Zeszyty czasopisma

Tom 31 (2022): Zeszyt 2 (July 2022)

Tom 31 (2022): Zeszyt 1 (March 2022)

Tom 30 (2021): Zeszyt 4 (November 2021)

Tom 30 (2021): Zeszyt 3 (July 2021)

Tom 30 (2021): Zeszyt 2 (May 2021)

Tom 30 (2021): Zeszyt 1 (March 2021)

Tom 29 (2020): Zeszyt 3 (December 2020)

Tom 29 (2020): Zeszyt 2 (August 2020)

Tom 29 (2020): Zeszyt 1 (April 2020)

Tom 28 (2019): Zeszyt 7 (December 2019)

Tom 28 (2019): Zeszyt 6 (August 2019)

Tom 28 (2019): Zeszyt 5 (May 2019)

Tom 28 (2018): Zeszyt 4 (December 2018)

Tom 28 (2018): Zeszyt 3 (October 2018)

Tom 28 (2018): Zeszyt 2 (August 2018)

Tom 28 (2018): Zeszyt 1 (April 2018)

Tom 27 (2017): Zeszyt 8 (December 2017)

Tom 27 (2017): Zeszyt 7 (September 2017)

Tom 27 (2017): Zeszyt 6 (April 2017)

Tom 27 (2017): Zeszyt 5 (January 2017)

Tom 27 (2016): Zeszyt 4 (October 2016)

Tom 27 (2016): Zeszyt 3 (July 2016)

Tom 27 (2016): Zeszyt 2 (April 2016)

Tom 27 (2016): Zeszyt 1 (January 2016)

Tom 26 (2015): Zeszyt 7 (September 2015)

Tom 26 (2015): Zeszyt 6 (June 2015)

Tom 26 (2015): Zeszyt 5 (March 2015)

Tom 26 (2014): Zeszyt 4 (December 2014)

Tom 26 (2014): Zeszyt 3 (September 2014)

Tom 26 (2014): Zeszyt 2 (July 2014)

Tom 26 (2014): Zeszyt 1 (April 2014)

Tom 25 (2013): Zeszyt 8 (December 2013)

Tom 25 (2013): Zeszyt 7 (September 2013)

Tom 25 (2013): Zeszyt 6 (June 2013)

Tom 25 (2013): Zeszyt 5 (March 2013)

Tom 25 (2012): Zeszyt 4 (December 2012)

Tom 25 (2012): Zeszyt 3 (August 2012)

Tom 25 (2012): Zeszyt 2 (June 2012)

Tom 25 (2012): Zeszyt 1 (February 2012)

Tom 24 (2011): Zeszyt 6 (November 2011)

Tom 24 (2011): Zeszyt 5 (May 2011)

Tom 24 (2011): Zeszyt 4 (January 2011)

Tom 24 (2010): Zeszyt 3 (November 2010)

Tom 24 (2010): Zeszyt 2 (July 2010)

Tom 24 (2010): Zeszyt 1 (April 2010)

Tom 23 (2009): Zeszyt 6 (December 2009)

Tom 23 (2009): Zeszyt 5 (September 2009)

Tom 23 (2009): Zeszyt 4 (May 2009)

Tom 23 (2008): Zeszyt 3 (December 2008)

Tom 23 (2008): Zeszyt 2 (August 2008)

Tom 23 (2008): Zeszyt 1 (April 2008)

Tom 22 (2007): Zeszyt 5 (June 2007)

Tom 22 (2007): Zeszyt 4 (January 2007)

Tom 22 (2006): Zeszyt 3 (October 2006)

Tom 22 (2006): Zeszyt 2 (July 2006)

Tom 22 (2006): Zeszyt 1 (April 2006)

Tom 21 (2005): Zeszyt 8 (December 2005)

Tom 21 (2005): Zeszyt 7 (October 2005)

Tom 21 (2005): Zeszyt 6 (July 2005)

Tom 21 (2005): Zeszyt 5 (April 2005)

Tom 21 (2004): Zeszyt 4 (December 2004)

Tom 21 (2004): Zeszyt 3 (October 2004)

Tom 21 (2004): Zeszyt 2 (July 2004)

Tom 21 (2004): Zeszyt 1 (March 2004)

Tom 20 (2003): Zeszyt 8 (December 2003)

Tom 20 (2003): Zeszyt 7 (November 2003)

Tom 20 (2003): Zeszyt 6 (July 2003)

Tom 20 (2003): Zeszyt 5 (March 2003)

Tom 20 (2002): Zeszyt 4 (December 2002)

Tom 20 (2002): Zeszyt 3 (August 2002)

Tom 20 (2002): Zeszyt 2 (June 2002)

Tom 20 (2002): Zeszyt 1 (February 2002)

Tom 19 (2001): Zeszyt 7 (October 2001)

