Neotropical xenarthrans: a data set of occurrence of xenarthran species in the neotropics

Xenarthrans -anteaters, sloths, and armadillos- have essential functions for ecosystem maintenance, such as insect control and nutrient cycling, playing key roles as ecosystem engineers. Because of habitat loss and fragmentation, hunting pressure, and conflicts with domestic dogs, these species have been threatened locally, regionally, or even across their full distribution ranges. The Neotropics harbor 21 species of armadillos, 10 anteaters, and 6 sloths. Our data set includes the families Chlamyphoridae (13), Dasypodidae (7), Myrmecophagidae (3), Bradypodidae (4), and Megalonychidae (2). We have no occurrence data on Dasypus pilosus (Dasypodidae). Regarding Cyclopedidae, until recently, only one species was recognized, but new genetic studies have revealed that the group is represented by seven species. In this data paper, we compiled a total of 42,528 records of 31 species, represented by occurrence and quantitative data, totaling 24,847 unique georeferenced records. The geographic range is from the southern United States, Mexico, and Caribbean countries at the northern portion of the Neotropics, to the austral distribution in Argentina, Paraguay, Chile, and Uruguay. Regarding anteaters, Myrmecophaga tridactyla has the most records (n = 5,941), and Cyclopes sp. Have the fewest (n = 240). The armadillo species with the most data is Dasypus novemcinctus (n = 11,588), and the fewest data are recorded for Calyptophractus retusus (n = 33). With regard to sloth species, Bradypus variegatus has the most records (n = 962), and Bradypus pygmaeus has the fewest (n = 12). Our main objective with Neotropical Xenarthrans is to make occurrence and quantitative data available to facilitate more ecological research, particularly if we integrate the xenarthran data with other data sets of Neotropical Series that will become.Fil: Marques Santos, Paloma. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas; BrasilFil: Bocchiglieri, Adriana. Universidade Federal de Sergipe; BrasilFil: Garcia Chiarello, Adriano. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Pereira Paglia, Adriano. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais. Instituto de Ciências Biológicas; BrasilFil: Moreira, Adryelle. Amplo Engenharia e Gestão de Projetos ; BrasilFil: Abba, Agustin Manuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - La Plata. Centro de Estudios Parasitológicos y de Vectores. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo. Centro de Estudios Parasitológicos y de Vectores; ArgentinaFil: Paviolo, Agustin Javier. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical; ArgentinaFil: Gatica, Ailin. Universidad Nacional de San Luis; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Investigaciones Biológicas de San Luis. Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Investigaciones Biológicas de San Luis; ArgentinaFil: Ochoa, Ana Cecilia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - San Luis. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Investigaciones Biológicas de San Luis. Universidad Nacional de San Luis. Facultad de Ciencias Físico Matemáticas y Naturales. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Investigaciones Biológicas de San Luis; ArgentinaFil: de Angelo, Carlos Daniel. Universidad Nacional de Rio Cuarto. Facultad de Cs.exactas Fisicoquimicas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra, Biodiversidad y Ambiente. - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas. Centro Cientifico Tecnologico Conicet - Cordoba. Instituto de Ciencias de la Tierra, Biodiversidad y Ambiente.; ArgentinaFil: Tellaeche, Cintia Gisele. Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias. Centro de Estudios Ambientales Territoriales y Sociales; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Jujuy. Instituto de Ecorregiones Andinas. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Salta. Instituto de Ecorregiones Andinas; ArgentinaFil: Varela, Diego Martin. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Vanderhoeven, Ezequiel Andres. Ministerio de Salud. Instituto Nacional de Medicina Tropical; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Caruso, María Flavia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Administración de Parques Nacionales. Delegación Regional del Noroeste; ArgentinaFil: Arrabal, Juan Pablo. Secretaria de Gobierno de Salud. Instituto Nacional de Medicina Tropical - Sede Puerto Iguazú Misiones; Argentina. Centro de Investigaciones del Bosque Atlántico; ArgentinaFil: Iezzi, María Eugenia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Di Bitetti, Mario Santiago. Centro de Investigaciones del Bosque Atlántico; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Cruz, Paula Andrea. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; Argentina. Centro de Investigaciones del Bosque Atlántico; ArgentinaFil: Reppucci, Juan Ignacio. Administración de Parques Nacionales. Delegación Regional del Noroeste; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Benito Santamaria, Silvia. Centro de Investigaciones del Bosque Atlántico; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Quiroga, Verónica Andrea. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Diversidad y Ecología Animal. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Diversidad y Ecología Animal; ArgentinaFil: Di Blanco, Yamil Edgardo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Marás, Gustavo Arnaldo. Administración de Parques Nacionales. Delegación Regional del Noroeste; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Camino, Micaela. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Centro de Ecología Aplicada del Litoral. Universidad Nacional del Nordeste. Centro de Ecología Aplicada del Litoral; ArgentinaFil: Perovic, Pablo Gastón. Administración de Parques Nacionales. Delegación Regional del Noroeste; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Martínez Pardo, Julia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Costa, Sebastián Andrés. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Nordeste. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú | Universidad Nacional de Misiones. Instituto de Biología Subtropical. Instituto de Biología Subtropical - Nodo Puerto Iguazú; ArgentinaFil: Pinheiro, Fabiana. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Volkmer de Castilho, Pedro. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; BrasilFil: Bercê, William. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Camara Assis, Julia. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho. Faculdade de Engenharia.; BrasilFil: Rodrigues Tonetti, Vinicius. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Alves Eigenheer, Milene. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Chinem, Simonne. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Honda, Laura K.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Bergallo, Helena de Godoy. Universidade do Estado de Rio do Janeiro; BrasilFil: Alberici, Vinicius. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Wallace, Robert. Wildlife Conservation Society; Estados UnidosFil: Ribeiro, Milton Cezar. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Galetti, Mauro. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; Brasi

