Biodiesel: The Next Fuel?

The focus of this project is to research the environmental and economic benefits of biodiesel. The motivation for this project came from the question of: Does the cost of biodiesel justify the pollution reduction? Research had to be done to gain the facts and knowledge to support the cause. This includes finding possible sourcing, pros, cons, costs, fuel mixes, environmental, and mechanical information as it pertains to diesel engines and even the potential use in the CATbus fleet. Secondly, CATbus would have to be contacted in order to gain their thoughts and share the supporting information on biodiesel. The outcome of this project should show that environmental effects are better when using biodiesel versus regular petroleum diesel, and that there is less impact on human life. Our conclusion is that we recommend CATbus to use biodiesel over regular petroleum diesel. Thanks goes to our advisor Gary Gaulin and the Creative Inquiry program for making this project possible

Drawing Coagulation Studies from Heparinized Central Lines

A literature review was conducted between the months of September and December 2017 to determine whether using heparinized central lines to draw coagulation studies is best evidence based practice. The purpose was to research the efficacy of using a heparinized central line to draw coagulation studies. This research is for the Abben Cancer Center affiliated with Spencer Hospital in Spencer, Iowa. Ten articles focusing on patients with heparinized lines or discard volume were reviewed. Results showed that heparin primarily has an effect on Activated Partial Thromboplastin Time (aPTT). It was found that using heparinized central lines to draw blood studies could have a positive impact on patient anxiety and comfort levels

To Achieve Big Wins for Terrestrial Conservation, Prioritize Protection of Ecoregions Closest to Meeting Targets

Most of the terrestrial world is experiencing high rates of land conversion despite growth of the global protected area (PA) network. There is a need to assess whether the current global protection targets are achievable across all major ecosystem types and to identify those that need urgent protection. Using recent rates of habitat conversion and protection and the latest terrestrial ecoregion map, we show that if the same approach to PA establishment that has been undertaken over the past three decades continues, 558 of 748 ecoregions (ca. 75%) will not meet an aspirational 30% area protection target by 2030. A simple yet strategic acquisition plan that considers realistic futures around habitat loss and PA expansion could more than double the number of ecoregions adequately protected by 2030 given current funding constraints. These results highlight the importance of including explicit ecoregional representation targets within any new post-2020 global PA target

Incorporating uncertainty associated with habitat data in marine reserve design

One of the most pervasive forms of uncertainty in data used to make conservation decisions is error associated with mapping of conservation features. Whilst conservation planners should consider uncertainty associated with ecological data to make informed decisions, mapping error is rarely, if ever, accommodated in the planning process. Here, we develop a spatial conservation prioritization approach that accounts for the uncertainty inherent in coral reef habitat maps and apply it in the Kubulau District fisheries management area, Fiji. We use accuracy information describing the probability of occurrence of each habitat type, derived from remote sensing data validated by field surveys, to design a marine reserve network that has a high probability of protecting a fixed percentage (10-90%) of every habitat type. We compare the outcomes of our approach to those of standard reserve design approaches, where habitat-mapping errors are not known or ignored. We show that the locations of priority areas change between the standard and probabilistic approaches, with errors of omission and commission likely to occur if reserve design does not accommodate mapping accuracy. Although consideration of habitat mapping accuracy leads to bigger reserve networks, they are unlikely to miss habitat conservation targets. We explore the trade-off between conservation feature representation and reserve network area, with smaller reserve networks possible if we give up on trying to meet targets for habitats mapped with a low accuracy. The approach can be used with any habitat type at any scale to inform more robust and defensible conservation decisions in marine or terrestrial environments. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Simple rules can guide whether land or ocean based conservation will best benefit marine ecosystems

Coastal marine ecosystems can be managed by actions undertaken both on the land and in the ocean. Quantifying and comparing the costs and benefits of actions in both realms is therefore necessary for efficient management. Here, we quantify the link between terrestrial sediment run-off and a downstream coastal marine ecosystem, and contrast the cost-effectiveness of marine and land-based conservation actions. We use a dynamic land- and sea-scape model to determine whether limited funds should be directed to one of four alternative conservation actions – protection on land, protection in the ocean, restoration on land, or restoration in the ocean – to maximise the extent of light-dependent marine benthic habitats, across decadal time-scales. We apply the model to a case study seagrass meadow in Australia. We find that marine restoration is the most cost-effective action over decadal time-scales in this system, based on a conservative estimate of the rate at which seagrass can expand into new habitat. The optimal decision will vary in different social-ecological contexts, but some basic information can guide optimal investments to counteract land and ocean based stressors: (1) marine restoration should be prioritised if the rates of marine ecosystem decline and expansion are similar and low; (2) marine protection should take precedence if the rate of marine ecosystem decline is high, or if the adjacent catchment is relatively intact and has a low rate of vegetation decline; (3) land-based actions are optimal when the ratio of marine ecosystem expansion to decline is >1.4, with terrestrial restoration typically the most cost effective; and (4) land protection should be prioritised if the catchment is relatively intact, but the rate of vegetation decline is high. These rules-of-thumb illustrate how cost-effective conservation outcomes for connected land-ocean systems can proceed without complex modelling

De novo CCND2 mutations leading to stabilization of cyclin D2 cause megalencephaly-polymicrogyria-polydactyly-hydrocephalus syndrome

