopamine using differences in fluorescence characteristics at pH about 5.3, microquantities of dopainine can be determined in the presence of at least equal amounts of adrenaline or noradrenaline.
Abstract: Summary. A fluorimetric method for the determination of dopamine is described. The principle is similar to that employed in the tri-hydroxyindole method for estimating adrenaline and noradrenaline. Utilizing differences in fluorescence characteristics at pH about 5.3, microquantities of dopainine can be determined in the presence of at least equal amounts of adrenaline or noradrenaline.

618 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Georges Aad1, Brad Abbott2, Jalal Abdallah3, Ovsat Abdinov4, Baptiste Abeloos5, Rosemarie Aben6, Ossama AbouZeid7, N. L. Abraham8, Halina Abramowicz9, Henso Abreu10, Ricardo Abreu11, Yiming Abulaiti12, Bobby Samir Acharya13, Bobby Samir Acharya14, Leszek Adamczyk15, David H. Adams16, Jahred Adelman17, Stefanie Adomeit18, Tim Adye19, A. A. Affolder20, Tatjana Agatonovic-Jovin21, Johannes Agricola22, Juan Antonio Aguilar-Saavedra23, Steven Ahlen24, Faig Ahmadov25, Faig Ahmadov4, Giulio Aielli26, Henrik Akerstedt12, T. P. A. Åkesson27, Andrei Akimov, Gian Luigi Alberghi28, Justin Albert29, S. Albrand30, M. J. Alconada Verzini31, Martin Aleksa32, Igor Aleksandrov25, Calin Alexa, Gideon Alexander9, Theodoros Alexopoulos33, Muhammad Alhroob2, Malik Aliev34, Gianluca Alimonti, John Alison35, Steven Patrick Alkire36, Bmm Allbrooke8, Benjamin William Allen11, Phillip Allport37, Alberto Aloisio38, Alejandro Alonso39, Francisco Alonso31, Cristiano Alpigiani40, Mahmoud Alstaty1, B. Alvarez Gonzalez32, D. Álvarez Piqueras41, Mariagrazia Alviggi38, Brian Thomas Amadio42, K. Amako, Y. Amaral Coutinho43, Christoph Amelung44, D. Amidei45, S. P. Amor Dos Santos46, António Amorim47, Simone Amoroso32, Glenn Amundsen44, Christos Anastopoulos48, Lucian Stefan Ancu49, Nansi Andari17, Timothy Andeen50, Christoph Falk Anders51, G. Anders32, John Kenneth Anders20, Kelby Anderson35, Attilio Andreazza52, Andrei51, Stylianos Angelidakis53, Ivan Angelozzi6, Philipp Anger54, Aaron Angerami36, Francis Anghinolfi32, Alexey Anisenkov55, Nuno Anjos56 
Aix-Marseille University1, University of Oklahoma2, University of Iowa3, Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences4, Université Paris-Saclay5, University of Amsterdam6, University of California, Santa Cruz7, University of Sussex8, Tel Aviv University9, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology10, University of Oregon11, Stockholm University12, International Centre for Theoretical Physics13, King's College London14, AGH University of Science and Technology15, Brookhaven National Laboratory16, Northern Illinois University17, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich18, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory19, University of Liverpool20, University of Belgrade21, University of Göttingen22, University of Granada23, Boston University24, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research25, University of Rome Tor Vergata26, Lund University27, University of Bologna28, University of Victoria29, University of Grenoble30, National University of La Plata31, CERN32, National Technical University of Athens33, University of Salento34, University of Chicago35, Columbia University36, University of Birmingham37, University of Naples Federico II38, University of Copenhagen39, University of Washington40, University of Valencia41, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory42, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro43, Brandeis University44, University of Michigan45, University of Coimbra46, University of Lisbon47, University of Sheffield48, University of Geneva49, University of Texas at Austin50, Heidelberg University51, University of Milan52, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens53, Dresden University of Technology54, Novosibirsk State University55, IFAE56
TL;DR: In this article, a combined ATLAS and CMS measurements of the Higgs boson production and decay rates, as well as constraints on its couplings to vector bosons and fermions, are presented.
Abstract: Combined ATLAS and CMS measurements of the Higgs boson production and decay rates, as well as constraints on its couplings to vector bosons and fermions, are presented. The combination is based on the analysis of five production processes, namely gluon fusion, vector boson fusion, and associated production with a $W$ or a $Z$ boson or a pair of top quarks, and of the six decay modes $H \to ZZ, WW$, $\gamma\gamma, \tau\tau, bb$, and $\mu\mu$. All results are reported assuming a value of 125.09 GeV for the Higgs boson mass, the result of the combined measurement by the ATLAS and CMS experiments. The analysis uses the CERN LHC proton--proton collision data recorded by the ATLAS and CMS experiments in 2011 and 2012, corresponding to integrated luminosities per experiment of approximately 5 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV and 20 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV. The Higgs boson production and decay rates measured by the two experiments are combined within the context of three generic parameterisations: two based on cross sections and branching fractions, and one on ratios of coupling modifiers. Several interpretations of the measurements with more model-dependent parameterisations are also given. The combined signal yield relative to the Standard Model prediction is measured to be 1.09 $\pm$ 0.11. The combined measurements lead to observed significances for the vector boson fusion production process and for the $H \to \tau\tau$ decay of $5.4$ and $5.5$ standard deviations, respectively. The data are consistent with the Standard Model predictions for all parameterisations considered.

618 citations


Authors

Showing all 42777 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Yi Chen2174342293080
Fred H. Gage216967185732
Kari Stefansson206794174819
Mark I. McCarthy2001028187898
Ruedi Aebersold182879141881
Jie Zhang1784857221720
Feng Zhang1721278181865
Martin G. Larson171620117708
Michael Snyder169840130225
Unnur Thorsteinsdottir167444121009
Anders Björklund16576984268
Carl W. Cotman165809105323
Dennis R. Burton16468390959
Jaakko Kaprio1631532126320
Panos Deloukas162410154018
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
176.5K papers, 6.2M citations

93% related

McGill University
162.5K papers, 6.9M citations

93% related

Utrecht University
139.3K papers, 6.2M citations

93% related

Imperial College London
209.1K papers, 9.3M citations

93% related

University of British Columbia
209.6K papers, 9.2M citations

93% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023246
2022698
20216,295
20206,032
20195,584
20185,249