Search Results (2)

Prenatal alcohol exposure (PAE) causes growth restriction that worsens in the first year of life. However, the roles of postnatal nutrition in fetal alcohol growth restriction and the impact of postnatal alcohol exposure via breastmilk on growth remain unknown. We aimed to compare infant feeding practices during the first 6.5 months of life between heavy drinkers and abstainers/light drinkers, to examine whether these practices play confounding roles in fetal alcohol growth restriction, and to determine the impact of postnatal alcohol exposure via breastmilk on growth. Eighty-seven heavy-drinking pregnant women and 71 abstainers/light drinkers (controls) were recruited prenatally from antenatal clinics in Cape Town, South Africa. Demographic background and alcohol, cigarette, marijuana, and methamphetamine use during pregnancy were assessed pre- and postnatally. Infant feeding practices were assessed at 6.5 months postpartum using the USDA Infant Feeding Questionnaire. Infant weight, length, and head circumference were measured at 2 weeks, 6.5 and 12 months, and 5 years. Neither prenatal nor postnatal alcohol consumption was related to the duration of breastfeeding, exclusive breastfeeding, exclusive formula, or mixed feeding. Complementary feeding practices were remarkably similar between exposure groups. PAE was related to all postnatal anthropometry measures at all age points, independent of infant feeding practices. Postnatal alcohol exposure via breastmilk was unrelated to any anthropometry outcome after control for PAE. In conclusion, fetal alcohol-related postnatal growth restriction was not attributable to differences in postnatal infant feeding practices or postnatal alcohol exposure and is thus likely a direct teratogenic effect of PAE. Full article

Soil erodibility is among the trickiest erosion factors to estimate. This is especially true for heterogeneous Mediterranean environments, where reliable and dense soil data are rarely available, and interpolation methods give very low accuracies. Towards estimating soil erodibility, research so far has resulted in several alternatives mainly based on empirical formulas, on physics-based equations or on inference with expertise. The aim of this work was to compare erodibility patterns derived by using the empirical United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) formula and by inference from a geological map in a Mediterranean agricultural site. The Kolymvari area, located in the western part of Crete, an area covered by olive groves and citrus orchards, was selected as the study site for this work. Comparison of the spatial patterns of soil erodibility derived from the two alternatives showed significant differences (i.e., a mean normalized difference value of 0.52), while a test of the “inference” alternative indicated very low accuracies (0.1475 RMS error). A comparison, however, of the spatial patterns of erosion values derived from both alternatives indicated that dissimilarities of the two soil erodibility maps faded out. Moreover, the highly risky areas provided by both alternatives were found to be identical for 88% of the whole study site. Full article