Taxonomy Based on Science is Necessary for Global Conservation

Taxonomy is a scientific discipline that has provided the universal naming and classification system of biodiversity for centuries and continues effectively to accommodate new knowledge. A recent publication by Garnett and Christidis (Garnett ST, Christidis L. Taxonomy anarchy hampers conservation. Nature. 2017; 546(7656):25±27. https://doi.org/10.1038/546025a) expressed concerns regarding the difficulty that taxonomic changes represent for conservation efforts and proposed the establishment of a system to govern taxonomic changes. Their proposal to restrict the freedom of taxonomic action through governing subcommittees that would review taxonomic papers for compliance and their assertion that the scientific community\u27s failure to govern taxonomy threatens the effectiveness of global efforts to halt biodiversity loss, damages the credibility of science, and is expensive to society are flawed in many respects. They also assert that the lack of governance of taxonomy damages conservation efforts, harms the credibility of science, and is costly to society. Despite its fairly recent release, Garnett and Christidis\u27 proposition has already been rejected by a number of colleagues. Herein, we contribute to the conversation between taxonomists and conservation biologists aiming to clarify some misunderstandings and issues in the proposition by Garnett and Christidis. Placing governance over the science of taxonomy blurs the distinction between taxonomy and nomenclature. Garnett and Christidis’s proposal is far-reaching but represents a narrow perspective of taxonomy, as utilized by conservation, and reflects an increasingly broad misunderstanding throughout biology of the scientific basis of taxonomy, formalized nomenclature, and the relationship between them. This trend may have resulted from the attenuation of instruction in taxonomic principles and, in particular, nomenclature at many universities, in part because of a shift in research priorities away from taxonomy. Garnett and Christidis assert that an “assumption that species are fixed entities underpins every international agreement on biodiversity conservation.” This assumption demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of taxonomy and the evolving view of what species represent. The essential features of science include documenting natural patterns and processes, developing and testing hypotheses, and refining existing ideas and descriptions of nature based on new data and insights. Taxonomy, the science of recognizing and delimiting species, adheres to these fundamental principles. Discoveries of new organisms together with advances in methodology continue unabated, leading to a constant reevaluation of the boundaries between taxonomic entities. Species (and higher taxa) comprise related organisms that may be clustered together differently depending on which sets of criteria are emphasized. Hey et al. acknowledge “the inherent ambiguity of species in nature” but point out that “species-related research and conservation efforts can proceed without suffering from, and without fear of, the ambiguity of species.” Through taxonomic research, our understanding of biodiversity and classifications of living organisms will continue to progress. Any system that restricts such progress runs counter to basic scientific principles, which rely on peer review and subsequent acceptance or rejection by the community, rather than third-party regulation. Thiele and Yeates cautioned that such a system “could lead to authoritarianism and a stifling of innovative taxonomic viewpoints. No other hypothesis-driven field of science would accept such a straitjacket”. Taxonomy and associated nomenclature are not without problems. Even with a common set of facts, alternative interpretations of how to classify organisms can lead to differing classifications. However, the science of taxonomy is increasingly rigorous, which can improve the foundation for targeted legislative action regarding species. Taxonomic instability does not affect all taxonomic groups equally. Garnett and Christidis provide examples from mammals and birds, which collectively represent a small fraction

Six simple guidelines for introducing new genera of fungi

We formulate five guidelines for introducing new genera, plus one recommendation how to publish the results of scientific research. We recommend that reviewers and editors adhere to these guidelines. We propose that the underlying research is solid, and that the results and the final solutions are properly discussed. The six criteria are: (1) all genera that are recognized should be monophyletic; (2) the coverage of the phylogenetic tree should be wide in number of species, geographic coverage, and type species of the genera under study; (3) the branching of the phylogenetic trees has to have sufficient statistical support; (4) different options for the translation of the phylogenetic tree into a formal classification should be discussed and the final decision justified; (5) the phylogenetic evidence should be based on more than one gene; and (6) all supporting evidence and background information should be included in the publication in which the new taxa are proposed, and this publication should be peer-reviewed

Taxonomy based on science is necessary for global conservation

Peer reviewe

The Changing Landscape for Stroke\ua0Prevention in AF: Findings From the GLORIA-AF Registry Phase 2

