Angler effort and catch within a spatially complex system of small lakes

Spatial layout of waterbodies and waterbody size can affect a creel clerk’s ability to intercept anglers for interviews and to accurately count anglers, which will affect the accuracy and precision of estimates of effort and catch. This study aimed to quantify angling effort and catch across a spatially complex system of19 small (\u3c100 ha) lakes, the Fremont lakes. Total (±SE) angling effort (hours) on individual lakes ranged from 0 (0) to 7,137 (305). Bank anglers utilized 18 of the 19 lakes, and their mean (±SE) trip lengths(hours) ranged from 0.80 (0.31) to 7.75 (6.75), depending on the waterbody. In contrast, boat anglers utilized 14 of the 19 lakes, and their trip lengths ranged from 1.39 (0.24) to 4.25 (0.71), depending on the waterbody. The most sought fishes, as indexed by number of lakes on which effort was exerted, were anything (17 of 19 lakes), largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides (15 of 19 lakes), and channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus (13 of 19 lakes). Bluegill Lepomis machrochirus, crappie Pomoxis spp., and largemouth bass were caught most frequently across the lakes, but catch rates varied considerably by lake. Of the1,138 parties interviewed, most parties (93%) visited a single lake but there were 77 (7%) parties that indicated that they had visited multiple lakes during a single day. The contingent of parties that visited more than one lake a day were primarily (87%) bank anglers.. The number of lake-to-lake connections made by anglers visiting more than one waterbody during a single day was related to catch rates and total angling effort. The greater resolution that was achieved with a lake specific creel survey at Fremont lakes revealed a system of lakes with a large degree of spatial variation in angler effort and catch that would be missed by a coarser, system-wide survey that did not differentiate individual lakes

The evolving SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Africa: Insights from rapidly expanding genomic surveillance

INTRODUCTION Investment in Africa over the past year with regard to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) sequencing has led to a massive increase in the number of sequences, which, to date, exceeds 100,000 sequences generated to track the pandemic on the continent. These sequences have profoundly affected how public health officials in Africa have navigated the COVID-19 pandemic. RATIONALE We demonstrate how the first 100,000 SARS-CoV-2 sequences from Africa have helped monitor the epidemic on the continent, how genomic surveillance expanded over the course of the pandemic, and how we adapted our sequencing methods to deal with an evolving virus. Finally, we also examine how viral lineages have spread across the continent in a phylogeographic framework to gain insights into the underlying temporal and spatial transmission dynamics for several variants of concern (VOCs). RESULTS Our results indicate that the number of countries in Africa that can sequence the virus within their own borders is growing and that this is coupled with a shorter turnaround time from the time of sampling to sequence submission. Ongoing evolution necessitated the continual updating of primer sets, and, as a result, eight primer sets were designed in tandem with viral evolution and used to ensure effective sequencing of the virus. The pandemic unfolded through multiple waves of infection that were each driven by distinct genetic lineages, with B.1-like ancestral strains associated with the first pandemic wave of infections in 2020. Successive waves on the continent were fueled by different VOCs, with Alpha and Beta cocirculating in distinct spatial patterns during the second wave and Delta and Omicron affecting the whole continent during the third and fourth waves, respectively. Phylogeographic reconstruction points toward distinct differences in viral importation and exportation patterns associated with the Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants and subvariants, when considering both Africa versus the rest of the world and viral dissemination within the continent. Our epidemiological and phylogenetic inferences therefore underscore the heterogeneous nature of the pandemic on the continent and highlight key insights and challenges, for instance, recognizing the limitations of low testing proportions. We also highlight the early warning capacity that genomic surveillance in Africa has had for the rest of the world with the detection of new lineages and variants, the most recent being the characterization of various Omicron subvariants. CONCLUSION Sustained investment for diagnostics and genomic surveillance in Africa is needed as the virus continues to evolve. This is important not only to help combat SARS-CoV-2 on the continent but also because it can be used as a platform to help address the many emerging and reemerging infectious disease threats in Africa. In particular, capacity building for local sequencing within countries or within the continent should be prioritized because this is generally associated with shorter turnaround times, providing the most benefit to local public health authorities tasked with pandemic response and mitigation and allowing for the fastest reaction to localized outbreaks. These investments are crucial for pandemic preparedness and response and will serve the health of the continent well into the 21st century