Coendangered hard-ticks: threatened or threatening?

The overwhelming majority of animal conservation projects are focused on vertebrates, despite most of the species on Earth being invertebrates. Estimates state that about half of all named species of invertebrates are parasitic in at least one stage of their development. The dilemma of viewing parasites as biodiversity or pest has been discussed by several authors. However, ticks were omitted. The latest taxonomic synopses of non-fossil Ixodidae consider valid 700 species. Though, how many of them are still extant is almost impossible to tell, as many of them are known only from type specimens in museums and were never collected since their original description. Moreover, many hosts are endangered and as part of conservation efforts of threatened vertebrates, a common practice is the removal of, and treatment for external parasites, with devastating impact on tick populations. There are several known cases when the host became extinct with subsequent coextinction of their ectoparasites. For our synoptic approach we have used the IUCN status of the host in order to evaluate the status of specifically associated hard-ticks. As a result, we propose a number of 63 coendangered and one extinct hard-tick species. On the other side of the coin, the most important issue regarding tick-host associations is vectorial transmission of microbial pathogens (i.e. viruses, bacteria, protozoans). Tick-borne diseases of threatened vertebrates are sometimes fatal to their hosts. Mortality associated with pathogens acquired from ticks has been documented in several cases, mostly after translocations. Are ticks a real threat to their coendangered host and should they be eliminated? Up to date, there are no reliable proofs that ticks listed by us as coendangered are competent vectors for pathogens of endangered animals

Pathways towards coexistence with large carnivores in production systems

Coexistence between livestock grazing and carnivores in rangelands is a major challenge in terms of sustainable agriculture, animal welfare, species conservation and ecosystem function. Many effective non-lethal tools exist to protect livestock from predation, yet their adoption remains limited. Using a social-ecological transformations framework, we present two qualitative models that depict transformative change in rangelands grazing. Developed through participatory processes with stakeholders from South Africa and the United States of America, the models articulate drivers of change and the essential pathways to transition from routine lethal management of carnivores towards mutually beneficial coexistence. The pathways define broad actions that incorporate multiple values in grazing systems including changes to livestock management practices, financial support, industry capacity building, research, improved governance and marketing initiatives. A key fnding is the new concept of ‘Predator Smart Farming’, a holistic and conscientious approach to agriculture, which increases the resilience of landscapes, animals (domesticated and wild) and rural livelihoods. Implementation of these multiple pathways would lead to a future system that ensures thriving agricultural communities, secure livelihoods, reduced violence toward animals, and landscapes that are productive and support species conservation and coexistence

Evaluation of prognostic risk models for postoperative pulmonary complications in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and international external validation cohort study

Background Stratifying risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery allows clinicians to modify risk through targeted interventions and enhanced monitoring. In this study, we aimed to identify and validate prognostic models against a new consensus definition of postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods We did a systematic review and international external validation cohort study. The systematic review was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched MEDLINE and Embase on March 1, 2020, for articles published in English that reported on risk prediction models for postoperative pulmonary complications following abdominal surgery. External validation of existing models was done within a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing major abdominal surgery. Data were collected between Jan 1, 2019, and April 30, 2019, in the UK, Ireland, and Australia. Discriminative ability and prognostic accuracy summary statistics were compared between models for the 30-day postoperative pulmonary complication rate as defined by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine Core Outcome Measures in Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC). Model performance was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC). Findings In total, we identified 2903 records from our literature search; of which, 2514 (86·6%) unique records were screened, 121 (4·8%) of 2514 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 29 unique prognostic models were identified. Nine (31·0%) of 29 models had score development reported only, 19 (65·5%) had undergone internal validation, and only four (13·8%) had been externally validated. Data to validate six eligible models were collected in the international external validation cohort study. Data from 11 591 patients were available, with an overall postoperative pulmonary complication rate of 7·8% (n=903). None of the six models showed good discrimination (defined as AUROCC ≥0·70) for identifying postoperative pulmonary complications, with the Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia score showing the best discrimination (AUROCC 0·700 [95% CI 0·683–0·717]). Interpretation In the pre-COVID-19 pandemic data, variability in the risk of pulmonary complications (StEP-COMPAC definition) following major abdominal surgery was poorly described by existing prognostication tools. To improve surgical safety during the COVID-19 pandemic recovery and beyond, novel risk stratification tools are required. Funding British Journal of Surgery Society