Local Clustering ofPRSS1R122H Mutations in Hereditary Pancreatitis Patients From Northern Germany

On 2 January 1625, the English ambassador Robert Anstruther met with King Christian IV of Norway and Denmark and requested his participation in a union of Protestant states against Emperor Ferdinand II and the Catholic League in Germany. Within three days, King Christian proposed to contribute five thousand soldiers for one year, as part of an army of almost thirty thousand men. In early June, despite opposition from the Danish Council of State, reluctant to put a huge amount of money into foreign affairs, Christian decided to join what he called “the war for the defence of Lower Saxony”. He then headed an army of mercenaries southwards through Lower Saxony, secured all crossings over the river Weser and prepared to confront the Catholic forces. On 29 November, it was decided that Denmark would be in charge of military operations in Northern Germany, whereas England and the United Provinces would provide a monthly subsidy. The political and military prospects for Denmark were excellent, to say the least. It had the fourth strongest navy in Europe (after Spain and the two new allies), and only a few years before the Danish warships had been described by a French observer as “merveilles de l'océan”. A small standing army of two regiments had recently been established and Denmark was the fourth European state to do so after France, Spain and the neighbouring Sweden.

Download Full-text

Early Maastrichtian benthos of the chalk at Kronsmoor, northern Germany: implications for Late Cretaceous environmental change

Palaeobiodiversity and Palaeoenvironments ◽

10.1007/s12549-017-0283-2 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 97 (4) ◽

pp. 703-722 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Julia Engelke ◽

Christian Linnert ◽

Jörg Mutterlose ◽

Markus Wilmsen

Keyword(s):

Environmental Change ◽

Late Cretaceous ◽

Northern Germany

Download Full-text

Nest cameras do not affect nest survival in a meadow-nesting shorebird

Bird Conservation International ◽

10.1017/s0959270920000659 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 1-10

Author(s):

VOLKER SALEWSKI ◽

LUIS SCHMIDT

Keyword(s):

Nest Survival ◽

Bird Species ◽

Conservation Strategies ◽

Survival Models ◽

Northern Germany ◽

Term Study ◽

Long Term Study ◽

Limosa Limosa ◽

Study Sites

Summary Identifying the fate of birds’ nests and the causes of breeding failure is often crucial for the development of conservation strategies for threatened species. However, collecting these data by repeatedly visiting nests might itself contribute to nest failure or bias. To solve this dilemma, automatic cameras have increasingly been used as a time-efficient means for nest monitoring. Here, we consider whether the use of cameras itself may influence hatching success of nests of the Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa at two long-term study sites in northern Germany. Annually between 2013 and 2019, cameras were used to monitor godwit nests. In 2014 and 2019, nests were randomly equipped with cameras or not, and nest survival checked independently of the cameras. Nest-survival models indicated that survival probabilities varied between years, sites and with time of the season, but were unaffected by the presence of cameras. Even though predation is the main cause of hatching failure in our study system, we conclude that predators did not learn to associate cameras with food either when the cameras were initially installed or after they had been used for several years. Cameras were thus an effective and non-deleterious tool to collect data for conservation in this case. As other bird species may react differently to cameras at their nests, and as other sets of predators may differ in their ability to associate cameras with food, the effect of cameras on breeding success should be carefully monitored when they are used in a new study system.

Download Full-text