| |
|
|
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha : |
27/09/2022 |
|
Actualizado : |
27/09/2022 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
|
Autor : |
ZARBÁ, L.; PIQUER-RODRÍGUEZ, M.; BOILLAT, S.; LEVERS, C.; GASPARRI, I.; AIDE, T. M.; ÁLVAREZ-BERRÍOS, N. L.; ANDERSON, L. O.; ARAOZ, E.; ARIMA, E.; BATISTELLA, M.; CALDERÓN-LOOR, M.; ECHEVERRÍA, C.; GONZALEZ-ROGLICH, M.; JOBBÁGY, E. G.; MATHEZ-STIEFEL, S.-L.; RAMIREZ-REYES, C-; PACHECHO, A.; VALLEJOS, M.; YOUNG, K. R.; GRAU, R. |
|
Afiliación : |
LUCÍA ZARBÁ, Instituto de Ecología Regional (IER), Universidad Nacional de Tucumán (UNT) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Tucumán, Argentina.; MARÍA PIQUER-RODRÍGUEZ, Instituto Ecología Regional (IER), Univ. Nacional de Tucumán (UNT). Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Tucumán, Argentina; Lateinamerika-Institut, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany; Geography Department, Humbold, Germany; SÉBASTIEN BOILLAT, Institute of Geography, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland; CHRISTIAN LEVERS, Depart. Environmental Geography, Inst. for Environmental Studies, Vrije Univ. Amsterdam, Netherlands; Inst. for Resources, Environment and Sustainability, Univ. of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, Univ.; IGNACIO GASPARRI, Instituto de Ecología Regional (IER), Universidad Nacional de Tucumán (UNT) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Tucumán, Argentina; T. MITCHELL AIDE, Department of Biology, University of Puerto Rico-Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico; NORA L. ÁLVAREZ-BERRÍOS, USDA Forest Service, International Institute of Tropical Forestry, Río Piedras, Puerto Rico; LIANA O. ANDERSON, National Center for Monitoring and Early Warning of Natural Disasters-CEMADEN, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation-MCTI, Brazil; EZEQUIEL ARAOZ, Instituto de Ecología Regional (IER), Universidad Nacional de Tucumán (UNT) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Tucumán, Argentina; EUGENIO ARIMA, Department of Geography and the Environment, University of Texas at Austin, United States; MATEUS BATISTELLA, Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa Agricultural Informatics) State University of Campinas (Unicamp), Brazil; MARCO CALDERÓN-LOOR, Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia;Grupo de Investigación de Biodiversidad, Medio Ambiente y Salud-BIOMAS, Universidad de las Américas (UDLA), Quito, Ecuador; CRISTIAN ECHEVERRÍA, Landscape Ecology Laboratory, Facultad de Ciencias Forestales, Universidad de Concepción, Chile; Millennium Nucleus Center for the Socioeconomic Impact of Environmental Policies (CESIEP), Santiago de Chile, Chile; MARIANO GONZALEZ-ROGLICH, Wildlife Conservation Society, Buenos Aires, Argentina; ESTEBAN G. JOBBÁGY, Grupo de Estudios Ambientales, IMASL-CONICET and Universidad Nacional de San Luis, San Luis, Argentina; South American Institute for Resilience and Sustainability Studies (SARAS), Maldonado, Uruguay; SARAH-LAN MATHEZ-STIEFEL, Centre for Development and Environment, University of Bern, Switzerland; Wyss Academy for Nature at the University of Bern, Switzerland; CARLOS RAMIREZ-REYES, Quantitative Ecology & Spatial Technologies Laboratory, Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Aquaculture, Mississippi State University, United States; ANDREA PACHECO, German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Germany; MARÍA VALLEJOS, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y Sistemas de Información, Facultad de Agronomía, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina; KENNETH R. YOUNG, Department of Geography and the Environment, University of Texas at Austin, United States; RICARDO GRAU, Instituto de Ecología Regional (IER), Universidad Nacional de Tucumán (UNT) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Tucumán, Argentina. |
|
Título : |
Mapping and characterizing social-ecological land systems of South America. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2022 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Ecology and Society, 2022, Volume 27, Issue 2, Article number 27. OPEN ACCESS. doi: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13066-270227 |
|
ISSN : |
1708-3087 |
|
DOI : |
10.5751/ES-13066-270227 |
|
Idioma : |
Inglés |
|
Notas : |
Article: Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. -- Erratum: On 6 June 2022 the abstract was edited. See online for more detail: https://ecologyandsociety.org/vol27/iss2/art27/#dataarchive_stmt --
LICENSE: Published under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article is under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. You may share and adapt the work provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license. -- Article metrics: https://plu.mx/plum/a/?doi=10.5751/ES-13066-270227&theme=plum-bigben-theme |
|
Contenido : |
