Nineteenth-century Ship-based Catches of Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the Eastern North Pacific

The 19th century commercial ship-based fishery for gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the eastern North Pacific began in 1846 and continued until the mid 1870’s in southern areas and the 1880’s in the north. Henderson identified three periods in the southern part of the fishery: Initial, 1846–1854; Bonanza, 1855–1865; and Declining, 1866–1874. The largest catches were made by “lagoon whaling” in or immediately outside the whale population’s main wintering areas in Mexico—Magdalena Bay, Scammon’s Lagoon, and San Ignacio Lagoon. Large catches were also made by “coastal” or “alongshore” whaling where the whalers attacked animals as they migrated along the coast. Gray whales were also hunted to a limited extent on their feeding grounds in the Bering and Chukchi Seas in summer. Using all available sources, we identified 657 visits by whaling vessels to the Mexican whaling grounds during the gray whale breeding and calving seasons between 1846 and 1874. We then estimated the total number of such visits in which the whalers engaged in gray whaling. We also read logbooks from a sample of known visits to estimate catch per visit and the rate at which struck animals were lost. This resulted in an overall estimate of 5,269 gray whales (SE = 223.4) landed by the ship-based fleet (including both American and foreign vessels) in the Mexican whaling grounds from 1846 to 1874. Our “best” estimate of the number of gray whales removed from the eastern North Pacific (i.e. catch plus hunting loss) lies somewhere between 6,124 and 8,021, depending on assumptions about survival of struck-but-lost whales. Our estimates can be compared to those by Henderson (1984), who estimated that 5,542–5,507 gray whales were secured and processed by ship-based whalers between 1846 and 1874; Scammon (1874), who believed the total kill over the same period (of eastern gray whales by all whalers in all areas) did not exceed 10,800; and Best (1987), who estimated the total landed catch of gray whales (eastern and western) by American ship-based whalers at 2,665 or 3,013 (method-dependent) from 1850 to 1879. Our new estimates are not high enough to resolve apparent inconsistencies between the catch history and estimates of historical abundance based on genetic variability. We suggest several lines of further research that may help resolve these inconsistencies

Insights From Whaling Logbooks on Whales, Dolphins, and Whaling in the Gulf of Mexico

Whaling voyage logbooks provide a unique window into historical marine animal distribution and relative numbers. The Gulf of Mexico was among the regions visited by American commercial whalers beginning in the late 1700s, and possibly as early as the 1760s. For more than a century, they hunted sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) and blackfish (usually probably short-finned pilot whales; Globicephala macrorhynchus) in the Gulf. An ongoing study of global whaling history has allowed us to offer some insights on characteristics and trends of the Gulf fishery and on cetacean populations in the Gulf. We examined 53 voyage logbooks that included some whaling in the Gulf. Using the information from those logbooks and other sources, we identified 204 different voyages that included one or more ‘‘vessel-seasons’’ of whaling in the Gulf (total of 214 vessel-seasons) between 1788 and 1877. More than three-quarters (76%) of the 186 voyages for which the rig type is known were by brigs or schooners; they sailed primarily from the Massachusetts ports of New Bedford and Nantucket initially and Provincetown in later years. The whaling took place mainly in deep portions of the Gulf and in the first 7 mo of the calendar year (i.e., from Jan. through July). The sperm whales hunted in the Gulf tended to be small and were usually taken from schools, suggesting that they were mostly juveniles and females. Observations (and occasionally catches) of other cetaceans besides sperm whales and blackfish are mentioned in the logbooks—mainly ‘‘finbacks’’ (Balaenoptera sp.), killer whales (Orcinus orca), and ‘‘porpoises’’ (various small delphinids)

Spatial and Seasonal Distribution of American Whaling and Whales in the Age of Sail

American whalemen sailed out of ports on the east coast of the United States and in California from the 18th to early 20th centuries, searching for whales throughout the world’s oceans. From an initial focus on sperm whales (Physeter macrocephalus) and right whales (Eubalaena spp.), the array of targeted whales expanded to include bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus), humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae), and gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus). Extensive records of American whaling in the form of daily entries in whaling voyage logbooks contain a great deal of information about where and when the whalemen found whales. We plotted daily locations where the several species of whales were observed, both those caught and those sighted but not caught, on world maps to illustrate the spatial and temporal distribution of both American whaling activity and the whales. The patterns shown on the maps provide the basis for various inferences concerning the historical distribution of the target whales prior to and during this episode of global whaling