Tom 19 (2001): Zeszyt 6 (July 2001)

Tom 19 (2001): Zeszyt 5 (April 2001)

Tom 19 (2001): Zeszyt 4 (January 2001)

Tom 19 (2000): Zeszyt 3 (October 2000)

Tom 19 (2000): Zeszyt 2 (July 2000)

Tom 19 (2000): Zeszyt 1 (April 2000)

Tom 18 (1999): Zeszyt 6 (December 1999)

Tom 18 (1999): Zeszyt 5 (July 1999)

Tom 18 (1999): Zeszyt 4 (April 1999)

Tom 18 (1998): Zeszyt 3 (December 1998)

Tom 18 (1998): Zeszyt 2 (August 1998)

Tom 18 (1998): Zeszyt 1 (April 1998)

Tom 17 (1997): Zeszyt 3 (December 1997)

Tom 17 (1997): Zeszyt 2 (September 1997)

Tom 17 (1996): Zeszyt 1 (December 1996)

Tom 16 (1995): Zeszyt 4 (November 1995)

Tom 16 (1995): Zeszyt 3 (July 1995)

Tom 16 (1994): Zeszyt 2 (June 1994)

Tom 16 (1994): Zeszyt 1 (May 1994)

Tom 15 (1992): Zeszyt 3 (November 1992)

Tom 15 (1992): Zeszyt 2 (April 1992)

Tom 15 (1991): Zeszyt 1 (August 1991)

Tom 14 (1990): Zeszyt 6 (June 1990)

Tom 14 (1989): Zeszyt 5 (October 1989)

Tom 14 (1989): Zeszyt 4 (February 1989)

Tom 14 (1989): Zeszyt 3 (January 1989)

Tom 14 (1988): Zeszyt 2 (October 1988)

Tom 14 (1987): Zeszyt 1 (December 1987)

Tom 13 (1986): Zeszyt 5 (December 1986)

Tom 13 (1986): Zeszyt 4 (August 1986)

Tom 13 (1986): Zeszyt 3 (July 1986)

Tom 13 (1985): Zeszyt 2 (December 1985)

Tom 13 (1985): Zeszyt 1 (January 1985)

Tom 12 (1984): Zeszyt 5 (November 1984)

Tom 12 (1984): Zeszyt 4 (July 1984)

Tom 12 (1984): Zeszyt 3 (February 1984)

Tom 12 (1983): Zeszyt 2 (June 1983)

Tom 12 (1983): Zeszyt 1 (February 1983)

Tom 11 (1982): Zeszyt 5 (November 1982)

Tom 11 (1982): Zeszyt 4 (August 1982)

Tom 11 (1982): Zeszyt 3 (January 1982)

Tom 11 (1981): Zeszyt 2 (September 1981)

Tom 11 (1981): Zeszyt 1 (March 1981)

Tom 10 (1980): Zeszyt 3 (October 1980)

Tom 10 (1980): Zeszyt 2 (July 1980)

Tom 10 (1979): Zeszyt 1 (December 1979)

Tom 9 (1978): Zeszyt 5 (December 1978)

Tom 9 (1978): Zeszyt 4 (July 1978)

Tom 9 (1977): Zeszyt 3 (October 1977)

Tom 9 (1977): Zeszyt 2 (June 1977)

Tom 9 (1977): Zeszyt 1 (April 1977)

Tom 8 (1976): Zeszyt 7 (October 1976)

Tom 8 (1976): Zeszyt 6 (June 1976)

Tom 8 (1976): Zeszyt 5 (March 1976)

Tom 8 (1975): Zeszyt 4 (December 1975)

Tom 8 (1975): Zeszyt 3 (August 1975)

Tom 8 (1975): Zeszyt 2 (May 1975)

Tom 8 (1975): Zeszyt 1 (January 1975)

Tom 7 (1974): Zeszyt 5 (September 1974)

Tom 7 (1974): Zeszyt 4 (April 1974)

Tom 7 (1973): Zeszyt 3 (November 1973)

Tom 7 (1973): Zeszyt 2 (June 1973)

Tom 7 (1973): Zeszyt 1 (January 1973)

Tom 6 (1972): Zeszyt 5 (October 1972)

Tom 6 (1972): Zeszyt 4 (August 1972)

Tom 6 (1972): Zeszyt 3 (March 1972)

Tom 6 (1971): Zeszyt 2 (September 1971)

Tom 6 (1971): Zeszyt 1 (July 1971)

Tom 5 (1970): Zeszyt 6 (December 1970)

Tom 5 (1970): Zeszyt 5 (November 1970)

Tom 5 (1970): Zeszyt 4 (August 1970)

Tom 5 (1969): Zeszyt 3 (December 1969)

Tom 5 (1969): Zeszyt 2 (August 1969)

