While understanding interest group systems remains crucial to understanding the functioning of advanced democracies, the study of interest groups remains a somewhat niche field within political science. Nevertheless, during the last 15 years, the academic interest in group politics has grown and we reflect on the state of the current literature. The main objective is to take stock, consider the main empirical and theoretical/ conceptual achievements, but most importantly, to reflect upon potential fertile future research avenues. In our view interest group studies would be reinvigorated and would benefit from being reintegrated within the broader field of political science, and more particularly, the comparative study of government. The study of interest group politics-that is the organisation, aggregation, articulation, and intermediation of societal interests that seek to shape public policies-is a relatively small field within political science. There is no special journal devoted to interest group studies, and mainstream political science journals publish less on interest groups than they do on other areas of political science such as electoral, legislative, and party politics. 1 This phenomenon is not due to interest group scholarship being less advanced or less sophisticated than the other sub-fields. It is largely an artefact of size: fewer scholars work in the group area than in party politics or policy studies. There are also more substantive reasons for the paucity of interest group research: several conceptual, methodological and disciplinary barriers militate against the accumulation of knowledge. Nevertheless, during the last 15 years, the academic interest in group politics has grown. This is evidenced by numerous empirical studiesqualitative and quantitative-within the fields of European Union studies, comparative European politics, and American politics. In recent years, the

International audienceDrawing on a survey of 800 business associations, the article seeks to explain why interest groups lobby the EU institutions and what groups maintain contacts with them. Rooted in organizational theory, it argues that four main dimensions influence access patterns — institutional context, resource dependencies, interest group organization, and strategic choices. The empirical analysis demonstrates that all dimensions are relevant. Nonetheless, contacts between EU policy-makers and interest groups display only a few general traits: they are shaped by the political mobilization of groups in response to EU regulation, the division of labour among EU and national associations and the importance of organizational resources. Beyond these general influences, the interactions vary profoundly in the segmented institutional context

No abstract

and European Union (EU) trade associations as well as thirty-four large firms. The argument is that the multilevel governance approach to European integration captures the realities of EU interest intermediation better than neofunctionalism and intergovernmentalism. The article suggests that the strategies of interest organizations depend mainly on their location in the EU multilevel system and on their governance capacities. I distinguish two kinds of governance capacities: negotiation capacities and organizational resources. The analysis proceeds in the following steps: After outlining the three theories of European integration and presenting their implications for interest groups, a brief overview of the relative importance for interest organizations of EU and national institutions over time is provided. Then, cluster analysis techniques serve to identify types of interest groups according to their lobbying strategies in the multilevel system: niche organizations, occasional players, traditionalists, EU players, and multilevel players are distinguished. The composition of these clusters and the characteristics of their members support the multilevel governance approach and indicate that multilevel players have greater governance capacities than organizations in the other clusters.

This article outlines both the overall structure of the INTEREURO Project (Comparative Research on Interest Group Politics in Europe) and the theoretical foci, research activities and data sets generated by its several modules. We provide this description for two purposes. First, it provides a necessary backdrop for understanding the remaining essays in this special issue. Importantly, we do not believe that the methodological challenges we faced are unique to the INTEREURO Project. Rather, they characterize any large-N research project on interest representation. Thus, we hope that these articles based on the INTEREURO Project are useful to a broad range of scholars. Our second purpose is to describe for the wider community of interest organization scholars the INTEREURO Project and the data generated thereby.

Taking the example of the liberalization of the electricity supply industy, I analyze member-state negotiations in the European Union (EU). Confronting central tenets of the intergovernmental approach, I suggest that member-state executives act within the limits of bounded rationality and do not always hold clear and fixed preferences. I focus on the large member states Germany, France, and the United Kingdom and identify four institutional mechanisms that support outcomes above the least common denominator: (1) the role of norms that constrain strategic action and frame the negotiations, (2) the empowerment of supranational actors, (3) the decision routines of the Council of the European Union that provide standardized mechanisms for resolving conflicts and induce policy learning and preference changes, and (4) the vertical differentiation within the Council system that can unblock issue-specific controversies. Even if as a result of these techniques EU legal acts contain several flexibilization elements, they can trigger behavioral changes that clearly surpass their regulatory content.

Five charge isoforms of tetrameric catalase were isolated from cotyledons of germinated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) seedlings. Denaturing isoelectric focusing of the individual isoforms in polyacrylamide gels indicated that isoforms A (most anodic) and E (most cathodic) consisted of one subunit of different charge, whereas isoforms B, C and D each consisted of a mixture of these two subunits. Thus the five isoforms apparently were formed through combinations of two subunits in different ratios. Labelling cotyledons in vivo with [35S]methionine at three daily intervals in the dark, and translation in vivo of polyadenylated RNA isolated from cotyledons at the same ages, revealed synthesis of two different subunits. One of the subunits was synthesized in cotyledons at all ages studied (days 1-3), whereas the other subunit was detected only at days 2 and 3. This differential expression of two catalase subunits helped explain previous results from this laboratory showing that the two anodic forms (A and B) found in maturing seeds were supplemented with three cathodic forms (C-E) after the seeds germinated. These subunit data also helped clarify our new findings that proteins of isoforms A, B and C (most active isoforms) accumulated in cotyledons of plants kept in the dark for 3 days, then gradually disappeared during the next several days, whereas isoforms D and E (least active isoforms) remained in the cells. This shift in isoform pattern occurred whether seedlings were kept in the dark or exposed to continuous light after day 3, although exposure to light enhanced this process. These sequential molecular events were responsible for the characteristic developmental changes (rise and fall) in total catalase activity. We believe that the isoform changeover is physiologically related to the changeover in glyoxysome to leaf-type-peroxisome metabolism.

Hydrogen peroxide of the host origin accumulates in plant apoplasts in response to pathogen attack and probably functions directly in defense reactions or in signaling, according to a previous study. Since Claviceps purpurea produces compatible interactions with hundreds of host species, we hypothesized that the fungus might interfere with H(2)O(2)-mediated defense by means of secreted catalases. In axenic culture of C. purpurea, catalase activity accumulated in the medium and was inhibited by the catalase inhibitor aminotriazole. Polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis followed by diaminobenzidine (DAB)-mediated activity staining showed that one specific catalase found in culture filtrate was also present in rye ovaries infected with C. purpurea and in honeydew. This catalase form is probably induced during infection. In situ activity staining, using DAB-mediated enzyme-cytochemistry in electron microscopy, located catalase activity in hyphal walls during both axenic culture and infection of rye. Activity staining accumulated in periplasmic spaces and was especially strong at hyphal surfaces; control staining after aminotriazole inhibition was negative. Intracellular activity staining in organelles of the fungal secretory pathway substantiated that catalase was secreted by C. purpurea. With molecular cytology, anticatalase epitopes were localized with different heterologous catalase antibodies at sites corresponding to the activity staining pattern. In all infection phases, immunogold labeling indicated that the putative catalase was secreted via multivesicular bodies into the fungal wall and diffused into the host apoplast exclusively at the hostpathogen interface. The secretion of fungal catalase is a novel finding in phytopathology, and we discuss its role in the ubiquitous ergot disease.