Background GLORIA-AF (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation) is a prospective, global registry program describing antithrombotic treatment patterns in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at risk of stroke. Phase 2 began when dabigatran, the first non\u2013vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), became available. Objectives This study sought to describe phase 2 baseline data and compare these with the pre-NOAC era collected during phase 1. Methods During phase 2, 15,641 consenting patients were enrolled (November 2011 to December 2014); 15,092 were eligible. This pre-specified cross-sectional analysis describes eligible patients\u2019 baseline characteristics. Atrial fibrillation disease characteristics, medical outcomes, and concomitant diseases and medications were collected. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results Of the total patients, 45.5% were female; median age was 71 (interquartile range: 64, 78) years. Patients were from Europe (47.1%), North America (22.5%), Asia (20.3%), Latin America (6.0%), and the Middle East/Africa (4.0%). Most had high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc [Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age  6575 years, Diabetes mellitus, previous Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65 to 74 years, Sex category] score  652; 86.1%); 13.9% had moderate risk (CHA2DS2-VASc = 1). Overall, 79.9% received oral anticoagulants, of whom 47.6% received NOAC and 32.3% vitamin K antagonists (VKA); 12.1% received antiplatelet agents; 7.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. For comparison, the proportion of phase 1 patients (of N = 1,063 all eligible) prescribed VKA was 32.8%, acetylsalicylic acid 41.7%, and no therapy 20.2%. In Europe in phase 2, treatment with NOAC was more common than VKA (52.3% and 37.8%, respectively); 6.0% of patients received antiplatelet treatment; and 3.8% received no antithrombotic treatment. In North America, 52.1%, 26.2%, and 14.0% of patients received NOAC, VKA, and antiplatelet drugs, respectively; 7.5% received no antithrombotic treatment. NOAC use was less common in Asia (27.7%), where 27.5% of patients received VKA, 25.0% antiplatelet drugs, and 19.8% no antithrombotic treatment. Conclusions The baseline data from GLORIA-AF phase 2 demonstrate that in newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients, NOAC have been highly adopted into practice, becoming more frequently prescribed than VKA in Europe and North America. Worldwide, however, a large proportion of patients remain undertreated, particularly in Asia and North America. (Global Registry on Long-Term Oral Antithrombotic Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [GLORIA-AF]; NCT01468701

Eighth International Symposium on Arctic-Alpine Mycology (ISAM 8), Beartooth Plateau, Rocky Mountains, USA 2008

The eighth International Symposium on Arctic-Alpine Mycology (ISAM 8) was held on the Beartooth Plateau, Rocky Mountains, USA, August 3-10, 2008. A report on this symposium is given along with a list of participants, the group’s preamble, and references for proceedings of previous symposia published as a series of volumes on Arctic and Alpine Mycology 1-7. The contributions that follow in this issue of North American Fungi are the complete proceedings for ISAM 8 published here as Arctic and Alpine Mycology 8 (editors Cathy Cripps and Joe Ammirati). We dedicate this issue to two mycologists who worked in Arctic-Alpine Ecosystems: Meinhard Moser, Austria (1924-2002) and Orson K. Miller, Jr, U.S.A. (1930-2006)

PD-L1 (Programmed Death Ligand 1) as a Marker of Acute Cellular Rejection After Heart Transplantation

International audienceNo abstract availabl

Systematic analysis of drug-associated myocarditis reported in the World Health Organization pharmacovigilance database

International audienceWhile multiple pharmacological drugs have been associated with myocarditis, temporal trends and overall mortality have not been reported. Here we report the spectrum and main features of 5108 reports of drug-induced myocarditis, in a worldwide pharmacovigilance analysis, comprising more than 21 million individual-case-safety reports from 1967 to 2020. Significant association between myocarditis and a suspected drug is assessed using disproportionality analyses, which use Bayesian information component estimates. Overall, we identify 62 drugs associated with myocarditis, 41 of which are categorized into 5 main pharmacological classes: antipsychotics (n = 3108 reports), salicylates (n = 340), antineoplastic-cytotoxics (n = 190), antineoplastic-immunotherapies (n = 538), and vaccines (n = 790). Thirty-eight (61.3%) drugs were not previously reported associated with myocarditis. Antipsychotic was the first (1979) and most reported class (n = 3018). In 2019, the two most reported classes were antipsychotics (54.7%) and immunotherapies (29.5%). Time-to-onset between treatment start and myocarditis is 15 [interquartile range: 10; 23] days. Subsequent mortality is 10.3% and differs between drug classes with immunotherapies the highest, 32.5% and salicylates the lowest, 2.6%. These elements highlight the diversity of presentations of myocarditis depending on drug class, and show the emerging role of antineoplastic drugs in the field of drug-induced myocarditis