Amplified ambivalence: having a sibling with juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Despite increased awareness of family responses to chronic illness and disability, there is still a need to understand experiences of well siblings. We begin to address this by asking “What is it like to have a sibling with juvenile idiopathic arthritis?” (JIA).Eight families with an adolescent diagnosed with JIA participated. Four members of each family, including one healthy sibling, were interviewed and transcripts analyzed using grounded theory. Analysis suggests healthy siblings see their family as different to ‘normal’ families, forfeit time with peers, share vicariously adverse experiences of their ill sibling, and feel inadequately informed. Such experiences amplify the ambivalent nature of sibling relationships and are possibly felt most strongly during late childhood and early adolescence. Support from extended family can reduce these negative experiences and facilitate social and emotional adjustment which also occurs over time as the children mature. These findings have implications for healthcare professionals and voluntary organizations

Current And Future Land Use Around A Nationwide Protected Area Network

Land-use change around protected areas can reduce their effective size and limit their ability to conserve biodiversity because land-use change alters ecological processes and the ability of organisms to move freely among protected areas. The goal of our analysis was to inform conservation planning efforts for a nationwide network of protected lands by predicting future land use change. We evaluated the relative effect of three economic policy scenarios on land use surrounding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service\u27s National Wildlife Refuges. We predicted changes for three land-use classes (forest/range, crop/pasture, and urban) by 2051. Our results showed an increase in forest/range lands (by 1.9% to 4.7% depending on the scenario), a decrease in crop/pasture between 15.2% and 23.1%, and a substantial increase in urban land use between 28.5% and 57.0%. The magnitude of land-use change differed strongly among different USFWS administrative regions, with the most change in the Upper Midwestern US (approximately 30%), and the Southeastern and Northeastern US (25%), and the rest of the U.S. between 15 and 20%. Among our scenarios, changes in land use were similar, with the exception of our restricted-urban-growth\u27\u27 scenario, which resulted in noticeably different rates of change. This demonstrates that it will likely be difficult to influence land-use change patterns with national policies and that understanding regional land-use dynamics is critical for effective management and planning of protected lands throughout the U.S

Combined effects of heat waves and droughts on avian communities across the conterminous United States

Increasing surface temperatures and climatic variability associated with global climate change are expected to produce more frequent and intense heat waves and droughts in many parts of the world. Our goal was to elucidate the fundamental, but poorly understood, effects of these extreme weather events on avian communities across the conterminous United States. Specifically, we explored: (1) the effects of timing and duration of heat and drought events, (2) the effects of jointly occurring drought and heat waves relative to these events occurring in isolation, and (3) how effects vary among functional groups related to nest location and migratory habit, and among ecoregions with differing precipitation and temperature regimes. Using data from remote sensing, meteorological stations, and the North American Breeding Bird Survey, we used mixed effects models to quantify responses of overall and functional group abundance to heat waves and droughts (occurring alone or in concert) at two key periods in the annual cycle of birds: breeding and post-fledging. We also compared responses among species with different migratory and nesting characteristics, and among 17 ecoregions of the conterminous United States. We found large changes in avian abundances related to 100-year extreme weather events occurring in both breeding and post-fledging periods, but little support for an interaction among time periods. We also found that jointly-, rather than individually-occurring heat waves and droughts were both more common and more predictive of abundance changes. Declining abundance was the only significant response to post-fledging events, while responses to breeding period events were larger but could be positive or negative. Negative responses were especially frequent in the western U.S., and among ground-nesting birds and Neotropical migrants, with the largest single-season declines (36%) occurring among ground-nesting birds in the desert Southwest. These results indicate the importance of functional traits, timing, and geography in determining avian responses to weather extremes. Because dispersal to other regions appears to be an important avian response, it may be essential to maintain habitat refugia in a more climatically variable future

