ライフサイエンスコーパス: birch

1 ir monocultures or mixtures without pine and birch.

2 t data: (1) dog/cat/horse, (2) timothy grass/birch, (3) molds, (4) house dust mites, (5) peanut/wheat

3 ive quantification of Bet v 1 in 30 marketed birch allergen products in one laboratory, simulating th

4 urement of Bet v 1 in a panel of 'real-life' birch allergen products indicated better repeatability o

5 ma to birch pollen (n = 12) before and after birch allergen provocation.

6 onths decreased the risk of sensitization to birch allergen.

7 allergic patients with sensitization against birch allergen.

8 eding decreased the risk of sensitization to birch allergen; introduction of oats <5.1 months and bar

9 lly associated with milk, timothy grass, and birch allergens.

10 h sensitization to wheat, timothy grass, and birch allergens; the introduction of 1-2 food items at 4

11 rom murine mDCs and PBMCs from patients with birch allergy.

12 black spruce, burned black spruce and paper birch, allowing us to determine vegetation and edaphic d

13 neighbourhood scale, where the proportion of birch among neighbouring trees varied, but not at the pl

14 enome, and advanced germplasm resources make birch an attractive model for forest biotechnology.

15 operator26PFASs per tree was up to 11 mg for birch and 1.8 mg for spruce.

16 ergenic proteins shared by many pollens (eg, birch and alder) and foods (eg, apple, peach, and soy).

17 haw in unburned dominant forest types (paper birch and black spruce) associated with location on elev

18 d the (3)He chemical shifts observed for the Birch and dihydroanthracene reduction products, the two

19 pollen were analyzed regarding IgE to major birch and grass pollen allergens Bet v 1 and Phl p 1/p 5

20 munotherapy for patients symptomatic to both birch and grass pollen allergens.

21 Birch and grass pollen allergic individuals underwent sk

22 notherapy with mixed depigmented-polymerized birch and grass pollen extract in 285 patients with alle

23 rhinoconjunctivitis symptomatic during both birch and grass pollen seasons.

24 promoting growth of deciduous shrubs (dwarf birch and gray willow).

25 , indicating T-cell cross-reactivity between birch and hazelnut allergens in all patients of the stud

26 ollen and examine cross-reactivities between birch and nut species.

27 In birch and other plant pollens, a major allergen is profi

28 n updated include respiratory allergens from birch and ragweed pollen, midge larvae, and horse dander

29 compositions of the exudates of aspen, white birch and silver birch buds were determined.

30 mentation as the primary factors controlling birch and spruce forest change, respectively.

31 elterwood system with mixed stands of silver birch and spruce in combination with regular harvest of

32 zed both with and without cosensitization to birch and stratified into age-categories.

33 community biomass response, and responses of birch and willow, to warming by 19%, 46%, and 11%, respe

34 with American beech, sugar maple, and yellow birch, and negatively with red spruce and balsam fir - g

35 ing three types of wood logs, namely, beech, birch, and spruce, were chemically characterized using t

36 d spruce, sugar maple, yellow birch, cordate birch, and striped maple.

37 the major pollen allergen Bet v1 from silver birch as examples and showed that these purified recombi

38 resent analyses we included 28 children with birch atopy and randomly selected 28 nonatopic children

39 nd (2) IgE responses to birch (children with birch atopy) or no IgE response at all to 9 common aeroa

40 as well as commercial available softwood and birch-bark pellets were investigated.

41 om timothy grass (Phl p 7), alder (Aln g 4), birch (Bet v 4), turnip rape (Bra r 1), lamb's quarter (

42 (Populus tremuloides) stands and mixed aspen-birch (Betula papyrifera) stands.

43 mbling aspen (Populus tremuloides) and paper birch (Betula papyrifera) to the north vs. eastern cotto

44 d host trees aspen (Populus tremuloides) and birch (Betula papyrifera).

45 berian larch (Larix sibirica Ledeb.), silver birch (Betula pendula Roth.) and black alder (Alnus glut

46 Foliar fungi of silver birch (Betula pendula) in an experimental Finnish forest

47 Silver birch (Betula pendula) is a pioneer boreal tree that can

48 tity with an ACC oxidase from European white birch (Betula pendula), and phylogenetic analyses clearl

49 al plant community were taken, namely silver birch (Betula pendula), Norway spruce (Picea abies), bir

50 )-D-Xylp, which was previously identified in birch (Betula verrucosa) and spruce (Picea abies) GX.

