A unilateral microinjection of morphine into the amygdala impaired fear conditioning to both a conditioned stimulus (CS) paired with shock and the context where shock occurred, whereas a microinjection of morphine into the nucleus accumbens (NA) spared fear conditioning to the CS but impaired, in a dose-dependent and receptor-specific manner, fear conditioning to the context. Morphine in the NA also spared extinction and latent inhibition of a CS but abolished the context specificity of these effects and eliminated the increase in discriminability that results from preexposure to a to-be-shocked context. The results identify a role for the NA in the processes by which rats learn about a context and are discussed in terms of an opioid disruption of either within-context associations or of attentional processes that contribute to such associations.

A unilateral microinjection of morphine into the amygdala impaired the acquisition of fear and hypoalgesic responses in rats exposed to a heated floor in a hot-plate apparatus. This impairment was dose dependent, receptor specific, and not observed in rats microinjected with morphine into the caudal basolateral amygdala. A microinjection of morphine into the amygdala reduced the expression of fear responses and of naloxone-sensitive hypoalgesic responses, but did not reduce the expression of naloxone-insensitive hypoalgesic responses. The results document an involvement of opioidergic mechanisms in the amygdala in learned danger and of the amygdala in the control of opioid hypoalgesic responses. They also suggest that learned danger can activate antinociceptive mechanisms independently of the amygdala.

Clinical and immunologic responses to a B-cell epitope vaccine in HER2/neuoverexpressing advanced gastric cancer patients -results from Phase 1b trial IMU.ACS.

Experiments conducted over three seasons in southern New South Wales tested the effects of concentrating anhydrous ammonia (AA) and urea fertiliser in bands occupying ~3.5% of the topsoil volume. Yield responses to applied nitrogen (N) were small or negative in a drought but larger (17 kg grain kg–1 N fertiliser) in favourable seasons. There was no consistent difference between AA and urea effects on yield, grain protein or efficiency of fertiliser-N recovery, and there were no consistent differences arising from banding depth or application time. Gaseous loss of ammonia to the atmosphere was negligible from urea granules or AA injected into the soil as gas or liquid. Soil ammonium concentration was >700 μg N g–1 in bands of ~5 cm diameter when measured 6 days after AA application but halved within 5 weeks due to nitrification. Within 1 day of banding AA or urea at sowing, pHwater in the bands rose from 6 to 8.5, leading to transient changes in microbial activity and populations. Immediately after banding, microbial biomass carbon and numbers of protozoa fell by about half, but numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidisers were unchanged. Five weeks later, microbial biomass carbon and protozoa had partly recovered whereas numbers of ammonia- and nitrite-oxidisers increased 5–10-fold. After 7 months, there was a small reduction in microbial diversity in the bands, shown by analysis of fatty acid methyl esters. Seedling growth was slower where N fertiliser was applied in concentrated bands than when mixed throughout the topsoil, supporting previous research showing that roots avoid bands of highly concentrated ammonium. Banding thus provided a slow-release form of N to wheat crops, thereby reducing excessive seedling growth and the risks of haying-off.

Land preparation for canola (oilseed rape; Brassica napus L.) by conventional cultivation can involve a number of workings, resulting in soil degradation and reduced crop growth. Minimum-tillage systems may help overcome these problems, but the placement of fertiliser at sowing must avoid chemical injury to germinating seed. The responses of canola cultivars to tillage and fertiliser placement were studied for 2 seasons at high (Breakfast Creek, 1997; Harden, 1998) and low (Ardlethan, 1997–98) rainfall sites. The tillage treatments were conventional cultivation, one-pass, and no-till (direct drill). The fertiliser treatments were 200 kg/ha 'starter' fertiliser (a�compound fertiliser supplying 30 kg N, 26 kg P and 22 kg S/ha) either placed with the seed, or broadcast, or banded to the side and 3 cm below the seed. In 1997 the canola was sown after wheat, and in 1998 after pasture. Plant establishment of all cultivars was reduced by 40–65% when fertiliser was placed with the seed; tillage treatment did not alter this response. Placing fertiliser with the seed reduced dry matter/m2 by up to 40% in plants at flowering, but by physiological maturity, there were no differences in dry matter/m2 due to fertiliser placement. Analysis of the combined seed yields for both years showed that although plants in the with-seed placement compensated by producing more seed/plant, this compensation was sufficient only at Breakfast Creek for yields to be comparable to those of the other fertiliser placements. Tillage had little effect on seed yields. In 1997, no-till yielded more than one-pass at Ardlethan, but in 1998 at Ardlethan no-till yielded less than the other tillage systems. Fertiliser placement and tillage had no effect on seed oil concentration and meal protein content. Cone penetrometer measurements (1998) showed no differences in soil strength between tillage treatments at Ardlethan; while at Harden, one-pass had less soil strength than the other tillage treatments. Crop water extraction was not affected by tillage at any site. It is concluded that a conservation-farming system involving no-till or one-pass tillage, and separation of seed and fertiliser has the potential for producing high yielding canola crops, reducing the risk of soil degradation, as well as saving time and land-preparation costs.