Tibouchina pulchra (Cham.) Cogn., a native Atlantic Forest species, as a bio-indicator of ozone: visible injury

Tibouchina pulchra saplings were exposed to carbon filtered air (CF), ambient non-filtered air (NF) and ambient non-filtered air+40 ppb ozone (NF+O3) 8 h per day during two months. The AOT40 values at the end of the experiment were 48, 910 and 12,895 ppb h(-1), respectively, for the three treatments. After 25 days of exposure (AOT40=3871 ppb h(-1)), interveinal red stippling appeared in plants in the NF+O3 chamber. In the NF chamber, symptoms were observed only after 60 days of exposure (AOT40=910 ppb h(-1)). After 60 days, injured leaves per plant corresponded to 19% in NF+O3 and 1% in the NF treatment; and the average leaf area injured was 7% within the NF+O3 and 0.2% within the NF treatment. The extent of leaf area injured (leaf injury index) was mostly explained by the accumulated exposure of ozone (r2=0.89; p<0.05).     

Disaster studies inside out

Disaster studies is faced with a fascinating anomaly: frequently it claims to be critical and innovative, as suggested by the so‐called vulnerability paradigm that emerged more than 40 years ago, yet often it is perpetuating some of the core and problematic tenets of the hazard paradigm that we were asked to challenge initially. This paper interrogates why such an anomaly persists. In so doing, it employs Antonio Gramsci's concept of hegemony to unpack why disaster studies is still dominated by Western epistemologies and scholars that perpetuate an orientalist view of disasters. Ultimately, it suggests a research agenda for the 40 years to come, which builds on the importance of local researchers analysing local disasters using local epistemologies, especially in the non‐Western world. Such subaltern disaster studies are to be fuelled by increasing consciousness of the need to resist the hegemony of Western scholarship and to relocate disaster studies within the realm of its original political agenda.     

Solomon versus selective fetoscopic laser photocoagulation for twin-twin transfusion syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis aims to compare the perinatal outcome of twin-twin transfusion syndrome (TTTS) pregnancies undergoing selective versus vascular equator (Solomon) fetoscopic laser photocoagulation (FLP). We performed a systematic search in PubMed and Web of Science from inception up to 25 July 2021. Studies comparing the Solomon and selective techniques of FLP for treatment of TTTS pregnancies were eligible. Random-effects or fixed-effect models were used to pool standardized mean differences (SMD) and log odds ratio. Seven studies with a total of 1664 TTTS pregnancies (n = 671 undergoing Solomon and n = 993 selective techniques) were included. As compared to the selective FLP, Solomon was associated with a lower risk of recurrent TTTS compared to the selective technique (Log odds ratio [OR]: −1.167; 95% credible interval [CrI]: −2.01, −0.33; p = 0.021; I²: 67%). In addition, Solomon was significantly associated with a higher risk of placental abruption than the selective technique (Log [OR]: 1.44; 95% CrI: 0.45, 2.47; p = 0.012; I²: 0.0%). Furthermore, a trend for the higher risk of preterm premature rupture of membranes was observed among those undergoing Solomon (Log [OR]: 0.581; 95% CrI: −0.43, 1.49; p = 0.131; I²: 17%). As compared to selective FLP, the Solomon technique for TTTS pregnancies is associated with a significantly lower recurrence of TTTS; however, it significantly increases the risk of placental abruption.