Anatomy of avian rictal bristles in Caprimulgiformes reveals reduced tactile function in open-habitat, partially diurnal foraging species

Avian rictal bristles are present in many species of birds, especially in nocturnal species. Rictal bristles occur along the upper beak and are morphologically similar to mammalian whiskers. Mammalian whiskers are important tactile sensors, guiding locomotion, foraging and social interactions, and have a well‐characterised anatomy. However, it is not yet known whether avian rictal bristles have a sensory function, and their morphology, anatomy and function have also not been described in many species. Our study compares bristle morphology, follicle anatomy and their association with foraging traits, across 12 Caprimulgiform species. Rictal bristle morphology and follicle anatomy were diverse across the 12 species. Nine of the 12 species had mechanoreceptors around their bristle follicles; however, there was large variation in their musculature, mechanoreceptor numbers and bristle morphology. Overall, species with short, thin, branching bristles that lacked mechanoreceptors tended to forage pre‐dusk in open habitats, whereas species with mechanoreceptors around their bristle follicle tended to forage at night and in more closed habitats. We suggest that rictal bristles are likely to be tactile in many species and may aid in navigation, foraging and collision avoidance; however, identifying rictal bristle function is challenging and demands further investigation in many species

Using Ethnographic Methods to Articulate Community-Based Conceptions of Cultural Heritage Management

How can ethnographic methods help communities articulate and enact their own conceptions of heritage management? This and related questions are being explored through an international research project, ‘Intellectual Property Issues in Cultural Heritage’. The project includes up to twenty community- based initiatives that incorporate community-based participatory research and ethnographic methods to explore emerging intellectual property-related issues in archaeological contexts; the means by which they are being addressed or resolved; and the broader implications of these issues and concerns. We discuss three examples that use ethnography to (a) articulate local or customary laws and principles of archaeological heritage management among a First Nations group in British Columbia; (b) assemble knowledge related to land/sea use and cultural practices of the Moriori people of Rekohu (Chatham Islands) for their use in future land and heritage manage- ment policies; and (c) aid a tribal cultural centre in Michigan in crafting co-management strategies to protect spiritual traditions associated with a rock art site on state property. Such situations call for participatory methods that place control over the design, process, products, and interpretation of ‘archaeology’ in the hands of cultural descendants. We hope that these examples of community-based conceptions of archaeological heritage management, facilitated through ethnographic methods and participatory approaches, will increase awareness of the value of these and other alternative approaches and the need to share them widely

Physician privacy concerns when disclosing patient data for public health purposes during a pandemic influenza outbreak

Background: Privacy concerns by providers have been a barrier to disclosing patient information for public health\ud purposes. This is the case even for mandated notifiable disease reporting. In the context of a pandemic it has been\ud argued that the public good should supersede an individual’s right to privacy. The precise nature of these provider\ud privacy concerns, and whether they are diluted in the context of a pandemic are not known. Our objective was to\ud understand the privacy barriers which could potentially influence family physicians’ reporting of patient-level\ud surveillance data to public health agencies during the Fall 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza outbreak.\ud Methods: Thirty seven family doctors participated in a series of five focus groups between October 29-31 2009.\ud They also completed a survey about the data they were willing to disclose to public health units. Descriptive\ud statistics were used to summarize the amount of patient detail the participants were willing to disclose, factors that\ud would facilitate data disclosure, and the consensus on those factors. The analysis of the qualitative data was based\ud on grounded theory.\ud Results: The family doctors were reluctant to disclose patient data to public health units. This was due to concerns\ud about the extent to which public health agencies are dependable to protect health information (trusting beliefs),\ud and the possibility of loss due to disclosing health information (risk beliefs). We identified six specific actions that\ud public health units can take which would affect these beliefs, and potentially increase the willingness to disclose\ud patient information for public health purposes.\ud Conclusions: The uncertainty surrounding a pandemic of a new strain of influenza has not changed the privacy\ud concerns of physicians about disclosing patient data. It is important to address these concerns to ensure reliable\ud reporting during future outbreaks.University of Ottawa Open Access Author Fun

Cold War : a Transnational Approach to a Global Heritage

Although within living memory, many countries now consider their surviving Cold War architecture as part of their heritage. It can even be a priority for heritage managers given that significant buildings are often suitable for reuse while extensive ‘brownfield’ sites such as airfields can be used for large-scale redevelopment. In a number of countries whose work we refer to here (notably the United Kingdom and elsewhere in Europe), agencies responsible for managing their country’s heritage have approached this priority by creating national inventories of sites and buildings with a view to taking informed decisions on their future. This paper presents the argument that the wider international context of the Cold War provides a more appropriate (or additional, higher-level) framework for such decision making. Such a ‘transnational’ approach would allow the comparison of similar (e.g. European) sites not merely within national borders but across the full extent of their western NATO1 deployment in Europe and North America. Taking this approach would also allow comparison with related sites in countries that formed part of the eastern-bloc Warsaw Pact.2 After outlining some examples of how national agencies have approached their Cold War heritage, this paper presents the four stages of this transnational approach making provision for an improved understanding and management of Cold War heritage sites wherever they occur. With a specific focus on the direct comparison between England and Russia, and also referring to sites surviving elsewhere within the former NATO and Warsaw Pact regions, as well as the United States, we argue that this four-stage approach: provides new understandings of a complex archaeological and architectural record; gives fresh perspectives on significance; and (importantly in a time of geopolitical instability) does so in a spirit of cooperation and friendship