Effect of herbage density, height and age on nutrient and invertebrate generalist predator abundance in permanent and temporary pastures

© 2020 by the authors. The aim of this research was to assess differences in the quantity and quality of herbage and invertebrate generalist predator abundance among permanent and temporary pastures. Two permanent pastures and four temporary ley pastures (either one year or two years since being sown) were monitored weekly for 10 weeks in the spring. Permanent pastures included a diverse range of native UK grass species, and temporary ley pastures were predominantly perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) with or without white clover (Trifolium repens). Weekly measurements of herbage height (in centimeters), herbage cover (fresh and dry matter in kg per hectare) and herbage density (fresh and dry matter in kg per hectare per centimeter) were obtained for each field, along with lycosid spider and carabid beetle abundance. Weekly pasture samples were used to obtain nutrient concentrations of dry matter, crude protein, neutral detergent fibre (NDF), acid detergent fibre (ADF), ash, oil, sugars, digestible organic matter in the dry matter (DOMD) and metabolisable energy (ME) in the herbage as a measure of forage quality for grazing or harvesting. A linear mixed model was used to assess the effect of sward age, herbage density and height on herbage production, nutrient concentrations and invertebrate abundance. Although this study showed that permanent pastures were associated with lower nutrient concentrations of crude protein, ash, oil and ME compared to younger and predominantly perennial ryegrass pastures, the older pastures were associated with higher carabid numbers. Furthermore, permanent pastures had a higher density of dry matter herbage compared to younger pastures, and more dense and taller swards were associated with higher lycosid numbers. The study suggests that within pastures of 3 to 20 cm height, increasing the height and density of swards increases both ME and oil concentrations in herbage, therefore enhancing forage nutrient quality. Older and more permanent pastures can be beneficial for plant and invertebrate generalist predator populations, and still provide a useful source of nutrients for forage production

Species conservation profiles of a random sample of world spiders I : Agelenidae to Filistatidae

Background The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the most widely used information source on the extinction risk of species. One of the uses of the Red List is to evaluate and monitor the state of biodiversity and a possible approach for this purpose is the Red List Index (RLI). For many taxa, mainly hyperdiverse groups, it is not possible within available resources to assess all known species. In such cases, a random sample of species might be selected for assessment and the results derived from it extrapolated for the entire group - the Sampled Red List Index (SRLI). With the current contribution and the three following papers, we intend to create the first point in time of a future spider SRLI encompassing 200 species distributed across the world. New information A sample of 200 species of spiders were randomly selected from the World Spider Catalogue, an updated global database containing all recognised species names for the group. The 200 selected species where divided taxonomically at the family level and the familes were ordered alphabetically. In this publication, we present the conservation profiles of 46 species belonging to the famillies alphabetically arranged between Agelenidae and Filistatidae, which encompassed Agelenidae, Amaurobiidae, Anyphaenidae, Araneidae, Archaeidae, Barychelidae, Clubionidae, Corinnidae, Ctenidae, Ctenizidae, Cyatholipidae, Dictynidae, Dysderidae, Eresidae and Filistatidae.Peer reviewe

Species conservation profiles of a random sample of world spiders III : Oecobiidae to Salticidae

Background The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the most widely used information source on the extinction risk of species. One of the uses of the Red List is to evaluate and monitor the state of biodiversity and a possible approach for this purpose is the Red List Index (RLI). For many taxa, mainly hyperdiverse groups, it is not possible within available resources to assess all known species. In such cases, a random sample of species might be selected for assessment and the results derived from it extrapolated for the entire group-the Sampled Red List Index (SRLI). The current contribution is the third in four papers that will constitute the baseline of a future spider SRLI encompassing 200 species distributed across the world. New information A sample of 200 species of spiders were randomly selected from the World Spider Catalogue, an updated global database containing all recognized species names for the group. The 200 selected species where divided taxonomically at the family level, and the familes were ordered alphabetically. In this publication, we present the conservation profiles of 58 species belonging to the famillies alphabetically arranged between Oecobiidae and Salticidae, which encompassed Oecobiidae, Oonopidae, Orsolobidae, Oxyopidae, Palpimanidae, Philodromidae, Pholcidae, Pisauridae, Prodidomidae and Salticidae.Peer reviewe

Globally distributed occurrences utilised in 200 spider species conservation profiles (Arachnida, Araneae)

Background Data on 200 species of spiders were collected to assess the global threat status of the group worldwide. To supplement existing digital occurrence records from GBIF, a dataset of new occurrence records was compiled for all species using published literature or online sources, from which geographic coordinates were extracted or interpreted from locality description data. New information A total of 5,104 occurrence records were obtained, of which 2,378 were from literature or online sources other than GBIF. Of these, 2,308 had coordinate data. Reporting years ranged from 1834 to 2017. Most records were from North America and Europe, with Brazil, China, India and Australia also well represented.Peer reviewe

Spider conservation in Europe : a review

Despite their ecological importance and diversity, spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) are underrepresented in conservation policies in comparison to other groups. We review all extant conservation tools focusing on spiders in Europe, highlighting general patterns, limitations, gaps, and future directions. We assembled a comprehensive online database reporting all available information concerning the legal protection and conservation status of 4,154 spider species. Existing international legislation has limited coverage, with only one species listed in the Bern Convention and EU Habitats Directive. At the national and subnational levels, 178 species are formally mentioned in the legislation of 19 European countries. Moreover, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) includes assessments for 301 species worldwide, 164 of these threatened and eight native to Europe. In addition, spiders are mentioned in Regional Red Lists and Red Books in 28 out of 42 European countries considered in this review. Northern and Central European countries have the highest percentage of species assessed at the regional level in Red Lists and Red Books. The Mediterranean basin has the highest spider diversities in Europe but conservation efforts are lacking, both in terms of assessments and national or subnational legislation. Among European species, Dolomedes plantarius, Argyroneta aquatica and Eresus kollari are the most frequently mentioned in European conservation measures, possibly due to their ecological traits and their strict association with declining habitats. Considering the current threats to spiders in Europe, the protection of large areas of suitable habitat should be considered as the most effective approach to spider conservation.Peer reviewe

Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study

Introduction: The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures. Methods: In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025. Findings: Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2–6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5–5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4–10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32–4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23–11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation. Interpretation: After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Feeding the future: developing the skills landscape in the agri‐food sector

The agri-food sector and supply chain is a foundational component of society and is required for healthy populations across the globe. Feeding the world, not only with enough calories, but with nutritious food that has been sustainably sourced and processed, is a continuous and developing challenge. Despite this, careers in research and development opportunities in the agri-food sector have less visibility in comparison to other sectors, and we argue that agri-food remains under-represented in education and training, from school through to higher education. In this perspective, we explore how diversity in people, skills and education contributes to the agri-food sector, and how fostering this diversity could help to solve some of the big challenges faced in 2021 and beyond. Specific focus is given to education and training schemes, and the lack of agri-food topics in relevant science degrees.</p