Tom 5 (1969): Zeszyt 1 (June 1969)

Tom 4 (1968): Zeszyt 7 (December 1968)

Tom 4 (1968): Zeszyt 6 (November 1968)

Tom 4 (1968): Zeszyt 5 (July 1968)

Tom 4 (1968): Zeszyt 4 (May 1968)

Tom 4 (1968): Zeszyt 3 (February 1968)

Tom 4 (1967): Zeszyt 2 (October 1967)

Tom 4 (1967): Zeszyt 1 (August 1967)

Tom 3 (1966): Zeszyt 9 (December 1966)

Tom 3 (1966): Zeszyt 8 (December 1966)

Tom 3 (1966): Zeszyt 7 (November 1966)

Tom 3 (1966): Zeszyt 6 (September 1966)

Tom 3 (1966): Zeszyt 5 (May 1966)

Tom 3 (1965): Zeszyt 4 (October 1965)

Tom 3 (1965): Zeszyt 3 (August 1965)

Tom 3 (1965): Zeszyt 2 (May 1965)

Tom 3 (1965): Zeszyt 1 (April 1965)

Tom 2 (1964): Zeszyt 7 (November 1964)

Tom 2 (1964): Zeszyt 6 (October 1964)

Tom 2 (1964): Zeszyt 5 (May 1964)

Tom 2 (1964): Zeszyt 4 (February 1964)

Tom 2 (1963): Zeszyt 3 (October 1963)

Tom 2 (1963): Zeszyt 2 (June 1963)

Tom 2 (1963): Zeszyt 1 (March 1963)

Tom 1 (1962): Zeszyt 10 (December 1962)

Tom 1 (1962): Zeszyt 9 (December 1962)

Tom 1 (1962): Zeszyt 8 (November 1962)

Tom 1 (1962): Zeszyt 7 (November 1962)

Tom 1 (1962): Zeszyt 6 (July 1962)

Tom 1 (1962): Zeszyt 5 (February 1962)

Tom 1 (1961): Zeszyt 4 (November 1961)

Tom 1 (1961): Zeszyt 3 (August 1961)

Tom 1 (1961): Zeszyt 2 (May 1961)

Tom 1 (1961): Zeszyt 1 (January 1961)

Informacje o czasopiśmie
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
2719-9509
Pierwsze wydanie
01 Jan 1992
Częstotliwość wydawania
4 razy w roku
Języki
Angielski

Wyszukiwanie

Tom 17 (1997): Zeszyt 2 (September 1997)

Informacje o czasopiśmie
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
2719-9509
Pierwsze wydanie
01 Jan 1992
Częstotliwość wydawania
4 razy w roku
Języki
Angielski

Wyszukiwanie

6 Artykułów
Otwarty dostęp

Editorial

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 29 - 29

Abstrakt

Otwarty dostęp

Alternative Forms of Storage Protection: Biological Insecticides for the Control of the Cigarette Beetle (Lasiodermaserricorne) and the Tobacco Moth (Ephestiaelutella)

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 31 - 47

Abstrakt

Abstract

A large number of physical and chemical pest control methods have been developed up to now in order to ensure the effective protection of stored tobacco and tobacco products. These methods include the use of fumigants and insecticides, treatment of baled tobacco in cold chambers, monitoring the extent of infestation with pheromone traps and, the most important preventive measure of all, maintaining a strict programme to ensure hygienic storage conditions. To date, very little serious consideration has been given to the practical use of biologically based insecticides in storage pest control. Compared with synthetically-produced pesticides, however, they often have the advantage of being significantly less toxic to users and the environment, while retaining a comparable level of effectiveness on the target organism. One reason for this neglect may certainly be found in the somewhat higher price of bioinsecticides. Another hurdle is presented by the complex mixture of different biological pesticides, which makes it more difficult to obtain official approval for their use in some countries. One possible alternative is, for example, the use of Bacillus thuringiensis endotoxin preparations. The insecticidal activity of certain B.t. kurstaki or B.t. tenebrionis strains against the tobacco moth and cigarette beetle has already been sufficiently documented. Recent research has also looked at the possibility of using natural substances, such as extracts from the neem tree (Azadirachtaindica), as storage protectants. Another very promising development is based on the autodissemination technique, whereby a modified pheromone trap in combination with entomopathogenic viruses or fungi could help to achieve a dramatic increase in mortality rates in stored tobacco pests. The chemical and biological properties of these bioinsecticides will be presented here and their advantages and disadvantages as storage protectants for tobacco discussed.

