Taxonomic notes on the Luciolinae (Coleoptera: Lampyridae)

Several nomenclatural changes for taxa in the firefly subfamily Luciolinae (Coleoptera: Lampyri­dae) are proposed. Evidence is presented to correct the year of description for Luciola dregei Motschulsky 1853 to Motschulsky 1854 when the name was ratified. We correct the authorities and years of descriptions for type species designations for the genera Delopleurus Motschulsky, 1853, and Delopyrus Motschulsky, 1853 to Motschulsky 1854 for both. All remaining taxa described as variations in the subfamily Luciolinae by McDermott (1966), are evaluated to subspecies with their availability determined based on ICZN (1999) Article 45.6

A catalogue and redescription of type specimens of fireflies (Coleoptera, Lampyridae, Luciolinae) deposited in Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden

Type specimens of flashing fireflies (Coleoptera, Lampyridae, Luciolinae) in the Naturalis Biodiversity Center, Leiden (RMNH) collection were documented. Specimens explicitly marked or indicated as types belonging to the lucioline fireflies were investigated with each specimen and its accompanying labels photographed, and its morphological characters analysed and compared with the original species description. The genitalia dissections of selected types enabled redescription and clarification of the taxonomic status of seven name-bearing type specimens. This study provides the first redescriptions of holotypes, designation of lectotypes for five species, and confirmation that two of these belong in the genus Luciola s. str. A lectotype and paralectotype were designated for two specimens of Luciola cerea Gorham, 1882 which is confirmed to belong to the genus Curtos Motschulsky, 1845. Atyphella testaceolineata Pic, 1939 was redescribed and figured based on the holotype (an incomplete specimen). We assigned Luciola laticollis Gorham, 1883 and Luciola nicollieri Bugnion, 1922 to Luciola sensu stricto and Luciola picea Gorham, 1882 to species inquirenda. The identity of Pteroptyx decolor Olivier, 1911 is finally confirmed as a close Indonesian relative of Pteroptyx valida Olivier,1909 and a lectotype is designated. In addition, we take the first opportunity to present pictures of the original holotype of Pygoluciola stylifer Wittmer, 1939. We also discuss the challenges taxonomists face in identifying specimens and how detailed dissections allow us to present descriptions of certain male features not previously addressed

Equity in vaccine trials for higher weight people? A rapid review of weight-related inclusion and exclusion criteria for COVID-19 clinical trials

Higher weight status, defined as body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2, is frequently described as a risk factor for severity and susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome coron-avirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) disease (known as COVID-19). Therefore, study groups in COVID-19 vaccine trials should be representative of the weight spectrum across the global population. Appropriate subgroup analysis should be conducted to ensure equitable vaccine outcomes for higher weight people. In this study, inclusion and exclusion criteria of registered clinical trial protocols were reviewed to determine the proportion of trials including higher weight people, and the proportion of trials conducting subgroup analyses of efficacy by BMI. Eligibility criteria of 249 trial protocols (phase I, II, III and IV) were analysed; 51 protocols (20.5%) specified inclusion of BMI > 30, 73 (29.3%) specified exclusion of BMI > 30, and 125 (50.2%) did not specify whether BMI was an inclusion or exclusion criterion, or if BMI was included in any ‘health’ screenings or physical examinations during recruitment. Of the 58 protocols for trials in phase III and IV, only 2 (3.4%) indicated an intention to report subgroup analysis of vaccine efficacy by weight status. Higher weight people appear to be significantly under-represented in the majority of vaccine trials. This may result in reduced efficacy and acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines for higher weight people and exacerbation of health inequities within this population group. Explicit inclusion of higher weight people in COVID-19 vaccine trials is required to reduce health inequities

