Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg

About: Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg is a education organization based out in Halle, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Liquid crystal. The organization has 20232 authors who have published 38773 publications receiving 965004 citations. The organization is also known as: MLU & University of Wittenberg.

Descriptive normative beliefs and conservation behavior: The moderating roles of personal involvement and injunctive normative beliefs

Abstract: There is ample evidence of the power of social influence on pro-environmental behaviors. Beliefs about the conservation behavior of others (descriptive normative beliefs) have a strong positive correlation with one's own conservation actions. However, this relationship has not been investigated much further in terms of possible moderators or involved mechanisms of information processing. The present study examines two potential moderators and draws links to underlying processing mechanisms. We hypothesized that personal involvement with conservation issues and beliefs about other's approval of conservation (injunctive normative beliefs) would moderate the relationship between descriptive normative beliefs and conservation behavior. The sample consisted of 1604 California residents that were recruited through random digit telephone dialing. Results showed that both injunctive normative beliefs and personal involvement moderated the relationship between descriptive normative beliefs and conservation behavior. High personal involvement weakened the relationship, whereas high injunctive normative beliefs strengthened it. We conclude from these findings that descriptive normative beliefs influence conservation behavior through a rather nonconscious, peripheral route of information processing, while personal involvement motivates a more elaborate, central route of information processing. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fungal Planet description sheets: 214–280

Abstract: Novel species of microfungi described in the present study include the following from South Africa: Cercosporella dolichandrae from Dolichandra unguiscati, Seiridium podocarpi from Podocarpus latifolius, Pseudocercospora parapseudarthriae from Pseudarthria hookeri, Neodevriesia coryneliae from Corynelia uberata on leaves of Afrocarpus falcatus, Ramichloridium eucleae from Euclea undulata and Stachybotrys aloeticola from Aloe sp. (South Africa), as novel member of the Stachybotriaceae fam. nov. Several species were also described from Zambia, and these include Chaetomella zambiensis on unknown Fabaceae, Schizoparme pseudogranati from Terminalia stuhlmannii, Diaporthe isoberliniae from Isoberlinia angolensis, Peyronellaea combreti from Combretum mossambiciensis, Zasmidium rothmanniae and Phaeococcomyces rothmanniae from Rothmannia engleriana, Diaporthe vangueriae from Vangueria infausta and Diaporthe parapterocarpi from Pterocarpus brenanii. Novel species from the Netherlands include: Stagonospora trichophoricola, Keissleriella trichophoricola and Dinemasporium trichophoricola from Trichophorum cespitosum, Phaeosphaeria poae, Keissleriella poagena, Phaeosphaeria poagena, Parastagonospora poagena and Pyrenochaetopsis poae from Poa sp., Septoriella oudemansii from Phragmites australis and Dendryphion europaeum from Hedera helix (Germany) and Heracleum sphondylium (the Netherlands). Novel species from Australia include: Anungitea eucalyptorum from Eucalyptus leaf litter, Beltraniopsis neolitseae and Acrodontium neolitseae from Neolitsea australiensis, Beltraniella endiandrae from Endiandra introrsa, Phaeophleospora parsoniae from Parsonia straminea, Penicillifer martinii from Cynodon dactylon, Ochroconis macrozamiae from Macrozamia leaf litter, Triposporium cycadicola, Circinotrichum cycadis, Cladosporium cycadicola and Acrocalymma cycadis from Cycas spp. Furthermore, Vermiculariopsiella dichapetali is described from Dichapetalum rhodesicum (Botswana), Marasmius vladimirii from leaf litter (India), Ophiognomonia acadiensis from Picea rubens (Canada), Setophoma vernoniae from Vernonia polyanthes and Penicillium restingae from soil (Brazil), Pseudolachnella guaviyunis from Myrcianthes pungens (Uruguay) and Pseudocercospora neriicola from Nerium oleander (Italy). Novelties from Spain include: Dendryphiella eucalyptorum from Eucalyptus globulus, Conioscypha minutispora from dead wood, Diplogelasinospora moalensis and Pseudoneurospora canariensis from soil and Inocybe lanatopurpurea from reforested woodland of Pinus spp. Novelties from France include: Kellermania triseptata from Agave angustifolia, Zetiasplozna acaciae from Acacia melanoxylon, Pyrenochaeta pinicola from Pinus sp. and Pseudonectria rusci from Ruscus aculeatus. New species from China include: Dematiocladium celtidicola from Celtis bungeana, Beltrania pseudorhombica, Chaetopsina beijingensis and Toxicocladosporium pini from Pinus spp. and Setophaeosphaeria badalingensis from Hemerocallis fulva. Novel genera of Ascomycetes include Alfaria from Cyperus esculentus (Spain), Rinaldiella from a contaminated human lesion (Georgia), Hyalocladosporiella from Tectona grandis (Brazil), Pseudoacremonium from Saccharum spontaneum and Melnikomyces from leaf litter (Vietnam), Annellosympodiella from Juniperus procera (Ethiopia), Neoceratosperma from Eucalyptus leaves (Thailand), Ramopenidiella from Cycas calcicola (Australia), Cephalotrichiella from air in the Netherlands, Neocamarosporium from Mesembryanthemum sp. and Acervuloseptoria from Ziziphus mucronata (South Africa) and Setophaeosphaeria from Hemerocallis fulva (China). Several novel combinations are also introduced, namely for Phaeosphaeria setosa as Setophaeosphaeria setosa, Phoma heteroderae as Peyronellaea heteroderae and Phyllosticta maydis as Peyronellaea maydis. Morphological and culture characteristics along with ITS DNA barcodes are provided for all taxa.

Alternative methods to safety studies in experimental animals: role in the risk assessment of chemicals under the new European Chemicals Legislation (REACH)

Abstract: During the last two decades, substantial efforts have been made towards the development and international acceptance of alternative methods to safety studies using laboratory animals. In the EU, challenging timelines for phasing out of many standard tests using laboratory animals were established in the seventh Amending Directive 2003/15/EC to Cosmetics Directive 76/768/EEC. In continuation of this policy, the new European Chemicals Legislation (REACH) favours alternative methods to conventional in vivo testing, if validated and appropriate. Even alternative methods in the status of prevalidation or validation, but without scientific or regulatory acceptance may be used under certain conditions. Considerable progress in the establishment of alternative methods has been made in some fields, in particular with respect to methods predicting local toxic effects and genotoxicity. In more complex important fields of safety and risk assessment such as systemic single and repeated dose toxicity, toxicokinetics, sensitisation, reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, it is expected that the development and validation of in silico methods, testing batteries (in vitro and in silico) and tiered testing systems will have to overcome many scientific and regulatory obstacles which makes it extremely difficult to predict the outcome and the time needed. The main reasons are the complexity and limited knowledge of the biological processes involved on one hand and the long time frame until validation and regulatory acceptance of an alternative method on the other. New approaches in safety testing and evaluation using “Integrated Testing Strategies” (ITS) (including combinations of existing data, the use of chemical categories/grouping, in vitro tests and QSAR) that have not been validated or not gained wide acceptance in the scientific community and by regulatory authorities will need a thorough justification of their appropriateness for a given purpose. This requires the availability of knowledge and experience of experts in toxicology. The challenging deadlines for phasing out of in vivo tests in the Cosmetics Amending Directive 2003/15/EC appear unrealistic. Likewise, we expect that the application of validated alternative methods will only have a small or moderate impact on the reduction of in vivo tests under the regimen of REACH, provided that at least the same level of protection of human health as in the past is envisaged. As a consequence, under safety aspects, it appears wise to consider established in vivo tests to be indispensable as basic tools for hazard and risk assessment with respect to systemic single and repeated dose toxicity, sensitisation, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity, especially regarding quantitative aspects of risk assessment such as NOAELs, LOAELs and health-related limit values derived from them. Based on the overall evaluation in this review, the authors are of the opinion that in the short- and mid-term, the strategy of the development of alternative methods should be more directed towards the refinement or reduction of in vivo tests. The lessons learnt during these efforts will provide a substantial contribution towards the replacement initiatives in the long-term.