Trade in live reptiles, its impact on wild populations, and the role of the European market

Of the 10,272 currently recognized reptile species, the trade of fewer than 8% are regulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the European Wildlife Trade Regulations (EWTR). However, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List has assessed 45% of the world's reptile species and determined that at least 1390 species are threatened by “biological resource use”. Of these, 355 species are intentionally targeted by collectors, including 194 non-CITES-listed species. Herein we review the global reptile pet trade, its impacts, and its contribution to the over-harvesting of species and populations, in light of current international law. Findings are based on an examination of relevant professional observations, online sources, and literature (e.g., applicable policies, taxonomy [reptile database], trade statistics [EUROSTAT], and conservation status [IUCN Red List]). Case studies are presented from the following countries and regions: Australia, Central America, China, Galapagos Islands (Ecuador), Germany, Europe, India, Indonesia (Kalimantan), Islamic Republic of Iran, Japan, Madagascar, Mexico, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Western Africa, and Western Asia. The European Union (EU) plays a major role in reptile trade. Between 2004 and 2014 (the period under study), the EU member states officially reported the import of 20,788,747 live reptiles. This review suggests that illegal trade activities involve species regulated under CITES, as well as species that are not CITES-regulated but nationally protected in their country of origin and often openly offered for sale in the EU. Further, these case studies demonstrate that regulations and enforcement in several countries are inadequate to prevent the overexploitation of species and to halt illegal trade activities

Processing abstract sequence structure: learning without knowing, or knowing without learning?

Constant interaction with a dynamic environment-from riding a bicycle to segmenting speech-makes sensitivity to the sequential structure of the world a fundamental dimension of information processing. Accounts of sequence learning vary widely, with some authors arguing that parsing and segmentation processes are central, and others proposing that sequence learning involves mere memorization. In this paper, we argue that sequence knowledge is essentially statistical in nature, and that sequence learning involves simple associative prediction mechanisms. We focus on a choice reaction situation introduced by Lee (1997), in which participants were exposed to material that follows a single abstract rule, namely that stimuli are selected randomly, but never appear more than once in a legal sequence. Perhaps surprisingly, people can learn this rule very well. Or can they? We offer a conceptual replication of the original finding, but a very different interpretation of the results, as well as simulation work that makes it clear how highly abstract dimensions of the stimulus material can in fact be learned based on elementary associative mechanisms. We conclude that, when relevant, memory is optimized to facilitate responding to events that have not occurred recently, and that sequence learning in general always involves sensitivity to repetition distance.Journal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tSCOPUS: cp.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Photodynamic therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in pathologic myopia with verteporfin - 1-year results of a randomized clinical trial - VIP report no. 1

Objective: To determine if photodynamic therapy with verteporfin (Visudyne; CIBA Vision Corp, Duluth, GA) can improve the chance of stabilizing or improving vision (m and best-corrected visual acuity (Snellen equivalent) of approximately 20/100 or better. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to verteporfin (6 mg per square meter of body surface area; n = 81) or placebo (5% dextrose in water, n = 39) administered via intravenous infusion of 30 ml over 10 minutes. Fifteen minutes after the start of the infusion, a laser light at 689 nm was delivered at an intensity of 600 mW/cm(2) over 83 seconds to give a light dose of 50 J/cm(2) to a round spot size on the retina with a diameter of 1000 mum larger than the greatest linear dimension of the choroidal neovascular lesion. At follow-up examinations every 3 months, retreatment with either verteporfin or placebo (as assigned at baseline) was applied to areas of fluorescein leakage if present. Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of eyes at the follow-up examination 12 months after study entry with fewer than eight letters (approximately 1.5 lines) of visual acuity lost, adhering to an intent-to-treat analysis. Results: At baseline, move than 90% of each group had evidence of classic CNV (regardless of whether occult CNV was present) and only 12 (15%) and 5 (13%) cases in the verteporfin and placebo groups, respectively, had occult CNV (regardless of whether classic CNV was present). Seventy-nine of the 81 verteporfin-treated patients (98%) compared with 36 of the 39 placebo-treated patients (92%) completed the month 12 examination. Visual acuity, contrast sensitivity, and fluorescein angiographic outcomes were better in the verteporfin-treated eyes than in the placebo-treated eyes at every follow-up examination through the month 12 examination. At the month 12 examination, 58 (72%) of the verteporfin-treated patients compared with 17 (44%) of the placebo-treated patients lost fewer than eight letters (P 1 line). Seventy (86%) of the verteporfin-treated patients compared with 26 (67%) of the placebo-treated patients lost fewer than 15 letters (P = 0.01), Few ocular or other systemic adverse events were associated with verteporfin therapy compared with placebo treatment. Conclusions: Because photodynamic therapy with verteporfin can safely increase the chance of stabilizing or improving vision in patients with subfoveal CNV from pathologic myopia compared with a placebo, we recommend ophthalmologists consider verteporfin therapy for treatment of such patients. Ophthalmology 2001; 108:841-852 (C) 2001 by the American Academy of Ophthalmology

Verteporfin therapy of subfoveal choroidal neovascularization in age-related macular degeneration: Two-year results of a randomized clinical trial including lesions with occult with no classic choroidal neovascularization-verteporfin in photodynamic therapy report 2

PURPOSE: To determine if photodynamic therapy with verteporfin (Visudyne; Novartis AG, Bulach, Switzerland), termed verteporfin therapy, can safely reduce the risk of vision loss compared with a placebo (with sham treatment) in patients with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization caused by age-related macular degeneration who were identified with a lesion composed of occult with no classic choroidal neovascularization, or with presumed early onset classic choroidal neovascularization with good visual acuity letter score, METHODS: This was a double-masked, placebo controlled (sham treatment), randomized, multicenter clinical trial involving 28 ophthalmology practices in Europe and North America. The study population was patients with age related macular degeneration, with subfoveal choroidal neovascularization lesions measuring no greater than 5400 mum in greatest linear dimension with either 1) occult with no classic choroidal neovascularization, best-corrected visual acuity score of at least 50 (Snellen equivalent approximately 20/100), and evidence of hemorrhage or recent disease progression; or 2) evidence of classic choroidal neovascularization with a best-corrected visual acuity score of at least 70 (better than a Snellen equivalent of approximately 20/40); assigned randomly (2:1) to verteporfin therapy or placebo therapy. Verteporfin (6 mg per square meter of body surface area) or placebo (5% dextrose in water) was administered by means of intravenous infusion of 30 mi over 10 minutes. Fifteen minutes after the start of the infusion, a laser light at 689 nm delivered 50 J/cm(2) by application of an intensity of 600 mW/cm(2) over 83 seconds using a spot size with a diameter 1000 mum larger than the greatest linear dimension of the choroidal neovascularization lesion on the retina. At follow-up examinations every 3 months, retreatment with the same regimen was applied if angiography showed fluorescein leakage. The main outcome measure was at least moderate vision loss, that is, a loss of at least 15 letters (approximately 3 lines), adhering to an intent-to treat analysis with the last observation carried forward to impute for missing data. RESULTS: Two hundred ten (93%) and 193 (86%) of the 225 patients in the verteporfin group compared with 104 (91%) and 99 (87%) of the 114 patients in the placebo group completed the month 12 and 24 examinations, respectively. On average, verteporfin-treated patients received five treatments over the 24 months of follow-up. The primary outcome was similar for the verteporfin-treated and the placebo-treated eyes through the month 12 examination, although a number of secondary visual and angiographic outcomes significantly favored the verteporfin-treated group. Between the month 12 and 24 examinations, the treatment benefit grew so that by the month 24 examination, the vertepor-fin-treated eyes were less likely to have moderate or severe vision loss. Of the 225 verteporfin-treated patients, 121 (54%) compared with 76 (67%) of 114 placebo-treated patients lost at least 15 letters (P =.023). Likewise, 61 of the verteporfin-treated patients (30%) compared with 54 of the placebo-treated patients (47%) lost at least 30 letters (P = .001). Statistically significant results favoring verteporfin therapy at the month 24 examination were consistent between the total population and the subgroup of patients with a baseline lesion composition identified as occult choroidal neovascularization with no classic choroidal neovascularization, This subgroup included 166 of the 225 verteporfin-treated patients (74%) and 92 of the 114 placebo-treated patients (81%). In these patients, 91 of the verteporfin-treated group (55%) compared with 63 of the placebo-treated group (68%) lost at least 15 letters (P =.032), whereas 48 of the verteporfin-treated group (29%) and 43 of the placebo-treated group (47%) lost at least 30 letters (P =.004). Other secondary outcomes, including visual acuity letter score worse than 34 (approximate Snellen equivalent of 20/200 or worse), mean change in visual acuity letter score, development of classic choroidal neovascularization, progression of classic choroidal neovascularization and size of lesion, favored the verteporfin-treated group at both the month 12 and month 24 examination for both the entire study group and the subgroup of cases with occult with no classic choroidal neovascularization at baseline. Subgroup analyses of lesions composed of occult with no classic choroidal neovascularization at baseline suggested that the treatment benefit was greater for patients with either smaller lesions (4 disc areas or less) or lower levels of visual acuity (letter score less than 65, an approximate Snellen equivalent of 20/50(-1) or worse) at baseline. Prospectively planned multivariable analyses confirmed that these two baseline variables affected the magnitude of treatment benefit. Of the 123 verteporfin-treated patients and 64 placebo-heated patients with either visual acuity score Less than 65 or lesion size 4 disc areas or less at baseline, 60 (49%) and 48 (75%) lost at least 15 letters (P 2001 by Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.)