University of Graz

About: University of Graz is a education organization based out in Graz, Steiermark, Austria. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Context (language use). The organization has 17934 authors who have published 37489 publications receiving 1110980 citations. The organization is also known as: Carolo Franciscea Graecensis & Karl Franzens Universität.

Monoolein: a magic lipid?

Abstract: During the last few years, there has been an extraordinary increase in publications describing the manifold applications of monoolein, one of the most important lipids in the fields of drug delivery, emulsion stabilization and protein crystallization. In this perspective we present a comprehensive review of the phase behavior of this ‘magic lipid’. An account of various mesophases formed in the presence of water and a collection of formulae for the calculation of their nano-structural parameters are provided. Effects of chemical and biological molecules including lipids, detergents, salts, sugars, proteins and DNA on the classical behavior are also discussed. Physicochemical triggers such as, temperature, pressure and shearing modulate the phase behavior of monoolein self assemblies that are covered in subsequent sections. Finally the growing applications of monoolein in various fields are also reported.

Central transmission of afferent impulses. III. Incidence and significance of the substance P in the dorsal roots of the spinal cord

Abstract: Extrakte aus dorsalen Wurzeln verursachen am isolierten Meerschweinchenileum eine Kontraktion, die nicht auf Acetylcholin-, Histamin-und ATP-Wirkung zuruckzufuhren ist, vielmehr gegen diese abgegrenzt werden konnte. Eine derartige Wirkung ist in Extrakten aus ventralen Wurzeln, wenn uberhaupt vorhanden, nur angedeutet.

Biogeographic responses to geodynamics: A key study all around the Oligo–Miocene Tethyan Seaway ☆

Abstract: Extensive terrestrial exchanges were initiated by the closure of the Tethyan Seaway during the Early Miocene. Proboscideans are among the most prominent African immigrants, which arrived in Eurasia about 19 Ma ago via the ‘‘Gomphotherium Landbridge’’. Several distinct waves of continental migrations, however, document that the formation of this landbridge was a multiphase process. Until the closure, a marine faunal exchange was enabled via the Mesopotamian Trough and the Zagros Basin, as reflected by contributions of Indonesian corals in the Iranian basins and by the occurrence of ‘‘western’’ gastropods in Pakistan and India. Nevertheless, the emergence of the landbridge was preceded in the marine biosphere by first biogeographic divergences on both sides of the seaway already during Oligocene times (e.g. within the tridacnines and strombids). Around the closure event, the breakdown of biogeographic relations was near-complete and the Proto-Mediterranean faunas bear little in common with those of the Indo-West Pacific Region (IWPR). Some of the discussed examples suggest that the Western Tethys Region (WTR) had acted as centre of origin and diversity during Oligocene and Early Miocene times. After the closure of the seaway, this centre had shifted to the southeast, heralding the enormous biodiversity of the modern IWPR. Some originally WTR elements managed to follow this shift and formed the Miocene stock for the modern IWPR faunas. In contrast, the marine fauna in the Mediterranean cul-de-sac suffered strong impoverishment due to the Miocene cooling, the Messinian Salinity Crisis and the late Pliocene and Pleistocene glacials – a fact which might explain the receptivity of the Mediterranean Sea for Lessepsian migrants. This synthesis tries to document the practical problem of recognising biogeographic patterns despite the heterochronous developments in different systematic groups, which, in addition, are often obscured by a stratigraphically incomplete and geographically patchy fossil record. r 2007 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.

Towards process-informed bias correction of climate change simulations

Abstract: Biases in climate model simulations introduce biases in subsequent impact simulations. Therefore, bias correction methods are operationally used to post-process regional climate projections. However, many problems have been identified, and some researchers question the very basis of the approach. Here we demonstrate that a typical cross-validation is unable to identify improper use of bias correction. Several examples show the limited ability of bias correction to correct and to downscale variability, and demonstrate that bias correction can cause implausible climate change signals. Bias correction cannot overcome major model errors, and naive application might result in ill-informed adaptation decisions. We conclude with a list of recommendations and suggestions for future research to reduce, post-process, and cope with climate model biases. Bias correction methods aim to remove introduced bias for climate model simulations; however, improper use can result in spurious climate signals. This Perspective considers the issues of bias correction and makes recommendations for research to overcome model biases.

Adjuvant endocrine therapy plus zoledronic acid in premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: 5-year follow-up of the ABCSG-12 bone-mineral density substudy

Abstract: Summary Background The Austrian Breast and Colorectal Cancer Study Group trial-12 (ABCSG-12) bone substudy assesses zoledronic acid for preventing bone loss associated with adjuvant endocrine therapy and reports on long-term findings of bone-mineral density (BMD) during 3 years of treatment and 2 years after completing adjuvant treatment with or without zoledronic acid. The aim of this substudy is to gain insight into bone health in this setting. Methods ABCSG-12 is a randomised, open-label, phase III, 4-arm trial comparing tamoxifen (20 mg/day orally) and goserelin (3·6 mg subcutaneously every 28 days) versus anastrozole (1 mg/day orally) and goserelin (3·6 mg subcutaneously every 28 days), both with or without zoledronic acid (4 mg intravenously every 6 months) for 3 years in premenopausal women with endocrine-responsive breast cancer. This prospective bone subprotocol measured BMD at 0, 6, 12, 36, and 60 months. The primary endpoint of the bone substudy (secondary endpoint in the main trial) was change in BMD at 12 months, assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in assessable patients. Analyses were intention to treat. Statistical significance was assessed by t tests. The ABCSG-12 trial is registered on the ClinicalTrials.gov website, number NCT00295646. Findings 404 patients were prospectively included in the bone substudy and randomly assigned to endocrine therapy alone (goserelin and anastrozole or goserelin and tamoxifen; n=199) or endocrine therapy concurrent with zoledronic acid (goserelin, anastrozole, and zoledronic acid or goserelin, tamoxifen, and zoledronic acid; n=205). After 3 years of treatment, endocrine therapy alone caused significant loss of BMD at the lumbar spine (−11·3%, mean difference −0·119 g/cm 2 [95% CI −0·146 to −0·091], p 2 [−0·076 to −0·030], p 2 [−0·179 to −0·102] vs −9·0%, mean difference −0·095 g/cm 2 [−0·134 to −0·057], p 2 [−0·106 to −0·027], p=0·001; trochanter −4·1%, mean difference −0·03 g/cm 2 [−0·062 to 0·001], p=0·058). Patients who received zoledronic acid had stable BMD at 36 months (lumbar spine +0·4%, mean difference 0·004 g/cm 2 [−0·024 to 0·032]; trochanter +0·8%, mean difference 0·006 g/cm 2 [−0·018 to 0·028]) and increased BMD at 60 months at both sites (lumbar spine +4·0%, mean difference 0·039 g/cm 2 [0·005–0·075], p=0·02; trochanter +3·9%, mean difference 0·028 g/cm 2 [0·003–0·058], p=0·07) compared with baseline. Interpretation Goserelin plus tamoxifen or anastrozole for 3 years without concomitant zoledronic acid caused significant bone loss. Although there was partial recovery 2 years after completing treatment, patients receiving endocrine therapy alone did not recover their baseline BMD levels. Concomitant zoledronic acid prevented bone loss during therapy and improved BMD at 5 years. Funding AstraZeneca (London, UK) and Novartis (Basel, Switzerland).