Runx Expression Is Mitogenic and Mutually Linked to Wnt Activity in Blastula-Stage Sea Urchin Embryos

The Runt homology domain (Runx) defines a metazoan family of sequence-specific transcriptional regulatory proteins that are critical for animal development and causally associated with a variety of mammalian cancers. The sea urchin Runx gene SpRunt-1 is expressed throughout the blastula stage embryo, and is required globally during embryogenesis for cell survival and differentiation.Depletion of SpRunt-1 by morpholino antisense-mediated knockdown causes a blastula stage deficit in cell proliferation, as shown by bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation and direct cell counts. Reverse transcription coupled polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) studies show that the cell proliferation deficit is presaged by a deficit in the expression of several zygotic wnt genes, including wnt8, a key regulator of endomesoderm development. In addition, SpRunt-1-depleted blastulae underexpress cyclinD, an effector of mitogenic Wnt signaling. Blastula stage cell proliferation is also impeded by knockdown of either wnt8 or cyclinD. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) indicates that Runx target sites within 5′ sequences flanking cyclinD, wnt6 and wnt8 are directly bound by SpRunt-1 protein at late blastula stage. Furthermore, experiments using a green fluorescent protein (GFP) reporter transgene show that the blastula-stage operation of a cis-regulatory module previously shown to be required for wnt8 expression (Minokawa et al., Dev. Biol. 288: 545–558, 2005) is dependent on its direct sequence-specific interaction with SpRunt-1. Finally, inhibitor studies and immunoblot analysis show that SpRunt-1 protein levels are negatively regulated by glycogen synthase kinase (GSK)-3.These results suggest that Runx expression and Wnt signaling are mutually linked in a feedback circuit that controls cell proliferation during development

Safeguarding human–wildlife cooperation

Human–wildlife cooperation occurs when humans and free-living wild animals actively coordinate their behavior to achieve a mutually beneficial outcome. These interactions provide important benefits to both the human and wildlife communities involved, have wider impacts on the local ecosystem, and represent a unique intersection of human and animal cultures. The remaining active forms are human–honeyguide and human–dolphin cooperation, but these are at risk of joining several inactive forms (including human–wolf and human–orca cooperation). Human–wildlife cooperation faces a unique set of conservation challenges, as it requires multiple components—a motivated human and wildlife partner, a suitable environment, and compatible interspecies knowledge—which face threats from ecological and cultural changes. To safeguard human–wildlife cooperation, we recommend: (i) establishing ethically sound conservation strategies together with the participating human communities; (ii) conserving opportunities for human and wildlife participation; (iii) protecting suitable environments; (iv) facilitating cultural transmission of traditional knowledge; (v) accessibly archiving Indigenous and scientific knowledge; and (vi) conducting long-term empirical studies to better understand these interactions and identify threats. Tailored safeguarding plans are therefore necessary to protect these diverse and irreplaceable interactions. Broadly, our review highlights that efforts to conserve biological and cultural diversity should carefully consider interactions between human and animal cultures. Please see AfricanHoneyguides.com/abstract-translations for Kiswahili and Portuguese translations of the abstract

Safeguarding human–wildlife cooperation

Human–wildlife cooperation occurs when humans and free-living wild animals actively coordinate their behavior to achieve a mutually beneficial outcome. These interactions provide important benefits to both the human and wildlife communities involved, have wider impacts on the local ecosystem, and represent a unique intersection of human and animal cultures. The remaining active forms are human–honeyguide and human–dolphin cooperation, but these are at risk of joining several inactive forms (including human–wolf and human–orca cooperation). Human–wildlife cooperation faces a unique set of conservation challenges, as it requires multiple components—a motivated human and wildlife partner, a suitable environment, and compatible interspecies knowledge—which face threats from ecological and cultural changes. To safeguard human–wildlife cooperation, we recommend: (i) establishing ethically sound conservation strategies together with the participating human communities; (ii) conserving opportunities for human and wildlife participation; (iii) protecting suitable environments; (iv) facilitating cultural transmission of traditional knowledge; (v) accessibly archiving Indigenous and scientific knowledge; and (vi) conducting long-term empirical studies to better understand these interactions and identify threats. Tailored safeguarding plans are therefore necessary to protect these diverse and irreplaceable interactions. Broadly, our review highlights that efforts to conserve biological and cultural diversity should carefully consider interactions between human and animal cultures

