scholarly journals Perfluorooctanesulfonate and Related Fluorinated Hydrocarbons in Mink and River Otters from the United States.

2004 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 1264-1264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurunthachalam Kannan ◽  
John Newsted ◽  
Richard S. Halbrook ◽  
John P. Giesy
2002 ◽  
Vol 36 (12) ◽  
pp. 2566-2571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurunthachalam Kannan ◽  
John Newsted ◽  
Richard S. Halbrook ◽  
John P. Giesy

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 279-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan M. Roberts ◽  
Matthew J. Lovallo ◽  
Shawn M. Crimmins

Abstract River otter Lontra canadensis populations in the United States have expanded during the past 50 y as a result of improvements in habitat quality and effective management programs implemented by state and federal agencies and native tribes. Periodic assessments of river otter status, population trends, and geographic distribution are needed to detect changes in populations, assess management approaches, and to identify and prioritize conservation efforts. We surveyed state wildlife agency experts to assess the current population and regulatory status of river otters in their jurisdictions. River otters were legally harvested in 40 states as of 2016. Twenty-two states reported increasing populations while 25 reported stable populations. Most states used multiple methods to monitor river otter populations including harvest-based surveys, presence–absence surveys, and empirically derived population model predictions; harvest-based surveys were the most commonly used monitoring approach. As populations have expanded, river otter reintroduction efforts have become less frequent; two additional states had conducted reintroductions since 1998 and only one state had conducted a reintroduction since 2010. We estimated that river otter distribution increased by 10.2% in the continental United States and by 13.7% in the contiguous United States during an 18-y period. Although populations may continue to increase numerically, river otters may be approaching their potential maximum geographic distribution in the United States.


Author(s):  
A. Hakam ◽  
J.T. Gau ◽  
M.L. Grove ◽  
B.A. Evans ◽  
M. Shuman ◽  
...  

Prostate adenocarcinoma is the most common malignant tumor of men in the United States and is the third leading cause of death in men. Despite attempts at early detection, there will be 244,000 new cases and 44,000 deaths from the disease in the United States in 1995. Therapeutic progress against this disease is hindered by an incomplete understanding of prostate epithelial cell biology, the availability of human tissues for in vitro experimentation, slow dissemination of information between prostate cancer research teams and the increasing pressure to “ stretch” research dollars at the same time staff reductions are occurring.To meet these challenges, we have used the correlative microscopy (CM) and client/server (C/S) computing to increase productivity while decreasing costs. Critical elements of our program are as follows:1) Establishing the Western Pennsylvania Genitourinary (GU) Tissue Bank which includes >100 prostates from patients with prostate adenocarcinoma as well as >20 normal prostates from transplant organ donors.


Author(s):  
Vinod K. Berry ◽  
Xiao Zhang

In recent years it became apparent that we needed to improve productivity and efficiency in the Microscopy Laboratories in GE Plastics. It was realized that digital image acquisition, archiving, processing, analysis, and transmission over a network would be the best way to achieve this goal. Also, the capabilities of quantitative image analysis, image transmission etc. available with this approach would help us to increase our efficiency. Although the advantages of digital image acquisition, processing, archiving, etc. have been described and are being practiced in many SEM, laboratories, they have not been generally applied in microscopy laboratories (TEM, Optical, SEM and others) and impact on increased productivity has not been yet exploited as well.In order to attain our objective we have acquired a SEMICAPS imaging workstation for each of the GE Plastic sites in the United States. We have integrated the workstation with the microscopes and their peripherals as shown in Figure 1.


2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (01) ◽  
pp. 53-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Rehfeld

Every ten years, the United States “constructs” itself politically. On a decennial basis, U.S. Congressional districts are quite literally drawn, physically constructing political representation in the House of Representatives on the basis of where one lives. Why does the United States do it this way? What justifies domicile as the sole criteria of constituency construction? These are the questions raised in this article. Contrary to many contemporary understandings of representation at the founding, I argue that there were no principled reasons for using domicile as the method of organizing for political representation. Even in 1787, the Congressional district was expected to be far too large to map onto existing communities of interest. Instead, territory should be understood as forming a habit of mind for the founders, even while it was necessary to achieve other democratic aims of representative government.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document