bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
MicroRNA-30c-2-3p targets STRIP2 to suppress malignant progression of gastric cancer cells
Authors: Wu Junfei , Lu Guochun , Zhou Shengkun , Jin Zier , Fang Fu 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
MicroRNA plays a crucial part in genesis and development of gastric cancer (GC). We uncovered that microRNA-30c-2-3p was down-regulated in GC tissue and cell lines. Suppression of microRNA-30c-2-3p promoted progression of GC cells in vitro. STRIP2 was confirmed as a target for microRNA-30c-2-3p. MicroRNA-30c-2-3p overexpression remarkably suppressed cell malignant behaviours, while reintroduction of STRIP2 partially restored the anticancer effect of microRNA-30c-2-3p. Taken together, these findings suggested that microRNA-30c-2-3p acted as a candidate tumour suppressor in GC by directly targeting STRIP2. Therefore, microRNA-30c-2-3p can be used as a towardly GC therapeutic target.
Practical genetic control strategies for industrial bioprocesses
Authors: Moore Jonathan C , Ramos Itzel , Van Dien Stephen 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
Optimization of metabolism to maximize production of bio-based chemicals must consistently balance cellular resources for biocatalyst growth and desired compound synthesis. This mini-review discusses synthetic biology strategies for dynamically controlling expression of genes to enable dual-phase fermentations in which growth and production are separated into dedicated phases. Emphasis is placed on practical examples which can be reliably scaled to commercial production with the current state of technology. Recent case studies are presented, and recommendations are provided for environmental signals and genetic control circuits.
The hidden world within plants: metatranscriptomics unveils the complexity of wood microbiomes
Authors: Nerva Luca , Garcia Jadran F , Favaretto Francesco , Giudice Gaetano , Moffa Loredana , Sandrini Marco , Cantu Dario , Zanzotto Alessandro , Gardiman Massimo , Velasco Riccardo , Gambino Giorgio , Chitarra Walter 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
The importance of plants as complex entities influenced by genomes of the associated microorganisms is now seen as a new source of variability for a more sustainable agriculture, also in the light of ongoing climate change. For this reason, we investigated through metatranscriptomics whether the taxa profile and behaviour of microbial communities associated with the wood of 20-year-old grapevine plants are influenced by the health status of the host. We report for the first time a metatranscriptome from a complex tissue in a real environment, highlighting that this approach is able to define the microbial community better than referenced transcriptomic approaches. In parallel, the use of total RNA enabled the identification of bacterial taxa in healthy samples that, once isolated from the original wood tissue, displayed potential biocontrol activities against a wood-degrading fungal taxon. Furthermore, we revealed an unprecedented high number of new viral entities (~120 new viral species among 180 identified) associated with a single and limited environment and with potential impact on the whole holobiont. Taken together, our results suggest a complex multitrophic interaction in which the viral community also plays a crucial role in raising new ecological questions for the exploitation of microbial-assisted sustainable agriculture.
The Institutional Framework
Authors: Blanco Luis Ortiz , Jörgens Konstantin 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This introductory chapter provides an overview of the EU competition procedure. The basic EU competition provisions applicable to businesses or undertakings are Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Both provisions are an important part of the EU legal order and pursue one of the main objectives of the TFEU and the Treaty on European Union (TEU), namely that of achieving an internal market. Article 101(1) TFEU prohibits agreements and arrangements between undertakings that affect trade between Member States and which have as their object or effect the prevention, restriction, or distortion of competition within the European Union. Meanwhile, Article 102 TFEU prohibits abuses of a dominant position within the internal market by one or more undertakings. On the basis of Article 103 TFEU, the EU Council adopted a series of regulations which define in detail the procedure applicable to competition matters and has entrusted the application of that procedure to the European Commission. The Council also authorized the Commission to adopt supplementary procedural rules. The chapter then details the antitrust general regime. Both the Commission and national competition authorities (NCAs) are responsible for enforcing the EU competition rules.
The Role of National Judicial Authorities
Authors: Jörgens Konstantin , Holzwarth Johannes 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter discusses the role of national judicial authorities. National courts' involvement with the EU competition rules occurs at three different levels. First, a specific court can be designated by a Member State as its national competition authority, thereby becoming a specialized body. Second, particular courts may be vested with the power to review on appeal the decisions of the national competition authority, whether of an administrative or judicial nature. Finally, national courts are those which, in the exercise of their general jurisdiction, may be called upon to apply Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) in claims between private parties at first instance or on appeal. This chapter concentrates on the third function. The adoption of Directive 2014/104/EU on certain rules governing actions for damages under national law for infringements of competition law provisions of the Member States and of the European Union (Damages Directive) was meant to strengthen further the role of the national courts. It required all Member States to enable recovery by introducing a consistent minimum standard on procedural matters such as time periods for limitation and disclosure of documents and on evidence such as the presumption that cartels cause harm. The chapter then looks at the cooperation between national courts and the European Commission.