51 T treatment against grass (Phleum pratense), birch (Betula verrucosa) or both was included.

52 elevant nonphylogenetically related species: birch (Betula verrucosa), pine (Pinus sylvestris), and r

53 he exudates of aspen, white birch and silver birch buds were determined.

54 ears, and 13 years) and (2) IgE responses to birch (children with birch atopy) or no IgE response at

55 al susceptibility when growing with pine and birch compared with their monocultures or mixtures witho

56 tional feeding experiments on related silver birch confirmed the SOA results.

57 e synthesis applies the previously developed Birch-Cope sequence to create the key arylic quaternary

58 The product of the Birch-Cope sequence, a versatile 4,4-disubstituted-2-car

59 tivity to recombinant Bet v 1.0101 (Bet v 1; birch), Cor a 1.0401 (Cor a 1; hazelnut), and Dau c 1.01

60 an adults of red spruce, sugar maple, yellow birch, cordate birch, and striped maple.

61 In aspen and birch, CUE and RGR declined significantly with increasin

62 ionally occurring pollen allergens (ragweed, birch, cypress), IgE sensitization was significantly ass

63 e forest tree (Betula alleghaniensis, yellow birch) displayed responses to increased CO2 that were bo

64 s away from graminoid-dominated toward dwarf birch-dominated.

65 s for moderate-to-severe peanut allergy in a birch-endemic region and to create an oral-peanut challe

66 In Hokkaido the prevalence of birch family pollen count was larger than that in other

67 There is cross-reactivity between beech and birch family which related with oral allergic syndrome.P

68 and suggests that chewing damage on mountain birch foliage could significantly increase reactive VOC

69 es along replicated natural transitions from birch forest (Betula pubescens), through deciduous shrub

70 er measurements identified net CH4 uptake in birch forest soils.

71 e wider landscape, lichen heath and mountain birch forest.

72 year period, we observed a nonlinear loss of birch forests and a relatively continuous gain of spruce

73 stimates a transition of ~15 km(2) or ~7% of birch forests to wetlands, where the greatest change fol

74 Additionally, birch, grass, or pine-pollen extracts were tested.

75 erbivore-induced VOC emissions from mountain birch in laboratory experiments and assessed the impact

76 This conversion was not observed with birch leaf diets, which had lower carbohydrate content.

77 g(-1) wet weight (ww) and 94 ng g(-1) ww in birch leaves and spruce needles, respectively.

78 ncing revealed greater diversity of fungi on birch leaves than the visual assessment method.

79 of electron-deficient pyrroles using either Birch (Li/NH(3)) or ammonia-free (Li/di-tert-butyl biphe

80 The conversion of birch lignin to monomer C7-C9 hydrocarbons is nearly qua

81 In the second study, Bowman and Birch-Machin show that mitochondrial complex II activity

82 Global deprotection using Birch metal dissolving conditions did not remove the ter

83 A fourth-order Birch-Murnaghan equation of state reproduces our experim

84 re <6 GPa, the PAW-GGA can be described by a Birch-Murnaghan equation of state with = 687.4 A(3), = 5

85 Among the birch-negatives, prevalences of nut sensitizations decre

86 receiving steroids after SCIT against grass, birch or both were 0.65, 0.83 and 0.72, respectively (P

87 d He@C(60)H(36) have been synthesized by the Birch or dihydroanthracene reduction of C(60) and isolat

88 Using the aeroallergens birch or grass pollen as model allergens and, for some d

89 ion of effective vaccine candidates to treat birch PFS.

90 group 2 mite allergens (18.2%), Bet v 1 from birch pollen (16.3%) and Fel d 1 from cat (14.4%).

91 -10) protein family and allergic rhinitis to birch pollen (ARbp) from early childhood up to age 16 ye

92 endently of this were children sensitized to birch pollen (Bet v 1).

93 stigated its clinical safety and efficacy in birch pollen (BP)-allergic patients.

94 Specific immunotherapy with birch pollen (BP-SIT) induces IgG4 antibodies that inhib

95 3) and patients with mild allergic asthma to birch pollen (n = 12) before and after birch allergen pr

96 = 105), Dermatophagoides farina (n = 96) and birch pollen (n = 85).

