Galley Proofs Research Articles

Publisher Correction: MiR-21 and miR-183 can simultaneously target SOCS6 and modulate growth and invasion of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cells.

Correction to: Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2015; 19 (17): 3208-3217. PMID: 26400524-published online on September 14, 2015. After publication, a reader brought to our attention a mistake in Figure 4. The journal found that Figure 3 was mistakenly inserted twice in the galley proof, resulting in the publication of the same figure for Figures 3 and 4. The publisher is, therefore, substituting Figure 4 with the correct figure provided at the time of submission as follows: There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/9429.

Author Correction: Genetic variants identified in novel candidate genes for anorexia nervosa and analysis of molecular pathways for diagnostic applications.

Correction to: Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2023; 27 (6 Suppl): 77-88-DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202312_34692 After publication and following some post-publication concerns, the authors have applied the following corrections to the galley proof. The conflict of interest section has been amended as follows: K. Donato is employee at MAGI EUREGIO and MAGISNAT. G. Marceddu is employee at MAGI EUREGIO. M. Bertelli is president of MAGI EUREGIO, MAGISNAT, and MAGI's LAB. M.C. Medori, A. Macchia, S. Cecchin, C. Micheletti, K. Dhuli, G. Madeo, G. Bonetti are employees at MAGI's LAB. M. Bertelli, M.R. Ceccarini, and P. Chiurazzi are patent inventors (US20220362260A11). M. Bertelli, P.E. Maltese, G. Marceddu, and S. Cecchin are patent inventors (US20230173003A1). M. Bertelli, K. Dhuli, and P.E. Maltese are patent inventors (WO2022079498A1). M. Bertelli, K. Donato, M.C. Medori, M.R. Ceccarini, T. Beccari, P. Chiurazzi, C. Micheletti, K. Dhuli, G. Bonetti, G. Marceddu are patent applicants (Application Number: 18/466.879). The remaining authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. Since the current study shares the same NGS panel for the genetic analysis as the study cited in Ref. 5 (Ceccarini MR, Precone V, Manara E, Paolacci S, Maltese PE, Benfatti V, Dhuli K, Donato K, Guerri G, Marceddu G, Chiurazzi P, Dalla Ragione L, Beccari T, Bertelli M. A next generation sequencing gene panel for use in the diagnosis of anorexia nervosa. Eat Weight Disord 2022; 27: 1869-1880), the authors amend the following sentence: "A subset comprising 163 genes from a dedicated Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) panel was analyzed5" in "A subset comprising 163 genes from a dedicated Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) panel, previously used in the study by Ceccarini et al5, was analyzed". The authors clarify that the analyzed patients of the two articles are completely independent. To clarify the data reported in Table II, the authors amend the following sentence: "Genetic variants identified in the AN population are reported in Table II." In "The genomic sequencing NGS was performed in all 135 patients recruited in the study. After obtaining the raw data, based on the ACMG guidelines (https://www.acmg.net/ACMG/Medical-Genetics-Practice-Resources/Practice-Guidelines.aspx), the results were filtered, and Table II reports the variants considered Pathogenic (P), likely pathogenic (LP), and Variable with Uncertain Significance (VUS), 61 patients in total". Consequently, to improve clarity, the legend of Table II has been amended as follows: Genetic variants identified in 61 patients out of the total 135 patients analyzed by NGS. There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/34692.

Author Correction: Aldo-keto reductase 1C2 (AKR1C2) as the second gene associated to non-syndromic primary lipedema: investigating activating mutation or overexpression as causative factors.

Correction to: Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2023; 27 (6 Suppl): 127-136-DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202312_34697 After publication and following some post-publication concerns, the authors have applied the following corrections to the galley proof. - The conflict of interest section has been amended as follows: J. Kaftalli and G. Marceddu are employees at MAGI EUREGIO. K. Donato is employee at MAGI EUREGIO and MAGISNAT. M. Bertelli is president of MAGI EUREGIO, MAGISNAT, and MAGI's LAB. G. Bonetti, K. Dhuli, A. Macchia, and P.E. Maltese are employees at MAGI's LAB. M. Bertelli, P.E. Maltese, K. Louise Herbst, Sa. Michelini, Se. Michelini, and P. Chiurazzi are patent inventors (US20220362260A1). M. Bertelli, P.E. Maltese, G. Marceddu are patent inventors (US20230173003A1). M. Bertelli, K. Dhuli and P.E. Maltese are patent inventors (WO2022079498A1). M. Bertelli, P.E. Maltese, Sa. Michelini, Se. Michelini, P. Chiurazzi, K. Louise Herbst, J. Kaftalli, K. Donato, and A. Bernini are patent applicants (Application Number 18/516,241). M. Bertelli, K. Donato, P. Chiurazzi, G. Marceddu, K. Dhuli, G. Bonetti and J. Kaftalli are patent applicants (Application Number: 18/466.879). M. Bertelli, G. Bonetti, G. Marceddu, K. Donato, K. Dhuli, J. Kaftalli, Sa. Michelini, and K. Louise Herbst are patent applicants (Application Number 63/495,155). The remaining authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. - Figure 5 has been modified as follows to better distinguish outliers: - The legend of Figure 5 has to be modified as follows: Relative expression of AKR1C1 and AKR1C3 in different groups (CTR = non affected controls, L = lipedema patients without overexpression of AKR1C2, L-over = Lipedema patients with overexpression of AKR1C2), showing that lipedema patients expressed AKR1C1 and AKR1C3 levels similar to the control group. Outliers are reported as black triangles. There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/34697.

Author Correction: Achievement of sustainable development goals through the Mediterranean diet.

Correction to: Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2023; 27 (6 Suppl): 89-99-DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202312_34693 After publication and following some post-publication concerns, the authors have applied the following corrections to the galley proof. - The conflict of interest section has been amended as follows: M.C. Medori and D. Malacarne are employees at MAGI'S LAB. K. Donato is employee at MAGI EUREGIO and MAGISNAT. M. Bertelli is president of MAGI EUREGIO, MAGISNAT, and MAGI's LAB. E. Borghetti is president at AERSAFE srl. C. Zuccato is researcher at AERSAFE srl. E. Borghetti is patent inventor (IT202100021344A1, IT202100020330A1, WO2021260537A1, WO2022259165A1). M. Bertelli is patent inventor (US20220362260A1, US20230173003A1, WO2022079498A1). D. Malacarne is patent inventor (WO2022079498A1; US20230173003A1). S. Michelini is patent inventor (US20220362260A1). M. Bertelli, S. Michelini, and K. Donato are patent applicants (Application Number: 18/516,241). M. Bertelli and K. Donato are patent applicants (Application Number: 18/466.879). M. Bertelli, K. Donato, and S. Michelini are patent applicants (Application Number: 63/495,155). The remaining authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/34693.

Author Correction: High expression of MMP14 is associated with progression and poor short-term prognosis in muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

Correction to: Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2020; 24 (12): 6605-6615-DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202006_21646-published online on June 25, 2020. After publication, the authors have applied some corrections to the galley proof: - In Table II, data display in MMP14 expression between Low and high group was inverted. This correction does not involve any statistical data modification and does not affect the conclusion of the article. The correct table display should be as follows: - In Figure 4F, the cell invasion image of siRNA-2 group in T24 was misplaced. The authors have adjusted the brightness and contrast appropriately as well. The correct Figure 4F display should be as follows: There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/21646.

Author Correction: Utilization of peginterferon-β-1a in the real-world practice for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis.

