A Targeted Conservation Approach for Improving Environmental Quality: Multiple Benefits and Expanded Opportunities

Find out how targeted conservation practices can have the most impact on environmental quality while causing only a small change in overall agricultural production. Environmental benefits are discussed related to clean air and water, productive soils, diverse wildlife and plant habitat, and biological controls for crop protection.https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/extension_ag_pubs/1084/thumbnail.jp

Effectiveness of Denitrifying Bioreactors on Water Pollutant Reduction from Agricultural Areas

HighlightsDenitrifying woodchip bioreactors treat nitrate-N in a variety of applications and geographies.This review focuses on subsurface drainage bioreactors and bed-style designs (including in-ditch).Monitoring and reporting recommendations are provided to advance bioreactor science and engineering. Denitrifying bioreactors enhance the natural process of denitrification in a practical way to treat nitrate-nitrogen (N) in a variety of N-laden water matrices. The design and construction of bioreactors for treatment of subsurface drainage in the U.S. is guided by USDA-NRCS Conservation Practice Standard 605. This review consolidates the state of the science for denitrifying bioreactors using case studies from across the globe with an emphasis on full-size bioreactor nitrate-N removal and cost-effectiveness. The focus is on bed-style bioreactors (including in-ditch modifications), although there is mention of denitrifying walls, which broaden the applicability of bioreactor technology in some areas. Subsurface drainage denitrifying bioreactors have been assessed as removing 20% to 40% of annual nitrate-N loss in the Midwest, and an evaluation across the peer-reviewed literature published over the past three years showed that bioreactors around the world have been generally consistent with that (N load reduction median: 46%; mean ±SD: 40% ±26%; n = 15). Reported N removal rates were on the order of 5.1 g N m-3 d-1 (median; mean ±SD: 7.2 ±9.6 g N m-3 d-1; n = 27). Subsurface drainage bioreactor installation costs have ranged from less than $5,000 to$27,000, with estimated cost efficiencies ranging from less than $2.50 kg-1 N year-1 to roughly$20 kg-1 N year-1 (although they can be as high as $48 kg-1 N year-1). A suggested monitoring setup is described primarily for the context of conservation practitioners and watershed groups for assessing annual nitrate-N load removal performance of subsurface drainage denitrifying bioreactors. Recommended minimum reporting measures for assessing and comparing annual N removal performance include: bioreactor dimensions and installation date; fill media size, porosity, and type; nitrate-N concentrations and water temperatures; bioreactor flow treatment details; basic drainage system and bioreactor design characteristics; and N removal rate and efficiency

The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review

We survey the economic literature, both theoretical and empirical, on the choice of intellectual property protection by firms. Our focus is on the trade-offs between using patents and disclosing versus the use of secrecy, although we also look briefly at the use of other means of formal intellectual property protection. (JEL D82, K11, O31, O34) </jats:p

Ultra-rare genetic variation in common epilepsies: a case-control sequencing study