97 Birch pollen (rBet v 1) sensitization with cross-reactiv

98 lied to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of birch pollen AIT on birch pollen-related food allergy.

99 ovocation (COLAP) test using the recombinant birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 (rBet v 1) for in vivo dia

100 gellin A from Listeria monocytogenes and the birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 (recombinant flagellin A [

101 ions and T-cell responses to the recombinant birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 and recombinant hypoallerg

102 inly results from sensitization to the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 and subsequent cross-react

103 monoclonal human IgE, and the corresponding birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 at a molecular level.

104 ntibodies and T cells specific for the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 cross-react with structura

105 t fusion proteins of flagellin and the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 for suitability as allergy

106 The major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 is considered the prototyp

107 genetically engineered variant of the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 that lacks the typical Bet

108 gs which had been immunized with recombinant birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 using patch delivery syste

109 er 25 years ago, the gene encoding the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 was the first such gene to

110 ved from the IgE-reactive areas of the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1 were fused to the hepatiti

111 an ELISA for the quantification of the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1, established as a referenc

112 minent member of the PR-10 family, the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1, is the main cause of spri

113 effect of intranasal administration of major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1, omalizumab or placebo on

114 ed with the T-cell receptor specific for the birch pollen allergen Bet v 1, respectively.

115 city and sensitization capacity of the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1.

116 ged intranasally with omalizumab, placebo or birch pollen allergen Bet v 1.

117 uman basophils function as APC for the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1.

118 ution of specific surface areas of the major birch pollen allergen Bet v 1.0101 to binding IgE of ind

119 r Tlr4(-/-) BALB/c mice were sensitized to a birch pollen allergen extract (BPEx), then received eith

120 IgE antibodies specific for the major birch pollen allergen frequently cross-react with Bet v

121 llergic patients using recombinant (r) major birch pollen allergen rBet v 1 and major timothy grass p

122 Art v 4 are compared with those of Bet v 2 (birch pollen allergen) as well as with other allergenic

123 High numbers of major birch pollen allergen, Bet v 1-specific CD4(+)FOXP3(+) T

124 ble for quantification of Bet v 1, the major birch pollen allergen, in preceding phases of BSP090.

125 ed by co-sensitization to Bet v 1, the major birch pollen allergen, its cross-reactive food allergens

126 tides (COPs) derived from Bet v 1, the major birch pollen allergen, showed good clinical tolerability

127 aneous immunotherapy with Bet v 1, the major birch pollen allergen, to intervene in birch pollen alle

128 ty and thus represent promising vaccines for birch pollen allergen-specific immunotherapy.

129 the ideal dose for allergen immunotherapy in birch pollen allergic patients.

130 lind placebo-controlled pilot trial in which birch pollen allergic subjects were challenged intranasa

131 Birch pollen allergies are frequently associated with ad

132 ut AD (group 2), 5 allergic patients without birch pollen allergy (group 3), and 5 nonallergic subjec

133 Patients with birch pollen allergy (major allergen: Bet v 1) have ofte

134 Patients with birch pollen allergy and associated food allergy to haze

135 le to activate T-cell lines from donors with birch pollen allergy and from mice immunized with the pa

136 ergenicity of hazelnut in individuals with a birch pollen allergy and reactivity to raw hazelnut.

137 uction and characterization of a vaccine for birch pollen allergy is reported.

138 4 sera from Bet v 1-sensitized subjects with birch pollen allergy was determined by using direct ELIS

139 pecific immune responses of 16 patients with birch pollen allergy were characterized up to 54 months

140 ctions in not only most of the patients with birch pollen allergy with AD (11/15) but also in most of

141 ical study was conducted in 15 patients with birch pollen allergy with AD (group 1), 5 patients with

142 ent late reactions not only in patients with birch pollen allergy with AD but also in those without A

143 Patients with birch pollen allergy with AD had higher Bet v 1-specific

144 ontaining Bet v 1 fragments in patients with birch pollen allergy with and without atopic dermatitis

145 n allergy with AD (group 1), 5 patients with birch pollen allergy without AD (group 2), 5 allergic pa

146 CCR4(+) T cells compared with patients with birch pollen allergy without AD.

147 ed from studies on those with cross-reactive birch pollen allergy.

