The Life and Death of Barn Beetles: Faunas from Manure and Stored Hay inside Farm Buildings in Northern Iceland

This research was funded by the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission and received support from the Research Budget of the Department of Archaeology at the University of Aberdeen. This project was undertaken as part of doctoral studies supervised by Dr Karen Milek, to whom V.F. is especially grateful for her support and advice. Thomas Birch, Sigrún Inga Garðarsdóttir, and Paul Ledger provided invaluable assistance during fieldwork. V.F. would like to dedicate this paper to Tom and Sía, who met during this fieldwork and are getting married this year. Many people from Fornleifastofnun Íslands – Garðar Guðmundsson, Ólöf Þorsteinsdóttir, Þóra Pétursdóttir, Adolf Friðriksson and Uggi Ævarsson – as well as Unnstein Ingason, Ágústa Edwald, and Mark Young, helped with fieldwork logistics. Special thanks are due to all the Icelandic farmers and their families who kindly allowed us to collect insects on their farms and provided help when needed: Hermann Aðalsteinsson, Hermína Fjóla Ingólfsdóttir, Guðmundur Skúlason, Sigrún Á. Franzdóttir, Dúna Magnúsdóttir, Sverrir Steinbergsson, Valgeir Þorvaldsson, Reynir Sveinsson, Jónas Þór Ingólfsson, and Ívar Ólafsson. Eva Panagiotakopulu, Jan Klimaszewski, Ales Smetana, Georges Pelletier, Gabor Pozsgai, and Jenni Stockham helped with some of the beetle identifications. A.J.D. acknowledges the support of National Science Foundation through ARC 1202692. Consultation of the BugsCEP database (Buckland & Buckland, 2006) aided the redaction of this paper. The authors would like to thank David Smith and two anonymous reviewers for insightful comments that helped improve the quality of this paper.Peer reviewedPostprin

Tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tocilizumab in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with both hypoxia and systemic inflammation. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Those trial participants with hypoxia (oxygen saturation <92% on air or requiring oxygen therapy) and evidence of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥75 mg/L) were eligible for random assignment in a 1:1 ratio to usual standard of care alone versus usual standard of care plus tocilizumab at a dose of 400 mg–800 mg (depending on weight) given intravenously. A second dose could be given 12–24 h later if the patient's condition had not improved. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381936). Findings: Between April 23, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021, 4116 adults of 21 550 patients enrolled into the RECOVERY trial were included in the assessment of tocilizumab, including 3385 (82%) patients receiving systemic corticosteroids. Overall, 621 (31%) of the 2022 patients allocated tocilizumab and 729 (35%) of the 2094 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·85; 95% CI 0·76–0·94; p=0·0028). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including those receiving systemic corticosteroids. Patients allocated to tocilizumab were more likely to be discharged from hospital within 28 days (57% vs 50%; rate ratio 1·22; 1·12–1·33; p<0·0001). Among those not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, patients allocated tocilizumab were less likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (35% vs 42%; risk ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·77–0·92; p<0·0001). Interpretation: In hospitalised COVID-19 patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation, tocilizumab improved survival and other clinical outcomes. These benefits were seen regardless of the amount of respiratory support and were additional to the benefits of systemic corticosteroids. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings: Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·93–1·07; p=0·95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·94–1·03; p=0·57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·93–1·05; p=0·79). Interpretation: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Some reflections on jurisprudence.

LEIDSSTELSELOPLADEN-RUG0

Dispersal and seasonal distributions of black-faced impala in the Etosha National Park, Namibia

Factors affecting the seasonal distribution of the vulnerable black-faced impala at Etosha National Park, Namibia and the spread of the impala in the park since their translocation there in the 1970s were studied in the hot dry season of 2000 and the wet season of 2001 in order to provide information for future translocations of this antelope. In the 30 years since their release in the park, black-faced impala appear to have dispersed a maximum of 31.5 km from their initial release sites, effectively forming five subpopulations based on their five initial release sites. The mean minimum distance that impala had dispersed between water holes since their release was 7.11 +/- 1.47 km. Black-faced impala concentrated strongly around water holes; more than 50% were within 1 km of water holes in both seasons. Changes in population densities in different habitats may have resulted from seasonal movements of impala between adjacent habitats. The role of initial release sites in determining the distribution of threatened species such as the black-faced impala is discussed in light of its importance for future translocations