Challenges of a novel range: water balance, stress, and immunity in an invasive toad

Species introduced by human activities can alter the normal functioning of ecosystems promoting negative impacts on native biodiversity, as they can rapidly expand their population size, demonstrating phenotypic plasticity and possible adaptive capacity to novel environments. Twenty years ago, the guttural toad, Sclerophrys gutturalis, was introduced to a peri-urban area of Cape Town, with cooler and drier climatic characteristics than its native source population, Durban, South Africa. Our goal was to understand the phenotypic changes, in terms of physiology and immunity, of populations in native and novel environments. We evaluated body index (BI), field hydration level, plasma corticosterone levels (CORT), proportion of neutrophils: lymphocytes (N: L), plasma bacterial killing ability (BKA), and hematocrit (HTC) in the field, and after standardized stressors (dehydration and movement restriction) in males from the native and invasive populations. Toads from the invasive population presented lower BI and tended to show a lower field hydration state, which is consistent with living in the drier environmental conditions of Cape Town. Additionally, invasive toads also showed higher BKA and N:L ratio under field conditions. After exposure to stressors, invasive animals presented higher BKA than the natives. Individuals from both populations showed increased CORT after dehydration, an intense stressor for these animals. The highest BKA and N:L ratio in the field and after submission to stressors in the laboratory shows that the invasive population has a phenotype that might increase their fitness, leading to adaptive responses in the novel environment and, thus, favoring successful dispersion and population increase

COVID-19 As A Chronic Stressor And The Importance Of Individual Identity: A Data-Driven Look At Academic Productivity During The Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted personal and professional life. For academics, research, teaching, and service tasks were upended and we all had to navigate the altered landscape. However, some individuals faced a disproportionate burden, particularly academics with minoritized identities or those who were early career, were caregivers, or had intersecting identities. As comparative endocrinologists, we determine how aspects of individual and species-level variation influence response to, recovery from, and resilience in the face of stressors. Here, we flip that framework and apply an integrative biological lens to the impact of the COVID-19 chronic stressor on our endocrine community. We address how the pandemic altered impact factors of academia (e.g., scholarly products) and relatedly, how factors of impact (e.g., sex, gender, race, career stage, caregiver status, etc.) altered the way in which individuals could respond. We predict the pandemic will have long-term impacts on the population dynamics, composition, and landscape of our academic ecosystem. Impact factors of research, namely journal submissions, were altered by COVID-19, and women authors saw a big dip. We discuss this broadly and then report General and Comparative Endocrinology (GCE) manuscript submission and acceptance status by gender and geographic region from 2019 to 2023. We also summarize how the pandemic impacted individuals with different axes of identity, how academic institutions have responded, compile proposed solutions, and conclude with a discussion on what we can all do to (re)build the academy in an equitable way. At GCE, the first author positions had gender parity, but men outnumbered women at the corresponding author position. Region of manuscript origin mattered for submission and acceptance rates, and women authors from Asia and the Middle East were the most heavily impacted by the pandemic. The number of manuscripts submitted dropped after year 1 of the pandemic and has not yet recovered. Thus, COVID-19 was a chronic stressor for the GCE community