Thesis (B.A.Hons.) -- University of Adelaide, Dept. of History, 1973.

Tesis para optar al grado de Magíster en Estudios Latinoamericanos

A preliminary experiment evaluated the effect of plant growth regulators (PGRs) or mechanical stimulation (brushing) on branching of sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum L.), cilantro (Coriandrum sativium L.), and parsley (Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Nyman ex A.W. Hill). Dikegulac sodium increased branching in sweet basil up to 400 ppm and thereafter branching decreased compared to control plants. Ethephon increased branching in sweet basil as rate increased up to 500 mg/L compared to control plants. Mechanical stimulation resulted in a significant decrease in plant height, plant width, number of branches, and number of leaders for all species compared to control plants. Benzyladenine and metaconazole had no effect on these species. In the main experiment the effect of colored shade cloth and PGRs or brushing were assessed on sweet basil, Thai basil (Ocimum basilicum "Siam Queen" L.), Genovese basil (Ocimum basilicum "Genovese" L.), cilantro, and parsley. All crops were grown under conventional black, blue ChromatiNet®, or red ChromatiNet® shade cloth. Subplot treatments included: dikegulac sodium at 400 ppm; benzyladenine at 300 ppm; ethephon at 350 ppm; brushing at 10 strokes applied twice daily. We assessed volatile compunds on all crops and conducted a sensory panel on sweet basil. Red shade cloth increased the number of branches and shoot fresh weight in sweet basil, Thai basil, and Genovese basil. Number of leaf stalks and shoot fresh weight also increased in cilantro plants grown under red shade cloth. Red shade cloth increased fresh weight of parsley plants. Sensory panel results showed a preference for the appearance of sweet basil grown under red shade cloth. Red shade cloth can be used to grow sweet basil, Thai basil, Genovese basil, cilantro, and parsley plants that have more branches and higher fresh weights. / Master of Science

[pt] A Escola de Gênova sobre a Interpretação Jurídica, para alguns, ou o Realismo Jurídico Genovês, para outros, é corrente teórica italiana que lança luz sobre uma série de problemas que envolvem a interpretação jurídica; especialmente, aqueles vinculados ao caráter discricionário do intérprete ao interpretar um documento normativo. Este trabalho faz uma reconstrução dos problemas jurídicos interpretativos mais consistentes que geraram as preocupações da Escola, e apresenta as principais reflexões dos autores a ela vinculados. Seus principais fundamentos são: a postura ceticista frente à interpretação jurídica e as decorrências analíticas: separação entre texto e norma e necessidade de despolitização dos juízes. Apresenta-se, neste trabalho, os argumentos principais que marcam um bloco de posições dos autores da Escola, que subsistem às críticas e que marcam o pensamento genovês. São estes: a criação de um modelo meta-teórico e metajusrisprudencial de análise do direito; o clareamento das discussões entre o formalismo jurídico e o ceticismo interpretativo; as críticas ao objetivismo moral; a separação analítica entre texto e norma; a reflexão crítica sobre o modelo tradicional de separação dos poderes e as noções e os conceitos de sistema, decisão, ponderação e discricionariedade como limitações da politização do judiciário. / [en] The Genoa School on Legal Interpretation, for some, or Genoese Legal Realism, for others, is an Italian theoretical current that sheds light on a series of problems involving legal interpretation; especially those linked to the interpreter s discretion when interpreting a normative document. This work reconstructs the most consistent interpretive legal problems that generated the School s concerns, and presents the main reflections of the authors linked to it. Its main foundations are: the skeptical attitude towards legal interpretation and the analytical consequences: separation between text and norm and the need for depoliticization of the judges. In this work, the main arguments that mark a block of positions of the authors of the School, that remain with criticisms and that mark the Genoese thought are presented. These are: the creation of a meta-theoretical and meta-jurisprudential model of law analysis; the clarification of the discussions between legal formalism and interpretive skepticism; criticisms of moral objectivism; the analytical separation between text and standard; critical reflection on the traditional model of separation of powers and the notions and concepts of system, decision, weighting and discretion as limitations of the politicization of the judiciary.