11. Zheng D, Vashist SK, Dykas MM, Saha S, Al-Rubeaan K, Lam E, Luong JH, Sheu F-S: Graphene versus multi-walled carbon nanotubes for electrochemical glucose biosensing. Materials 2013, 6:1011–1027.CrossRef 12. Razumiene J, Gureviciene V, Sakinyte I, Barkauskas J, Petrauskas K, Baronas R: Modified SWCNTs for reagentless glucose biosensor: electrochemical and mathematical characterization.

Electroanalysis 2013, 25:166–173.CrossRef 13. Raicopol M, Prun A, Damian C, Pilan L: Functionalized single-walled carbon nanotubes/polypyrrole composites for amperometric glucose biosensors. Nanoscale Res Lett 2013, 8:316.CrossRef 14. Jose MV, Marx S, Murata H, Koepsel RR, Russell AJ: Direct electron transfer in AZD6244 cost a mediator-free glucose oxidase-based carbon nanotube-coated biosensor. Carbon 2012, 50:4010–4020.CrossRef selleck chemical 15. Sotiropoulou S, Gavalas V, Vamvakaki V, Chaniotakis N: Novel carbon materials in biosensor systems. Biosens Bioelectron 2003, 18:211–215.CrossRef 16. Sotiropoulou S, Chaniotakis NA: Carbon nanotube array-based biosensor. Anal Bioanal Chem 2003, 375:103–105. 17. Zhang Y-Q, Tao M-L, Shen W-D, Zhou Y-Z, Ding Y, Ma Y, Zhou W-L: Immobilization of L -asparaginase on the microparticles of the natural silk sericin protein and

its characters. Biomaterials 2004, 25:3751–3759.CrossRef 18. Guisan JM: Immobilization of Enzymes and Cells. 2nd edition. Totowa: Humana Press; 2006.CrossRef 19. Chaniotakis NA: Enzyme stabilization strategies based on electrolytes and polyelectrolytes for biosensor applications. Anal Bioanal Chem 2004, 378:89–95.CrossRef 20. Skoog DA, West DM, Holler FJ: Fundamentals of Analytical Chemistry. 5th

edition. Philadelphia: Saunders College Publishing; 1988. 21. Grieshaber D, MacKenzie R, Vörös J, Reimhult E: Electrochemical biosensors-sensor principles and architectures. Protein kinase N1 Sensors 2008, 8:1400–1458.CrossRef 22. Cao Q, Han SJ, Tulevski GS, Zhu Y, Lu DD, Haensch W: Arrays of single-walled carbon nanotubes with full surface coverage for high-performance electronics. Nat Nanotechnol 2013, 8:180–186.CrossRef 23. Park H, Afzali A, Han S-J, Tulevski GS, Franklin AD, Tersoff J, Hannon JB, Haensch W: High-density integration of carbon nanotubes via chemical self-assembly. Nature Nanotech 2012, 7:787–791.CrossRef 24. Lee D, Cui T: Low-cost, transparent, and flexible single-walled carbon nanotube nanocomposite based ion-sensitive field-effect transistors for pH/glucose sensing. Biosens Bioelectron 2010, 25:2259–2264.CrossRef 25. Lee D, Cui T: Layer-by-layer self-assembled single-walled carbon nanotubes based ion-sensitive conductometric glucose biosensors. Sens J, IEEE 2009, 9:449–456.CrossRef 26. Lee D, Cui T: pH-dependent conductance behaviors of layer-by-layer self-assembled carboxylated carbon nanotube multilayer thin-film sensors. J Vacuum Sci Technol B: Microelect Nano Struct 2009, 27:842.CrossRef 27. Ahmadi MT, Tan MLP, Ismail R, Arora VK: The high-field drift velocity in degenerately-doped silicon nanowires.

, Madison, WI). Alignment analysis was also performed between the identified epitopes and other associated flavivirus strains, including the members of JEV serocomplex, and another three antigenically related flaviviruses, DENV (type 1-4), YFV and TBEV, the factors of isolation time and geographical location of all strains were considered. Acknowledgements The authors thank Dr. Peter Wilker for editing the manuscript. This study was supported by National High-Tech Research and Development Program of China (No. 2011AA10A212) and

