Minimal-invasive anterior approach to the hip provides a better surgery-related and early postoperative functional outcome than conventional lateral approach after hip hemiarthroplasty following femoral neck fractures

Introduction Femoral neck fractures (FNF) are one of the most frequent fractures among elderly patients and commonly require surgical treatment. Bipolar hip hemiarthroplasty (BHHA) is mostly performed in these cases. Material and methods In the present retrospective study geriatric patients with FNF (n=100) treated either by anterior minimal-invasive surgery (AMIS; n=50) or lateral conventional surgery (LCS; n=50) were characterized (age at the time of surgery, sex, health status/ASA score, walking distance and need for walking aids before the injury) and intraoperative parameters (duration of surgery, blood loss, complications), as well as postoperative functional performance early (duration of in-patient stay, radiological leg length discrepancy, ability to full weight-bearing, mobilization with walking aids) and 12 months (radiological signs of sintering, clinical parameters, complication rate) after surgery were analyzed. Results Patients in the AMIS group demonstrated a reduced blood loss intraoperatively, while the duration of surgery and complication rates did not difer between the two groups. Further, more patients in the AMIS group achieved full weightbearing of the injured leg and were able to walk with a rollator or less support during their in-patient stay. Of interest, patients in the AMIS group achieved this level of mobility earlier than those of the LCS group, although their walking distance before the acute injury was reduced. Moreover, patients of the AMIS group showed equal leg lengths postoperatively more often than patients of the LCS group. No signifcant diferences in functional and surgery-related performance could be observed between AMIS and LCS group at 12 months postoperatively. Conclusions In conclusion, geriatric patients treated by AMIS experience less surgery-related strain and recover faster in the early postoperative phase compared to LCS after displaced FNF. Hence, AMIS should be recommended for BHHA in these vulnerable patients

Location of studies and evidence of effects of herbivory on Arctic vegetation : a systematic map

Background: Herbivores modify the structure and function of tundra ecosystems. Understanding their impacts is necessary to assess the responses of these ecosystems to ongoing environmental changes. However, the effects of herbivores on plants and ecosystem structure and function vary across the Arctic. Strong spatial variation in herbivore effects implies that the results of individual studies on herbivory depend on local conditions, i.e., their ecological context. An important first step in assessing whether generalizable conclusions can be produced is to identify the existing studies and assess how well they cover the underlying environmental conditions across the Arctic. This systematic map aims to identify the ecological contexts in which herbivore impacts on vegetation have been studied in the Arctic. Specifically, the primary question of the systematic map was: "What evidence exists on the effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation?". Methods: We used a published systematic map protocol to identify studies addressing the effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation. We conducted searches for relevant literature in online databases, search engines and specialist websites. Literature was screened to identify eligible studies, defined as reporting primary data on herbivore impacts on Arctic plants and plant communities. We extracted information on variables that describe the ecological context of the studies, from the studies themselves and from geospatial data. We synthesized the findings narratively and created a Shiny App where the coded data are searchable and variables can be visually explored. Review findings We identified 309 relevant articles with 662 studies (representing different ecological contexts or datasets within the same article). These studies addressed vertebrate herbivory seven times more often than invertebrate herbivory. Geographically, the largest cluster of studies was in Northern Fennoscandia. Warmer and wetter parts of the Arctic had the largest representation, as did coastal areas and areas where the increase in temperature has been moderate. In contrast, studies spanned the full range of ecological context variables describing Arctic vertebrate herbivore diversity and human population density and impact. Conclusions: The current evidence base might not be sufficient to understand the effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation throughout the region, as we identified clear biases in the distribution of herbivore studies in the Arctic and a limited evidence base on invertebrate herbivory. In particular, the overrepresentation of studies in areas with moderate increases in temperature prevents robust generalizations about the effects of herbivores under different climatic scenarios.Peer reviewe

Developing common protocols to measure tundra herbivory across spatial scales

Understanding and predicting large-scale ecological responses to global environmental change requires comparative studies across geographic scales with coordinated efforts and standardized methodologies. We designed, applied, and assessed standardized protocols to measure tundra herbivory at three spatial scales: plot, site (habitat), and study area (landscape). The plot- and site-level protocols were tested in the field during summers 2014–2015 at 11 sites, nine of them consisting of warming experimental plots included in the International Tundra Experiment (ITEX). The study area protocols were assessed during 2014–2018 at 24 study areas across the Arctic. Our protocols provide comparable and easy to implement methods for assessing the intensity of invertebrate herbivory within ITEX plots and for characterizing vertebrate herbivore communities at larger spatial scales. We discuss methodological constraints and make recommendations for how these protocols can be used and how sampling effort can be optimized to obtain comparable estimates of herbivory, both at ITEX sites and at large landscape scales. The application of these protocols across the tundra biome will allow characterizing and comparing herbivore communities across tundra sites and at ecologically relevant spatial scales, providing an important step towards a better understanding of tundra ecosystem responses to large-scale environmental change