The Organization of European Commission Proceedings
Authors: Jörgens Konstantin , Centella Marisa Tierno 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter focuses on the organization of European Commission proceedings. The Commission is an administrative authority which plays several different roles at the same time. Its functions are legislative, administrative, and, consequently, political. Not only does it enforce competition law, it also creates it, and, by so creating and applying it, develops competition policy. Like any administrative authority, the Commission undertakes preliminary inquiries, hears submissions of the parties, and then adopts the appropriate decision, imposing fines if necessary. The Commission has the burden of proving the infringement and throughout the proceedings it ‘strives to respect the rights of defendants, complainants and third parties’. With regard to infringements, Regulation 1/2003 lays down two successive but clearly separate procedures. First, a preparatory investigation procedure, the purpose of which is to enable the Commission to obtain the information necessary to check the actual existence and scope of a specific factual and legal situation, and which includes the possibility of requesting information and carrying out inspections of undertakings' premises. A second inter partes procedure commences with the statement of objections that the Commission sends to the undertakings when it has sufficient evidence of an infringement. The chapter then describes Commission decisions.
Procedural Infringements
Authors: Sauer Ralf , Blanco Luis Ortiz 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter addresses fines and periodic penalty payments. Undertakings which fail to fulfil their procedural obligations during an investigation may be held responsible and fined. EU competition law provides for two types of pecuniary penalties, which, however, have ‘shared characteristics and objectives’: first, fines which sanction past unlawful behaviour but are considered as non-criminal by the EU legislator; and second, periodic penalty payments, which accumulate daily for each day the undertaking fails to comply with its obligations. The objective of fines is twofold: they are designed (i) to penalize infringements; and (ii) to ensure that undertakings in general and specifically the infringing undertaking refrain(s) from hampering Commission investigations. As for periodic penalty payments, their central objective is to induce undertakings by way of a financial incentive to take, or refrain from taking, certain action. In both cases, the Commission seeks to ensure the effectiveness of the investigatory process, and in particular to avoid that decisions on substance are taken on the basis of incomplete, incorrect, or misleading information.
Voluntary Adjustments, Commitments, Finding of Inapplicability, Informal Guidance
Authors: Jörgens Konstantin , Blanco Luis Ortiz 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter focuses on voluntary adjustments, commitments, finding of inapplicability, and informal guidance. Regulation 1/2003 does not prevent the European Commission from settling cases by way of informal arrangements. While Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003 empowers the Commission to adopt decisions accepting commitments offered by undertakings in the course of proceedings, the Commission continues to end cases by informal settlements if, all things considered, it deems that this is the best way to settle a matter. The Commission's power under Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003 to terminate its proceedings by binding companies to the commitments they offer thus does not create an obligation to this effect. Nor is the Commission obliged to adopt any other formal decision provided by Regulation 1/2003. Examples of such informal settlements are situations where it is agreed with the parties that the latter will behave in a given manner in order to avoid infringing the EU competition rules, at least where a statement of objections has yet to be issued or where the conduct in question has already definitively ceased.
Other Special Procedures
Authors: Sauer Ralf , Jörgens Konstantin 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter looks at other special procedures, such as interim measures and withdrawal of the benefit of a block exemption. Article 8 of Regulation 1/2003 empowers the European Commission, ‘in cases of urgency due to the risk of serious and irreparable damage to competition, acting on its own initiative’, to take a decision ordering interim measures ‘on the basis of a prima facie finding of infringement’. Since the conditions for ordering interim measures are cumulative, failure to fulfil one of these them will prevent the Commission from exercising its power to adopt interim measures. In addition, any measures that the Commission takes must be of a temporary and conservatory nature, and restricted to what is necessary in the situation at hand. Also, the Commission has to balance the public interest in adopting interim measures with the legitimate interests of the undertaking that is the object of such measures, and respect the essential procedural safeguards guaranteed to it. Meanwhile, Article 29(1) of Regulation 1/2003 provides that the Commission may revoke a block exemption in individual cases, without the need to modify the Regulation under which that exemption was granted.
