Reduced Population Control of an Insect Pest in Managed Willow Monocultures

BACKGROUND: There is a general belief that insect outbreak risk is higher in plant monocultures than in natural and more diverse habitats, although empirical studies investigating this relationship are lacking. In this study, using density data collected over seven years at 40 study sites, we compare the temporal population variability of the leaf beetle Phratora vulgatissima between willow plantations and natural willow habitats. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The study was conducted in 1999-2005. The density of adult P. vulgatissima was estimated in the spring every year by a knock-down sampling technique. We used two measures of population variability, CV and PV, to compare temporal variations in leaf beetle density between plantation and natural habitat. Relationships between density and variability were also analyzed to discern potential underlying processes behind stability in the two systems. The results showed that the leaf beetle P. vulgatissima had a greater temporal population variability and outbreak risk in willow plantations than in natural willow habitats. We hypothesize that the greater population stability observed in the natural habitat was due to two separate processes operating at different levels of beetle density. First, stable low population equilibrium can be achieved by the relatively high density of generalist predators observed in natural stands. Second, stable equilibrium can also be imposed at higher beetle density due to competition, which occurs through depletion of resources (plant foliage) in the natural habitat. In willow plantations, competition is reduced mainly because plants grow close enough for beetle larvae to move to another plant when foliage is consumed. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: To our knowledge, this is the first empirical study confirming that insect pest outbreak risk is higher in monocultures. The study suggests that comparative studies of insect population dynamics in different habitats may improve our ability to predict insect pest outbreaks and could facilitate the development of sustainable pest control in managed systems

Nicotine replacement therapy for agitation and delirium management in the intensive care unit: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Active smokers are prevalent within the intensive care setting and place a significant burden on healthcare systems. Nicotine withdrawal due to forced abstinence on admission may contribute to increased agitation and delirium in this patient group. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether management of nicotine withdrawal, with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), reduces agitation and delirium in critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: The following sources were used in this review: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus databases. Included studies reported delirium or agitation outcomes in current smokers, where NRT was used as management of nicotine withdrawal, in the intensive care setting. Studies were included regardless of design or number of participants. Data were extracted on ICU classification; study design; population baseline characteristics; allocation and dose of NRT; agitation and delirium assessment methods; and the frequency of agitation, delirium, and psychotropic medication use. RESULTS: Six studies were included. NRT was mostly prescribed for smokers with heavier smoking histories. Three studies reported an association between increased agitation or delirium and NRT use; one study could not find any significant benefit or harm from NRT use; and two described a reduction of symptomatic nicotine withdrawal. A lack of consistent and validated assessment measures, combined with limitations in the quality of reported data, contribute to conflicting results. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence for the use of NRT in agitation and delirium management in the ICU is inconclusive. An evaluation of risk versus benefit on an individual patient basis should be considered when prescribing NRT. Further studies that consider prognostic balance, adjust for confounders, and employ validated assessment tools are urgently needed

Training future generations to deliver evidence-based conservation and ecosystem management

Data availability statement: No data was used in this study.Peer review: The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1002/2688-8319.12032.Supporting Information: eso312032-sup-0001-SuppMat.docx (21.1 KB) available at: https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/action/downloadSupplement?doi=10.1002%2F2688-8319.12032&file=eso312032-sup-0001-SuppMat.docx. Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. 1. To be effective, the next generation of conservation practitioners and managers need to be critical thinkers with a deep understanding of how to make evidence-based decisions and of the value of evidence synthesis. 2. If, as educators, we do not make these priorities a core part of what we teach, we are failing to prepare our students to make an effective contribution to conservation practice. 3. To help overcome this problem we have created open access online teaching materials in multiple languages that are stored in Applied Ecology Resources. So far, 117 educators from 23 countries have acknowledged the importance of this and are already teaching or about to teach skills in appraising or using evidence in conservation decision-making. This includes 145 undergraduate, postgraduate or professional development courses. 4. We call for wider teaching of the tools and skills that facilitate evidence-based conservation and also suggest that providing online teaching materials in multiple languages could be beneficial for improving global understanding of other subject areas. Making informed conservation and ecosystem management choices is based upon a sound understanding of the relevant evidence. There is an increasing wealth of conservation science available, and access to this is becoming easier. But, are conservation practitioners being trained to utilize this information? In conservation, decision-making is often based upon past experience or expert knowledge, as opposed to the full body of scientific literature (e.g., Pullin, Knight, Stone, & Charman, 2004; Rafidimanantsoa, Poudyal, Ramamonjisoa, & Jones, 2018). The failure to include scientific evidence in decision-making has the potential to reduce the effectiveness of management, or even lead to detrimental actions being undertaken (Walsh, Dicks, & Sutherland, 2015). Evidence-based conservation (EBC) seeks to avoid this by providing tools to facilitate and inform decision-making. To do this, scientific evidence is collated and critically appraised for its quality and relevance, and integrated with other knowledge, experience, values and costs (Sutherland, Pullin, Dolman, & Knight, 2004). Wider adoption of EBC requires conservation professionals to be trained in its principles and taught how to use it to inform conservation decision-making.MAVA Foundation; Arcadia Fund