BACKGROUND:Despite progress in understanding the genetics of rare epilepsies, the more common epilepsies have proven less amenable to traditional gene-discovery analyses. We aimed to assess the contribution of ultra-rare genetic variation to common epilepsies. METHODS:We did a case-control sequencing study with exome sequence data from unrelated individuals clinically evaluated for one of the two most common epilepsy syndromes: familial genetic generalised epilepsy, or familial or sporadic non-acquired focal epilepsy. Individuals of any age were recruited between Nov 26, 2007, and Aug 2, 2013, through the multicentre Epilepsy Phenome/Genome Project and Epi4K collaborations, and samples were sequenced at the Institute for Genomic Medicine (New York, USA) between Feb 6, 2013, and Aug 18, 2015. To identify epilepsy risk signals, we tested all protein-coding genes for an excess of ultra-rare genetic variation among the cases, compared with control samples with no known epilepsy or epilepsy comorbidity sequenced through unrelated studies. FINDINGS:We separately compared the sequence data from 640 individuals with familial genetic generalised epilepsy and 525 individuals with familial non-acquired focal epilepsy to the same group of 3877 controls, and found significantly higher rates of ultra-rare deleterious variation in genes established as causative for dominant epilepsy disorders (familial genetic generalised epilepsy: odd ratio [OR] 2·3, 95% CI 1·7-3·2, p=9·1 × 10-8; familial non-acquired focal epilepsy 3·6, 2·7-4·9, p=1·1 × 10-17). Comparison of an additional cohort of 662 individuals with sporadic non-acquired focal epilepsy to controls did not identify study-wide significant signals. For the individuals with familial non-acquired focal epilepsy, we found that five known epilepsy genes ranked as the top five genes enriched for ultra-rare deleterious variation. After accounting for the control carrier rate, we estimate that these five genes contribute to the risk of epilepsy in approximately 8% of individuals with familial non-acquired focal epilepsy. Our analyses showed that no individual gene was significantly associated with familial genetic generalised epilepsy; however, known epilepsy genes had lower p values relative to the rest of the protein-coding genes (p=5·8 × 10-8) that were lower than expected from a random sampling of genes. INTERPRETATION:We identified excess ultra-rare variation in known epilepsy genes, which establishes a clear connection between the genetics of common and rare, severe epilepsies, and shows that the variants responsible for epilepsy risk are exceptionally rare in the general population. Our results suggest that the emerging paradigm of targeting of treatments to the genetic cause in rare devastating epilepsies might also extend to a proportion of common epilepsies. These findings might allow clinicians to broadly explain the cause of these syndromes to patients, and lay the foundation for possible precision treatments in the future. FUNDING:National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), and Epilepsy Research UK

Overall Cost Comparison of Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Procedures With Endoscopist- or Anesthesia-Supported Sedation by Activity-Based Costing Techniques

Objective: Endoscopic/colonoscopic procedures are either done with gastroenterologist-administered conscious sedation or with anesthesia-administered sedation with propofol. There are potential benefits to anesthesia-administered sedation, but the concern has been the associated increased cost. Methods: To perform this study, we used the time-derived activity-based costing (TDABC) technique to accurately assess the true cost of gastrointestinal procedures done with gastroenterologist-administered conscious sedation vs anesthesia-administered sedation in 2 areas of our practice that use predominantly conscious sedation or anesthesia-administered sedation. This type of study has never been reported using such an integrated approach. This study was performed on 2 different days in June 2015. Results: The true cost associated with anesthesia-administered sedation in our practice was associated with only 9% to 24% greater cost when the TDABC technique was applied. Conclusion: Gastrointestinal procedures with anesthesia-administered sedation are not as costly when all factors are considered. Using novel approaches to cost measurement, such as the TDABC, allows a total cost measurement approach across an episode of care that existing cost measurements in health care are incapable of

Harvested winter rye energy cover crop: multiple benefits for North Central US

Cover crops (CCs) can reduce nitrogen (N) loss to subsurface drainage and can be reimagined as bioenergy crops for renewable natural gas production and carbon (C) benefits (fossil fuel substitution and C storage). Little information is available on the large-scale adoption of winter rye for these purposes. To investigate the impacts in the North Central US, we used the Root Zone Water Quality Model to simulate corn-soybean rotations with and without winter rye across 40 sites. The simulations were interpolated across a five-state area (IA, IL, IN, MN, and OH) with counties in the Mississippi River basin, which consists of ∼8 million ha with potential for rye CCs on artificially drained corn-soybean fields (more than 63 million ha total). Harvesting fertilized rye CCs before soybean planting in this area can reduce N loads to the Gulf of Mexico by 27% relative to no CCs, and provide 18 million Mg yr ^−1 of biomass-equivalent to 0.21 EJ yr ^−1 of biogas energy content or 3.5 times the 2022 US cellulosic biofuel production. Capturing the CO _2 in biogas from digesting rye in the region and sequestering it in underground geologic reservoirs could mitigate 7.5 million Mg CO _2 yr ^−1 . Nine clusters of counties (hotspots) were identified as an example of implementing rye as an energy CC on an industrial scale where 400 Gg yr ^−1 of rye could be sourced within a 121 km radius. Hotspots consisted of roughly 20% of the region’s area and could provide ∼50% of both the N loss reduction and rye biomass. These results suggest that large-scale energy CC adoption would substantially contribute to the goals of reducing N loads to the Gulf of Mexico, increasing bioenergy production, and providing C benefits