148 l and allergen-specific IgE in patients with birch pollen allergy.

149 major birch pollen allergen, to intervene in birch pollen allergy.

150 en-specific immune response in patients with birch pollen allergy.

151 ting candidate for specific immunotherapy of birch pollen allergy.

152 for allergen-specific immunotherapy against birch pollen allergy.

153 , and PBMCs were isolated from subjects with birch pollen allergy.

154 pollen profilin, can hamper the diagnosis of birch pollen allergy.

155 For Bet v 1-mediated birch pollen and associated food allergies, a single wil

156 symptoms, conjunctival provocation test with birch pollen and Bet v 1, and in vitro tests (tIgE, sIgE

157 zations to nuts in individuals sensitized to birch pollen and examine cross-reactivities between birc

158 n an environmental exposure chamber (EEC) to birch pollen at an average concentration of 3500 +/- 500

159 Sensitization to birch pollen causes cross-sensitization to nuts, but rar

160 patients allergic to grass pollen and 94 to birch pollen completed two questionnaires (RCAT and RQLQ

161 ll subjects with skin prick tests (SPTs) for birch pollen conducted during 1997-2013 in the Skin and

162 Cor a 8 is diluted by the increased role of birch pollen cross-reactivity with Cor a 1.

163 signaling to experimental asthma induced by birch pollen exposure exclusively via the airways.

164 was defined as upper airway symptoms during birch pollen exposure.

165 exposed to native or heat-inactivated white birch pollen extract (BPEx) intratracheally and injected

166 birch pollen-allergic patients together with birch pollen extract and human IL-4.

167 ly increased reactivity to grass compared to birch pollen extract in Bet v 2 only sensitized patients

168 with >90% of Bet v 1 content present in the birch pollen extract, while displaying a weak cross-reac

169 de adjuvant and intranasally challenged with birch pollen extract.

170 recombinant rBet v 1.0101 as well as native birch pollen extracts were measured independently at lea

171 However, specific immunotherapy with birch pollen has inconsistent effects on apple allergy.

172 It has been shown that birch pollen immunotherapy can induce IgG antibodies whi

173 As successful birch pollen immunotherapy does not consistently improve

174 r allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) with birch pollen improves birch pollen-related food allergy.

175 In sensitized individuals birch pollen induces an allergic response characterized

176 Bet v 1 from birch pollen is a common sensitizing agent, and OAS resu

177 PBMCs obtained from donors allergic to birch pollen or from healthy donors were injected into N

178 ections of ALK Alutard (containing 1000 SQ-U birch pollen or grass pollen) or placebo (ALK diluent).

179 se reactions to food, GI tract symptoms, and birch pollen pollinosis and five healthy controls underw

180 dose-finding study with a sublingual liquid birch pollen preparation (SB) was conducted.

181 total of 40 patients with a clear history of birch pollen rhinoconjunctivitis and associated OAS to a

182 easured (all measures determined outside the birch pollen season).

183 d in autumn 2007 and spring 2008, before the birch pollen season, in 32 Dutch adults with symptoms of

184 of Bet v 1 COP immunotherapy during the 2013 birch pollen season.

185 ngually on 2 consecutive days outside of the birch pollen season.

186 as well as before and after the intermediate birch pollen season.

187 s-reactivity to food allergens after primary birch pollen sensitization.

188 Inhalation of birch pollen significantly enhanced allergen-specific Ig

189 for inhalant allergies; however, successful birch pollen SIT does not correlate well with the amelio

190 ted from patients before and during AIT with birch pollen were added to the allergen prior to intrana

191 ients with positive skin prick test (SPT) to birch pollen were analyzed regarding IgE to major birch

192 showed that allergen-Ab complexes formed in birch pollen, as well as food allergy, contained IgE, Ig

193 e identified as allergens (e.g. Bet v 7 from birch pollen, Cat r 1 from periwinkle pollen).

194 for a PreS carrier-based peptide vaccine for birch pollen, which, in addition to the established redu

195 Both birch pollen- and grass pollen-specific IgG4 increased w

196 by basophils and different types of APC from birch pollen-allergic and nonallergic individuals.

197 Basophils from birch pollen-allergic donors very efficiently bound Bet

198 IgE immunoblotting studies with sera from birch pollen-allergic individuals demonstrate that cleav

199 re detected in oral tissues from healthy and birch pollen-allergic individuals.