A 52-Week Placebo-Controlled Trial of Evolocumab in Hyperlipidemia

BACKGROUND Evolocumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits proprotein convertase subtilisin/ kexin type 9 (PCSK9), significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels in phase 2 studies. We conducted a phase 3 trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 52 weeks of treatment with evolocumab. METHODS We stratified patients with hyperlipidemia according to the risk categories outlined by the Adult Treatment Panel III of the National Cholesterol Education Program. On the basis of this classification, patients were started on background lipid-lowering therapy with diet alone or diet plus atorvastatin at a dose of 10 mg daily, atorvastatin at a dose of 80 mg daily, or atorvastatin at a dose of 80 mg daily plus ezetimibe at a dose of 10 mg daily, for a run-in period of 4 to 12 weeks. Patients with an LDL cholesterol level of 75 mg per deciliter (1.9 mmol per liter) or higher were then randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either evolocumab (420 mg) or placebo every 4 weeks. The primary end point was the percent change from baseline in LDL cholesterol, as measured by means of ultracentrifugation, at week 52. RESULTS Among the 901 patients included in the primary analysis, the overall least-squares mean (±SE) reduction in LDL cholesterol from baseline in the evolocumab group, taking into account the change in the placebo group, was 57.0±2.1% (P<0.001). The mean reduction was 55.7±4.2% among patients who underwent background therapy with diet alone, 61.6±2.6% among those who received 10 mg of atorvastatin, 56.8±5.3% among those who received 80 mg of atorvastatin, and 48.5±5.2% among those who received a combination of 80 mg of atorvastatin and 10 mg of ezetimibe (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Evolocumab treatment also significantly reduced levels of apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, lipoprotein(a), and triglycerides. The most common adverse events were nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, influenza, and back pain. CONCLUSIONS At 52 weeks, evolocumab added to diet alone, to low-dose atorvastatin, or to high-dose atorvastatin with or without ezetimibe significantly reduced LDL cholesterol levels in patients with a range of cardiovascular risks

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

\u3ci\u3eLuciola lambkinae\u3c/i\u3e Keller and Ballantyne, new replacement name for \u3ci\u3eLuciola roseicollis\u3c/i\u3e Pic, 1935 (Coleoptera: Lampyridae)

Two different species descriptions for Luciola roseicollis by Pic (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) are compared, and a replacement name, Luciola lambkinae Keller and Ballantyne nomen novum, for Luciola roseicollis Pic, 1935 is proposed. In McDermott’s (1966) catalog of the family Lampyridae two citations are listed under the heading Luciola roseicollis Pic, 1933. Both articles include descriptions of L. roseicollis and also the statement that they are new species (Pic 1933, 1935). After comparing both descriptions OK contacted LB with the suspicion that the descriptions are about two different species

\u3ci\u3eEmarginoptyx\u3c/i\u3e Ballantyne (Coleoptera: Lampyridae: Luciolinae), a replacement name for the firefly genus \u3ci\u3eEmarginata\u3c/i\u3e Ballantyne, 2019

Emarginata Ballantyne, 2019 (Coleoptera: Lampyridae: Luciolinae), is found to be a junior homonym of the bird genus Emarginata Shelley, 1896 (Avis: Passeriformes: Muscicapidae). The new replacement name Emarginoptyx Ballantyne is provided for the SE Asian genus Emarginata Ballantyne, leading to one new combination, Emarginoptyx trilucida (Jeng, Yang and Lai, 2003). It has come to our attention that the name Emarginata Ballantyne in Ballantyne et al. (2019) for Emarginata trilucida (Jeng, Yang and Lai, 2003), is preoccupied by Emarginata Shelley, a genus of birds from southern Africa (Shelley 1896)

The strange case of \u3ci\u3eColophotia miranda\u3c/i\u3e Olivier, 1886 (Coleoptera: Lampyridae: Luciolinae)

A single male specimen identified as Colophotia miranda Olivier (Coleoptera: Lampyridae: Lucio­linae) by Blair and housed in the Natural History Museum, London, is redescribed, and its identification and affinities explored. Ernest Olivier, who first described Colophotia miranda in 1886, was then curator of insects at the Muséum natio­nale d’Histoire naturelle, Paris (MNHN). Effectively for lampyridologists he was the first in a narrow line of firefly taxonomists. Thanks to Olivier we have our first subfamily classifications, keys, catalogues and species descrip­tions; work that has undergone much revision and expansion in the last 100 years. One of Olivier’s strengths, for those of us who followed him, lies in the meticulous way he organized his col­lections. When LB last examined it in 2015 it was still arranged in an order of taxa that reflected the chronological sequence of his publications. And the sequence of the specimens within those taxa reflected his publications too. It was thus possible to examine his collection and find the specimens he referred to in various publications. As such it is a veritable treasure trove of information for those of us who follow him. Usually. Why is this an issue now? Today we list all our specimens examined, designate types and so on, which permits accurate relocation of type and other material. It is Olivier’s collection that enables us to partly overcome the deficien­cies of taxonomic descriptions of over 100 years ago where present day requirements were not expected nor met. But Olivier made mistakes. He was quite cavalier in identifying isolated females to genus and species. We know now that this is a very difficult proposition and currently have a male based taxonomy for the Luciolinae in particular (Ballantyne et al. 2019). And sometimes his references to the same (named) species in different publications seem to deal with different species (and may well do)