| 1. |
- Wendisch, M., et al.
(författare)
-
Atmospheric and Surface Processes, and Feedback Mechanisms Determining Arctic Amplification: A Review of First Results and Prospects of the (AC)(3) Project
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. - : American Meteorological Society. - 0003-0007 .- 1520-0477. ; 104:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Mechanisms behind the phenomenon of Arctic amplification are widely discussed. To contribute to this debate, the (AC)(3) project was established in 2016 (www.ac3-tr.de/). It comprises modeling and data analysis efforts as well as observational elements. The project has assembled a wealth of ground-based, airborne, shipborne, and satellite data of physical, chemical, and meteorological properties of the Arctic atmosphere, cryosphere, and upper ocean that are available for the Arctic climate research community. Short-term changes and indications of long-term trends in Arctic climate parameters have been detected using existing and new data. For example, a distinct atmospheric moistening, an increase of regional storm activities, an amplified winter warming in the Svalbard and North Pole regions, and a decrease of sea ice thickness in the Fram Strait and of snow depth on sea ice have been identified. A positive trend of tropospheric bromine monoxide (BrO) column densities during polar spring was verified. Local marine/biogenic sources for cloud condensation nuclei and ice nucleating particles were found. Atmospheric-ocean and radiative transfer models were advanced by applying new parameterizations of surface albedo, cloud droplet activation, convective plumes and related processes over leads, and turbulent transfer coefficients for stable surface layers. Four modes of the surface radiative energy budget were explored and reproduced by simulations. To advance the future synthesis of the results, cross-cutting activities are being developed aiming to answer key questions in four focus areas: lapse rate feedback, surface processes, Arctic mixed-phase clouds, and airmass transport and transformation.
|
|
| 2. |
- Beyer, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Maintaining success, reducing treatment burden, focusing on survivorship: highlights from the third European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Annals of Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 1569-8041 .- 0923-7534. ; 24:4, s. 878-888
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In November 2011, the Third European Consensus Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Germ-Cell Cancer (GCC) was held in Berlin, Germany. This third conference followed similar meetings in 2003 (Essen, Germany) and 2006 (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) [Schmoll H-J, Souchon R, Krege S et al. European consensus on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus Group (EGCCCG). Ann Oncol 2004; 15: 1377-1399; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part I. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 478-496; Krege S, Beyer J, Souchon R et al. European consensus conference on diagnosis and treatment of germ-cell cancer: a report of the second meeting of the European Germ-Cell Cancer Consensus group (EGCCCG): part II. Eur Urol 2008; 53: 497-513]. A panel of 56 of 60 invited GCC experts from all across Europe discussed all aspects on diagnosis and treatment of GCC, with a particular focus on acute and late toxic effects as well as on survivorship issues. The panel consisted of oncologists, urologic surgeons, radiooncologists, pathologists and basic scientists, who are all actively involved in care of GCC patients. Panelists were chosen based on the publication activity in recent years. Before the meeting, panelists were asked to review the literature published since 2006 in 20 major areas concerning all aspects of diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of GCC patients, and to prepare an updated version of the previous recommendations to be discussed at the conference. In addition, similar to 50 E-vote questions were drafted and presented at the conference to address the most controversial areas for a poll of expert opinions. Here, we present the main recommendations and controversies of this meeting. The votes of the panelists are added as online supplements.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
