Suchergebnisse

The human secondary sex ratio reportedly falls in populations subjected to exogenous stressors such as earthquakes or political and social upheavals. Explanations of the association include reduced conception of males and increased fetal deaths among males. The latter explanation has been supported by research reporting that the sex ratio in California fell 3 months, but not 8, 9 or 10 months, after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. California's distance from the attacks raises the questions of whether the results arose from chance and would be found elsewhere. We contribute to the literature by testing the association between the secondary sex ratio and the events of September 11 in New York City. We replicate the California tests by applying interrupted time-series methods, which control for secular trends, seasonality and other forms of autocorrelation, to 91 cohorts born in New York City during 28-day periods from January 1996 to June 2002. As hypothesized, the sex ratio in New York City in the period 1 January to 28 January 2002 fell to 1, which was the lowest observed value during the test period and significantly (i.e. P < 0.01, two-tailed test) below the value expected from history. Our findings support the male fetal loss explanation of the association between exogenous population shocks and the secondary sex ratio.

Abstract
Anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases could lead to undesirable effects on oceans in coming centuries. Drawing on recommendations published by the German Advisory Council on Global Change, levels of unacceptable global marine change (so-called guardrails) are defined in terms of global mean temperature, sea level rise, and ocean acidification. A global-mean climate model [the Aggregated Carbon Cycle, Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate Model (ACC2)] is coupled with an economic module [taken from the Dynamic Integrated Climate–Economy Model (DICE)] to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis to derive CO2 emission pathways that both minimize abatement costs and are compatible with these guardrails. Additionally, the "tolerable windows approach" is used to calculate a range of CO2 emissions paths that obey the guardrails as well as a restriction on mitigation rate. Prospects of meeting the global mean temperature change guardrail (2° and 0.2°C decade−1 relative to preindustrial) depend strongly on assumed values for climate sensitivity: at climate sensitivities &gt;3°C the guardrail cannot be attained under any CO2 emissions reduction strategy without mitigation of non-CO2 greenhouse gases. The ocean acidification guardrail (0.2 unit pH decline relative to preindustrial) is less restrictive than the absolute temperature guardrail at climate sensitivities &gt;2.5°C but becomes more constraining at lower climate sensitivities. The sea level rise and rate of rise guardrails (1 m and 5 cm decade−1) are substantially less stringent for ice sheet sensitivities derived in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report, but they may already be committed to violation if ice sheet sensitivities consistent with semiempirical sea level rise projections are assumed.

The Working Group III (WGIII) contribution to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) assesses literature on the scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigation of climate change. It builds upon the WGIII contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and previous reports and incorporates subsequent new findings and research. Throughout, the focus is on the implications of its findings for policy, without being prescriptive about the particular policies that governments and other important participants in the policy process should adopt. In light of the IPCC's mandate, authors in WGIII were guided by several principles when assembling this assessment: (1) to be explicit about mitigation options, (2) to be explicit about their costs and about their risks and opportunities vis-a-vis other development priorities, (3) and to be explicit about the underlying criteria, concepts, and methods for evaluating alternative policies. This summary offers the main findings of the report.

The Working Group III (WGIII) contribution to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) assesses literature on the scientific, technological, environmental, economic and social aspects of mitigation of climate change. It builds upon the WGIII contribution to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and previous reports and incorporates subsequent new findings and research. Throughout, the focus is on the implications of its findings for policy, without being prescriptive about the particular policies that governments and other important participants in the policy process should adopt. In light of the IPCC's mandate, authors in WGIII were guided by several principles when assembling this assessment: (1) to be explicit about mitigation options, (2) to be explicit about their costs and about their risks and opportunities vis-a-vis other development priorities, (3) and to be explicit about the underlying criteria, concepts, and methods for evaluating alternative policies. This summary offers the main findings of the report.