Effects of drought on avian community structure

Droughts are expected to become more frequent under global climate change. Avifauna depend on precipitation for hydration, cover, and food. While there are indications that avian communities respond negatively to drought, little is known about the response of birds with differing functional and behavioral traits, what time periods and indicators of drought are most relevant, or how response varies geographically at broad spatial scales. Our goals were thus to determine (1) how avian abundance and species richness are related to drought, (2) whether community variations are more related to vegetation vigor or precipitation deviations and at what time periods relationships were strongest, (3) how response varies among avian guilds, and (4) how response varies among ecoregions with different precipitation regimes. Using mixed effect models and 1989–2005 North American Breeding Bird Survey data over the central United States, we examined the response to 10 precipitation- and greenness based metrics by abundance and species richness of the avian community overall, and of four behavioral guilds. Drought was associated with the most negative impacts on avifauna in the semiarid Great Plains, while positive responses were observed in montane areas. Our models predict that in the plains, Neotropical migrants respond the most negatively to extreme drought, decreasing by 13.2% and 6.0% in abundance and richness, while permanent resident abundance and richness increase by 11.5% and 3.6%, respectively in montane areas. In most cases, response of abundance was greater than richness and models based on precipitation metrics spanning 32-week time periods were more supported than those covering shorter time periods and those based on greenness. While drought is but one of myriad environmental variations birds encounter, our results indicate that drought is capable of imposing sizable shifts in abundance, richness, and composition on avian communities, an important implication of a more climatically variable future

Developing population models with data from marked individuals

Population viability analysis (PVA) is a powerful tool for biodiversity assessments, but its use has been limited because of the requirements for fully specified population models such as demographic structure, densitydependence, environmental stochasticity, and specification of uncertainties. Developing a fully specified population model from commonly available data sources -notably, mark-recapture studies -remains complicated due to lack of practical methods for estimating fecundity, true survival (as opposed to apparent survival), natural temporal variability in both survival and fecundity, density-dependence in the demographic parameters, and uncertainty in model parameters. We present a general method that estimates all the key parameters required to specify a stochastic, matrix-based population model, constructed using a long-term mark-recapture dataset. Unlike standard mark-recapture analyses, our approach provides estimates of true survival rates and fecundities, their respective natural temporal variabilities, and density-dependence functions, making it possible to construct a population model for long-term projection of population dynamics. Furthermore, our method includes a formal quantification of parameter uncertainty for global (multivariate) sensitivity analysis. We apply this approach to 9 bird species and demonstrate the feasibility of using data from the Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship (MAPS) program. Bias-correction factors for raw estimates of survival and fecundity derived from markrecapture data (apparent survival and juvenile:adult ratio, respectively) were non-negligible, and corrected parameters were generally more biologically reasonable than their uncorrected counterparts. Our method allows the development of fully specified stochastic population models using a single, widely available data source, substantially reducing the barriers that have until now limited the widespread application of PVA. This method is expected to greatly enhance our understanding of the processes underlying population dynamics and our ability to analyze viability and project trends for species of conservation concern

Current and Future Land Use around a Nationwide Protected Area Network

Land-use change around protected areas can reduce their effective size and limit their ability to conserve biodiversity because land-use change alters ecological processes and the ability of organisms to move freely among protected areas. The goal of our analysis was to inform conservation planning efforts for a nationwide network of protected lands by predicting future land use change. We evaluated the relative effect of three economic policy scenarios on land use surrounding the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Wildlife Refuges. We predicted changes for three land-use classes (forest/range, crop/pasture, and urban) by 2051. Our results showed an increase in forest/range lands (by 1.9% to 4.7% depending on the scenario), a decrease in crop/pasture between 15.2% and 23.1%, and a substantial increase in urban land use between 28.5% and 57.0%. The magnitude of land-use change differed strongly among different USFWS administrative regions, with the most change in the Upper Midwestern US (approximately 30%), and the Southeastern and Northeastern US (25%), and the rest of the U.S. between 15 and 20%. Among our scenarios, changes in land use were similar, with the exception of our ‘‘restricted-urban-growth’’ scenario, which resulted in noticeably different rates of change. This demonstrates that it will likely be difficult to influence land-use change patterns with national policies and that understanding regional land-use dynamics is critical for effective management and planning of protected lands throughout the U.S

Conservation of Forest Birds: Evidence of a Shifting Baseline in Community Structure