Procedures
Authors: Boyd Marcos Araujo , Lingen Nicolas von 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter details the procedures under the Merger Control Regulation. Proceedings under the Merger Control Regulation have two phases. The first phase is limited to determining whether there are serious doubts about the operation that justify initiating the second phase. This involves an analysis of the markets affected. At the same time, other tasks are carried out, such as verifying that the notification is complete, that the European Commission has jurisdiction, contacting NCAs and competitors, and, where appropriate, drafting and signing the decision. Article 6(1)(c) of the Merger Control Regulation provides that ‘where the Commission finds that the concentration notified falls within the scope of this Regulation and raises serious doubts as to its compatibility with the internal market, it shall decide to initiate proceedings’. This decision, which brings an end to the first phase and initiates the second, normally contains a lengthy statement of the Commission's doubts. Once this decision has been adopted, the Commission will invite the notifying parties to discuss the timetable, with a view to making the investigation more effective, reducing the burden on the notifying parties and third parties, and increasing transparency in the procedure. Remedies may be offered both in the first or the second phase of the proceedings. The chapter then considers the investigative and sanctioning powers of the Commission.
Judicial Review of Commission Decisions Regarding Concentrations
Authors: Boyd Marcos Araujo , Lingen Nicolas von 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter addresses the judicial review of European Commission decisions regarding concentrations. The Courts of the European Union have exclusive jurisdiction to control the legality of the decisions adopted by the Commission in the field of concentrations. Over the years, judicial review of these decisions has touched many aspects of the Commission's practice, raising questions as to where the balance of discretion of the Commission and intensity of the review should lie. The European Courts have also examined the conformity of actions of Member States in relation to the Regulation. The resulting body of case law has been instrumental in the review and improvement of the working methods of the Commission and has played a major instigating role in the reform process that the Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP) and the Merger Control Regulation (MCR) itself have undergone. Articles 263 TFEU and 21(2) of the MCR provide for the direct review by the EU Courts of decisions adopted by the Commission under the Regulation. That principle is reiterated in respect of decisions imposing fines or periodic penalty payments by Article 16 of the MCR, where the courts enjoy unlimited jurisdiction pursuant to Article 262 TFEU. Other acts adopted by the Commission under the MCR may also be challenged before the EU Courts.
Decisions under Article 106(3) TFEU
Authors: Sierra José Luis Buendía 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter describes the procedure for the application of rules regarding public undertakings and special and exclusive rights in EU law, a question which is more complicated and of greater scope than may first appear. In fact, Article 106(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides a special procedure intended not only to bring an end to infringements of Article 106(1) TFEU committed by Member States, but also to adopt general measures designed to define the scope of the obligations under Article 106(1) and/or to prevent future infringements of those obligations. Thus, Article 106(3) grants to the Commission, on the one hand, the power to adopt decisions declaring that Member States have infringed the obligations under Article 106(1) and obliging the Member State to put an end to the infringement. Decisions adopted under the legal basis provided by Article 106(3) have also been issued by the Commission for taking note of remedies proposed by a Member State following up an Article 106(3) decision and making such commitments binding within a certain time frame. This procedure constitutes an exception to the general procedure contained in Article 258 TFEU, in which it is up to the Court of Justice (ECJ) to declare that the Treaty has been infringed.
Unlawful Aid
Authors: Keppenne Jean Paul , Caviedes Carlos Urraca 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter focuses on unlawful aid. Aid is considered to be unlawful (or unlawfully granted) when it is put into effect without first having been notified to the European Commission, or when it has been notified but then put into effect before the Commission has made a decision within the given time limit. Its unlawfulness derives from an infringement of the last sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU. The existence of unlawful aid represents a ‘pathological’ situation in relation to the procedure laid down by the Treaty, thus explaining why it is not dealt with as such therein. The particular features of the unlawful aid control procedure have therefore had to be established on the basis of the case law of the Court of Justice (ECJ), and the Procedural Regulation. The general principle is one of parallelism with the review of notified aid, unless otherwise specified. Thus, the notion of existing aid serves to determine whether or not it is a case of unlawful aid. As for the procedure to be followed by the Commission in controlling unlawful aid, it also ensues from the stages laid down for the notified aid review procedure. Three different principles nonetheless characterize the unlawful aid control procedure: the Lorenz two-month time limit does not apply; the Commission can use its powers to impose injunctions; finally, if the aid is declared to be incompatible, the Commission has to demand its recovery.