Correction to: European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 2024; 28 (1): 411-418. DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202401_34930-published online on January 16, 2024. After publication, the authors have applied some corrections to the galley proof: • In the Patients and Methods section of the abstract, "National Health System" is corrected to "National Health Service". • In the Conclusions section of the abstract, "SC PEG-IFN-β-1a and IFN- β-1a" is corrected to "PEG-IFN-β-1a and SC IFN-β-1a". • In the Population section, the study period "January 1st 2015 to December 31st 2019" was not reported; therefore, this specification has been added to the text. • The legend of Figure 1 was wrongly reported as the same as Table I. The correct title of Figure 1 is "Study flow diagram". • Under Tables I, II, and III, "interferon beta 1a IFN-β-1a" is corrected to "interferon beta 1a (IFN-β-1a)". • In Table III, "CS Glatiramer acetate" is corrected to "SC Glatiramer acetate". • In the Conclusions section, "SC IFN-β-1a SC" is corrected to "SC IFN-β-1a". • The funding section has been amended as follows: "This study was sponsored by Biogen Italia (Milan, Italy)." There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/34930.

Author Correction: An investigation into the mechanism of nobiletin's inhibition of papillary thyroid cancer using network pharmacology analysis and experimental pharmacology.

Correction to: European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences 2023; 27 (4): 1553-1564. DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202302_31398-PMID:36876711-published online on February 15, 2023. After publication, the authors applied some corrections to the galley proof: - The order of Table I and II has been inverted. - The scale bar of Figure 9A has been inserted in the Legend. There are amendments to this paper. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. https://www.europeanreview.org/article/31398.

The Translators' Take on Three Possible Typos in Jorge L. Borges' Story “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius”

This article examines how translators tackled the problem given by three possible typos in Jorge Luis Borges' short story “Tlön, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius.” Translations to all major Western languages are considered. The translators' decisions are found to display great diversity. Some of them treat the textual changes in question as mere typos, while others incorporate the changes (be it partially, in full, or even in excess). Borges' role in altering the text can only be assessed indirectly as no hard evidence, such as corrected galley proofs or written accounts, is known to exist. The present findings allign well with Sánchez's complementary analysis of the context in which the three textual changes occur and how they indirectly impact the plot. In case they are not mere typos, the changes discussed here could obey Borges' decision to reintroduce a metaliterary element of surprise into the story.

Reflections on the Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society

Reflections on the Journal of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society Tan Sri Dato Haji Mubin Sheppard and Paul H. Kratoska Publication is one of the principal activities of most scholarly associations, including the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. The Society's mission is to collect, disseminate, and preserve information about Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei, and to fulfil this goal, it publishes a journal, original monographs, and reprints of older publications. Tan Sri Dato Haji Mubin Sheppard (1905–94) was an officer of the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society and served for many years as editor of its journal. In September 1985 he presented a paper about the journal at a conference on 'Academic publishing in ASEAN: problems and prospects'. The paper, which was printed in the conference proceedings,1 provided a useful summary of the journal's history and some of the problems it faced. His concerns included printing, marketing, and distribution (both overseas and in Malaysia), and how to ensure that back issues of the journal remained available and accessible. The points Sheppard mentioned in 1985 would have been familiar to Carl Gibson-Hill, who edited the journal 30 years earlier. Gibson-Hill complained of substandard printing and difficulties getting printers to make corrections. Editors needed to visit printing offices, and Sheppard notes that when the society's offices relocated from Singapore to Petaling Jaya, a satellite city of Kuala Lumpur, printing of the journal also moved from Singapore.2 Gibson-Hill also expressed concern about preserving back issues of the journal and keeping them available to the public. In connection with a possible donation of back issues to a library, Gibson-Hill wrote: if possible the back numbers should be bound, and arrangements made to bind each subsequent volume as it is completed. … We mention the matter [End Page 95] of binding as experience has taught us that loose parts of journal are much more liable to disappear from libraries than are bound volumes.3 When Sheppard wrote his article, authors submitted typed manuscripts and communicated with the journal editor through the postal service. Processing articles for publication involved keying them in on a linotype machine, which produced slugs of type used for printing, and proofreading took place on "galley proofs", long sheets of paper that would later be broken down into pages. Corrections required physical replacement of lines of metallic type, and changes had to conform to the number of words and letters in the corrected passage to fit the space taken up by the original text. At the time of printing, the editor ordered extra copies of the journal that were used to prepare offprints, copies of an article sent to the author for distribution to friends and colleagues. Thirty years later, when I assumed the editorship in 2015, every step in the process had changed. This article begins with Sheppard's paper, edited to remove details that have fallen out of date. Following his account, I have added an update explaining changes in the way manuscripts are submitted, published, and read. The History, Publications and Distribution of JMBRAS in Ancient and Modern Times By Tan Sri Dato' Mubin Sheppard History A meeting was held in Raffles Library, Singapore, on November 4th 1877 at which a resolution was presented and approved reading 'that the gentlemen present form themselves into a Society for collecting and recording scientific information in the Malay Peninsula and Archipelago. The said Society to be, for the present, called The Straits Asiatic Society.' Those present included Archdeacon G. F. Hose, who presided, W. E. Maxwell, who was then the Colonial Secretary, A. M. Skinner, who was then the Colonial Treasurer, W. A. Pickering the Protector of the Chinese, C. J. Irving, the Resident Councillor Malacca, and D. F. A. Hervey, a Magistrate. Mr. Skinner, who was the first Honorary Secretary, wrote to the Royal Asiatic Society in London asking if the new body could be accepted as a Branch of the older Society (which had been founded in 1826). Approval was received from London in March 1878 and the Society was then renamed The Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society. The Governor of the Straits...