Otwarty dostęp

The Removal of Stems from Cut Tobacco

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 49 - 55

Abstrakt

Abstract

The presence of stems in cut tobacco is detrimental to cigarette quality, resulting in problems during production particularly on today's high-speed makers. Incomplete threshing and the use of unthreshed semi-Oriental tobaccos can increase the stem content in the cut tobacco considerably. The percentage of stems present in cut tobacco was investigated by HauniMaschinenbau AG specifically for semi-Oriental tobacco. Their findings show that not all stems present in the strips or lamina after cutting are classified as “objectionable”. However, the percentage of objectionable stems in the cut tobacco is not inconsiderable and depends on the thickness of the stems present. Reducing the objectionable stem contingent in cut tobacco is therefore a crucial concern of many cigarette manufacturers who set great store on ensuring high-quality product. HauniMaschinenbau AG offers a cut tobacco separator which has been specially designed for this purpose and also used as a cooler. A corresponding model is available in the HauniMaschinenbau AG pilot plant in Hamburg for tests using the customers’ own tobacco.

Otwarty dostęp

Conference Report - Fifty Years of Tobacco Science and Technology: Tobacco Chemists” Research Conference (TCRC), October, 1996

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 57 - 58

Abstrakt

Otwarty dostęp

Conference Report - Seventy Years of Tobacco Research at the Landesanstalt Für Pflanzenbau in Forchheim (Forchheim Institut of Plant Cultivation)

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 59 - 59

Abstrakt

Otwarty dostęp

Tobacco Smoke Components

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 61 - 66

Abstrakt

6 Artykułów
Otwarty dostęp

Editorial

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 29 - 29

Abstrakt

Otwarty dostęp

Alternative Forms of Storage Protection: Biological Insecticides for the Control of the Cigarette Beetle (Lasiodermaserricorne) and the Tobacco Moth (Ephestiaelutella)

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 31 - 47

Abstrakt

Abstract

A large number of physical and chemical pest control methods have been developed up to now in order to ensure the effective protection of stored tobacco and tobacco products. These methods include the use of fumigants and insecticides, treatment of baled tobacco in cold chambers, monitoring the extent of infestation with pheromone traps and, the most important preventive measure of all, maintaining a strict programme to ensure hygienic storage conditions. To date, very little serious consideration has been given to the practical use of biologically based insecticides in storage pest control. Compared with synthetically-produced pesticides, however, they often have the advantage of being significantly less toxic to users and the environment, while retaining a comparable level of effectiveness on the target organism. One reason for this neglect may certainly be found in the somewhat higher price of bioinsecticides. Another hurdle is presented by the complex mixture of different biological pesticides, which makes it more difficult to obtain official approval for their use in some countries. One possible alternative is, for example, the use of Bacillus thuringiensis endotoxin preparations. The insecticidal activity of certain B.t. kurstaki or B.t. tenebrionis strains against the tobacco moth and cigarette beetle has already been sufficiently documented. Recent research has also looked at the possibility of using natural substances, such as extracts from the neem tree (Azadirachtaindica), as storage protectants. Another very promising development is based on the autodissemination technique, whereby a modified pheromone trap in combination with entomopathogenic viruses or fungi could help to achieve a dramatic increase in mortality rates in stored tobacco pests. The chemical and biological properties of these bioinsecticides will be presented here and their advantages and disadvantages as storage protectants for tobacco discussed.

Otwarty dostęp

The Removal of Stems from Cut Tobacco

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 49 - 55

Abstrakt

Abstract

The presence of stems in cut tobacco is detrimental to cigarette quality, resulting in problems during production particularly on today's high-speed makers. Incomplete threshing and the use of unthreshed semi-Oriental tobaccos can increase the stem content in the cut tobacco considerably. The percentage of stems present in cut tobacco was investigated by HauniMaschinenbau AG specifically for semi-Oriental tobacco. Their findings show that not all stems present in the strips or lamina after cutting are classified as “objectionable”. However, the percentage of objectionable stems in the cut tobacco is not inconsiderable and depends on the thickness of the stems present. Reducing the objectionable stem contingent in cut tobacco is therefore a crucial concern of many cigarette manufacturers who set great store on ensuring high-quality product. HauniMaschinenbau AG offers a cut tobacco separator which has been specially designed for this purpose and also used as a cooler. A corresponding model is available in the HauniMaschinenbau AG pilot plant in Hamburg for tests using the customers’ own tobacco.

Otwarty dostęp

Conference Report - Fifty Years of Tobacco Science and Technology: Tobacco Chemists” Research Conference (TCRC), October, 1996

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 57 - 58

Abstrakt

Otwarty dostęp

Conference Report - Seventy Years of Tobacco Research at the Landesanstalt Für Pflanzenbau in Forchheim (Forchheim Institut of Plant Cultivation)

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 59 - 59

Abstrakt

Otwarty dostęp

Tobacco Smoke Components

Data publikacji: 06 Jan 2015
Zakres stron: 61 - 66

Abstrakt

Zaplanuj zdalną konferencję ze Sciendo