Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time, and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space. While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes, vast areas of the tropics remain understudied. In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity, but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases. To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge, it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Evaluation of the reproductive performance of rabbits does fed a half-simplified diet based on cassava byproducts

A total of 70 five-month-old female New Zealand White rabbits were assigned in a completely randomized design, over three reproductive cycles, with two treatments: a reference diet and a half-simplified diet containing 79.83% cassava byproduct. The study evaluated body weight and feed intake of does, feed cost, number and total body weight of kits at kindling and weaning per female during three cycles, number and percentage of mortality/female/cycle, and weight gain of kits from birth to weaning. No interaction was observed between the diets and among the reproductive cycles for any evaluated characteristics. The body weight of does at the moment of weaning was similar in both groups for all three reproductive cycles. However, does fed the half-simplified diet had lower feed intake during the three reproductive cycles and, consequently, more reproductive flaws. The number of kits at weaning, body weight of kits at kindling and weaning, weight gain of kits from birth to weaning, and total body weight of kits at weaning were lower for the group of does fed the half-simplified diet and, consequently, there was a higher number and percentage of dead kits in this group. The total numbers of kits at kindling and weaning and total body weight of kits at birth during all three reproductive cycles were similar between the groups; however, total body weight of weaning rabbits was higher for the animals receiving the reference diet. It is possible to conclude that although the use of the half-simplified diet decreases the reproductive performance of does, it reduces feed cost per kg of body weight by 23.63% compared with the reference diet, proving to be a viable nutritional option for rabbit production