Search

Land use and management activities have a substantial impact on carbon stocks and associated greenhouse gas emissions and removals. However, it is challenging to discriminate between anthropogenic and non-anthropogenic sources and sinks from land. To address this problem, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change developed a managed land proxy to determine which lands are contributing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and removals. Governments report all emissions and removals from managed land to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change based on this proxy, and policy interventions to reduce emissions from land use are expected to focus on managed lands. Our objective was to review the use of the managed land proxy, and summarize the criteria that governments have applied to classify land as managed and unmanaged. We found that the large majority of governments are not reporting on their application of the managed land proxy. Among the governments that do provide information, most have assigned all area in specific land uses as managed, while designating all remaining lands as unmanaged. This designation as managed land is intuitive for croplands and settlements, which would not exist without management interventions, but a portion of forest land, grassland, and wetlands may not be managed in a country. Consequently, Brazil, Canada and the United States have taken the concept further and delineated managed and unmanaged forest land, grassland and wetlands, using additional criteria such as functional use of the land and accessibility of the land to anthropogenic activity. The managed land proxy is imperfect because reported emissions from any area can include non-anthropogenic sources, such as natural disturbances. However, the managed land proxy does make reporting of GHG emissions and removals from land use more tractable and comparable by excluding fluxes from areas that are not directly influenced by anthropogenic activity. Moreover, application of the managed land proxy can be improved by incorporating additional criteria that allow for further discrimination between managed and unmanaged land.

Estudos epidemiológicos têm demonstrado que a prevalência de cárie e doença periodontal ainda é elevada em alguns países em desenvolvimento, embora mostre uma tendência geral de declínio. Nestes países o tratamento para doença periodontal avançada e cárie dental é ainda a extração do dente O objetivo do presente estudo foi determinar a prevalência de dentes ausentes em uma população de adolescentes e adultos jovens.. A população estudada compreendeu 321 indivíduos que procuraram tratamento dentário na Clínica Odontológica da Universidade de Taubaté, em Taubaté, estado de São Paulo. Os participantes do estudo tinham entre 15 e 25 anos de idade (19.51 ± 3.21 anos), e pertenciam a 3 grupos étnicos: Negro, Branco e Pardo. Foram conduzidas entrevistas afim de se determinar a história média e hábito de fumar dos participantes. Indivíduos com problemas sistêmicos sem acompanhamento médico regular foram excluídos deste estudo. O exame bucal completo foi conduzido por um único examinador, e a perda dentária foi registrada para cada participante, de acordo com os critérios propostos pela Organização Mundial de Saúde/WHO (1997) excluindo-se os terceiros molares. Setenta porcento das mulheres e 65% dos homens haviam perdido um ou mais dentes. O número de dentes perdidos variou de 1 a 21. A média de dentes ausentes para o grupo estudado foi 2.4. A perda dentária mostrou correlação positiva com a idade (r = 0.88). Os primeiros molares inferiores apresentaram a maior freqüência de perda (42%), e os caninos inferiores a menor freqüência (