ARCHIVED LEXICOGRAPHY: THE GALLEY PROOFS OF THE UNPUBLISHED “GREAT JAPANESE-RUSSIAN CHARACTER DICTIONARY” AS A HISTORICAL SOURCE

The inconsistent history of a large-scale lexicographical project of 1930–1940s (under N. I. Konrad, N. A. Nevsky, A. A. Kholodovich) is a remarkable milestone in development of the Far East ideographic languages’ lexicography in our country. The absence of published dictionaries as visible outcome of the lexicographical works poses the main difficulty for historians of science in reconstruction of the period and the treatment of the subject. Fund No. 152 of the Archive of Orientalists of the Institute of Oriental Manuscripts of the Russian Academy of Sciences contains a massif of documents, together with other materials illustrating the project in detail, but not offering coherent interpretation in the absence of extra sources, that is lexicographically informative ones, in order to close the gap of the reliable source material. Yet until recently, the historiography of the subject was lacking. The gap could be closed by a unique lexicographical monument discovered in the Institute of Oriental Studies. It should be a copy of the first galley proof portion of the “Great Japanese-Russian Character Dictionary”. The source analysis of the monument and its criticism in the full context of relevant documentary evidence known up to date along with more meaningful interpretation of the data allow for precise qualification of a little-studied decade-long dictionary project in the history of Oriental lexicography and prewar Japan studies in our country. It may be determined that for the first generations of Soviet scholars of Japan the unpublished dictionary appeared to be a kind of school forging a vital link between the pre-Revolution and post-war Soviet lexicography of Japanese language: from D. M. Pozdneyev to N. A. Syromyatnikov.