Location of studies and evidence of effects of herbivory on Arctic vegetation: a systematic map

Herbivores modify the structure and function of tundra ecosystems. Understanding their impacts is necessary to assess the responses of these ecosystems to ongoing environmental changes. However, the effects of herbivores on plants and ecosystem structure and function vary across the Arctic. Strong spatial variation in herbivore effects implies that the results of individual studies on herbivory depend on local conditions, i.e., their ecological context. An important first step in assessing whether generalizable conclusions can be produced is to identify the existing studies and assess how well they cover the underlying environmental conditions across the Arctic. This systematic map aims to identify the ecological contexts in which herbivore impacts on vegetation have been studied in the Arctic. Specifically, the primary question of the systematic map was: “What evidence exists on the effects of herbivores on Arctic vegetation?”

Can bryophyte groups increase functional resolution in tundra ecosystems?

Funding Information: This study was supported by a grant to SL from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie, Grant No. 797446 and by the Independent Research Fund Denmark, Grant no. 0135-00140B. Funding from the Academy of Finland (grant 322266), National Science Foundation (1504224, 1836839, PLR-1504381 and PLR-1836898), Independent Research Fund Denmark (9040-00314B), Moscow State University, (project No 121032500089-1), Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, ArcticNet, Polar Continental Shelf Program, Northern Science Training Program, Polar Knowledge Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Tomsk State University competitiveness improvement program and the Russian Science Foundation (grant No 20-67-46018) are gratefully acknowledged. Matthias Ahrens provided valuable insights on the cushion growth form, and we are most thankful. We thank Gaius Shaver and two anonymous reviewers for providing valuable critique and input to earlier versions of this manuscript. Publisher Copyright: © the author(s) or their institution(s).The relative contribution of bryophytes to plant diversity, primary productivity, and ecosystem functioning increases towards colder climates. Bryophytes respond to environmental changes at the species level, but because bryophyte species are relatively difficult to identify, they are often lumped into one functional group. Consequently, bryophyte function remains poorly resolved. Here, we explore how higher resolution of bryophyte functional diversity can be encouraged and implemented in tundra ecological studies. We briefly review previous bryophyte functional classifications and the roles of bryophytes in tundra ecosystems and their susceptibility to environmental change. Based on shoot morphology and colony organization, we then propose twelve easily distinguishable bryophyte functional groups. To illustrate how bryophyte functional groups can help elucidate variation in bryophyte effects and responses, we compiled existing data on water holding capacity, a key bryophyte trait. Although plant functional groups can mask potentially high interspecific and intraspecific variability, we found better separation of bryophyte functional group means compared with previous grouping systems regarding water holding capacity. This suggests that our bryophyte functional groups truly represent variation in the functional roles of bryophytes in tundra ecosystems. Lastly, we provide recommendations to improve the monitoring of bryophyte community changes in tundra study sites.Peer reviewe

Global maps of soil temperature.

Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1-km <sup>2</sup> resolution for 0-5 and 5-15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e. offset) between in situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1-km <sup>2</sup> pixels (summarized from 8519 unique temperature sensors) across all the world's major terrestrial biomes, and coarse-grained air temperature estimates from ERA5-Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (-0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome-specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near-surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil-related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications

Global maps of soil temperature

Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1-km² resolution for 0–5 and 5–15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e., offset) between in-situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1-km² pixels (summarized from 8500 unique temperature sensors) across all the world’s major terrestrial biomes, and coarse-grained air temperature estimates from ERA5-Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (-0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome-specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near-surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil-related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in-situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications

Tundra Trait Team: A database of plant traits spanning the tundra biome

Abstract Motivation: The Tundra Trait Team (TTT) database includes field-based measurements of key traits related to plant form and function at multiple sites across the tundra biome. This dataset can be used to address theoretical questions about plant strategy and trade-offs, trait–environment relationships and environmental filtering, and trait variation across spatial scales, to validate satellite data, and to inform Earth system model parameters. Main types of variable contained: The database contains 91,970 measurements of 18 plant traits. The most frequently measured traits (> 1,000 observations each) include plant height, leaf area, specific leaf area, leaf fresh and dry mass, leaf dry matter content, leaf nitrogen, carbon and phosphorus content, leaf C:N and N:P, seed mass, and stem specific density. Spatial location and grain: Measurements were collected in tundra habitats in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, including Arctic sites in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Fennoscandia and Siberia, alpine sites in the European Alps, Colorado Rockies, Caucasus, Ural Mountains, Pyrenees, Australian Alps, and Central Otago Mountains (New Zealand), and sub-Antarctic Marion Island. More than 99% of observations are georeferenced. Time period and grain: All data were collected between 1964 and 2018. A small number of sites have repeated trait measurements at two or more time periods. Major taxa and level of measurement: Trait measurements were made on 978 terrestrial vascular plant species growing in tundra habitats. Most observations are on individuals (86%), while the remainder represent plot or site means or maximums per species. Software format: csv file and GitHub repository with data cleaning scripts in R; contribution to TRY plant trait database (www.try-db.org) to be included in the next version release

Global maps of soil temperature

Research in global change ecology relies heavily on global climatic grids derived from estimates of air temperature in open areas at around 2 m above the ground. These climatic grids do not reflect conditions below vegetation canopies and near the ground surface, where critical ecosystem functions occur and most terrestrial species reside. Here, we provide global maps of soil temperature and bioclimatic variables at a 1-km2 resolution for 0–5 and 5–15 cm soil depth. These maps were created by calculating the difference (i.e. offset) between in situ soil temperature measurements, based on time series from over 1200 1-km2 pixels (summarized from 8519 unique temperature sensors) across all the world\u27s major terrestrial biomes, and coarse-grained air temperature estimates from ERA5-Land (an atmospheric reanalysis by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts). We show that mean annual soil temperature differs markedly from the corresponding gridded air temperature, by up to 10°C (mean = 3.0 ± 2.1°C), with substantial variation across biomes and seasons. Over the year, soils in cold and/or dry biomes are substantially warmer (+3.6 ± 2.3°C) than gridded air temperature, whereas soils in warm and humid environments are on average slightly cooler (−0.7 ± 2.3°C). The observed substantial and biome-specific offsets emphasize that the projected impacts of climate and climate change on near-surface biodiversity and ecosystem functioning are inaccurately assessed when air rather than soil temperature is used, especially in cold environments. The global soil-related bioclimatic variables provided here are an important step forward for any application in ecology and related disciplines. Nevertheless, we highlight the need to fill remaining geographic gaps by collecting more in situ measurements of microclimate conditions to further enhance the spatiotemporal resolution of global soil temperature products for ecological applications

Developing common protocols to measure tundra herbivory across spatial scales

Understanding and predicting large-scale ecological responses to global environmental change requires comparative studies across geographic scales with coordinated efforts and standardized methodologies. We designed, applied and assessed standardized protocols to measure tundra herbivory at three spatial scales: plot, site (habitat), and study area (landscape). The plot and site-level protocols were tested in the field during summers 2014-2015 at eleven sites, nine of them comprising warming experimental plots included in the International Tundra Experiment (ITEX). The study area protocols were assessed during 2014-2018 at 24 study areas across the Arctic. Our protocols provide comparable and easy-to-implement methods for assessing the intensity of invertebrate herbivory within ITEX plots and for characterizing vertebrate herbivore communities at larger spatial scales. We discuss methodological constraints and make recommendations for how these protocols can be used and how sampling effort can be optimized to obtain comparable estimates of herbivory, both at ITEX sites and at large landscape scales. The application of these protocols across the tundra biome will allow characterizing and comparing herbivore communities across tundra sites and at ecologically relevant spatial scales, providing an important step towards a better understanding of tundra ecosystem responses to large-scale environmental change.CGB was funded by the Estonian Research Council (grant IUT 20-28), and the European Regional Development Fund (Centre of Excellence EcolChange). JDMS was supported by the Research Council of Norway (262064). OG and LB were supported by the French Polar Institute (program “1036 Interactions”) and PRC CNRS Russie 396 (program “ICCVAT”). DSH, NL, MAG, JB and JDR were supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (Canada). NL, MAG, JB and JDR were supported by the Polar Continental Shelf Program. NL was supported by the Canada Research Chair program and the Canada Foundation for Innovation. NL and JB were supported by Environment Canada and Polar Knowledge Canada. NL and MAG were supported by the Government of Nunavut, the Igloolik Community, and Université de Moncton. NL, MAG and JB were supported by the Northern Scientific Training Program. JMA was funded by Carl Tryggers stiftelse för vetenskaplig forskning and Qatar Petroleum (QUEX-CAS-QP-RD-18_19). IHM-S was funded by the UK Natural Environmental Research Council Shrub Tundra (NE/M016323/1) grant. ISJ was funded by the University of Iceland Research Fund. Fieldwork in Yamal peninsula (Erkuta, Sabetta and Belyi) for DE, NS and AS was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (No: 18-05-60261 and No: 18-54-15013), Fram Centre project YaES (No: 362259), the Russian Center of Development of the Arctic, and the “Yamal-LNG” company. Fieldwork in Utqiaġvik was supported by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Fieldwork in Svalbard was supported by the Norwegian Research Council (AFG No: 246080/E10), the Norwegian Polar Institute, Climate-ecological Observatory for Arctic Tundra – COAT, the Svalbard Environmental protection fund (project number 15/20), and the University Centre in Svalbard (UNIS) and the AB-338/AB-838 students of 2018. Sampling at Billefjorden was supported by GACR 17- 20839S