Greening of the brown-dwarf desert EPIC 212036875b: a 51 M-J object in a 5-day orbit around an F7V star

Context. Although more than 2000 brown dwarfs have been detected to date, mainly from direct imaging, their characterisation is difficult due to their faintness and model-dependent results. In the case of transiting brown dwarfs, however, it is possible to make direct high-precision observations. Aims. Our aim is to investigate the nature and formation of brown dwarfs by adding a new well-characterised object, in terms of its mass, radius and bulk density, to the currently small sample of less than 20 transiting brown dwarfs. Methods. One brown dwarf candidate was found by the KESPRINT consortium when searching for exoplanets in the K2 space mission Campaign 16 field. We combined the K2 photometric data with a series of multicolour photometric observations, imaging, and radial velocity measurements to rule out false positive scenarios and to determine the fundamental properties of the system. Results. We report the discovery and characterisation of a transiting brown dwarf in a 5.17-day eccentric orbit around the slightly evolved F7V star EPIC 212036875. We find a stellar mass of 1.15 +/- 0.08 M-circle dot, a stellar radius of 1.41 +/- 0.05 R-circle dot, and an age of 5.1 +/- 0.9 Gyr. The mass and radius of the companion brown dwarf are 51 +/- 2 M-J and 0.83 +/- 0.03 R-J, respectively, corresponding to a mean density of 108(-13)(+15) g cm(-3). Conclusions. EPIC 212036875 b is a rare object that resides in the brown-dwarf desert. In the mass-density diagram for planets, brown dwarfs, and stars, we find that all giant planets and brown dwarfs follow the same trend from similar to 0.3 M-J to the turn-over to hydrogen burning stars at similar to 73 M-J. EPIC 212036875 b falls close to the theoretical model for mature H/He dominated objects in this diagram as determined by interior structure models. We argue that EPIC 212036875 b formed via gravitational disc instabilities in the outer part of the disc, followed by a quick migration. Orbital tidal circularisation may have started early in its history for a brief period when the brown dwarf\u27s radius was larger. The lack of spin-orbit synchronisation points to a weak stellar dissipation parameter (Q(star)\u27 greater than or similar to 10(8)), which implies a circularisation timescale of greater than or similar to 23 Gyr, or suggests an interaction between the magnetic and tidal forces of the star and the brown dwarf

The Multiplanet System TOI-421: A Warm Neptune and a Super Puffy Mini-Neptune Transiting a G9 V Star in a Visual Binary

We report the discovery of a warm Neptune and a hot sub-Neptune transiting TOI-421 (BD-14 1137, TIC 94986319), a bright (V = 9.9) G9 dwarf star in a visual binary system observed by the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) space mission in Sectors 5 and 6. We performed ground-based follow-up observations—comprised of Las Cumbres Observatory Global Telescope transit photometry, NIRC2 adaptive optics imaging, and FIbre-fed Echellé Spectrograph, CORALIE, High Accuracy Radial velocity Planet Searcher, High Resolution Échelle Spectrometer, and Planet Finder Spectrograph high-precision Doppler measurements—and confirmed the planetary nature of the 16 day transiting candidate announced by the TESS team. We discovered an additional radial velocity signal with a period of five days induced by the presence of a second planet in the system, which we also found to transit its host star. We found that the inner mini-Neptune, TOI-421 b, has an orbital period of P_b = 5.19672 ± 0.00049 days, a mass of M_b = 7.17 ± 0.66 M⊕, and a radius of R_b = 2.68^(+0.19)_(-0.18) R⊕, whereas the outer warm Neptune, TOI-421 c, has a period of Pc = 16.06819 ± 0.00035 days, a mass of M_c = 16.42^(+1.06)_(-1.04) M⊕, a radius of R_c = 5.09^(+0.16)_(-0.15) R⊕ and a density of ρ_c = 0.685^(+0.080)_(-0.072) g cm⁻³. With its characteristics, the outer planet (ρ_c = 0.685^(+0.080)_(-0.072) g cm⁻³) is placed in the intriguing class of the super-puffy mini-Neptunes. TOI-421 b and TOI-421 c are found to be well-suited for atmospheric characterization. Our atmospheric simulations predict significant Lyα transit absorption, due to strong hydrogen escape in both planets, as well as the presence of detectable CH4 in the atmosphere of TOI-421 c if equilibrium chemistry is assumed

Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches