@article{KleemannZamoraVillacisChiluisaetal.2022,
  author    = {Kleemann, Janina and Zamora, Camilo and Villacis-Chiluisa, Alexandra Belen and Cuenca, Pablo and Koo, Hongmi and Noh, Jin Kyoung and F{\"u}rst, Christine and Thiel, Michael},
  title     = {Deforestation in continental Ecuador with a focus on protected areas},
  series = {Land},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Land},
  number    = {2},
  issn      = {2073-445X},
  doi       = {10.3390/land11020268},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-262078},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Forest conservation is of particular concern in tropical regions where a large refuge of biodiversity is still existing. These areas are threatened by deforestation, forest degradation and fragmentation. Especially, pressures of anthropogenic activities adjacent to these areas significantly influence conservation effectiveness. Ecuador was chosen as study area since it is a globally relevant center of forest ecosystems and biodiversity. We identified hotspots of deforestation on the national level of continental Ecuador between 1990 and 2018, analyzed the most significant drivers of deforestation on national and biome level (the Coast, the Andes, The Amazon) as well as inside protected areas in Ecuador by using multiple regression analysis. We separated the national system of protected areas (SNAP) into higher and lower protection levels. Besides SNAP, we also considered Biosphere Reserves (BRs) and Ramsar sites. In addition, we investigated the rates and spatial patterns of deforestation in protected areas and buffer zones (5 km and 10 km outwards the protected area boundaries) using landscape metrics. Between 1990 and 2018, approximately 4\% of the accumulated deforestation occurred within the boundaries of SNAP, and up to 25.5\% in buffer zones. The highest rates of deforestation have been found in the 5 km buffer zone around the protected areas with the highest protection level. Protected areas and their buffer zones with higher protection status were identified as the most deforested areas among SNAP. BRs had the highest deforestation rates among all protected areas but most of these areas just became BRs after the year 2000. The most important driver of deforestation is agriculture. Other relevant drivers differ between the biomes. The results suggest that the SNAP is generally effective to prevent deforestation within their protection boundaries. However, deforestation around protected areas can undermine conservation strategies to sustain biodiversity. Actions to address such dynamics and patterns of deforestation and forest fragmentation, and developing conservation strategies of their landscape context are urgently needed especially in the buffer zones of areas with the highest protection status.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{AssfalgSeligTolksdorfetal.2020,
  author    = {Assfalg, Volker and Selig, Katharina and Tolksdorf, Johanna and van Meel, Marieke and de Vries, Erwin and Ramsoebhag, Anne-Marie and Rahmel, Axel and Renders, Lutz and Novotny, Alexander and Matevossian, Edouard and Schneeberger, Stefan and Rosenkranz, Alexander R. and Berlakovich, Gabriela and Ysebaert, Dirk and Knops, No{\"e}l and Kuypers, Dirk and Weekers, Laurent and Muehlfeld, Anja and Rump, Lars-Christian and Hauser, Ingeborg and Pisarski, Przemyslaw and Weimer, Rolf and Fornara, Paolo and Fischer, Lutz and Kliem, Volker and Sester, Urban and Stippel, Dirk and Arns, Wolfgang and Hau, Hans-Michael and Nitschke, Martin and Hoyer, Joachim and Thorban, Stefan and Weinmann-Menke, Julia and Heller, Katharina and Banas, Bernhard and Schwenger, Vedat and Nadalin, Silvio and Lopau, Kai and H{\"u}ser, Norbert and Heemann, Uwe},
  title     = {Repeated kidney re-transplantation—the Eurotransplant experience: a retrospective multicenter outcome analysis},
  series = {Transplant International},
  volume    = {33},
  journal   = {Transplant International},
  number    = {6},
  doi       = {10.1111/tri.13569},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-214161},
  pages     = {617 -- 631},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {In Eurotransplant kidney allocation system (ETKAS), candidates can be considered unlimitedly for repeated re-transplantation. Data on outcome and benefit are indeterminate. We performed a retrospective 15-year patient and graft outcome data analysis from 1464 recipients of a third or fourth or higher sequential deceased donor renal transplantation (DDRT) from 42 transplant centers. Repeated re-DDRT recipients were younger (mean 43.0 vs. 50.2 years) compared to first DDRT recipients. They received grafts with more favorable HLA matches (89.0\% vs. 84.5\%) but thereby no statistically significant improvement of patient and graft outcome was found as comparatively demonstrated in 1st DDRT. In the multivariate modeling accounting for confounding factors, mortality and graft loss after 3rd and ≥4th DDRT (P < 0.001 each) and death with functioning graft (DwFG) after 3rd DDRT (P = 0.001) were higher as compared to 1st DDRT. The incidence of primary nonfunction (PNF) was also significantly higher in re-DDRT (12.7\%) than in 1st DDRT (7.1\%; P < 0.001). Facing organ shortage, increasing waiting time, and considerable mortality on dialysis, we question the current policy of repeated re-DDRT. The data from this survey propose better HLA matching in first DDRT and second DDRT and careful selection of candidates, especially for ≥4th DDRT.},
  language  = {en}
}