Quantifying changes in forest bird diversity is an essential task for developing effective conservation actions. When subtle changes in diversity accumulate over time, annual comparisons may offer an incomplete perspective of changes in diversity. In this case, progressive change, the comparison of changes in diversity from a baseline condition, may offer greater insight because changes in diversity are assessed over longer periods of times. Our objectives were to determine how forest bird diversity has changed over time and whether those changes were associated with forest disturbance.We used North American Breeding Bird Survey data, a time series of Landsat images classified with respect to land cover change, and mixed-effects models to associate changes in forest bird community structure with forest disturbance, latitude, and longitude in the conterminous United States for the years 1985 to 2006. We document a significant divergence from the baseline structure for all birds of similar migratory habit and nest location, and all forest birds as a group from 1985 to 2006. Unexpectedly, decreases in progressive similarity resulted from small changes in richness (<1 species per route for the 22-year study period) and modest losses in abundance (-28.7 - -10.2 individuals per route) that varied by migratory habit and nest location. Forest disturbance increased progressive similarity for Neotropical migrants, permanent residents, ground nesting, and cavity nesting species. We also documented highest progressive similarity in the eastern United States.Contemporary forest bird community structure is changing rapidly over a relatively short period of time (e.g., approximately 22 years). Forest disturbance and forest regeneration are primary factors associated with contemporary forest bird community structure, longitude and latitude are secondary factors, and forest loss is a tertiary factor. Importantly, these findings suggest some regions of the United States may already fall below the habitat amount threshold where fragmentation effects become important predictors of forest bird community structure

Extinction filters mediate the global effects of habitat fragmentation on animals

Habitat loss is the primary driver of biodiversity decline worldwide, but the effects of fragmentation (the spatial arrangement of remaining habitat) are debated. We tested the hypothesis that forest fragmentation sensitivity—affected by avoidance of habitat edges—should be driven by historical exposure to, and therefore species’ evolutionary responses to disturbance. Using a database containing 73 datasets collected worldwide (encompassing 4489 animal species), we found that the proportion of fragmentation-sensitive species was nearly three times as high in regions with low rates of historical disturbance compared with regions with high rates of disturbance (i.e., fires, glaciation, hurricanes, and deforestation). These disturbances coincide with a latitudinal gradient in which sensitivity increases sixfold at low versus high latitudes. We conclude that conservation efforts to limit edges created by fragmentation will be most important in the world’s tropical forests

BIOFRAG: A new database for analysing BIOdiversity responses to forest FRAGmentation