Dritte Walpurgisnacht by Karl Kraus

Reviewed by: Dritte Walpurgisnacht by Karl Kraus Caitríona Ní Dhúill and Werner Garstenauer Dritte Walpurgisnacht. By Karl Kraus. Translated by Fred Bridgham and Edward Timms as The Third Walpurgis Night: The Complete Text, with a foreword by Marjorie Perloff. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2020. Hardcover. 320 pp. $35. ISBN 978–0-300–23600–2. When a text waits for almost a century to appear in full in translation, the task of making it comprehensible to a new, culturally and linguistically remote readership involves the cracking of multiple codes, from style to contextual knowledge to intertextual reference. As Marjorie Perloff puts it in her foreword to this first full translation into English of Dritte Walpurgisnacht, referring to Kraus's great preoccupation with the power and pitfalls of the press, 'nothing comes to us unmediated' (p. xv). The mediating work of translators — a labour too often rendered invisible — is executed for The Third Walpurgis Night by Fred Bridgham and Edward Timms with the exemplary care and flair evident in their acclaimed translation of The Last Days of Mankind (published in 2015). Just as Kraus did not live to see the publication of his great anti-Nazi polemic, so too does this translation mark the final chapter in Timms's immensely productive decades-long engagement with Kraus. It is tempting and necessary to draw parallels between Kraus's time and our own, and the translators do this with relish where they write of events in 1933 seeming to 'make Germany great again', of Hitler 'taking back control' (p. xxi), or where they render 'Raison annehmen […] und sich […] zufrieden [geben]' (Dritte Walpurgisnacht, 1989, p. 278) as 'calm down and carry on' (p. 202). Even more notable than the undoubted contemporary relevance of the source text is the minute care the translators have taken to explain Kraus's allusions: ten pages of notes, together with a glossary and index running to over thirty pages, provide welcome support to readers lacking familiarity with the context. The explosive effect of Kraus's montage technique is arguably weaker for readers who are culturally and historically remote from the saturation-levels of familiarity with Goethe's Faust Part Two which Kraus would have been able to assume in his own readers. But there are gains, too: Kraus's mining of Shakespeare packs a new emotional punch when the quotations are returned to English, with hindsight revealing an uncanny edge to the choice of 'the worst is not | So long as we can say "This is the worst"' (King Lear IV, 1, quoted on p. 8), especially given the year of writing (1933). That the translators' 'struggle' (as they call it on p. xvii) is ultimately a hermeneutic one is evident in the opening sentence ('Mir fällt zu Hitler nichts ein'), and we can be grateful that they share solutions they rejected ('Mention Hitler and my mind goes blank', 'Hitler brings [End Page 203] nothing to my mind', p. xvii) as well as the one they ultimately settled on ('As to Hitler, I have nothing to say', p. 1). Regarding the editorial history of the source text, one wonders why Bridgham and Timms opted to work from the 1952 Kösel Verlag edition by Heinrich Fischer rather than the later Suhrkamp edition by Christian Wagenknecht. The introduction does not elaborate on this decision, although Wagenknecht's editorial report stresses the differences between the unpublished 1933 galley proofs and the parts published in Die Fackel in July 1934 and notes the shortcomings — in his view — of the 'contaminating' approach taken by Fischer, which created a 'Mischtext' by eliding the differences between the versions. Editorial work on Dritte Walpurgisnacht continues into the digital age with the ongoing project of the Arbeitsstelle österreichischer Corpora und Editionen (ACE) at the Austrian Academy of Sciences (ÖAW), directed by Konstanze Fliedl. The revised full text, edited by Bernhard Oberreither, was published in the ACE open access digital edition in June 2021, with an easily navigable register of persons mentioned, together with indexes of the many intertexts. A future edition of the Bridgham/Timms translation would do well to draw on the ACE...

Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.• Type of peer review: Double-blind • Describe criteria used by Reviewers when accepting/declining papers. Was there the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions? There are five main criteria: relevance to the conference topic, importance of the research/state-of-the-art, proper methodology, arguments and conclusions, and academic writing quality. All the criteria are included in the substantial review form (attached) provided for the reviewers. Organizers also prepared a technical review form (attached) to assess the compliance with IOP template and guidelines and to inform the result of plagiarism check. There was the opportunity to resubmit articles after revisions, up to a maximum of two (2) times based on two (2) substantial reviews.• Conference submission management system: Universitas Indonesia online conference system (https://symposiumjessd.ui.ac.id/online-submission/) using Digital Commons From Bepress (Elsevier), the complete submission guidelines are available in following link https://symposiumjessd.ui.ac.id/guideline/• Number of submissions received: 250• Number of submissions sent for review: 250• Number of submissions accepted: 141• Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 56.4%• Average number of reviews per paper: 1–2• Total number of reviewers involved:• Any additional info on review process (i.e. plagiarism check system): Review process was done in 8-14 days. One reviewer might review up to two (2) articles.• Contact person for queries: Herdis Herdiansyah, School of Environmental Science, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia, e-mail: herdis@ui.ac.id Additional information Review Period 1. Review process will be done in range of 8 to 14 days.2. One Reviewer in term of substantial, maximum article to review are 3 article. Substantial Review 1. Relevance to the Conference topic.2. Importance of the research/State-of-the-art.3. Proper methodology.4. Arguments and conclusions.5. Academic Writing quality. Other Information 1. Author will received 1 Technical Review and Minimum of 1-2 Substantial Reviewer both from Author Suggestion or/and choose from Committee2. When the article deliver to publisher, every Author will receive Galley Proof. As an Author must agree with the editing version, except there is some correction from Author.3. Every Author will receive information and status of the article after submitted. Submission Ethics Ethics in JESSD Symposium is based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Before submitting your article(s), please ensure that your submission completely represents following statements.1. The uploaded files have been carefully prepared based on the provided templates, both title page (title, author name(s), affiliation(s), abstract, and acknowledgements) and article (title, abstract, introduction, method, results and discussion, conclusion, and references)2. The article represents a qualified scientific knowledge that might come from international collaborations3. Author(s) has/have approved the article and agree(s) with the submission, therefore any withdrawal of the article is prohibited once it is submitted4. Author(s) is/are willing to pay the symposium fee and publication fee charged by the organizers (symposium fee is mandatory charged for one author attendance virtually while publication fee is optionally charged before the symposium or after the article is listed in Scopus)5. The article does not contain any form of plagiarism6. Author(s) has/have made significant substantial contribution to the article, whether it is in the concept or design, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas7. The article has not been published elsewhere and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere (either partly or wholly)8. Author(s) has/have acknowledged any conflict of interest in the article, if necessary9. Author(s) has/have acknowledged any source of funding in the article, if necessary10. The article was written in English and carefully reviewed by a native English editor Review Ethics 1. The author(s) is/are required to propose one reviewer and another one reviewer optionally. However, the organizers manage to prevent any conflict of interest that might be happened during review process. Therefore, please ensure that your suggested reviewer fits to following criteria.2. He/she is an expert in the relevant field.3. He/she has no competing interest with the author(s).4. He/she has never been involved in any related work with the author(s).5. He/she does not know the author(s) personally.6. There is no certainty that the organizer will accept your suggested reviewer. The double-blind peer review will be conducted, therefore reviewers will not receive any author(s) information and vice versa. Similarity Check Each submitted article will be going to preliminary review with iThenticate. Through the preliminary review, any form of plagiarism will be detected and measured. If similarity check result is more than 10%, the article will be returned or directly rejected. Moreover, the preliminary review will also consider return or direct rejection due to, but not limited to, following reasons.1. Falling out of topic.2. Multiple submission or consideration for other publications.3. Recommendation for rejection from reviewer.

