19 research outputs found

    Crop pests and predators exhibit inconsistent responses to surrounding landscape composition

    Get PDF
    The idea that noncrop habitat enhances pest control and represents a win–win opportunity to conserve biodiversity and bolster yields has emerged as an agroecological paradigm. However, while noncrop habitat in landscapes surrounding farms sometimes benefits pest predators, natural enemy responses remain heterogeneous across studies and effects on pests are inconclusive. The observed heterogeneity in species responses to noncrop habitat may be biological in origin or could result from variation in how habitat and biocontrol are measured. Here, we use a pest-control database encompassing 132 studies and 6,759 sites worldwide to model natural enemy and pest abundances, predation rates, and crop damage as a function of landscape composition. Our results showed that although landscape composition explained significant variation within studies, pest and enemy abundances, predation rates, crop damage, and yields each exhibited different responses across studies, sometimes increasing and sometimes decreasing in landscapes with more noncrop habitat but overall showing no consistent trend. Thus, models that used landscape-composition variables to predict pest-control dynamics demonstrated little potential to explain variation across studies, though prediction did improve when comparing studies with similar crop and landscape features. Overall, our work shows that surrounding noncrop habitat does not consistently improve pest management, meaning habitat conservation may bolster production in some systems and depress yields in others. Future efforts to develop tools that inform farmers when habitat conservation truly represents a win–win would benefit from increased understanding of how landscape effects are modulated by local farm management and the biology of pests and their enemies

    Planck 2013 results. I. Overview of products and scientific results

    Get PDF

    Expanded phenotypic spectrum of neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative disorder Bryant-Li-Bhoj syndrome with 38 additional individuals.

    Get PDF
    Bryant-Li-Bhoj syndrome (BLBS), which became OMIM-classified in 2022 (OMIM: 619720, 619721), is caused by germline variants in the two genes that encode histone H3.3 (H3-3A/H3F3A and H3-3B/H3F3B) [1-4]. This syndrome is characterized by developmental delay/intellectual disability, craniofacial anomalies, hyper/hypotonia, and abnormal neuroimaging [1, 5]. BLBS was initially categorized as a progressive neurodegenerative syndrome caused by de novo heterozygous variants in either H3-3A or H3-3B [1-4]. Here, we analyze the data of the 58 previously published individuals along 38 unpublished, unrelated individuals. In this larger cohort of 96 people, we identify causative missense, synonymous, and stop-loss variants. We also expand upon the phenotypic characterization by elaborating on the neurodevelopmental component of BLBS. Notably, phenotypic heterogeneity was present even amongst individuals harboring the same variant. To explore the complex phenotypic variation in this expanded cohort, the relationships between syndromic phenotypes with three variables of interest were interrogated: sex, gene containing the causative variant, and variant location in the H3.3 protein. While specific genotype-phenotype correlations have not been conclusively delineated, the results presented here suggest that the location of the variants within the H3.3 protein and the affected gene (H3-3A or H3-3B) contribute more to the severity of distinct phenotypes than sex. Since these variables do not account for all BLBS phenotypic variability, these findings suggest that additional factors may play a role in modifying the phenotypes of affected individuals. Histones are poised at the interface of genetics and epigenetics, highlighting the potential role for gene-environment interactions and the importance of future research

    Predictors of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentrations among postmenopausal women: the Women's Health Initiative Calcium plus Vitamin D clinical trial.

    No full text
    BackgroundIt is unclear how well surrogate markers for vitamin D exposure (eg, oral intake of vitamin D and estimates of sunlight exposure), with and without consideration of other potential predictors of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentrations, similarly rank individuals with respect to 25(OH)D blood concentrations.ObjectiveThe objective was to determine how much variation in serum 25(OH)D concentrations (nmol/L) could be explained by a predictive model with the use of different vitamin D surrogate markers (latitude of residence, mean annual regional solar irradiance estimates, and oral sources) and other individual characteristics that might influence vitamin D status.DesignA random sample of 3055 postmenopausal women (aged 50-70 y) participating in 3 nested case-control studies of the Women's Health Initiative Calcium plus Vitamin D Clinical Trial was used. Serum 25(OH)D values, assessed at year 1 (1995-2000), and potential predictors of 25(OH)D concentrations, assessed at year 1 or Women's Health Initiative baseline (1993-1998), were used.ResultsMore than half of the women (57.1%) had deficient (<50 nmol/L) concentrations of 25(OH)D. Distributions of 25(OH)D concentrations by level of latitude of residence, mean annual regional solar irradiance, and intake of vitamin D varied considerably. The predictive model for 25(OH)D explained 21% of the variation in 25(OH)D concentrations. After adjustment for month of blood draw, breast cancer status, colorectal cancer status, fracture status, participation in the hormone therapy trial, and randomization to the dietary modification trial, the predictive model included total vitamin D intake from foods and supplements, waist circumference, recreational physical activity, race-ethnicity, regional solar irradiance, and age.ConclusionsSurrogate markers for 25(OH)D concentrations, although somewhat correlated, do not adequately reflect serum vitamin D measures. These markers and predictive models of blood 25(OH)D concentrations should not be given as much weight in epidemiologic studies of cancer risk
    corecore