679 research outputs found

    Estimating Bald Eagle Occupancy and Density in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

    Get PDF
    Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are a newly recovered species, and as such, little is known about their modern population dynamics and how these dynamics interact with their ecology. With the recent expansion of eagle populations, managers have begun to question assumptions about bald eagles, including their sensitivity to disturbances. Discerning how eagles react to both outside influences and internal factors is crucial for eagle conservation, especially in focal areas of importance, such as the Chesapeake Bay. I used seven years of monitoring data from the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF) to determine the occupancy (chapter 1) and density (chapter 2) of bald eagles in concentration areas in the Bay (Rappahannock, James, Potomac, York Rivers) and their associations with habitat characteristics. I used robust occupancy models to assess habitat associations within concentration areas (chapter 1). Additionally, I used Royle-Nichols n-mixture models to find average abundance and multiply this across the number of units in the study area to determine effective density (chapter 2). Bald eagle occupancy (chapter 1) was seasonally variable, with different covariates influencing eagles at different times of the year. Patterns of occupancy by non-breeding populations (summer months) responded to salinity, land cover, and recreational disturbance. Patterns of occupancy by bald eagles in winter (breeding season) responded to salinity and were age-specific. In both seasons, less saline waters (tidal fresh and oligohaline) were more frequently occupied than more saline waters (mesohaline). Density models (chapter 2) suggested that canopy cover may be important. However, the models I used appeared inappropriate for the data, they did not converge, and therefore my results were generally uninformative for this metric. Chapter one occupancy analyses show high rates of bald eagle occupancy and a relative resistance of eagles to recreational disturbances, which suggests that this population is growing, which may lead to increased management concerns in the future. Chapter two analyses revealed that archived data from mandated monitoring of sensitive species are valuable to the scientific community; however, if the models used are not appropriate for the data collected, the ability to answer research questions is limited

    The sociogram - a useful tool in the analysis of focus groups

    Get PDF

    Nerve growth factor (NGF)

    Get PDF

    The function and the role of the mitochondrial glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase in mammalian tissues

    Get PDF
    AbstractMitochondrial glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (mGPDH) is not included in the traditional textbook schemes of the respiratory chain, reflecting the fact that it is a non-standard, tissue-specific component of mammalian mitochondria. But despite its very simple structure, mGPDH is a very important enzyme of intermediary metabolism and as a component of glycerophosphate shuttle it functions at the crossroads of glycolysis, oxidative phosphorylation and fatty acid metabolism. In this review we summarize the present knowledge on the structure and regulation of mGPDH and discuss its metabolic functions, reactive oxygen species production and tissue and organ specific roles in mammalian mitochondria at physiological and pathological conditions

    Psychological and educational interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community

    Get PDF
    This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of psychological interventions (such as cognitive behavioural therapy) (with or without an education component) for preventing falls in older people living in the community.To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of educational interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community

    Sandhill Crane abundance in Nebraska during spring migration: making sense of multiple data points

    Get PDF
    The USFWS conducts an annual one-day aerial survey of the North and Central Platte River Valleys, generally on the fourth Tuesday in March, to estimate the abundance of the midcontinent Sandhill Crane population. However, these abundance indices demonstrate unrealistic inter-annual variation as a result of deviations in migration chronology and other factors. Additional research efforts have been undertaken within the region to estimate Sandhill Crane abundance over time and space but these projects generally seek to answer unique questions, employ differing survey methods, and cover overlapping yet distinct survey areas. Despite the wealth of information there remains significant uncertainty regarding the actual abundance of Sandhill Cranes in Nebraska during the peak of migration. We conducted a model-based metadata analysis relying on the distinctive strengths of three databases to assess USFWS data, identify annual abundance estimates that may not be robust, and developed parameter-based and factorbased corrections to USFWS indices from 2000 to 2019. Our analyses suggest that at the peak of spring migration there is likely between 1.1 and 1.4 million Sandhill Cranes in the North and Central Platte River Valleys of Nebraska. Our best performing models indicated the most likely peak estimate was 1.27 million Sandhill Cranes with approximately 220,000 in the North Platte River Valley and 1,050,000 in the Central Platte River Valley in both 2018 and 2019. Our assessment suggests that 25% of USFWS aerial estimates are robust, with the rest representing underestimates as both exogenous and endogenous factors such as migration chronology and survey methodology serve to bias indices downward. Given this downward bias, the three-year running average used by the USFWS actually provides a robust estimate for only 5–15% of the years analyzed. By contrast, we found that a five-year rolling maximum provides a robust estimate for 70–75% of the years analyzed

    Care home versus hospital and own home environments for rehabilitation of older people

    Get PDF
    Background Rehabilitation for older people has acquired an increasingly important profile for both policy‐makers and service providers within health and social care agencies. This has generated an increased interest in the use of alternative care environments including care home environments. Yet, there appears to be limited evidence on which to base decisions. This review is the first update of the Cochrane review which was published in 2003. Objectives To compare the effects of care home environments (e.g. nursing home, residential care home and nursing facilities) versus hospital environments and own home environments in the rehabilitation of older people. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Specialised Register and Pending Folder, MEDLINE (1950 to March Week 3 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 2007 Week 13), CINAHL (1982 to March, Week 4, 2007), other databases and reference lists of relevant review articles were additionally reviewed. Date of most recent search: March 2007. Selection criteria Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) that compared rehabilitation outcomes for persons 60 years or older who received rehabilitation whilst residing in a care home with those who received rehabilitation in hospital or own home environments. Data collection and analysis Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Main results In this update, 8365 references were retrieved. Of these, 339 abstracts were independently assessed by 2 review authors, and 56 studies and 5 review articles were subsequently obtained. Full text papers were independently assessed by two or three review authors and none of these met inclusion criteria. Authors' conclusions There is insufficient evidence to compare the effects of care home environments versus hospital environments or own home environments on older persons rehabilitation outcomes. Although the authors acknowledge that absence of effect is not no effect. There are three main reasons; the first is that the description and specification of the environment is often not clear; secondly, the components of the rehabilitation system within the given environments are not adequately specified and; thirdly, when the components are clearly specified they demonstrate that the control and intervention sites are not comparable with respect to the methodological criteria specified by Cochrane EPOC group. The combined effect of these factors resulted in the comparability between intervention and control groups being very weak
    corecore