Peer Review Declaration Form Guidance

On the following page you will find the declaration form.• Please answer each question.• You should submit the form along with the rest of your submission files.• The deadline is the submission date written in your publishing agreement. All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. We will published the information you provide as part of your proceedings. Peer review declaration All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing.• Type of peer review: Double-blindThe 2nd International Symposium on Arboriculture in the Tropics: Trees and Human Health (The 2nd ISATrop2021) Editorial team used a double-blind review, where both the reviewer (scientific committee) and author identities were concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. Only the editor knows the name of this reviewer and author. The list of Scientific committees has been determined before the symposium takes place and was ratified in the form of a Letter of Assignment.• Conference submission management system: The registration mechanism for the 2nd ISATrop2021 for participants, both non-presenters and oral presenters was carried out via online submission with the form provided on the arboriculture website ( https://arborikultur.ipb.ac.id/registration/ ). s for presenters are also uploaded when filling out the registration form. Speakers and participants can monitor and communicate with symposium organizers via email arborikultur@apps.ipb.ac.id and WhatsApp with contact person Ulfa Adzkia, S.Hut, M.Si as the symposium secretary (+62 822 6245 4154). Participants who have presented their papers at the 2nd ISATrop2021 on 21-22 June 2021, can then submit full papers via email arborikultur@apps.ipb.ac.id to the 2nd ISATrop2021 Editorial Team.• Number of submissions received: 62• Number of submissions sent for review: 53• Number of submissions accepted: 53• Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 85.48%• Average number of reviews per paper: 2 papers• Total number of reviewers involved: 27 reviewers• Any additional info on review process: -Full papers that have been received by the 2nd ISATrop2021 Editorial Team via email arborikultur@apps.ipb.ac.id from the participants have been going through a peer review mechanism as follows:1. The Editor Team allocates 1-3 papers to the 2nd ISATrop2021 Scientific Committees (reviewers).2. Each full paper along with the review form was sent to each reviewer via email arborikultur@apps.ipb.ac.id.3. The review and revision process were continued until the full paper is declared “Accepted by No Revision” by the reviewer.4. Full Paper that has been Accepted by Revision, then processed for plagiarism checking by TURNITIN, proofread checking by the proofreader team, and layout checking by the layout team.5. While waiting for the proof read and layout check results, the author was asked to submit a “Statement of Originality form” via email. The form template was provided by the editor team.6. The results of the proofread and layout in the form of “Galley Proof Draft” were then sent back to the author via email.7. Galley Proof Draft that has been checked and corrected by the author, then sent back to the editor team via email.8. The final layout team then rechecks the full paper to ensure that the format is in accordance with the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science format.• Contact person for queries: Name : Fifi Gus DwiyantiAffiliation: Department of Silviculture, Faculty of Forestry and Environment, IPB UniversityEmail : fifi_dwiyanti@apps.ipb.ac.id

Metropolitan’s “Winter Dreams” and The Great Gatsby

Abstract While many scholars have pointed to the close relationship of “Winter Dreams,” which Fitzgerald referred to as “A sort of 1st draft of the Gatsby idea,” to The Great Gatsby, most have used the revised 1926 version collected in All the Sad Young Men to support their comparisons of story to novel. The text of “Winter Dreams” in Fitzgerald’s third short story collection, however, is a dramatically revised version of the original story that appeared in the December 1922 issue of Metropolitan Magazine. A reading of the Metropolitan version of “Winter Dreams,” when done with the holograph manuscript of The Great Gatsby, the galley proofs, the revised galley proofs of the novel, and the novel itself in mind, suggests that at many stages of the composition of Gatsby, Fitzgerald had the Metropolitan text of “Winter Dreams” close at hand as he composed Gatsby . He borrowed near-exact phrasings from the story and placed them in the novel, and he appropriated key dramatic elements in the relationship between Dexter Green and Judy Jones in the story and integrated them with subtle changes that can be tracked through the various stages of composition of Gatsby into the relationship between Jay Gatsby and Daisy Fay Buchanan. In the end, the Metropolitan version of “Winter Dreams” reveals itself to be the text that most clearly bears out Fitzgerald’s description of the story as “A sort of 1st draft of the Gatsby idea.” Examining The Great Gatsby after a close reading of the Metropolitan version of “Winter Dreams” shows story and novel to be much more closely related than has previously been considered.

