The Planteome database:an integrated resource for reference ontologies, plant genomics and phenomics

The Planteome project (http://www.planteome.org) provides a suite of reference and species-specific ontologies for plants and annotations to genes and phenotypes. Ontologies serve as common standards for semantic integration of a large and growing corpus of plant genomics, phenomics and genetics data. The reference ontologies include the Plant Ontology, Plant Trait Ontology and the Plant Experimental Conditions Ontology developed by the Planteome project, along with the Gene Ontology, Chemical Entities of Biological Interest, Phenotype and Attribute Ontology, and others. The project also provides access to species-specific Crop Ontologies developed by various plant breeding and research communities from around the world. We provide integrated data on plant traits, phenotypes, and gene function and expression from 95 plant taxa, annotated with reference ontology terms. The Planteome project is developing a plant gene annotation platform; Planteome Noctua, to facilitate community engagement. All the Planteome ontologies are publicly available and are maintained at the Planteome GitHub site (https://github.com/Planteome) for sharing, tracking revisions and new requests. The annotated data are freely accessible from the ontology browser (http://browser.planteome.org/amigo) and our data repository

Data sharing and ontology use among agricultural genetics, genomics, and breeding databases and resources of the AgBioData Consortium

Over the last several decades, there has been rapid growth in the number and scope of agricultural genetics, genomics and breeding (GGB) databases and resources. The AgBioData Consortium (https://www.agbiodata.org/) currently represents 44 databases and resources covering model or crop plant and animal GGB data, ontologies, pathways, genetic variation and breeding platforms (referred to as 'databases' throughout). One of the goals of the Consortium is to facilitate FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) data management and the integration of datasets which requires data sharing, along with structured vocabularies and/or ontologies. Two AgBioData working groups, focused on Data Sharing and Ontologies, conducted a survey to assess the status and future needs of the members in those areas. A total of 33 researchers responded to the survey, representing 37 databases. Results suggest that data sharing practices by AgBioData databases are in a healthy state, but it is not clear whether this is true for all metadata and data types across all databases; and that ontology use has not substantially changed since a similar survey was conducted in 2017. We recommend 1) providing training for database personnel in specific data sharing techniques, as well as in ontology use; 2) further study on what metadata is shared, and how well it is shared among databases; 3) promoting an understanding of data sharing and ontologies in the stakeholder community; 4) improving data sharing and ontologies for specific phenotypic data types and formats; and 5) lowering specific barriers to data sharing and ontology use, by identifying sustainability solutions, and the identification, promotion, or development of data standards. Combined, these improvements are likely to help AgBioData databases increase development efforts towards improved ontology use, and data sharing via programmatic means.Comment: 17 pages, 8 figure

Effects of Wolves on Elk and Cattle Behaviors: Implications for Livestock Production and Wolf Conservation

BACKGROUND: In many areas, livestock are grazed within wolf (Canis lupus) range. Predation and harassment of livestock by wolves creates conflict and is a significant challenge for wolf conservation. Wild prey, such as elk (Cervus elaphus), perform anti-predator behaviors. Artificial selection of cattle (Bos taurus) might have resulted in attenuation or absence of anti-predator responses, or in erratic and inconsistent responses. Regardless, such responses might have implications on stress and fitness. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We compared elk and cattle anti-predator responses to wolves in southwest Alberta, Canada within home ranges and livestock pastures, respectively. We deployed satellite- and GPS-telemetry collars on wolves, elk, and cattle (n = 16, 10 and 78, respectively) and measured seven prey response variables during periods of wolf presence and absence (speed, path sinuosity, time spent head-up, distance to neighboring animals, terrain ruggedness, slope and distance to forest). During independent periods of wolf presence (n = 72), individual elk increased path sinuosity (Z = -2.720, P = 0.007) and used more rugged terrain (Z = -2.856, P = 0.004) and steeper slopes (Z = -3.065, P = 0.002). For cattle, individual as well as group behavioral analyses were feasible and these indicated increased path sinuosity (Z = -2.720, P = 0.007) and decreased distance to neighbors (Z = -2.551, P = 0.011). In addition, cattle groups showed a number of behavioral changes concomitant to wolf visits, with variable direction in changes. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results suggest both elk and cattle modify their behavior in relation to wolf presence, with potential energetic costs. Our study does not allow evaluating the efficacy of anti-predator behaviors, but indicates that artificial selection did not result in their absence in cattle. The costs of wolf predation on livestock are often compensated considering just the market value of the animal killed. However, society might consider refunding some additional costs (e.g., weight loss and reduced reproduction) that might be associated with the changes in cattle behaviors that we documented

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries