ライフサイエンスコーパス: ivory

1 inue to be killed to harvest their tusks for ivory.

2 ionality as a viable substitute for elephant ivory.

3 d pleasant appearance that resemble elephant ivory.

4 thod for the extraction of DNA from elephant ivory.

5 ly determine geographic origin of contraband ivory.

6 ng origin(s) of large seizures of contraband ivory.

7 This method can be used on all forms of ivory.

8 al method to determine the origin of poached ivory.

9 , and banned contraband biomaterials such as ivories and animal products; in these applications the a

10 ly from habitat destruction and poaching for ivory and meat.

11 cal properties slightly inferior to elephant ivory and selected plastics, while retaining the visual

12 he high value of their parts (e.g., elephant ivory and shark fins) are at risk of extinction due to b

13 ion of the original polychromy of the carved ivories are postulated on this basis.

14 Our study shows that lifting the ivory ban will not address the current poaching challeng

15 rns of trade differ by regions: East African ivory, based on genetic assignments of geographic origin

16 yzed video presented as confirmation that an ivory-billed woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) persis

17 The ivory-billed woodpecker (Campephilus principalis), long

18 ated Woodpecker (Dryocopus pileatus) and the Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis).

19 the features described as diagnostic of the ivory-billed woodpecker eliminate a normal pileated wood

20 contain evidence for the persistence of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker.

21 hough we support efforts to find and protect ivory-billed woodpeckers, the video evidence does not de

22 used to assign geographic origin to poached ivory by comparing the ivory genotype to a geographic-ba

23 n) made between 2002 and 2014 show that most ivory (ca 90%) was derived from animals that had died le

24 fe authorities initially suspected that this ivory came from multiple locations across forest and sav

25 Ivory can be smuggled across multiple international bord

26 assessment of the original appearance of the ivory carvings.

27 y uncertain characterization factors for the Ivory Coast and Ghana contributed more than 50% of varia

28 rged in Africa, causing human disease in the Ivory Coast and Zaire.

29 50% in Java beans and increased about 30% in Ivory Coast beans, despite being roasted under equal con

30 morphisms using DNA from inbred Nigerian and Ivory Coast individuals.

31 are genetically diverse and that the recent Ivory Coast isolate represents a new (fourth) subtype of

32 es, the Suriname sample appears sister to an Ivory Coast landrace, and shows no evidence of introgres

33 behavior of a large number of individuals in Ivory Coast using cellular network data.

34 ar genetic methods confirmed the role of the Ivory Coast variant of CDC28 in the arrangement of spore

35 ocal distribution of A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccine in Ivory Coast we assessed knowledge of the pandemic and ac

36 In Mali, Cameroon, and Ivory Coast, 2407 SCD patients (1751 SS or sickle beta-z

37 (491 from Ghana, 363 from Nigeria, 277 from Ivory Coast, 59 from Cameroon, 51 from Sudan, 33 from Et

38 semi-synthetic library against Zaire, Sudan, Ivory Coast, and Reston Ebola viruses.

39 g colobus (Colobus polykomos) of Tai Forest, Ivory Coast, and the Guereza colobus (C. guereza) of Bud

40 Nigeria, four in Ghana, and one each in the Ivory Coast, Cameroon, Sudan, Ethiopia, Tanzania, and Ug

41 D patients and healthy controls in Cameroon, Ivory Coast, Gabon, Mali, and Senegal.

42 ollected in Brazil, Peru, the United States, Ivory Coast, Israel, and Indonesia, are described.

43 en used to screen 1,234 new samples from the Ivory Coast, Kenya, South Africa, Thailand, and the Unit

44 ce in isolates from HIV-1-infected people in Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Niger, Guinea Bissau, Benin, and E

45 were from Cameroon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Ghana, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, Sudan, Tanzania, and Uganda.

46 spores within the spore sac in a strain from Ivory Coast, West Africa.

47 nfected adults with high CD4+ cell counts in Ivory Coast.

48 n Plasmodium ovale attacks among soldiers in Ivory Coast.

49 , Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi, Uganda, Congo and Ivory Coast.

50 ucted during 15-28 February 2010 in Abidjan, Ivory Coast.

51 ory harvest to date and confirm that current ivory consumption is not sustainable.

52 Only 100 to 150 kg of ivory could be removed from a reference population of 1,

53 take and quota strategies to define how much ivory could be sustainably harvested.

54 market ivory price and increased seizures of ivory destined for China.

55 from neonatal rats were cultured for 26 h on ivory discs, with a maximum effect occurring at relative

56 hic origin to poached ivory by comparing the ivory genotype to a geographic-based gene frequency map,

57 the most comprehensive assessment of illegal ivory harvest to date and confirm that current ivory con

58 ican elephants is correct: Very little "old" ivory is included in large ivory shipments from Africa.

59 urgence of illicit trade in African elephant ivory is placing the elephant at renewed risk.

60 detected are P, Ca, and Sr, coming from the ivory material itself; Cu, characteristic of pigments; F

61 Phoenician ivory objects (8(th) century B.C., Syria) from the colle

62 ibutions at the surface of the archeological ivory objects.

63 much higher fraction of "rapid" transit than ivory originating in the Tridom region of Cameroon-Gabon

64 Although the financial motivations for ivory poaching are clear, the economic benefits of eleph

65 Recent ivory poaching targeting older elephants in a well-studi

66 dult mortality driven by drought and intense ivory poaching.

67 related strongly with the local black market ivory price and increased seizures of ivory destined for

68 -sex age-structured demographic model and an ivory production and harvest model.

69 edented levels driven by consumer demand for ivory products.

70 The method has three components: ivory pulverization, decalcification and DNA extraction.

71 creased poaching activities [4], and one-off ivory sales in 1999 and 2008 did nothing to halt elephan

72 o infer the geographic origin of the largest ivory seizure since the 1989 ivory trade ban.

73 We genetically assign origin to 28 large ivory seizures (>/=0.5 metric tons) made between 1996 an

74 n 231 elephant ivory specimens from 14 large ivory seizures (>/=0.5 ton) made between 2002 and 2014 s

75 e the geographic origin(s) of large elephant ivory seizures.

76 Very little "old" ivory is included in large ivory shipments from Africa.

77 Carbon-14 measurements on 231 elephant ivory specimens from 14 large ivory seizures (>/=0.5 ton

78 dating of confiscated animal tissues (e.g., ivory statues) can be used to determine whether trade of

79 Governance issues over the ivory supply chains, including stockpiling, make enforci

80 ame cannot be said for positions outside the ivory tower.

81 s now considering the development of a legal ivory trade [1, 2].

82 Despite the 1989 ivory trade ban, elephants continue to be killed to harv

83 of the largest ivory seizure since the 1989 ivory trade ban.

84 The illegal ivory trade recently intensified to the highest levels e

85 ation were confined to vertebral body, with "ivory vertebra" appearance.

86 These mutants have similar ivory/virescent pigmentation and similar reductions in p

87 m animals that had died less than 3 y before ivory was confiscated.

88 However, we show that the ivory was entirely from savanna elephants, most probably

89 quately assessed what could be a sustainable ivory yield.