Heilongjiang Natural Science Foundation of China (No. ZJN-0602-01). References 1. Garmendia AE, Van Kruiningen HJ, French RA: The West Nile virus: its recent emergence in North America. Microbes Infect 2001, 3:223–229.PubMedCrossRef 2. Centers for Disease Ro-3306 manufacturer Control and Prevention: 2010 West Nile Virus Human Infections in the United States. 3. Weissenbock H, Kolodziejek J, Url A, Lussy H, Rebel-Bauder B, Nowotny N: Emergence of Usutu virus, an African mosquito-borne flavivirus of the Japanese encephalitis virus group, central Europe. Emerg Infect Dis 2002, 8:652–656.PubMed 4. Heinz FXCM, Purcell RH, Gould EA, Howard CR, Tucidinostat solubility dmso Houghton HM,

Moormann RJM, Rice CM, Thiel HJ: Family Flaviviridae. San Diego, CA: Virus taxonomy 7th report of the international committee for the taxonomy of viruses 2000. 5. Brinton MA: The molecular biology of West Nile Virus: a new invader of the western hemisphere. Ann Rev Microbiol 2002, 56:371–402.CrossRef 6. Soleto E, Fernandez-Pinero J, Llorente F, Agüero M, Hoefle U, Blanco JM, Jiménez-Clavero MA: Characterization of West Nile virus isolates from Spain: New insights into the distinct West Nile virus eco-epidemiology in the Western Mediterranean. Tangeritin Virology 2009, 395:289–297.CrossRef 7. Chambers TJ, Hahn CS, Galler R, Rice CM: Flavivirus genome organization, expression, and replication. Annu

Rev Microbiol 1990, 44:649–688.PubMedCrossRef 8. Lindenbach BD, Rice CM: Trans -complementation of yellow fever virus NS1 reveals a role in early RNA replication. J Virol 1997, 71:9608–9617.PubMed 9. Min Chung K, Liszewski KM, Grant N, Davis AE, Townsend RR, Fremont DH, Atkinson JP, Diamond MS: West Nile virus nonstructural protein NS1 inhibits complement activation by binding the regulatory protein factor H. PNAS 2006, 103:19111–19116.CrossRef 10. Shi PY, Wong SJ: Serologic diagnosis of West Nile virus infection. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2003, 3:733–741.PubMedCrossRef 11. Koraka P, Zeller H, Niedrig M, Osterhaus AD, Groen J: Reactivity of serum samples from patients with a flavivirus infection measured by immunofluorescence assay and ELISA. Microbes Infect 2002, 4:1209–1215.PubMedCrossRef 12. McLean RG, Ubico SR, Bourne D, Komar N: West Nile virus in livestock and wildlife. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 2008, 267:271–308. 13.

1). Creeks, streams and rivers were defined by their progressively higher order, and this classification was confirmed by testing if the classified stretches had significantly different river bed width. Since there was a clear significant difference in river bed width between creeks, streams and rivers, the distinction was considered reliable. selleck chemicals I derived five land-cover classes from the 1990 CORINE land-cover data (derived from classification of Landsat TM 30m resolution multispectral imagery) within a 1.5 km wide buffer of the waterway. The classes are: extensive agriculture (cereal plantations) (58%), cork oak woodland

(23%), holm oak woodland (6%), intensive agriculture (e.g., tomato, corn; 1%), and other (including Eucalyptus spp. and Pinus spp. plantations, urban areas, etc.; 12%). I used a digital data layer of watercourses in the study area overlain on the land-cover data to identify

all possible 2 km stretches dominated by a single land-cover type within the waterway buffers. Seventy-two sampling sites were randomly selected from this layer and screened for site accessibility. Two river transects surrounded by holm oak woodlands were inaccessible, resulting in a final sample of 70 transects. Field data collection I visited all sites once for plant identification between December 2003 to February 2004, and revisited each transect between June to September 2004 to assess any change in environmental context variables Selleck Foretinib (see below). The two seasons represent the variability of surface water in the watercourses, a key factor affecting plant establishment

and growth. Each Fludarabine 2 km transect was subdivided into 200 m segments, in which plant species presence was recorded. This distance was selected as subsamples because it matches the minimum resolvable unit in the land cover map (approximately 200 m2), and is comparable to similar surveys along riparian systems in the Iberian Peninsula (Aguiar and Ferreira 2005). Each waterway was surveyed using a transect parallel to the right waterway margin, which I walked while recording the presence or absence of every woody plant species within 5 m of the bank. All plant species were identified in the field, and samples of unknown species were collected and identified in the laboratory. The identification was resolved to the finest taxonomic status possible, with all specimens categorized at genus or species levels, especially in the case of the willow, moor and heath species, which lacked diagnostic features during the sampling months. Herbaceous species were excluded from the analysis because of the lack of consistently identifiable features (due to either phenology or herbivory).