Activating mutations in genes encoding phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)-AKT pathway components cause megalencephaly-polymicrogyria-polydactyly-hydrocephalus syndrome (MPPH, OMIM 603387). Here we report that individuals with MPPH lacking upstream PI3K-AKT pathway mutations carry de novo mutations in CCND2 (encoding cyclin D2) that are clustered around a residue that can be phosphorylated by glycogen synthase kinase 3β (GSK-3β). Mutant CCND2 was resistant to proteasomal degradation in vitro compared to wild-type CCND2. The PI3K-AKT pathway modulates GSK-3β activity, and cells from individuals with PIK3CA, PIK3R2 or AKT3 mutations showed similar CCND2 accumulation. CCND2 was expressed at higher levels in brains of mouse embryos expressing activated AKT3. In utero electroporation of mutant CCND2 into embryonic mouse brains produced more proliferating transfected progenitors and a smaller fraction of progenitors exiting the cell cycle compared to cells electroporated with wild-type CCND2. These observations suggest that cyclin D2 stabilization, caused by CCND2 mutation or PI3K-AKT activation, is a unifying mechanism in PI3K-AKT–related megalencephaly syndromes

Integrated planning for land-sea ecosystem connectivity to protect coral reefs

Coral reefs are threatened by human activities both on the land and in the sea. However, standard approaches for prioritizing locations for marine and terrestrial reserves neglect to consider connections between ecosystems. We demonstrate an integrated approach for coral reef conservation with the objective of prioritizing marine reserves close to catchments with high forest cover in order to facilitate ecological processes that rely upon intact land-sea protected area connections and minimize negative impact of land-based runoff on coral reefs. Our aims are to (1) develop and apply simple models of connections between ecosystems that require little data and (2) incorporate different types of connectivity models into spatial conservation prioritization. We compared how, if at all, the locations and attributes (e.g., costs) of priorities differ from an approach that ignores connections. We analyzed spatial prioritization plans that allow for no connectivity, adjacent connectivity in the sea, symmetric and asymmetric land-sea connectivity, and the combination of adjacent connectivity in the sea and asymmetric land-sea connectivity. The overall reserve system costs were similar for all scenarios. We discovered that integrated planning delivered substantially different spatial priorities compared to the approach that ignored connections. Only 11-40% of sites that were high priority for conservation were similar between scenarios with and without connectivity. Many coral reefs that were a high priority when we considered adjacent connectivity in the sea and ignored land-sea connectivity were assigned to low priorities when symmetric land-sea connectivity was included, and vice versa. Our approach can be applied to incorporate connections between ecosystems. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Protecting 30% of the planet for nature: costs, benefits and economic implications

A. Waldron, K. Nakamura, J. Sze, T. Vilela, A. Escobedo, P. Negret Torres, R. Button, K. Swinnerton, A. Toledo, P. Madgwick, N. Mukherjee were supported by National Geographic and the Resources Legacy Fund. V. Christensen was supported by NSERC Discovery Grant RGPIN-2019-04901. M. Coll and J. Steenbeek were supported by EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 817578 (TRIATLAS). D. Leclere was supported by TradeHub UKRI CGRF project. R. Heneghan was supported by Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Acciones de Programacion Conjunta Internacional (PCIN-2017-115). M. di Marco was supported by MIUR Rita Levi Montalcini programme. A. Fernandez-Llamazares was supported by Academy of Finland (grant nr. 31176). S. Fujimori and T. Hawegawa were supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan and the Sumitomo Foundation. V. Heikinheimo was supported by Kone Foundation, Social Media for Conservation project. K. Scherrer was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 682602. U. Rashid Sumaila acknowledges the OceanCanada Partnership, which funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). T. Toivonen was supported by Osk. Huttunen Foundation & Clare Hall college, Cambridge. W. Wu was supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. Z. Yuchen was supported by a Ministry of Education of Singapore Research Scholarship Block (RSB) Research Fellowship

Working paper analysing the economic implications of the proposed 30% target for areal protection in the draft post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framewor

58 pages, 5 figures, 3 tables- The World Economic Forum now ranks biodiversity loss as a top-five risk to the global economy, and the draft post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework proposes an expansion of conservation areas to 30% of the earth’s surface by 2030 (hereafter the “30% target”), using protected areas (PAs) and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). - Two immediate concerns are how much a 30% target might cost and whether it will cause economic losses to the agriculture, forestry and fisheries sectors. - Conservation areas also generate economic benefits (e.g. revenue from nature tourism and ecosystem services), making PAs/Nature an economic sector in their own right. - If some economic sectors benefit but others experience a loss, high-level policy makers need to know the net impact on the wider economy, as well as on individual sectors. [...]A. Waldron, K. Nakamura, J. Sze, T. Vilela, A. Escobedo, P. Negret Torres, R. Button, K. Swinnerton, A. Toledo, P. Madgwick, N. Mukherjee were supported by National Geographic and the Resources Legacy Fund. V. Christensen was supported by NSERC Discovery Grant RGPIN-2019-04901. M. Coll and J. Steenbeek were supported by EU Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 817578 (TRIATLAS). D. Leclere was supported by TradeHub UKRI CGRF project. R. Heneghan was supported by Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, Acciones de Programacion Conjunta Internacional (PCIN-2017-115). M. di Marco was supported by MIUR Rita Levi Montalcini programme. A. Fernandez-Llamazares was supported by Academy of Finland (grant nr. 311176). S. Fujimori and T. Hawegawa were supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan and the Sumitomo Foundation. V. Heikinheimo was supported by Kone Foundation, Social Media for Conservation project. K. Scherrer was supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 682602. U. Rashid Sumaila acknowledges the OceanCanada Partnership, which funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). T. Toivonen was supported by Osk. Huttunen Foundation & Clare Hall college, Cambridge. W. Wu was supported by The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (2-2002) of the Environmental Restoration and Conservation Agency of Japan. Z. Yuchen was supported by a Ministry of Education of Singapore Research Scholarship Block (RSB) Research FellowshipPeer reviewe