200 Bet v 1-sensitized birch pollen-allergic patients (n = 35) were diagnosed f

201 , Mal d 1, and Cor a 1 were determined in 42 birch pollen-allergic patients before and during BP-SIT.

202 grass pollen-allergic patients and 45.7% of birch pollen-allergic patients receiving guideline-conco

203 blingual challenge tests in a high number of birch pollen-allergic patients that inter alia can be ap

204 ntraperitoneally allergen-reactive PBMC from birch pollen-allergic patients together with birch polle

205 Samples of birch pollen-allergic patients were used as control.

206 9% NaCl were sublingually administered to 72 birch pollen-allergic patients with apple allergy.

207 L) and clones (TCC) established from PBMC of birch pollen-allergic patients with carrot allergy were

208 tained from three healthy individuals and 23 birch pollen-allergic patients with/without oral allergy

209 s) and a moderate correlation of r = -0.539 (birch pollen-allergic patients).

210 pollen-allergic patients and r = -0.795 for birch pollen-allergic patients.

211 Birch pollen-associated plant food allergy is caused by

212 Birch pollen-driven hazelnut sensitization (Cor a 1) dom

213 Hazelnut allergy is birch pollen-driven in Northern/Western Europe and lipid

214 nd T-cell cross-reactivity contribute to the birch pollen-food syndrome.

215 g adjuvant in epicutaneous immunotherapy for birch pollen-induced allergic asthma.

216 Bet v 1 COPs versus placebo in subjects with birch pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis.

217 ristics, efficacy, and safety in ragweed- or birch pollen-induced seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR).

218 role of other immunoglobulin isotypes in the birch pollen-plant food syndrome has not been investigat

219 we analyzed the Fc glycosylation pattern of birch pollen-reactive serum IgGs after successful allerg

220 Birch pollen-related apple allergy is among the most pre

221 Sixty participants with birch pollen-related apple allergy were randomized to da

222 ble and relevant for sublingual treatment of birch pollen-related apple allergy.

223 sing approach for the effective treatment of birch pollen-related apple allergy.

224 ns containing either rMal d 1 or rBet v 1 on birch pollen-related apple allergy.

225 munotherapy (AIT) with birch pollen improves birch pollen-related food allergy.

226 therapeutic efficacy of birch pollen AIT on birch pollen-related food allergy.

227 rdized tests to assess clinical reactions to birch pollen-related foods, for example apple.

228 lls were quantified in peripheral blood, and birch pollen-specific IgE and IgG antibody levels were d

229 Bet v 1 is the main sensitizing allergen in birch pollen.

230 ly suppressed asthmatic features elicited by birch pollen.

231 sera and basophils from patients allergic to birch pollen.

232 e-blind intradermal injection with grass and birch pollen.

233 from a separate validation cohort exposed to birch pollen.

234 ing, phase IIb trial in patients allergic to birch pollen.

235 adults with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis to birch pollen.

236 yielded four significant SNP associations to birch pollen.

237 examine sensitizations in an area with less birch-pollen exposure.

238 birch were similar in Lapland with its lower birch-pollen exposure.

239 umber of patients, ILIT with grass-pollen or birch-pollen extracts appears to reduce nasal allergic s

240 Two hundred and sixty-nine adults with birch-pollen-induced AR were randomized to placebo, SB:

241 Safety, tolerability, birch-pollen-specific immunoglobulin levels and peak nas

242 IgE specific to birch profilin also binds human profilin I.

243 ysis at Tyr(6)-Val(7) and Trp(35)-Ala(36) in birch profilin and at Trp(32)-Ala(33) in human profilin,

244 at cleavage by chymase attenuates binding of birch profilin to IgE.

245 e (MFC), nanofibrillated cellulose (NFC) and birch pulp derivate, nanofibrillated anionic dicarboxyli

246 of cellulose fibres, except when unmodified birch pulp was used.

247 and alginate were produced using unmodified birch pulp, microfibrillated cellulose (MFC), nanofibril

248 An unrelated challenge (birch, rDer p2 or anti-IgE) resulted in 53.4% activation

249 and challenging with optimal doses of grass, birch, recombinant house dust mite (rDer p2) allergen or

250 The Birch reduction (lithium in liquid ammonia) of graphite

251 The reaction procedure for the ammonia Birch reduction (procedure A) takes about 9.5 h to compl

252 resistant to acidic, basic, Lewis acid, and Birch reduction conditions and was assessed as a polymer

253 smoothly and stereoselectively reduced under Birch reduction conditions to give trans-4,5-disubstitut

254 was found that ambident substrate 12, under Birch reduction conditions, underwent smooth partial red

255 earomatization of the aryl substituent under Birch reduction conditions.

256 es, which are incompatible with the standard Birch reduction conditions.

257 h ammonia (Na/NH3) and ammonia-free (Li/DBB) Birch reduction conditions.

258 es, were selectively partially reduced under Birch reduction conditions.

259 m of the reduction shows similarities to the Birch reduction known from organic chemistry.

260 1,4-cyclohexadienes 2, obtained through the Birch reduction of arenes 1, have found widespread use a

261 Birch reduction of the benzylated polymers gives water-s

262 Birch reduction of the SEM ether of methyl salicylate fo

263 Upon Birch reduction of unprotected, C4-alkylated tetrahydroi

264 bit the expected mass spectral peaks for the Birch reduction products of C 60 *3- (C60Hn).

265 olution, the mass spectral signature for the Birch reduction products of M+@C60-COT*3- and C60-COT*3-

266 into its dihydrocounterpart 16 by using the Birch reduction protocol.

267 the oxazolidine, followed by N-acylation and Birch reduction, completed the syntheses of 2 and 3.

268 ls-Alder, dipolar and ketene cycloadditions, Birch reduction, many types of nucleophilic additions, a

269 ylation, a variant of the nearly century-old Birch reduction, occurs on single-walled carbon nanotube

270 olving three reactions: the enantioselective Birch reduction-allylation, enol ether hydrolysis, and t

271 netic intermediates observed do not fit in a Birch reduction-like or ferraoxetane mechanism.

272 wet chemistry methods based on variations of Birch reduction.

273 r procedure can be only minor isomers of the Birch reduction.

274 nge thus results from a cyclic one-electron (Birch) reduction/protonation/reoxidation (by phenoxyl ra

275 also report that SmI2(H2O)n cleanly mediates Birch reductions of substrates bearing at least two arom

276 el (the Na(2)K-SG(I) reagent) cleanly effect Birch reductions of substrates with at least two or more

277 Birch reductive alkylation of methyl m-(hydroxymethyl)be

278 Here we show that the Billups-Birch reductive alkylation, a variant of the nearly cent

279 g variant (FV) of recombinant (r) Bet v 1 on birch-related soya allergy.

280 present data on the effect of rBet v 1-FV on birch-related soya allergy.

281 thus cannot be fitted to a linear relation, Birch's law, which has been used to extrapolate measured

282 mbination with regular harvest of leaves and birch sap and an understory of ground elder, it is poten

283 Of subjects with birch sensitization, 84% were cosensitized to hazelnut,

284 In a subgroup without birch sensitization, young children (<5 years) were most

285 Birch-sensitized individuals are frequently cosensitized

286 elopment of extensive peatlands, wet tundra, birch shrubland and coniferous forest.

287 across dominant groupings of species (dwarf birch shrubs, willow shrubs, other deciduous shrubs, gra

288 d might be helpful to evaluate the effect of birch-specific immunotherapy on pollen-associated food a

289 rent lignocellulosic biomass, namely, beech, birch, spruce, ash, oak, and pine as well as commercial

290 e and organic matter deposition in aspen and birch stands at the Aspen FACE facility in northern Wisc

291 mated to affect 50-90% of people allergic to birch tree pollen.

292 a n 2 (both from rapeseed) and Bet v 4 (from birch tree).

293 iterpene isolated from the bark of the white birch tree, has been reported to be a selective inducer

294 An alternative approach is the coppicing of birch trees in combination with an understory of ground

295 porarily installing a curbside line of young birch trees.

296 interior Alaska, including black spruce, bog birch, tussock grass and two fens.

297 lish reductions more usually performed under Birch type conditions.

298 Cosensitizations between nuts and birch were similar in Lapland with its lower birch-polle

299 plots containing preferred species (pine and birch) while intermediate preference species (larch and

300 ionships of Empetrum (crowberry) and Betula (birch) with millennial-scale changes in climate, fire ac