Does asymmetric gene flow among matrilines maintain the evolutionary potential of the European eel?

Using evolutionary theory to predict the dynamics of populations is one of the aims of evolutionary conservation. In endangered species, with geographic range extending over continuous areas, the predictive capacity of evolutionary-based conservation measures greatly depends on the accurate identification of reproductive units. The endangered European eel (Anguilla anguilla) is a highly migratory fish species with declining population due to a steep recruitment collapse in the beginning of the 1980s. Despite punctual observations of genetic structure, the population is viewed as a single panmictic reproductive unit. To understand the possible origin of the detected structure in this species, we used a combination of mitochondrial and nuclear loci to indirectly evaluate the possible existence of cryptic demes. For that, 403 glass eels from three successive cohorts arriving at a single location were screened for phenotypic and genetic diversity, while controlling for possible geographic variation. Over the 3 years of sampling, we consistently identified three major matrilines which we hypothesized to represent demes. Interestingly, not only we found that population genetic models support the existence of those matriline-driven demes over a completely panmictic mode of reproduction, but also we found evidence for asymmetric gene flow amongst those demes. We uphold the suggestion that the detection of demes related to those matrilines reflect a fragmented spawning ground, a conceptually plausible consequence of the low abundance that the European eel has been experiencing for three decades. Furthermore, we suggest that this cryptic organization may contribute to the maintenance of the adaptive potential of the species

Tornionjoen lohi-, meritaimen- ja vaellussiikakannat – yhteinen ruotsalais-suomalainen biologinen selvitys sopivien kalastussääntöjen arvioimiseksi vuodelle 2020

202

Tornionjoen lohi-, meritaimen- ja vaellussiikakannat – yhteinen ruotsalais-suomalainen biologinen selvitys sopivien kalastussääntöjen arvioimiseksi vuodelle 2019

202

Sympatric Spawning but Allopatric Distribution of Anguilla japonica and Anguilla marmorata: Temperature- and Oceanic Current-Dependent Sieving

Anguilla japonica and Anguilla marmorata share overlapping spawning sites, similar drifting routes, and comparable larval durations. However, they exhibit allopatric geographical distributions in East Asia. To clarify this ecological discrepancy, glass eels from estuaries in Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, and China were collected monthly, and the survival rate of A. marmorata under varying water salinities and temperatures was examined. The composition ratio of these 2 eel species showed a significant latitude cline, matching the 24°C sea surface temperature isotherm in winter. Both species had opposing temperature preferences for recruitment. A. marmorata prefer high water temperatures and die at low water temperatures. In contrast, A. japonica can endure low water temperatures, but their recruitment is inhibited by high water temperatures. Thus, A. japonica glass eels, which mainly spawn in summer, are preferably recruited to Taiwan, China, Korea, and Japan by the Kuroshio and its branch waters in winter. Meanwhile, A. marmorata glass eels, which spawn throughout the year, are mostly screened out in East Asia in areas with low-temperature coastal waters in winter. During summer, the strong northward currents from the South China Sea and Changjiang River discharge markedly block the Kuroshio invasion and thus restrict the approach of A. marmorata glass eels to the coasts of China and Korea. The differences in the preferences of the recruitment temperature for glass eels combined with the availability of oceanic currents shape the real geographic distribution of Anguilla japonica and Anguilla marmorata, making them “temperate” and “tropical” eels, respectively

Prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases—The EFP S3 level clinical practice guideline

Background: The recently published Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for the treatment of stages I–IV periodontitis provided evidence-based recommendations for treating periodontitis patients, defined according to the 2018 classification. Peri-implant diseases were also re-defined in the 2018 classification. It is well established that both peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis are highly prevalent. In addition, peri-implantitis is particularly challenging to manage and is accompanied by significant morbidity. Aim: To develop an S3 level CPG for the prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases, focusing on the implementation of interdisciplinary approaches required to prevent the development of peri-implant diseases or their recurrence, and to treat/rehabilitate patients with dental implants following the development of peri-implant diseases. Materials and Methods: This S3 level CPG was developed by the European Federation of Periodontology, following methodological guidance from the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process. A rigorous and transparent process included synthesis of relevant research in 13 specifically commissioned systematic reviews, evaluation of the quality and strength of evidence, formulation of specific recommendations, and a structured consensus process involving leading experts and a broad base of stakeholders. Results: The S3 level CPG for the prevention and treatment of peri-implant diseases culminated in the recommendation for implementation of various different interventions before, during and after implant placement/loading. Prevention of peri-implant diseases should commence when dental implants are planned, surgically placed and prosthetically loaded. Once the implants are loaded and in function, a supportive peri-implant care programme should be structured, including periodical assessment of peri-implant tissue health. If peri-implant mucositis or peri-implantitis are detected, appropriate treatments for their management must be rendered. Conclusion: The present S3 level CPG informs clinical practice, health systems, policymakers and, indirectly, the public on the available and most effective modalities to maintain healthy peri-implant tissues, and to manage peri-implant diseases, according to the available evidence at the time of publication

Treatment of stage I-III periodontitis-The EFP S3 level clinical practice guideline

Background: The recently introduced 2017 World Workshop on the classification of periodontitis, incorporating stages and grades of disease, aims to link disease classification with approaches to prevention and treatment, as it describes not only disease severity and extent but also the degree of complexity and an individual's risk. There is, therefore, a need for evidence-based clinical guidelines providing recommendations to treat periodontitis. Aim: The objective of the current project was to develop a S3 Level Clinical Practice Guideline (CPG) for the treatment of Stage I–III periodontitis. Material and Methods: This S3 CPG was developed under the auspices of the European Federation of Periodontology (EFP), following the methodological guidance of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The rigorous and transparent process included synthesis of relevant research in 15 specifically commissioned systematic reviews, evaluation of the quality and strength of evidence, the formulation of specific recommendations and consensus, on those recommendations, by leading experts and a broad base of stakeholders. Results: The S3 CPG approaches the treatment of periodontitis (stages I, II and III) using a pre-established stepwise approach to therapy that, depending on the disease stage, should be incremental, each including different interventions. Consensus was achieved on recommendations covering different interventions, aimed at (a) behavioural changes, supragingival biofilm, gingival inflammation and risk factor control; (b) supra- and sub-gingival instrumentation, with and without adjunctive therapies; (c) different types of periodontal surgical interventions; and (d) the necessary supportive periodontal care to extend benefits over time. Conclusion: This S3 guideline informs clinical practice, health systems, policymakers and, indirectly, the public on the available and most effective modalities to treat periodontitis and to maintain a healthy dentition for a lifetime, according to the available evidence at the time of publication