@article{SrokaGodunkoRutschmannetal.2019,
  author    = {Sroka, Pavel and Godunko, Roman J. and Rutschmann, Sereina and Angeli, Kamila B. and Salles, Frederico F. and Gattolliat, Jean-Luc},
  title     = {A new species of Bungona in Turkey (Ephemeroptera, Baetidae)},
  series = {Zoosytematics and evolution},
  volume    = {95},
  journal   = {Zoosytematics and evolution},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Pensoft Publ.},
  address   = {Sofia},
  issn      = {1860-0743},
  doi       = {10.3897/zse.95.29487},
  pages     = {1 -- 13},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {By using an integrative approach, we describe a new species of mayfly, Bungona (Chopralla) pontica sp. n., from Turkey. The discovery of a representative of the tropical mayfly genus Bungona in the Middle East is rather unexpected. The new species shows all the main morphological characters of the subgenus Chopralla, which has its closest related species occurring in southeastern Asia. Barcoding clearly indicated that the new species represents an independent lineage isolated for a very long time from other members of the complex. The claw is equipped with two rows of three or four flattened denticles. This condition is a unique feature of Bungona (Chopralla) pontica sp. n. among West Palaearctic mayfly species. Within the subgenus Chopralla, the species can be identified by the presence of a simple, not bifid right prostheca (also present only in Bungona (Chopralla) liebenauae (Soldan, Braasch \& Muu, 1987)), the shape of the labial palp, and the absence of protuberances on pronotum.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{Scianna2018,
  author    = {Scianna, Bastian Matteo},
  title     = {A Blueprint for Successful Peacekeeping?},
  series = {The international history review},
  volume    = {41},
  journal   = {The international history review},
  number    = {3},
  publisher = {Routledge, Taylor \& Francis Group},
  address   = {Abingdon},
  issn      = {0707-5332},
  doi       = {10.1080/07075332.2018.1431804},
  pages     = {650 -- 672},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {On 6 June 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon to fight the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Between August 1982 and February 1984, the US, France, Britain and Italy deployed a Multinational Force (MNF) to Beirut. Its task was to act as an interposition force to bolster the government and to bring peace to the people. The mission is often forgotten or merely remembered in context with the bombing of US Marines' barracks. However, an analysis of the Italian contingent shows that the MNF was not doomed to fail and could accomplish its task when operational and diplomatic efforts were coordinated. The Italian commander in Beirut, General Franco Angioni, followed a successful approach that sustained neutrality, respectful behaviour and minimal force, which resulted in a qualified success of the Italian efforts.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{DouglasAkkarAmerietal.2014,
  author    = {Douglas, John and Akkar, Sinan and Ameri, Gabriele and Bard, Pierre-Yves and Bindi, Dino and Bommer, Julian J. and Bora, Sanjay Singh and Cotton, Fabrice and Derras, Boumediene and Hermkes, Marcel and Kuehn, Nicolas Martin and Luzi, Lucia and Massa, Marco and Pacor, Francesca and Riggelsen, Carsten and Sandikkaya, M. Abdullah and Scherbaum, Frank and Stafford, Peter J. and Traversa, Paola},
  title     = {Comparisons among the five ground-motion models developed using RESORCE for the prediction of response spectral accelerations due to earthquakes in Europe and the Middle East},
  series = {Bulletin of earthquake engineering : official publication of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {Bulletin of earthquake engineering : official publication of the European Association for Earthquake Engineering},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Dordrecht},
  issn      = {1570-761X},
  doi       = {10.1007/s10518-013-9522-8},
  pages     = {341 -- 358},
  year      = {2014},
  abstract  = {This article presents comparisons among the five ground-motion models described in other articles within this special issue, in terms of data selection criteria, characteristics of the models and predicted peak ground and response spectral accelerations. Comparisons are also made with predictions from the Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) models to which the models presented here have similarities (e.g. a common master database has been used) but also differences (e.g. some models in this issue are nonparametric). As a result of the differing data selection criteria and derivation techniques the predicted median ground motions show considerable differences (up to a factor of two for certain scenarios), particularly for magnitudes and distances close to or beyond the range of the available observations. The predicted influence of style-of-faulting shows much variation among models whereas site amplification factors are more similar, with peak amplification at around 1s. These differences are greater than those among predictions from the NGA models. The models for aleatory variability (sigma), however, are similar and suggest that ground-motion variability from this region is slightly higher than that predicted by the NGA models, based primarily on data from California and Taiwan.},
  language  = {en}
}