Habitat fragmentation studies are producing inconsistent and complex results across which it is nearly impossible to synthesise. Consistent analytical techniques can be applied to primary datasets, if stored in a flexible database that allows simple data retrieval for subsequent analyses. Method: We developed a relational database linking data collected in the field to taxonomic nomenclature, spatial and temporal plot attributes and further environmental variables (e.g. information on biogeographic region. Typical field assessments include measures of biological variables (e.g. presence, abundance, ground cover) of one species or a set of species linked to a set of plots in fragments of a forested landscape. Conclusion: The database currently holds records of 5792 unique species sampled in 52 landscapes in six of eight biogeographic regions: mammals 173, birds 1101, herpetofauna 284, insects 2317, other arthropods: 48, plants 1804, snails 65. Most species are found in one or two landscapes, but some are found in four. Using the huge amount of primary data on biodiversity response to fragmentation becomes increasingly important as anthropogenic pressures from high population growth and land demands are increasing. This database can be queried to extract data for subsequent analyses of the biological response to forest fragmentation with new metrics that can integrate across the components of fragmented landscapes. Meta-analyses of findings based on consistent methods and metrics will be able to generalise over studies allowing inter-comparisons for unified answers. The database can thus help researchers in providing findings for analyses of trade-offs between land use benefits and impacts on biodiversity and to track performance of management for biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes.Fil: Pfeifer, Marion. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Lefebvre, Veronique. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Gardner, Toby A.. Stockholm Environment Institute; SueciaFil: Arroyo Rodríguez, Víctor. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; MéxicoFil: Baeten, Lander. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Banks Leite, Cristina. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Barlow, Jos. Lancaster University; Reino UnidoFil: Betts, Matthew G.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Brunet, Joerg. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; SueciaFil: Cerezo Blandón, Alexis Mauricio. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Agronomía. Departamento de Métodos Cuantitativos y Sistemas de Información; ArgentinaFil: Cisneros, Laura M.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Collard, Stuart. Nature Conservation Society of South Australia; AustraliaFil: D´Cruze, Neil. The World Society for the Protection of Animals; Reino UnidoFil: Da Silva Motta, Catarina. Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações. Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazônia; BrasilFil: Duguay, Stephanie. Carleton University; CanadáFil: Eggermont, Hilde. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Eigenbrod, Félix. University of Southampton; Reino UnidoFil: Hadley, Adam S.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Hanson, Thor R.. No especifíca;Fil: Hawes, Joseph E.. University of East Anglia; Reino UnidoFil: Heartsill Scalley, Tamara. United State Department of Agriculture. Forestry Service; Puerto RicoFil: Klingbeil, Brian T.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Kolb, Annette. Universitat Bremen; AlemaniaFil: Kormann, Urs. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Kumar, Sunil. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Lachat, Thibault. Swiss Federal Institute for Forest; SuizaFil: Lakeman Fraser, Poppy. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Lantschner, María Victoria. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Bahía Blanca; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria. Centro Regional Patagonia Norte. Estación Experimental Agropecuaria San Carlos de Bariloche; ArgentinaFil: Laurance, William F.. James Cook University; AustraliaFil: Leal, Inara R.. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Lens, Luc. University of Ghent; BélgicaFil: Marsh, Charles J.. University of Leeds; Reino UnidoFil: Medina Rangel, Guido F.. Universidad Nacional de Colombia; ColombiaFil: Melles, Stephanie. University of Toronto; CanadáFil: Mezger, Dirk. Field Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Oldekop, Johan A.. University of Sheffield; Reino UnidoFil: Overal , Williams L.. Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Departamento de Entomologia; BrasilFil: Owen, Charlotte. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Peres, Carlos A.. University of East Anglia; Reino UnidoFil: Phalan, Ben. University of Southampton; Reino UnidoFil: Pidgeon, Anna Michle. University of Wisconsin; Estados UnidosFil: Pilia, Oriana. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Possingham, Hugh P.. Imperial College London; Reino Unido. The University Of Queensland; AustraliaFil: Possingham, Max L.. No especifíca;Fil: Raheem, Dinarzarde C.. Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences; Bélgica. Natural History Museum; Reino UnidoFil: Ribeiro, Danilo B.. Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul; BrasilFil: Ribeiro Neto, Jose D.. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Robinson, Douglas W.. State University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Robinson, Richard. Manjimup Research Centre; AustraliaFil: Rytwinski, Trina. Carleton University; CanadáFil: Scherber, Christoph. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Slade, Eleanor M.. University of Oxford; Reino UnidoFil: Somarriba, Eduardo. Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza; Costa RicaFil: Stouffer, Philip C.. State University of Louisiana; Estados UnidosFil: Struebig, Matthew J.. University of Kent; Reino UnidoFil: Tylianakis, Jason M.. University College London; Estados Unidos. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Teja, Tscharntke. Universität Göttingen; AlemaniaFil: Tyre, Andrew J.. Universidad de Nebraska - Lincoln; Estados UnidosFil: Urbina Cardona, Jose N.. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; ColombiaFil: Vasconcelos, Heraldo L.. Universidade Federal de Uberlandia; BrasilFil: Wearn, Oliver. Imperial College London; Reino Unido. The Zoological Society of London; Reino UnidoFil: Wells, Konstans. University of Adelaide; AustraliaFil: Willig, Michael R.. University of Connecticut; Estados UnidosFil: Wood, Eric. University of Wisconsin; Estados UnidosFil: Young, Richard P.. Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust; Reino UnidoFil: Bradley, Andrew V.. Imperial College London; Reino UnidoFil: Ewers, Robert M.. Imperial College London; Reino Unid

BIOFRAG - a new database for analyzing BIOdiversity responses to forest FRAGmentation

Peer reviewe