Increasing phylogenetic stochasticity at high elevations on summits across a remote North American wilderness

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/1/ajb21328-sup-0002-AppendixS2.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/2/ajb21328-sup-0003-AppendixS3.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/3/ajb21328-sup-0004-AppendixS4.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/4/ajb21328.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/5/ajb21328-sup-0009-AppendixS9.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/6/ajb21328-sup-0005-AppendixS5.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/7/ajb21328-sup-0007-AppendixS7.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/8/ajb21328-sup-0006-AppendixS6.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/9/ajb21328-sup-0008-AppendixS8.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/10/ajb21328_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/150529/11/ajb21328-sup-0001-AppendixS1.pd

A path forward in the debate over health impacts of endocrine disrupting chemicals

Several recent publications reflect debate on the issue of “endocrine disrupting chemicals” (EDCs), indicating that two seemingly mutually exclusive perspectives are being articulated separately and independently. Considering this, a group of scientists with expertise in basic science, medicine and risk assessment reviewed the various aspects of the debate to identify the most significant areas of dispute and to propose a path forward. We identified four areas of debate. The first is about the definitions for terms such as “endocrine disrupting chemical”, “adverse effects”, and “endocrine system”. The second is focused on elements of hormone action including “potency”, “endpoints”, “timing”, “dose” and “thresholds”. The third addresses the information needed to establish sufficient evidence of harm. Finally, the fourth focuses on the need to develop and the characteristics of transparent, systematic methods to review the EDC literature. Herein we identify areas of general consensus and propose resolutions for these four areas that would allow the field to move beyond the current and, in our opinion, ineffective debate

Modelling distributions of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus using climate, host density and interspecies competition.

Florida faces the challenge of repeated introduction and autochthonous transmission of arboviruses transmitted by Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus. Empirically-based predictive models of the spatial distribution of these species would aid surveillance and vector control efforts. To predict the occurrence and abundance of these species, we fit a mixed-effects zero-inflated negative binomial regression to a mosquito surveillance dataset with records from more than 200,000 trap days, representative of 53% of the land area and ranging from 2004 to 2018 in Florida. We found an asymmetrical competitive interaction between adult populations of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus for the sampled sites. Wind speed was negatively associated with the occurrence and abundance of both vectors. Our model predictions show high accuracy (72.9% to 94.5%) in validation tests leaving out a random 10% subset of sites and data since 2017, suggesting a potential for predicting the distribution of the two Aedes vectors

A systematic review of antibody mediated immunity to coronaviruses: kinetics, correlates of protection, and association with severity

Funder: John A Watson Faculty Scholar fellowshipAbstract: Many public health responses and modeled scenarios for COVID-19 outbreaks caused by SARS-CoV-2 assume that infection results in an immune response that protects individuals from future infections or illness for some amount of time. The presence or absence of protective immunity due to infection or vaccination (when available) will affect future transmission and illness severity. Here, we review the scientific literature on antibody immunity to coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2 as well as the related SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and endemic human coronaviruses (HCoVs). We reviewed 2,452 abstracts and identified 491 manuscripts relevant to 5 areas of focus: 1) antibody kinetics, 2) correlates of protection, 3) immunopathogenesis, 4) antigenic diversity and cross-reactivity, and 5) population seroprevalence. While further studies of SARS-CoV-2 are necessary to determine immune responses, evidence from other coronaviruses can provide clues and guide future research

The regulatory challenge of chemicals in the environment: Toxicity testing, risk assessment, and decision-making models.

Environmental assessment for chemicals relies on models of fate, exposure, toxicity, risk, and impacts. Together, these models should provide scientific support for regulatory risk management decision-making, assuming that progress through the data-information-knowledge-wisdom (DIKW) hierarchy is both appropriate and sufficient. Improving existing regulatory processes necessitates continuing enhancement of interpretation and evaluation of key data for use in decision-making schemes, including ecotoxicity testing data, physical-chemical properties, and environmental fate processes. Yet, as environmental objectives also increase in scope and sophistication to encompass a safe chemical economy, testing, risk assessment, and decision-making are subject to additional complexity due to the ongoing interaction between science and policy models. Problems associated with existing design and implementation choices in science and policy have both limited needed development beyond chemo-centric environmental risk assessment modeling and constrained needed improvements in environmental decision-making. Without a thorough understanding of either the scientific foundations or the disparate evaluation processes for validation, quality, and relevance, this results in complex technical and philosophical problems that increase costs and decrease productivity. Both over- and under-management of chemicals are consequences of failure to validate key model assumptions, unjustified standardized views on data selection, and inordinate reification (i.e., abstract concepts are wrongly treated as facts)

Potency matters: Thresholds govern endocrine activity

AbstractWhether thresholds exist for endocrine active substances and for endocrine disrupting effects of exogenous chemicals has been posed as a question for regulatory policy by the European Union. This question arises from a concern that the endocrine system is too complex to allow estimations of safe levels of exposure to any chemical with potential endocrine activity, and a belief that any such chemical can augment, retard, or disrupt the normal background activity of endogenous hormones. However, vital signaling functions of the endocrine system require it to continuously discriminate the biological information conveyed by potent endogenous hormones from a more concentrated background of structurally similar, endogenous molecules with low hormonal potential. This obligatory ability to discriminate important hormonal signals from background noise can be used to define thresholds for induction of hormonal effects, without which normal physiological functions would be impossible. From such thresholds, safe levels of exposure can be estimated. This brief review highlights how the fundamental principles governing hormonal effects – affinity, efficacy, potency, and mass action – dictate the existence of thresholds and why these principles also define the potential that exogenous chemicals might have to interfere with normal endocrine functioning