Role of National Courts
Authors: Keppenne Jean Paul , Caviedes Carlos Urraca 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter describes the role of national courts in enforcing the procedural obligation laid down in Article 108(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), that is the obligation incumbent on Member States not to grant any aid before it is approved by the European Commission. The involvement of national courts is the result of the direct effect that the last sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU is acknowledged to have. This provision creates rights in favour of individuals, which national courts are bound to protect. The standstill obligation incumbent on Member States can be invoked before national courts, and, moreover, in many different types of case. The most obvious example is when a competitor of the aid-receiving undertaking appeals to the competent court for annulment of the aid granted, and the refunding thereof. The chapter then examines the obligations incumbent on the national court when it is called upon to deal with an action based on the direct effect of the last sentence of Article 108(3) TFEU. It also considers the cooperation of national courts with the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Commission.
State Aid Litigation before the European Union Courts
Authors: PaulKeppenne Jean , UrracaCaviedes Carlos 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter studies State aid litigation before the European Union courts, which can take the most varied forms. The contending parties may be Member States and EU institutions, or EU institutions and private persons, usually undertakings and associations of undertakings. As for the types of procedures, the vast majority of cases involve actions for annulment or for failure to fulfil an obligation, to which may be added some proceedings for failure to act or non-contractual liability. The main questions raised by this litigation involve the admissibility of the appeal, due to uncertainties about determining the contestable acts, on the one hand, and the locus standi of the persons concerned, on the other. The chapter then looks at the procedures against the European Commission; the procedures against Member States; and the procedure for action against Council decisions adopted on the basis of the third subparagraph of Article 108(2) TFEU.
Introduction: Keep Calm and Continue Crowdfunding
Authors: Ortolani Pietro , Louisse Marije 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This introductory chapter provides an overview of the EU Crowdfunding Regulation. Over the past ten years, technology has reshaped economic relationships on a global scale. One of the most notable developments in this respect is the rise of crowdfunding, which increasingly allows a wide range of ventures to receive funding through a variety of internet-based financing channels, rather than through the traditional vehicles of corporate finance. With the adoption of Regulation 2020/1503 (Crowdfunding Regulation), the EU aims at levelling the playing field for crowdfunding services, providing legal certainty and facilitating access to capital for companies (especially in the start-up phase). The chapter then distinguishes among different varieties of crowdfunding, looking at the different purposes that crowdfunding can serve.
Crowdfunding and UK Law
Authors: McMeel Gerard 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter discusses the impact of Brexit on the development and application of the Crowdfunding Regulation, summarising the main features of the UK legal framework applicable to crowdfunding. It also assesses the enduring relevance of that framework, in the wake of the Withdrawal Agreement. Overall the regime for crowdfunding in the UK is intended to facilitate business of this type, while ensuring that the usual protections for investors and debtors in orthodox financial services apply equally to functionally equivalent crowdfunded activities. The UK regime owes debts to earlier EU legislation, principally MiFID II for investment-based activity, and the Consumer Credit Directive for debt-based activity. However, given the UK’s withdrawal from the EU, it represents a distinct regime unaffected by the Crowdfunding Regulation.
Is the Crowdfunding Regulation Future-Proof?
Authors: Battaglini Raffaele , Davico Davide 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter assesses the scope of application of the Crowdfunding Regulation ratione materiae, with reference to the rapidly evolving world of blockchain-based crowdfunding techniques, such as Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs), Initial Token Offerings (ITOs), and Initial Exchange Offerings (IEOs). It investigates whether the choice to exclude ICOs/ITOs/IEOs from the scope of the Crowdfunding Regulation was correct. The chapter then presents a comparison between the Regulation and the future possible regulation of crypto-assets in the EU, with particular reference to the proposed Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) Regulation, and the Distributed Ledger Technology Pilot Regime. Cryptocurrencies pose two questions that seem far from being resolved: their definition and their legal nature. The term ‘cryptocurrency’ refers to the concept of money, which is misleading or at least reductive. Depending on their functions and technological peculiarities, cryptocurrencies may differ significantly from one to another, which necessarily affects their legal nature.
Organizational and Operational Requirements for Crowdfunding Service Providers
Authors: Lieverse Kitty , Pronk Wendy 
Published: January 2022

Abstract
This chapter analyses the organisational and operational requirements for crowdfunding service providers (CSPs) under the Crowdfunding Regulation. These requirements are in follow up to the authorisation requirements that the CSPs have to meet in order to obtain market access. CSPs should comply with certain requirements designed to ensure that projects on their platforms are selected in a professional, fair, and transparent way, and that crowdfunding services are provided in the same manner. The chapter then discusses the governance arrangements that CSPs should have in place to ensure their effective and prudent management, including the prevention of conflicts of interest. It also assesses the prudential requirements that are applicable in order to protect clients against operational risks and the rules in respect of outsourcing.