Temperature and Resource Availability May Interactively Affect Over-Wintering Success of Juvenile Fish in a Changing Climate

The predicted global warming may affect freshwater systems at several organizational levels, from organism to ecosystem. Specifically, in temperate regions, the projected increase of winter temperatures may have important effects on the over-winter biology of a range of organisms and especially for fish and other ectothermic animals. However, temperature effects on organisms may be directed strongly by resource availability. Here, we investigated whether over-winter loss of biomass and lipid content of juvenile roach (Rutilus rutilus) was affected by the physiologically relatively small (2-5°C) changes of winter temperatures predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), under both natural and experimental conditions. This was investigated in combination with the effects of food availability. Finally, we explored the potential for a correlation between lake temperature and resource levels for planktivorous fish, i.e., zooplankton biomass, during five consecutive winters in a south Swedish lake. We show that small increases in temperature (+2°C) affected fish biomass loss in both presence and absence of food, but negatively and positively respectively. Temperature alone explained only a minor part of the variation when food availability was not taken into account. In contrast to other studies, lipid analyses of experimental fish suggest that critical somatic condition rather than critical lipid content determined starvation induced mortality. Our results illustrate the importance of considering not only changes in temperature when predicting organism response to climate change but also food-web interactions, such as resource availability and predation. However, as exemplified by our finding that zooplankton over-winter biomass in the lake was not related to over-winter temperature, this may not be a straightforward task

Environmental risk factors for dementia: a systematic review

Background - Dementia risk reduction is a major and growing public health priority. While certain modifiable risk factors for dementia have been identified, there remains a substantial proportion of unexplained risk. There is evidence that environmental risk factors may explain some of this risk. Thus, we present the first comprehensive systematic review of environmental risk factors for dementia. Methods - We searched the PubMed and Web of Science databases from their inception to January 2016, bibliographies of review articles, and articles related to publically available environmental data. Articles were included if they examined the association between an environmental risk factor and dementia. Studies with another outcome (for example, cognition), a physiological measure of the exposure, case studies, animal studies, and studies of nutrition were excluded. Data were extracted from individual studies which were, in turn, appraised for methodological quality. The strength and consistency of the overall evidence for each risk factor identified was assessed. Results - We screened 4784 studies and included 60 in the review. Risk factors were considered in six categories: air quality, toxic heavy metals, other metals, other trace elements, occupational-related exposures, and miscellaneous environmental factors. Few studies took a life course approach. There is at least moderate evidence implicating the following risk factors: air pollution; aluminium; silicon; selenium; pesticides; vitamin D deficiency; and electric and magnetic fields. Conclusions - Studies varied widely in size and quality and therefore we must be circumspect in our conclusions. Nevertheless, this extensive review suggests that future research could focus on a short list of environmental risk factors for dementia. Furthermore, further robust, longitudinal studies with repeated measures of environmental exposures are required to confirm these associations

Socioeconomic and urban-rural differentials in exposure to air pollution and mortality burden in England

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomically disadvantaged populations often have higher exposures to particulate air pollution, which can be expected to contribute to differentials in life expectancy. We examined socioeconomic differentials in exposure and air pollution-related mortality relating to larger scale (5 km resolution) variations in background concentrations of selected pollutants across England. METHODS: Ozone and particulate matter (sub-divided into PM10, PM2.5, PM2.5-10, primary, nitrate and sulphate PM2.5) were simulated at 5 km horizontal resolution using an atmospheric chemistry transport model (EMEP4UK). Annual mean concentrations of these pollutants were assigned to all 1,202,578 residential postcodes in England, which were classified by urban-rural status and socioeconomic deprivation based on the income and employment domains of the 2010 English Index of Multiple Deprivation for the Lower-level Super Output Area of residence. We used life table methods to estimate PM2.5-attributable life years (LYs) lost in both relative and absolute terms. RESULTS: Concentrations of the most particulate fractions, but not of nitrate PM2.5 or ozone, were modestly higher in areas of greater socioeconomic deprivation. Relationships between pollution level and socioeconomic deprivation were non-linear and varied by urban-rural status. The pattern of PM2.5 concentrations made only a small contribution to the steep socioeconomic gradient in LYs lost due to PM2.5 per 103 population, which primarily was driven by the steep socioeconomic gradient in underlying mortality rates. In rural areas, the absolute burden of air pollution-related LYs lost was lowest in the most deprived deciles. CONCLUSIONS: Air pollution shows modest socioeconomic patterning at 5 km resolution in England, but absolute attributable mortality burdens are strongly related to area-level deprivation because of underlying mortality rates. Measures that cause a general reduction in background concentrations of air pollution may modestly help narrow socioeconomic differences in health