Announcements

Announcements

Los efectos de la censura franquista sobre la traducción catalana de narrativa en los años sesenta: una perspectiva panorámica

Este artículo se basa en los resultados obtenidos del análisis de los expedientes de censura de las novelas traducidas al catalán, publicadas a lo largo de los años sesenta, en el marco de la tesis doctoral «La censura franquista i la traducció catalana de narrativa als anys seixanta». Tras seleccionar las obras traducidas a lo largo de la década, hemos construido un corpus que nos ha permitido investigar de forma exhaustiva las repercusiones de la censura sobre la traducción catalana durante ese periodo. Mediante el examen de los informes conservados en el Archivo General de la Administración (AGA) y la lectura comparativa de los originales —o galeradas— y las versiones definitivas correspondientes, hemos reunido un conjunto de datos con el que pretendemos demostrar dicho control.

Christian mystery in determination of headwaters of the opera

The purpose of the article is tracking profound-structured connecting section medieval-rеnеssaence mystery and operatic classicists, which on ideological considerations in New and the most Latest time in the incidence of the past age did not notice then presentation was narrowed about semantic filling the operatic show and that became peg introduction decisions of operatic classicists on today. The methodology of the work is the culturology approach in science about art, presented including the school of B.Asafiev in Ukraine. The base place occupies the method of the genre-style benchmark analysis, hermeneutic, historian-descriptive methods, allowing within metaphysicians of the histories (A.Losev, N.Konrad) fix the semantic parallels of the formation of the humanitarian sphere and expressiveness of art. The scientific novelty of the study reveals itself in the independence of the building of the consequent steps of the historical relationships mystery and operas, but також in originality most march to this sort relationship from dramatic championship of the theatrics in music as style-genre opposition sacramental vocal and home sound expression with borrowing the ways of the comic manifestations and home dance plastics. Conclusions. The accepted contraposition of the first operas end XVI - a galley proof XVI-XVII century mystery and liturgical drama is refused not only by mystery symbology of plot, melody-declamatory presenting the text, obviously derived by church practical persons of psalmody-recitative, handhold on church origin vocal in singing, but also the most idea of dialogue in music forming show in his style-genre collations that incompatible with monologue principle of the church service, which excludes the penetration (in traditional church) of the home component in her sound structure.

Erratum: “Review of kerma‐area product, effective dose and dose conversion coefficients for non‐cardiac interventional fluoroscopy procedures” [Med. Phys. 47, 975‐982 (2020)

The units for air kerma-area product (PKA) and dose conversion coefficient (DCE) in this article1 were correct in the manuscript and published Accepted Article but were inadvertently changed during the copyediting process. The correct unit for PKA is Gy cm2, sometimes written as Gy·cm2. The correct unit for DCE is therefore mSv (Gy cm2) –1. Dose is multiplied by area, not divided. The incorrect units (Gy/cm2 and mSv (Gy/cm2)–1) appear on pages 977 and 979 and in Tables I and III. These changes were not brought to the attention of the author and were missed when the galley proofs were reviewed. The Results and Conclusions of this article are unchanged.

Last Bauman/lost Bauman: Fifty years on -Sketches in the Theory of Culture(1968) – The suppressed and now final book of Zygmunt Bauman (2018)

Zygmunt Bauman said of 1968 that he could not empathize with the enthusiasm of the Western Left, that this was some kind of party. In Eastern Europe 1968 stood for an end, not a hope. Soon Bauman would be forced into exile, opening a new and brilliant phase of his intellectual trajectory. Sketches in the Theory of Culture was his last Polish book. It was suppressed in 1968, the contract cancelled in retaliation against his support for reforming politics. Now it has been rediscovered, originally in galley proofs, and translated by Dariusz Brzezinski for Polity Press. Like much of Bauman’s work, it is sprawling and inclusive, taking in anthropology, sociology of culture, ethnology and semiotics. It anticipates his life-long enthusiasm for Lévi-Strauss; and it also foreshadows some of the themes much later to be identified as liquid modern, though it may be the case that the theme of continuity is rather social turbulence from postwar reconstruction to the travails of socialist Poland. In this paper I review some of its themes and its status in the body of his work, and offer some introductory remarks on its importance to the study of culture.

May 2020 Editorial in PES

May 2020 Editorial in <scp>PES</scp>