191 research outputs found

    Carbon budgets of top- and subsoil food webs in an arable system

    Get PDF
    © 2018 This study assessed the carbon (C) budget and the C stocks in major compartments of the soil food web (bacteria, fungi, protists, nematodes, meso- and macrofauna) in an arable field with/without litter addition. The C stocks in the food web were more than three times higher in topsoil (0–10 cm) compared to subsoil (>40 cm). Microorganisms contained over 95% of food web C, with similar contributions of bacteria and fungi in topsoil. Litter addition did not alter C pools of soil biota after one growing season, except for the increase of fungi and fungal feeding nematodes in the topsoil. However, the C budget for functional groups changed with depth, particularly in the microfauna. This suggests food web resilience to litter amendment in terms of C pool sizes after one growing season. In contrast, the distinct depth dependent pattern indicates specific metacommunities, likely shaped by dominant abiotic and biotic habitat properties

    Networking Our Way to Better Ecosystem Service Provision.

    Get PDF
    The ecosystem services (EcoS) concept is being used increasingly to attach values to natural systems and the multiple benefits they provide to human societies. Ecosystem processes or functions only become EcoS if they are shown to have social and/or economic value. This should assure an explicit connection between the natural and social sciences, but EcoS approaches have been criticized for retaining little natural science. Preserving the natural, ecological science context within EcoS research is challenging because the multiple disciplines involved have very different traditions and vocabularies (common-language challenge) and span many organizational levels and temporal and spatial scales (scale challenge) that define the relevant interacting entities (interaction challenge). We propose a network-based approach to transcend these discipline challenges and place the natural science context at the heart of EcoS research.The QUINTESSENCE Consortium gratefully acknowledges the support of DĂ©partment SPE and MĂ©taprogramme ECOSERV of INRA, and the French ANR projects PEERLESS (ANR-12-AGRO-0006) and AgroBioSE (ANR-13-AGRO-0001).This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Elsevier via http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.12.00

    Đ˜ĐœŃ„Đ”ĐșŃ†ĐžĐŸĐœĐœĐ°Ń ŃĐŸŃŃ‚Đ°ĐČĐ»ŃŃŽŃ‰Đ°Ń Đž ĐžĐŒĐŒŃƒĐœĐŸĐżĐ°Ń‚ĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐłĐžŃ про Ń…Ń€ĐŸĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșох ĐČĐŸŃĐżĐ°Đ»ĐžŃ‚Đ”Đ»ŃŒĐœŃ‹Ń… Đ·Đ°Đ±ĐŸĐ»Đ”ĐČĐ°ĐœĐžŃŃ… ŃĐ»ĐžĐ·ĐžŃŃ‚ĐŸĐč ĐŸĐ±ĐŸĐ»ĐŸŃ‡ĐșĐž ĐłĐ°ŃŃ‚Ń€ĐŸĐŽŃƒĐŸĐŽĐ”ĐœĐ°Đ»ŃŒĐœĐŸĐč ĐŸĐ±Đ»Đ°ŃŃ‚Đž

    Get PDF
    ВыяĐČĐ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ ĐșĐŸĐžĐœŃ„ĐžŃ†ĐžŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ°ĐœĐžĐ” ŃĐ»ĐžĐ·ĐžŃŃ‚ĐŸĐč ĐŸĐ±ĐŸĐ»ĐŸŃ‡ĐșĐž Đ¶Đ”Đ»ŃƒĐŽĐŸŃ‡ĐœĐŸâˆ’ĐșĐžŃˆĐ”Ń‡ĐœĐŸĐłĐŸ траĐșта Helicobacter pylori Đž ĐČĐžŃ€ŃƒŃĐ°ĐŒĐž группы гДрпДса у Đ±ĐŸĐ»ŃŒĐœŃ‹Ń… Ń…Ń€ĐŸĐœĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșĐžĐŒ ĐłĐ°ŃŃ‚Ń€ĐžŃ‚ĐŸĐŒ, ŃĐ·ĐČĐ”ĐœĐœĐŸĐč Đ±ĐŸĐ»Đ”Đ·ĐœŃŒŃŽ жДлуЎĐșĐ° Đž ĐŽĐČĐ”ĐœĐ°ĐŽŃ†Đ°Ń‚ĐžĐżĐ”Ń€ŃŃ‚ĐœĐŸĐč ĐșОшĐșĐž. ĐŸŃ€ĐŸĐČĐ”ĐŽĐ”ĐœĐ° ĐŸŃ†Đ”ĐœĐșĐ° ĐŸĐ±Ń‰ĐžŃ… Đž спДцОфОчДсĐșох ĐžĐŒĐŒŃƒĐœĐœŃ‹Ń… рДаĐșцоĐč ĐŸŃ€ĐłĐ°ĐœĐžĐ·ĐŒĐ° ĐœĐ° уĐșĐ°Đ·Đ°ĐœĐœŃ‹Đ” ĐžĐœŃ„Đ”ĐșŃ†ĐžĐŸĐœĐœŃ‹Đ” Đ°ĐłĐ”ĐœŃ‚Ń‹. ĐžĐ±ĐœĐ°Ń€ŃƒĐ¶Đ”ĐœĐœŃ‹Đ” ĐžĐ·ĐŒĐ”ĐœĐ”ĐœĐžŃ ĐČ ĐșĐ»Đ”Ń‚ĐŸŃ‡ĐœĐŸĐŒ Đž ĐłŃƒĐŒĐŸŃ€Đ°Đ»ŃŒĐœĐŸĐŒ Đ·ĐČĐ”ĐœĐ” ĐžĐŒĐŒŃƒĐœĐžŃ‚Đ”Ń‚Đ° ĐŒĐŸĐłŃƒŃ‚ сĐČĐžĐŽĐ”Ń‚Đ”Đ»ŃŒŃŃ‚ĐČĐŸĐČать ĐŸĐ± ĐŸĐ±ŃƒŃĐ»ĐŸĐČĐ»Đ”ĐœĐœĐŸĐŒ ĐžĐŒĐž ŃĐžŃŃ‚Đ”ĐŒĐœĐŸĐŒ ĐžĐŒĐŒŃƒĐœĐŸĐżĐ°Ń‚ĐŸĐ»ĐŸĐłĐžŃ‡Đ”ŃĐșĐŸĐŒ ĐżŃ€ĐŸŃ†Đ”ŃŃĐ”.Co−infection of the gastrointestinal mucosa with Helicobacter pylori and herpes viruses in patients with chronic gastritis, gastric and duodenal ulcer was revealed. General and specific immune reactions of the organism to the above agents were evaluated. The revealed changes in the cellular and humoral immunity can suggest systemic immunopathological process