ABSTRACT.- Humans place strong pressure on land and have modified around 75% of Earth's terrestrial surface. In this context, ecoregions and biomes, merely defined on the basis of their biophysical features, are incomplete characterizations of the territory. Land system science requires classification schemes that incorporate both social and biophysical dimensions. In this study, we generated spatially explicit social-ecological land system (SELS) typologies for South America with a hybrid methodology that combined data-driven spatial analysis with a knowledge-based evaluation by an interdisciplinary group of regional specialists. Our approach embraced a holistic consideration of the social-ecological land systems, gathering a dataset of 26 variables spanning across 7 dimensions: physical, biological, land cover, economic, demographic, political, and cultural. We identified 13 SELS nested in 5 larger social-ecological regions (SER). Each SELS was discussed and described by specific groups of specialists. Although 4 environmental and 1 socioeconomic variable explained most of the distribution of the coarse SER classification, a diversity of 15 other variables were shown to be essential for defining several SELS, highlighting specific features that differentiate them. The SELS spatial classification presented is a systematic and operative characterization of South American social-ecological land systems. We propose its use can contribute as a reference framework for a wide range of applications such as analyzing observations within larger contexts, designing system-specific solutions for sustainable development, and structuring hypothesis testing and comparisons across space. Similar efforts could be done elsewhere in the world. Copyright © 2022 by the author(s). MenosABSTRACT.- Humans place strong pressure on land and have modified around 75% of Earth's terrestrial surface. In this context, ecoregions and biomes, merely defined on the basis of their biophysical features, are incomplete characterizations of the territory. Land system science requires classification schemes that incorporate both social and biophysical dimensions. In this study, we generated spatially explicit social-ecological land system (SELS) typologies for South America with a hybrid methodology that combined data-driven spatial analysis with a knowledge-based evaluation by an interdisciplinary group of regional specialists. Our approach embraced a holistic consideration of the social-ecological land systems, gathering a dataset of 26 variables spanning across 7 dimensions: physical, biological, land cover, economic, demographic, political, and cultural. We identified 13 SELS nested in 5 larger social-ecological regions (SER). Each SELS was discussed and described by specific groups of specialists. Although 4 environmental and 1 socioeconomic variable explained most of the distribution of the coarse SER classification, a diversity of 15 other variables were shown to be essential for defining several SELS, highlighting specific features that differentiate them. The SELS spatial classification presented is a systematic and operative characterization of South American social-ecological land systems. We propose its use can contribute as a reference framework for a wide ran... Presentar Todo |
|
Palabras claves : |
Automatization; Hierarchical clustering; Multidisciplinary data; Participatory mapping; Social-ecological mapping. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
F01 Cultivo |
|
URL : |
http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/16772/1/ES-2021-13066.pdf
|
|
Marc : |
LEADER 03737naa a2200457 a 4500
001 1063581
005 2022-09-27
008 2022 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a1708-3087
024 7 $a10.5751/ES-13066-270227$2DOI
100 1 $aZARBÁ, L.
245 $aMapping and characterizing social-ecological land systems of South America.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2022
500 $aArticle: Gold Open Access, Green Open Access. -- Erratum: On 6 June 2022 the abstract was edited. See online for more detail: https://ecologyandsociety.org/vol27/iss2/art27/#dataarchive_stmt -- LICENSE: Published under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article is under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. You may share and adapt the work provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license. -- Article metrics: https://plu.mx/plum/a/?doi=10.5751/ES-13066-270227&theme=plum-bigben-theme
520 $aABSTRACT.- Humans place strong pressure on land and have modified around 75% of Earth's terrestrial surface. In this context, ecoregions and biomes, merely defined on the basis of their biophysical features, are incomplete characterizations of the territory. Land system science requires classification schemes that incorporate both social and biophysical dimensions. In this study, we generated spatially explicit social-ecological land system (SELS) typologies for South America with a hybrid methodology that combined data-driven spatial analysis with a knowledge-based evaluation by an interdisciplinary group of regional specialists. Our approach embraced a holistic consideration of the social-ecological land systems, gathering a dataset of 26 variables spanning across 7 dimensions: physical, biological, land cover, economic, demographic, political, and cultural. We identified 13 SELS nested in 5 larger social-ecological regions (SER). Each SELS was discussed and described by specific groups of specialists. Although 4 environmental and 1 socioeconomic variable explained most of the distribution of the coarse SER classification, a diversity of 15 other variables were shown to be essential for defining several SELS, highlighting specific features that differentiate them. The SELS spatial classification presented is a systematic and operative characterization of South American social-ecological land systems. We propose its use can contribute as a reference framework for a wide range of applications such as analyzing observations within larger contexts, designing system-specific solutions for sustainable development, and structuring hypothesis testing and comparisons across space. Similar efforts could be done elsewhere in the world. Copyright © 2022 by the author(s).
653 $aAutomatization
653 $aHierarchical clustering
653 $aMultidisciplinary data
653 $aParticipatory mapping
653 $aSocial-ecological mapping
700 1 $aPIQUER-RODRÍGUEZ, M.
700 1 $aBOILLAT, S.
700 1 $aLEVERS, C.
700 1 $aGASPARRI, I.
700 1 $aAIDE, T. M.
700 1 $aÁLVAREZ-BERRÍOS, N. L.
700 1 $aANDERSON, L. O.
700 1 $aARAOZ, E.
700 1 $aARIMA, E.
700 1 $aBATISTELLA, M.
700 1 $aCALDERÓN-LOOR, M.
700 1 $aECHEVERRÍA, C.
700 1 $aGONZALEZ-ROGLICH, M.
700 1 $aJOBBÁGY, E. G.
700 1 $aMATHEZ-STIEFEL, S.-L.
700 1 $aRAMIREZ-REYES, C-
700 1 $aPACHECHO, A.
700 1 $aVALLEJOS, M.
700 1 $aYOUNG, K. R.
700 1 $aGRAU, R.
773 $tEcology and Society, 2022, Volume 27, Issue 2, Article number 27. OPEN ACCESS. doi: https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-13066-270227
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
|
|
 | Acceso al texto completo restringido a Biblioteca INIA Las Brujas. Por información adicional contacte bibliolb@inia.org.uy. |
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA La Estanzuela; INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha actual : |
15/09/2014 |
|
Actualizado : |
09/10/2019 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
|
Circulación / Nivel : |
A - 1 |
|
Autor : |
CARRASCO-LETELIER, L.; MENDOZA, Y.; BRANCHICCELA, M.B. |
|
Afiliación : |
LEONIDAS CARRASCO-LETELIER, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; YAMANDU MENDOZA SPINA, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; MARÍA BELÉN BRANCHICCELA, MEC/ IIBCE (Instituto de Investigaciones de Ciencias Biológicas "Clemente Estable"). |
|
Título : |
Acute contact toxicity test of insecticides (Cipermetrina 25, Lorsban 48E, Thionex 35 on honeybees in the southwestern zone of Uruguay. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2012 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Chemosphere, 2012, v. 88, n. 4, p. 439-444 |
|
ISSN : |
0045-6535 |
|
DOI : |
10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.02.062 |
|
Idioma : |
Inglés |
|
Notas : |
Article History: Received 18 August 2011// Revised 23 January 2012 // Accepted 17 February 2012 // Available online 20 March 2012. |
|
Contenido : |
ABSTRACT.
Glyphosate-resistant soybean cultivation is expanding rapidly in Uruguay, with its land area having increased by 95 times during the past 10 years. Because of the region?s Neotropical conditions, insecticide use is required to ensure adequate soybean productivity. However, in areas shared by soybean crops and beekeepers ? such as the southwestern zone of Uruguay (SWZU) ? the use of insecticides can increase the risks of honeybee death and honey contamination. Uruguayan commercial and legal guidelines set out practices and field doses designed to prevent acute intoxication with insecticides. However, honeybees in the SWZU are predominantly a polyhybrid subspecies different from that used to set international reference values, and hence they may have a different acute toxicity response, thus rendering such precautions ineffective. The aim of this work was to assess the acute toxicity response of polyhybrid honeybees in the SWZU to cypermethrin (commercial formulation: Cipermetrina 25 Agrin®), chlorpyrifos (commercial formulation: Lorsban 48E®), and endosulfan (commercial formulation: Thionex 35®). Acute toxicity bioassays were conducted to determine the median lethal dose (LD50) of each insecticide for the honeybees. The results indicate that, compared with EU reference values, SWZU honeybees have a higher toxicological sensitivity to chlorpyrifos and endosulfan, and a lower toxicological sensitivity to cypermethrin, based on the commercial formulations tested. However, when these results were adjusted according to their field dose equivalents, only chlorpyrifos emerged as a potential problem for beekeeping, as the maximum recommended field dose of Lorsban 48E® for soybean crops in Uruguay is 23 times the corresponding LD50 for honeybees in the SWZU. MenosABSTRACT.
Glyphosate-resistant soybean cultivation is expanding rapidly in Uruguay, with its land area having increased by 95 times during the past 10 years. Because of the region?s Neotropical conditions, insecticide use is required to ensure adequate soybean productivity. However, in areas shared by soybean crops and beekeepers ? such as the southwestern zone of Uruguay (SWZU) ? the use of insecticides can increase the risks of honeybee death and honey contamination. Uruguayan commercial and legal guidelines set out practices and field doses designed to prevent acute intoxication with insecticides. However, honeybees in the SWZU are predominantly a polyhybrid subspecies different from that used to set international reference values, and hence they may have a different acute toxicity response, thus rendering such precautions ineffective. The aim of this work was to assess the acute toxicity response of polyhybrid honeybees in the SWZU to cypermethrin (commercial formulation: Cipermetrina 25 Agrin®), chlorpyrifos (commercial formulation: Lorsban 48E®), and endosulfan (commercial formulation: Thionex 35®). Acute toxicity bioassays were conducted to determine the median lethal dose (LD50) of each insecticide for the honeybees. The results indicate that, compared with EU reference values, SWZU honeybees have a higher toxicological sensitivity to chlorpyrifos and endosulfan, and a lower toxicological sensitivity to cypermethrin, based on the commercial formulations tested. Howe... Presentar Todo |
|
Palabras claves : |
APICULTURA; CHLORPYRIFOS; CYPERMETHRIN; ECOTOXICOLOGÍA; ENDOSULFAN; HONEYBEES; INSECTICIDE; LD50; PESTICIDAS; QUÍMICA AMBIENTAL. |
|
Thesagro : |
APICULTURA. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
T01 Polución |
|
Marc : |
LEADER 02825naa a2200313 a 4500
001 1013165
005 2019-10-09
008 2012 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a0045-6535
024 7 $a10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.02.062$2DOI
100 1 $aCARRASCO-LETELIER, L.
245 $aAcute contact toxicity test of insecticides (Cipermetrina 25, Lorsban 48E, Thionex 35 on honeybees in the southwestern zone of Uruguay.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2012
500 $aArticle History: Received 18 August 2011// Revised 23 January 2012 // Accepted 17 February 2012 // Available online 20 March 2012.
520 $aABSTRACT. Glyphosate-resistant soybean cultivation is expanding rapidly in Uruguay, with its land area having increased by 95 times during the past 10 years. Because of the region?s Neotropical conditions, insecticide use is required to ensure adequate soybean productivity. However, in areas shared by soybean crops and beekeepers ? such as the southwestern zone of Uruguay (SWZU) ? the use of insecticides can increase the risks of honeybee death and honey contamination. Uruguayan commercial and legal guidelines set out practices and field doses designed to prevent acute intoxication with insecticides. However, honeybees in the SWZU are predominantly a polyhybrid subspecies different from that used to set international reference values, and hence they may have a different acute toxicity response, thus rendering such precautions ineffective. The aim of this work was to assess the acute toxicity response of polyhybrid honeybees in the SWZU to cypermethrin (commercial formulation: Cipermetrina 25 Agrin®), chlorpyrifos (commercial formulation: Lorsban 48E®), and endosulfan (commercial formulation: Thionex 35®). Acute toxicity bioassays were conducted to determine the median lethal dose (LD50) of each insecticide for the honeybees. The results indicate that, compared with EU reference values, SWZU honeybees have a higher toxicological sensitivity to chlorpyrifos and endosulfan, and a lower toxicological sensitivity to cypermethrin, based on the commercial formulations tested. However, when these results were adjusted according to their field dose equivalents, only chlorpyrifos emerged as a potential problem for beekeeping, as the maximum recommended field dose of Lorsban 48E® for soybean crops in Uruguay is 23 times the corresponding LD50 for honeybees in the SWZU.
650 $aAPICULTURA
653 $aAPICULTURA
653 $aCHLORPYRIFOS
653 $aCYPERMETHRIN
653 $aECOTOXICOLOGÍA
653 $aENDOSULFAN
653 $aHONEYBEES
653 $aINSECTICIDE
653 $aLD50
653 $aPESTICIDAS
653 $aQUÍMICA AMBIENTAL
700 1 $aMENDOZA, Y.
700 1 $aBRANCHICCELA, M.B.
773 $tChemosphere, 2012$gv. 88, n. 4, p. 439-444
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
| Expresión de búsqueda válido. Check! |
|
|
