Site investigation for the effects of vegetation on ground stability

The procedure for geotechnical site investigation is well established but little attention is currently given to investigating the potential of vegetation to assist with ground stability. This paper describes how routine investigation procedures may be adapted to consider the effects of the vegetation. It is recommended that the major part of the vegetation investigation is carried out, at relatively low cost, during the preliminary (desk) study phase of the investigation when there is maximum flexibility to take account of findings in the proposed design and construction. The techniques available for investigation of the effects of vegetation are reviewed and references provided for further consideration. As for general geotechnical investigation work, it is important that a balance of effort is maintained in the vegetation investigation between (a) site characterisation (defining and identifying the existing and proposed vegetation to suit the site and ground conditions), (b) testing (in-situ and laboratory testing of the vegetation and root systems to provide design parameters) and (c) modelling (to analyse the vegetation effects)

Commentary on Coram et al. (2021) on the use of Facebook to understand marine mammal stranding issues in Southeast Asia

We reviewed Coram et al. (Biodivers Conserv 30:2341–2359, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-021-02196-6), a paper that highlights the use of social media data to understand marine litter and marine mammals in Southeast Asia. While we commend its intent, we find that the methodology used and conclusions drawn portray an incomplete and inaccurate perception of how strandings, stranding response, and analysis of stranding data have been conducted in the region. By focusing on investigative results revealed by a very limited search of one social media platform (Facebook), using only English keywords, and insuffcient ground-truthing, Coram et al. (2021) have, unintentionally, given the perception that Southeast Asian scientists have not conducted even the bare minimum of investigation required to better understand the issue of marine litter and its impact on marine mammals. In this commentary we provide a more accurate account of strandings research in Asia and include recommendations to improve future studies using social media to assess conservation issues

Commentary on Coram et al. (2021) on the use of Facebook to understand marine mammal stranding issues in Southeast Asia

We reviewed Coram et al. (Biodivers Conserv 30:2341–2359, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-021-02196-6), a paper that highlights the use of social media data to understand marine litter and marine mammals in Southeast Asia. While we commend its intent, we find that the methodology used and conclusions drawn portray an incomplete and inaccurate perception of how strandings, stranding response, and analysis of stranding data have been conducted in the region. By focusing on investigative results revealed by a very limited search of one social media platform (Facebook), using only English keywords, and insufficient ground-truthing, Coram et al. (2021) have, unintentionally, given the perception that Southeast Asian scientists have not conducted even the bare minimum of investigation required to better understand the issue of marine litter and its impact on marine mammals. In this commentary we provide a more accurate account of strandings research in Asia and include recommendations to improve future studies using social media to assess conservation issues

Abattoir-based estimates of mycobacterial infections in Cameroon

Mycobacteria cause major diseases including human tuberculosis, bovine tuberculosis and Johne’s disease. In livestock, the dominant species is M. bovis causing bovine tuberculosis (bTB), a disease of global zoonotic importance. In this study, we estimated the prevalence of Mycobacteria in slaughter cattle in Cameroon. A total of 2,346 cattle were examined in a cross-sectional study at four abattoirs in Cameroon. Up to three lesions per animal were collected for further study and a retropharyngeal lymph node was collected from a random sample of non-lesioned animals. Samples were cultured on Lowenstein Jensen media and the BACTEC MGIT 960 system, and identified using the Hain® Genotype kits. A total of 207/2,346 cattle were identified with bTB-like lesions, representing 4.0% (45/1,129), 11.3% (106/935), 23.8% (38/160) and 14.8% (18/122) of the cattle in the Bamenda, Ngaoundere, Garoua and Maroua abattoirs respectively. The minimum estimated prevalence of M. bovis was 2.8% (1.9–3.9), 7.7% (6.1–9.6), 21.3% (15.2–28.4) and 13.1% (7.7–20.4) in the four abattoirs respectively. One M. tuberculosis and three M. bovis strains were recovered from non-lesioned animals. The high prevalence of M. bovis is of public health concern and limits the potential control options in this setting without a viable vaccine as an alternative

Hypertrophic Scarring and Keloids: Pathomechanisms and Current and Emerging Treatment Strategies

Excessive scars form as a result of aberrations of physiologic wound healing and may arise following any insult to the deep dermis. By causing pain, pruritus and contractures, excessive scarring significantly affects the patient’s quality of life, both physically and psychologically. Multiple studies on hypertrophic scar and keloid formation have been conducted for decades and have led to a plethora of therapeutic strategies to prevent or attenuate excessive scar formation. However, most therapeutic approaches remain clinically unsatisfactory, most likely owing to poor understanding of the complex mechanisms underlying the processes of scarring and wound contraction. In this review we summarize the current understanding of the pathophysiology underlying keloid and hypertrophic scar formation and discuss established treatments and novel therapeutic strategies