During and after application, pesticides enter the atmosphere by volatilisation and by wind erosion of particles on which the pesticide is sorbed. Measurements at application sites revealed that sometimes more than half of the amount applied is lost into the atmosphere within a few days. The atmosphere is an important part of the hydrologic cycle that can transport pesticides from their point of application and deposit them into aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems far from their point of use. In the region of Trier pesticides are widely used. In order to protect crops from pests and increase crop yields in the viniculture, six to eight pesticide applications take place between May and August. The impact that these applications have on the environmental pollution of the region is not yet well understood. The present study was developed to characterize the atmospheric presence, temporal patterns, transport and deposition of a variety of pesticides in the atmosphere of the area of Trier. To this purpose, rain samples were weekly collected at eight sites during the growing seasons 2000, 2001 and 2002, and air samples (gas and particle phases) were collected during the growing season 2002. Multiresidue analysis methods were developed to determine multiple classes of pesticides in rain water, particle- and gas-phase samples. Altogether 24 active ingredients and 3 metabolites were chosen as representative substances, focussing mainly on fungicides. Twenty-four of the 27 measured pesticides were detected in the rain samples; seventeen pesticides were detected in the air samples. The most frequently detected pesticides and at the highest concentrations, both in rain and air, were compounds belonging to the class of fungicides. The insecticide methyl parathion was also detected in several rain samples as well as two substances that are banned in Germany, such as the herbicides atrazine and simazine. Concentration levels varied during the growing season with the highest concentrations being measured in the late spring and summer months, coinciding with application times and warmer months. Concentration levels measured in the rain samples were, generally, in the order of rnng l-1. Though average concentrations for single substances were less than 100 ng l-1, total concentrations were considerable and in some instances well above the EU drinking water quality standard of 500 ng l-1 for total pesticides. Compared to the amounts applied for pest control, the amounts deposited by rain resulted between 0,004% and 0,10% of the maximum application rates. These low pesticide inputs from precipitation to surface-water bodies is not of concern in vinicultural areas where the impact of other sources, such as superficial runoff inputs from the treated areas and cleaning of field crop sprayers, is more important. However, the potential impacts of these aerial pesticide inputs to non-target sites, such as organic crops, and sensitive ecosystems are as yet not known. Concentration levels in the air samples were in the order of ng m-3 at sites close to the fields were pesticides were applied, while lower values, in the order of pg m-3, were detected at the site located further away from fields where applications were performed. The measured air concentration levels found in this study do not represent a concern for human health in terms of acute risk. Inhalation toxicity studies have shown that an acute potential risk only arises at air concentrations in the range of g m-3. Finally, it must be kept in mind that only a small number of chemicals that were applied in the area were analysed for in this study. In order to gain a better evaluation of the local atmospheric load of pesticides, a wider spectrum of applied substances (including metabolites) needs to be investigated.

Aggression is one of the most researched topics in psychology. This is understandable, since aggression behavior does a lot of harm to individuals and groups. A lot is known already about the biology of aggression, but one system that seems to be of vital importance in animals has largely been overlooked: the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. Menno Kruk and Jószef Haller and their research teams developed rodent models of adaptive, normal, and abnormal aggressive behavior. They found the acute HPA axis (re)activity, but also chronic basal levels to be causally relevant in the elicitation and escalation of aggressive behavior. As a mediating variable, changes in the processing of relevant social information is proposed, although this could not be tested in animals. In humans, not a lot of research has been done, but there is evidence for both the association between acute and basal cortisol levels in (abnormal) aggression. However, not many of these studies have been experimental of nature. rnrnOur aim was to add to the understanding of both basal chronic levels of HPA axis activity, as well as acute levels in the formation of aggressive behavior. Therefore, we did two experiments, both with healthy student samples. In both studies we induced aggression with a well validated paradigm from social psychology: the Taylor Aggression Paradigm. Half of the subjects, however, only went through a non-provoking control condition. We measured trait basal levels of HPA axis activity on three days prior. We took several cortisol samples before, during, and after the task. After the induction of aggression, we measured the behavioral and electrophysiological brain response to relevant social stimuli, i.e., emotional facial expressions embedded in an emotional Stroop task. In the second study, we pharmacologically manipulated cortisol levels 60min before the beginning of the experiment. To do that, half of the subjects were administered 20mg of hydrocortisone, which elevates circulating cortisol levels (cortisol group), the other half was administered a placebo (placebo group). Results showed that acute HPA axis activity is indeed relevant for aggressive behavior. We found in Study 1 a difference in cortisol levels after the aggression induction in the provoked group compared to the non-provoked group (i.e., a heightened reactivity of the HPA axis). However, this could not be replicated in Study 2. Furthermore, the pharmacological elevation of cortisol levels led to an increase in aggressive behavior in women compared to the placebo group. There were no effects in men, so that while men were significantly more aggressive than women in the placebo group, they were equally aggressive in the cortisol group. Furthermore, there was an interaction of cortisol treatment with block of the Taylor Aggression Paradigm, in that the cortisol group was significantly more aggressive in the third block of the task. Concerning basal HPA axis activity, we found an effect on aggressive behavior in both studies, albeit more consistently in women and in the provoked and non-provoked groups. However, the effect was not apparent in the cortisol group. After the aggressive encounter, information processing patterns were changed in the provoked compared to the non-provoked group for all facial expressions, especially anger. These results indicate that the HPA axis plays an important role in the formation of aggressive behavior in humans, as well. Importantly, different changes within the system, be it basal or acute, are associated with the same outcome in this task. More studies are needed, however, to better understand the role that each plays in different kinds of aggressive behavior, and the role information processing plays as a possible mediating variable. This extensive knowledge is necessary for better behavioral interventions.

Abstracts book of oral presentations and poster contributions for the mid-term conference of the Interreg IVB NWE project ForeStClim. The international conference took place in Nancy (France) from 20. to 22. September 2010. The topics of the conference sessions were as follows:rnSession 1: Projecting forest sites and stand shiftsrnSession 2: Climate change and water: modelling across spatial and temporal scalesrnSession 3: Addressing climate change in practical silvicultural decision support

Kommentierte Übersetzung der Reiseeindrücke, die die englische Schriftstellerin Fanny Burney 1815 in Trier gewonnnen hat.

Während deutsche Einwanderer sich nur bedingt gegen die Institution der Sklaverei aussprachen, zeigten sie in ihrer Sicht auf African Americans ein weit höheres Maß an Geschlossenheit in ihrer ablehnenden Haltung. Um die Divergenz zwischen der Wahrnehmung von Sklaverei und African Americans sinnvoll zu kontextualisieren und zu erklären, erscheint die Kategorie der race als erhellende Untersuchungseinheit, welche hilft, die einseitige Wahrnehmung auf der menschlichen im Vergleich zur institutionellen Ebene zu beleuchten. Da der Begriff race weit weniger ideologisch belastet ist als der Begriff des Rassismus, bietet er ein Instrument, welches die nötige Offenheit für verschiedene Erklärungsansätze besitzt. Als Arbeitsgrundlage dient dabei die Definition von Stephen Cornell und Douglas Hartman. Die Autoren betonen besonders stark den menschlichen Ursprung der Kategorie race, ein für diese Untersuchung besonders wichtiger Aspekt, weil er auf die soziale Eingebundenheit des Konzepts verweist. Als solches handelt es sich bei race um eine historische Einheit, die Diskussionen und Wandlungen unterworfen war. Menschen schufen diese Kategorie als distinktes Merkmal für eine Gruppe von Menschen, die sie so eindeutig als von sich selbst unterschiedlich darstellten und damit eine möglichst große und eindeutige Differenz schufen. Diese Vorüberlegungen bilden die Basis für den Kontext, in dem die deutschen Einwanderer ihre Unterschiedlichkeit zu schwarzen Menschen wahrnahmen und davon ausgehend diese als Menschen beurteilten, was häufig mit einer Bewertung der Institution der Sklaverei einherging, der viele der in Amerika lebenden African Americans unterworfen waren. Die Divergenz zwischen dem Selbst und dem Gegenüber schlägt sich dabei in den komplementären Konzepten von blackness und whiteness nieder. Im Zusammenhang mit den deutschen Immigranten spielen diese beiden Perspektiven eine wichtige Rolle, weil so die Denkmuster der Deutschen zum Teil aus ihrem Fokus auf das Anderssein ihres Gegenübers, also der blackness, und zum Teil aus dem Gefühl der eigenen besonderen Stellung, also der whiteness, zu erklären sind. Deutsche Einwanderer schlossen sich Argumentationsmustern aus der Literatur oder der Populärwissenschaft in unterschiedlichen Ausprägung sowohl direkt auch indirekt an, was darauf hindeutet, dass sie wohl mit Gedanken um die Thematik blackness bereits schon in der alten Heimat in variierender Intensität konfrontiert worden waren und damit ihre Äußerungen zu schwarzen Menschen, welche sie nach ihrer Ankunft in den USA trafen, auch auf Vorstellungen beruhten, die sie vor einem direkten Kontakt mit Schwarzen geformt hatten. In Anlehnung an die Diskussionen innerhalb der USA zu schwarzen Menschen wurde Blackness für die deutschen Einwanderer zu einer gesellschaftlichen Kategorie, mit der sie sich in unterschiedlichen Intensitätsgraden auseinandersetzten mussten, weil sie potentiell enorme Auswirkungen auf die verschiedensten Aspekte des Lebens haben konnte. Die Institution der Sklaverei als eine auf race basierende Arbeitsform spielte dabei eine wichtige Rolle, weil hier eine institutionalisierte Manifestation der rassistischen Hierarchisierung in der amerikanischen Gesellschaft existierte. Innerhalb dieser hierarchisierten Gesellschaft stellte die Distanzierung von schwarzen Menschen und, damit einhergehend, die Integration in die Gruppe der weißen Amerikaner eine grundlegende Tendenz dar. Die Kategorie whiteness gewann also enorm an Wichtigkeit für die Einwanderer, wobei die sich daraus ergebenden Folgen etwa in wirtschaftlicher Hinsicht nicht unbedingt der Realität entsprechen mussten, sondern auch auf subjektive Wahrnehmungen beschränkt sein konnten. Vor diesem Hintergrund erklärt sich die hohe Zahl der deutschen Immigranten, die eine latente Abneigung oder sogar offene Abscheu gegenüber African Americans zeigte. Dieser Anreiz zur Differenzierung in Weiße und Schwarze war im Zusammenhang mit der Diskussion um die Institution der Sklaverei nicht gegeben, denn dabei ging es vor allem den intellektuellen Deutschen primär um abstrakte Ideen wie Freiheit und Gleichheit, die sie dann ohne oder nur mit geringem Bezug zu schwarzen Menschen diskutierten. Solange also die Distanz zu African Americans und damit die Zugehörigkeit zur Kategorie whiteness gewahrt blieb, konnten die Deutschen ihre Meinungen gegen die Sklaverei äußern. Es ging dann nicht um das Wohl der Schwarzen, sondern um die Institution und die damit verbundenen abstrakten Prinzipien.