Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities

Aim: Comprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW). Location: Global. Taxon: All extant mammal species. Methods: Range maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species). Results: Range maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use. Main conclusion: Expert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control.Fil: Marsh, Charles J.. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Sica, Yanina. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Burguin, Connor. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Dorman, Wendy A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Anderson, Robert C.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: del Toro Mijares, Isabel. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Vigneron, Jessica G.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Barve, Vijay. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Dombrowik, Victoria L.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Duong, Michelle. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Guralnick, Robert. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Hart, Julie A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Maypole, J. Krish. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: McCall, Kira. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Ranipeta, Ajay. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Schuerkmann, Anna. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Torselli, Michael A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Lacher, Thomas. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: Wilson, Don E.. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Abba, Agustin Manuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - La Plata. Centro de Estudios Parasitológicos y de Vectores. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo. Centro de Estudios Parasitológicos y de Vectores; ArgentinaFil: Aguirre, Luis F.. Universidad Mayor de San Simón; BoliviaFil: Arroyo Cabrales, Joaquín. Instituto Nacional de Antropología E Historia, Mexico; MéxicoFil: Astúa, Diego. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Baker, Andrew M.. Queensland University of Technology; Australia. Queensland Museum; AustraliaFil: Braulik, Gill. University of St. Andrews; Reino UnidoFil: Braun, Janet K.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Brito, Jorge. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Busher, Peter E.. Boston University; Estados UnidosFil: Burneo, Santiago F.. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: Camacho, M. Alejandra. Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: de Almeida Chiquito, Elisandra. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Cook, Joseph A.. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Cuéllar Soto, Erika. Sultan Qaboos University; OmánFil: Davenport, Tim R. B.. Wildlife Conservation Society; TanzaniaFil: Denys, Christiane. Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle; FranciaFil: Dickman, Christopher R.. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Eldridge, Mark D. B.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Fernandez Duque, Eduardo. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Francis, Charles M.. Environment And Climate Change Canada; CanadáFil: Frankham, Greta. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Freitas, Thales. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Friend, J. Anthony. Conservation And Attractions; AustraliaFil: Giannini, Norberto Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico - Tucumán. Unidad Ejecutora Lillo; ArgentinaFil: Gursky-Doyen, Sharon. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: Hackländer, Klaus. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Hawkins, Melissa. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Helgen, Kristofer M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Heritage, Steven. University of Duke; Estados UnidosFil: Hinckley, Arlo. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Estación Biológica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Holden, Mary. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Holekamp, Kay E.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Humle, Tatyana. University Of Kent; Reino UnidoFil: Ibáñez Ulargui, Carlos. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Estación Biológica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Jackson, Stephen M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Janecka, Mary. University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown; Estados Unidos. University of Pittsburgh; Estados UnidosFil: Jenkins, Paula. Natural History Museum; Reino UnidoFil: Juste, Javier. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Estación Biológica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Leite, Yuri L. R.. Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo; BrasilFil: Novaes, Roberto Leonan M.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Lim, Burton K.. Royal Ontario Museum; CanadáFil: Maisels, Fiona G.. Wildlife Conservation Society; Estados UnidosFil: Mares, Michael A.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Marsh, Helene. James Cook University; AustraliaFil: Mattioli, Stefano. Università degli Studi di Siena; ItaliaFil: Morton, F. Blake. University of Hull; Reino UnidoFil: Ojeda, Agustina Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Áridas; ArgentinaFil: Ordóñez Garza, Nicté. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Pardiñas, Ulises Francisco J.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Centro Nacional Patagónico. Instituto de Diversidad y Evolución Austral; ArgentinaFil: Pavan, Mariana. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Riley, Erin P.. San Diego State University; Estados UnidosFil: Rubenstein, Daniel I.. University of Princeton; Estados UnidosFil: Ruelas, Dennisse. Museo de Historia Natural, Lima; PerúFil: Schai-Braun, Stéphanie. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Schank, Cody J.. University of Texas at Austin; Estados UnidosFil: Shenbrot, Georgy. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Solari, Sergio. Universidad de Antioquia; ColombiaFil: Superina, Mariella. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Medicina y Biología Experimental de Cuyo; ArgentinaFil: Tsang, Susan. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Van Cakenberghe, Victor. Universiteit Antwerp; BélgicaFil: Veron, Geraldine. Université Pierre et Marie Curie; FranciaFil: Wallis, Janette. Kasokwa-kityedo Forest Project; UgandaFil: Whittaker, Danielle. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Wells, Rod. Flinders University.; AustraliaFil: Wittemyer, George. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Woinarski, John. Charles Darwin University; AustraliaFil: Upham, Nathan S.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Jetz, Walter. University of Yale; Estados Unido

Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities

AimComprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW).LocationGlobal.TaxonAll extant mammal species.MethodsRange maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species).ResultsRange maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use.Main conclusionExpert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control

Global wealth disparities drive adherence to COVID-safe pathways in head and neck cancer surgery

Peer reviewe

Outcomes from elective colorectal cancer surgery during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

Molecular Characterization of Monocyte Subsets Reveals Specific and Distinctive Molecular Signatures Associated With Cardiovascular Disease in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Objectives: This study, developed within the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking project PRECISESADS framework, aimed at functionally characterize the monocyte subsets in RA patients, and analyze their involvement in the increased CV risk associated with RA.Methods: The frequencies of monocyte subpopulations in the peripheral blood of 140 RA patients and 145 healthy donors (HDs) included in the PRECISESADS study were determined by flow cytometry. A second cohort of 50 RA patients and 30 HDs was included, of which CD14+ and CD16+ monocyte subpopulations were isolated using immuno-magnetic selection. Their transcriptomic profiles (mRNA and microRNA), proinflammatory patterns and activated pathways were evaluated and related to clinical features and CV risk. Mechanistic in vitro analyses were further performed.Results: CD14++CD16+ intermediate monocytes were extended in both cohorts of RA patients. Their increased frequency was associated with the positivity for autoantibodies, disease duration, inflammation, endothelial dysfunction and the presence of atheroma plaques, as well as with the CV risk score. CD14+ and CD16+ monocyte subsets showed distinctive and specific mRNA and microRNA profiles, along with specific intracellular signaling activation, indicating different functionalities. Moreover, that specific molecular profiles were interrelated and associated to atherosclerosis development and increased CV risk in RA patients. In vitro, RA serum promoted differentiation of CD14+CD16− to CD14++CD16+ monocytes. Co-culture with RA-isolated monocyte subsets induced differential activation of endothelial cells.Conclusions: Our overall data suggest that the generation of inflammatory monocytes is associated to the autoimmune/inflammatory response that mediates RA. These monocyte subsets, -which display specific and distinctive molecular signatures- might promote endothelial dysfunction and in turn, the progression of atherosclerosis through a finely regulated process driving CVD development in RA

Sexual Competitiveness and Induced Egg Sterility by Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus Gamma-Irradiated Males: A Laboratory and Field Study in Mexico

The sterile insect technique may prove useful for the suppression of mosquito vectors of medical importance in regions where arboviruses pose a serious public health threat. In the present study, we examined the effects of sterilizing irradiation doses across different ratios of fertile:irradiated males on the mating competitiveness of Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus under laboratory and field-cage conditions. For both species, the percentage of females inseminated and the number of eggs laid over two gonotrophic cycles varied significantly in mating treatments involving 1:1, 1:5, and 1:10 fertile:irradiated males compared to controls of entirely fertile or entirely irradiated males but was not generally affected by the irradiation dose. Egg hatching was negatively affected in females exposed to increasing proportions of irradiated males in both laboratory and field cages. Male competitiveness (Fried’s index) values varied from 0.19 to 0.58 in the laboratory and were between 0.09 and 1.0 in field cages, depending on th species. Competitiveness values were negatively affected by th eirradiation dose in both species under field-cage conditions, whereas in the laboratory, Ae. albopictus was sensitive to the dose but Ae. aegypti was not. In general, male competitiveness was similar across all mating regimes. Most importantly, induced egg sterility was positively correlated with the proportion of irradiated males present in the mating treatments, reaching a maximum of 88% under field-cage conditions for both Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus males treated with 50 and 40 Gy irradiation, respectively. These results indicate that sterile males produced at our facility are suitable and competitive enough for field pilot SIT projects and provide guidance to decide the optimal sterile:fertile ratios

Laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: Long-term results Gastrectomía laparoscópica por adenocarcinoma gástrico: Resultados a largo plazo

Background: the objective of our paper is to report on the long-term results of patients with gastric cancer treated by mini-invasive surgery with "intention-to-treat" laparoscopy. Patients and methods: between June 1993 and January 2006, 130 patients comprising 94 men and 36 women with gastric adenocarcinoma were prospectively selected by two surgical teams in three hospitals based on a prior agreement (CHU Charleroi, Belgium, Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg and Zumárraga Hospital, Spain). Patients with adenocarcinoma of the cardia were excluded. Mean age of patients was 68 years (range, 37-85 years). Results: post-operative mortality within 60 days of operation was 6 patients; 109 patients were therefore properly followed up for an average of 49 months (range, 2-153 months). Average survival time for 10 non-resected patients was 4.5 months. Average survival rate for all 14 palliatively resected patients was 6.9 months. Actuarial 5-year survival rate for R0-type surgery was 35%. Global actuarial 5-year survival rate after resective surgery was 31%. Conclusions: laparoscopic gastrectomy with any kind of lymphadenectomy is a major but safe operation with acceptable mortality and morbility rates in patients with advanced gastric cancer, usually in poor general condition. Laparoscopic gastrectomy for locally advanced cancers is equivalent to laparotomy as far as long-term oncological results are concerned