Terrestrial behavior in titi monkeys (Callicebus, Cheracebus, and Plecturocebus) : potential correlates, patterns, and differences between genera

For arboreal primates, ground use may increase dispersal opportunities, tolerance to habitat change, access to ground-based resources, and resilience to human disturbances, and so has conservation implications. We collated published and unpublished data from 86 studies across 65 localities to assess titi monkey (Callicebinae) terrestriality. We examined whether the frequency of terrestrial activity correlated with study duration (a proxy for sampling effort), rainfall level (a proxy for food availability seasonality), and forest height (a proxy for vertical niche dimension). Terrestrial activity was recorded frequently for Callicebus and Plecturocebus spp., but rarely for Cheracebus spp. Terrestrial resting, anti-predator behavior, geophagy, and playing frequencies in Callicebus and Plecturocebus spp., but feeding and moving differed. Callicebus spp. often ate or searched for new leaves terrestrially. Plecturocebus spp. descended primarily to ingest terrestrial invertebrates and soil. Study duration correlated positively and rainfall level negatively with terrestrial activity. Though differences in sampling effort and methods limited comparisons and interpretation, overall, titi monkeys commonly engaged in a variety of terrestrial activities. Terrestrial behavior in Callicebus and Plecturocebus capacities may bolster resistance to habitat fragmentation. However, it is uncertain if the low frequency of terrestriality recorded for Cheracebus spp. is a genus-specific trait associated with a more basal phylogenetic position, or because studies of this genus occurred in pristine habitats. Observations of terrestrial behavior increased with increasing sampling effort and decreasing food availability. Overall, we found a high frequency of terrestrial behavior in titi monkeys, unlike that observed in other pitheciids

Rationale, study design, and analysis plan of the Alveolar Recruitment for ARDS Trial (ART): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with high in-hospital mortality. Alveolar recruitment followed by ventilation at optimal titrated PEEP may reduce ventilator-induced lung injury and improve oxygenation in patients with ARDS, but the effects on mortality and other clinical outcomes remain unknown. This article reports the rationale, study design, and analysis plan of the Alveolar Recruitment for ARDS Trial (ART). Methods/Design: ART is a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized (concealed), controlled trial, which aims to determine if maximum stepwise alveolar recruitment associated with PEEP titration is able to increase 28-day survival in patients with ARDS compared to conventional treatment (ARDSNet strategy). We will enroll adult patients with ARDS of less than 72 h duration. The intervention group will receive an alveolar recruitment maneuver, with stepwise increases of PEEP achieving 45 cmH(2)O and peak pressure of 60 cmH2O, followed by ventilation with optimal PEEP titrated according to the static compliance of the respiratory system. In the control group, mechanical ventilation will follow a conventional protocol (ARDSNet). In both groups, we will use controlled volume mode with low tidal volumes (4 to 6 mL/kg of predicted body weight) and targeting plateau pressure <= 30 cmH2O. The primary outcome is 28-day survival, and the secondary outcomes are: length of ICU stay; length of hospital stay; pneumothorax requiring chest tube during first 7 days; barotrauma during first 7 days; mechanical ventilation-free days from days 1 to 28; ICU, in-hospital, and 6-month survival. ART is an event-guided trial planned to last until 520 events (deaths within 28 days) are observed. These events allow detection of a hazard ratio of 0.75, with 90% power and two-tailed type I error of 5%. All analysis will follow the intention-to-treat principle. Discussion: If the ART strategy with maximum recruitment and PEEP titration improves 28-day survival, this will represent a notable advance to the care of ARDS patients. Conversely, if the ART strategy is similar or inferior to the current evidence-based strategy (ARDSNet), this should also change current practice as many institutions routinely employ recruitment maneuvers and set PEEP levels according to some titration method.Hospital do Coracao (HCor) as part of the Program 'Hospitais de Excelencia a Servico do SUS (PROADI-SUS)'Brazilian Ministry of Healt

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake