Suchergebnisse

Trabalho de Projecto apresentado para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Ensino de Inglês ; The purpose of this Project Work is to assess how English textbooks present an approach to the literary text in secondary schools in Portugal. Whilst textbooks are not the only resource teachers use in their teaching practice, in the last years they have gained a significant place, being now the main tool in any classroom. Acknowledging its importance means textbooks have become legitimizing tools for the contents they promote. On the other hand, there has been a regression in textbooks due to several policies, political and educational, that have affected their role as sources of meaningful learning. In fact, being textbooks a reading of the syllabus and frequently their substitutes, it will be shown that there are flaws in the syllabus that are replicated in textbooks, affecting its content. In educational terms, the literary texts as valuable and valid learning material have been cause of debate throughout years, although the English syllabus in Portugal promotes its use. Bearing this in mind, the emphasis will be placed in the use of literary texts as a way of achieving meaningful learning and enhancing students' knowledge of English as a foreign language and on how textbooks do not support this perspective nor recognize its importance, because they follow a communicative perspective of learning a language.

Aim of the study: The effect of physical and chemical conditions at proliferation stage was evaluated in order to elucidate if this stage is the determinant phase to induce a marked effect in Pinus halepensis somatic embryogenesis. Area of study: The study was conducted in research laboratories of Neiker (Arkaute, Spain). Material and methods: Pinus halepensis embryonal masses from ten embryogenic cell lines subjected to nine treatments (tissues cultured at three temperatures on media supplemented with three agar concentrations) at proliferation stage. Main results: Significant differences were observed among different proliferation conditions months later at the end of maturation, germination and acclimatization stages. Research highlights: Aleppo pine embryonal masses are cultured under standard conditions on a culture medium supplemented with 4.5 g/L Gelrite® at 23ºC. However, better results in terms of plantlet production can be obtained proliferating the embryonal masses at 18ºC in a culture media with significantly lower water availability. ; MINECO, Spanish Government (project AGL2013-4700-C4-2R).

EFSA received an application from the Dutch Competent Authority, under Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and Regulation (EU) No 142/2011, for the evaluation of an alternative method for treatment of Category 3 animal by‐products (ABP). It consists of the hydrolysis of the material to short‐carbon chains, resulting in medium‐chain fatty acids that may contain up to 1% hydrolysed protein, for use in animal feed. A physical process, with ultrafiltration followed by nanofiltration to remove hazards, is also used. Process efficacy has been evaluated based on the ability of the membrane barriers to retain potential biological hazards present. Small viruses passing the ultrafiltration membrane will be retained at the nanofiltration step, which represents a Critical Control Point (CCP) in the process. This step requires the Applicant to validate and provide certification for the specific use of the nanofiltration membranes used. Continuous monitoring and membrane integrity tests should be included as control measures in the HACCP plan. The ultrafiltration and nanofiltration techniques are able to remove particles of the size of virus, bacteria and parasites from liquids. If used under controlled and appropriate conditions, the processing methods proposed should reduce the risk in the end product to a degree which is at least equivalent to that achieved with the processing standards laid down in the Regulation for Category 3 material. The possible presence of small bacterial toxins produced during the fermentation steps cannot be avoided by the nanofiltration step and this hazard should be controlled by a CCP elsewhere in the process. The limitations specified in the current legislation and any future modifications in relation to the end use of the product also apply to this alternative process, and no hydrolysed protein of ruminant origin (except ruminant hides and skins) can be included in feed for farmed animals or for aquaculture.

EFSA received an application from the Dutch Competent Authority, under Article 20 of Regulation (EC)No 1069/2009 and Regulation (EU) No 142/2011, for the evaluation of an alternative method fortreatment of Category 3 animal by-products (ABP). It consists of the hydrolysis of the material to short-carbon chains, resulting in medium-chain fatty acids that may contain up to 1% hydrolysed protein, foruse in animal feed. A physical process, with ultrafiltration followed by nanofiltration to remove hazards, isalso used. Process efficacy has been evaluated based on the ability of the membrane barriers to retainpotential biological hazards present. Small viruses passing the ultrafiltration membrane will be retained atthe nanofiltration step, which represents a Critical Control Point (CCP) in the process. This step requiresthe Applicant to validate and provide certification for the specific use of the nanofiltration membranesused. Continuous monitoring and membrane integrity tests should be included as control measures in theHACCP plan. The ultrafiltration and nanofiltration techniques are able to remove particles of the size ofvirus, bacteria and parasites from liquids. If used under controlled and appropriate conditions, theprocessing methods proposed should reduce the risk in the end product to a degree which is at leastequivalent to that achieved with the processing standards laid down in the Regulation for Category 3material. The possible presence of small bacterial toxins produced during the fermentation steps cannotbe avoided by the nanofiltration step and this hazard should be controlled by a CCP elsewhere in theprocess. The limitations specified in the current legislation and any future modifications in relation to theend use of the product also apply to this alternative process, and no hydrolysed protein of ruminantorigin (except ruminant hides and skins) can be included in feed for farmed animals or for aquaculture. ; publishedVersion

EFSA received an application from the Dutch Competent Authority, under Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and Regulation (EU) No 142/2011, for the evaluation of an alternative method for treatment of Category 3 animal by‐products (ABP). It consists of the hydrolysis of the material to short‐carbon chains, resulting in medium‐chain fatty acids that may contain up to 1% hydrolysed protein, for use in animal feed. A physical process, with ultrafiltration followed by nanofiltration to remove hazards, is also used. Process efficacy has been evaluated based on the ability of the membrane barriers to retain potential biological hazards present. Small viruses passing the ultrafiltration membrane will be retained at the nanofiltration step, which represents a Critical Control Point (CCP) in the process. This step requires the Applicant to validate and provide certification for the specific use of the nanofiltration membranes used. Continuous monitoring and membrane integrity tests should be included as control measures in the HACCP plan. The ultrafiltration and nanofiltration techniques are able to remove particles of the size of virus, bacteria and parasites from liquids. If used under controlled and appropriate conditions, the processing methods proposed should reduce the risk in the end product to a degree which is at least equivalent to that achieved with the processing standards laid down in the Regulation for Category 3 material. The possible presence of small bacterial toxins produced during the fermentation steps cannot be avoided by the nanofiltration step and this hazard should be controlled by a CCP elsewhere in the process. The limitations specified in the current legislation and any future modifications in relation to the end use of the product also apply to this alternative process, and no hydrolysed protein of ruminant origin (except ruminant hides and skins) can be included in feed for farmed animals or for aquaculture.