    A Tale of Four Stories: Soil Ecology, Theory, Evolution and the Publication System

    Get PDF
    International audienceBACKGROUND: Soil ecology has produced a huge corpus of results on relations between soil organisms, ecosystem processes controlled by these organisms and links between belowground and aboveground processes. However, some soil scientists think that soil ecology is short of modelling and evolutionary approaches and has developed too independently from general ecology. We have tested quantitatively these hypotheses through a bibliographic study (about 23000 articles) comparing soil ecology journals, generalist ecology journals, evolutionary ecology journals and theoretical ecology journals. FINDINGS: We have shown that soil ecology is not well represented in generalist ecology journals and that soil ecologists poorly use modelling and evolutionary approaches. Moreover, the articles published by a typical soil ecology journal (Soil Biology and Biochemistry) are cited by and cite low percentages of articles published in generalist ecology journals, evolutionary ecology journals and theoretical ecology journals. CONCLUSION: This confirms our hypotheses and suggests that soil ecology would benefit from an effort towards modelling and evolutionary approaches. This effort should promote the building of a general conceptual framework for soil ecology and bridges between soil ecology and general ecology. We give some historical reasons for the parsimonious use of modelling and evolutionary approaches by soil ecologists. We finally suggest that a publication system that classifies journals according to their Impact Factors and their level of generality is probably inadequate to integrate "particularity" (empirical observations) and "generality" (general theories), which is the goal of all natural sciences. Such a system might also be particularly detrimental to the development of a science such as ecology that is intrinsically multidisciplinary

    Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

    Get PDF
    Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≄1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≀6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

    Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks. DESIGN: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF). PARTICIPANTS: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk. RESULTS: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710)

    Two-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: results from GARFIELD-AF.

    Get PDF
    AIMS: The relationship between outcomes and time after diagnosis for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is poorly defined, especially beyond the first year. METHODS AND RESULTS: GARFIELD-AF is an ongoing, global observational study of adults with newly diagnosed NVAF. Two-year outcomes of 17 162 patients prospectively enrolled in GARFIELD-AF were analysed in light of baseline characteristics, risk profiles for stroke/systemic embolism (SE), and antithrombotic therapy. The mean (standard deviation) age was 69.8 (11.4) years, 43.8% were women, and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.3 (1.6); 60.8% of patients were prescribed anticoagulant therapy with/without antiplatelet (AP) therapy, 27.4% AP monotherapy, and 11.8% no antithrombotic therapy. At 2-year follow-up, all-cause mortality, stroke/SE, and major bleeding had occurred at a rate (95% confidence interval) of 3.83 (3.62; 4.05), 1.25 (1.13; 1.38), and 0.70 (0.62; 0.81) per 100 person-years, respectively. Rates for all three major events were highest during the first 4 months. Congestive heart failure, acute coronary syndromes, sudden/unwitnessed death, malignancy, respiratory failure, and infection/sepsis accounted for 65% of all known causes of death and strokes for <10%. Anticoagulant treatment was associated with a 35% lower risk of death. CONCLUSION: The most frequent of the three major outcome measures was death, whose most common causes are not known to be significantly influenced by anticoagulation. This suggests that a more comprehensive approach to the management of NVAF may be needed to improve outcome. This could include, in addition to anticoagulation, interventions targeting modifiable, cause-specific risk factors for death. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

    Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362
    • 

    corecore