Modeling the ecology and evolution of biodiversity: Biogeographical cradles, museums, and graves

Individual processes shaping geographical patterns of biodiversity are increasingly understood, but their complex interactions on broad spatial and temporal scales remain beyond the reach of analytical models and traditional experiments. To meet this challenge, we built a spatially explicit, mechanistic simulation model implementing adaptation, range shifts, fragmentation, speciation, dispersal, competition, and extinction, driven by modeled climates of the past 800,000 years in South America. Experimental topographic smoothing confirmed the impact of climate heterogeneity on diversification. The simulations identified regions and episodes of speciation (cradles), persistence (museums), and extinction (graves). Although the simulations had no target pattern and were not parameterized with empirical data, emerging richness maps closely resembled contemporary maps for major taxa, confirming powerful roles for evolution and diversification driven by topography and climate

Search for the rare decays B0→J/ψγB^{0}\to J/\psi \gamma and Bs0→J/ψγB^{0}_{s} \to J/\psi \gamma

A search for the rare decay of a $B^{0}$ or $B^{0}_{s}$ meson into the final state $J/\psi\gamma$ is performed, using data collected by the LHCb experiment in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ and $8$ TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 3 fb$^{-1}$. The observed number of signal candidates is consistent with a background-only hypothesis. Branching fraction values larger than $1.7\times 10^{-6}$ for the $B^{0}\to J/\psi\gamma$ decay mode are excluded at 90% confidence level. For the $B^{0}_{s}\to J/\psi\gamma$ decay mode, branching fraction values larger than $7.4\times 10^{-6}$ are excluded at 90% confidence level, this is the first branching fraction limit for this decay.Comment: All figures and tables, along with any supplementary material and additional information, are available at https://lhcbproject.web.cern.ch/lhcbproject/Publications/LHCbProjectPublic/LHCb-PAPER-2015-044.htm

Coefficient shifts in geographical ecology: an empirical evaluation of spatial and non-spatial regression

Copyright © 2009 The Authors. Copyright © ECOGRAPHY 2009.A major focus of geographical ecology and macro ecology is to understand the causes of spatially structured ecological patterns. However, achieving this understanding can be complicated when using multiple regressions, because the relative importance of explanatory variables, as measured by regression coefficients, can shift depending on whether spatially explicit or non-spatial modelling is used. However, the extent to which coefficients may shift and why shifts occur are unclear. Here, we analyze the relationship between environmental predictors and the geographical distribution of species richness, body size, range size and abundance in 97 multi-factorial data sets. Our goal was to compare standardized partial regression coefficients of non-spatial ordinary least squares regressions (i.e. models fitted using ordinary least squares without taking autocorrelation into account; “OLS models” hereafter) and eight spatial methods to evaluate the frequency of coefficient shifts and identify characteristics of data that might predict when shifts are likely. We generated three metrics of coefficient shifts and eight characteristics of the data sets as predictors of shifts. Typical of ecological data, spatial autocorrelation in the residuals of OLS models was found in most data sets. The spatial models varied in the extent to which they minimized residual spatial autocorrelation. Patterns of coefficient shifts also varied among methods and datasets, although the magnitudes of shifts tended to be small in all cases. We were unable to identify strong predictors of shifts, including the levels of autocorrelation in either explanatory variables or model residuals. Thus, changes in coefficients between spatial and non-spatial methods depend on the method used and are largely idiosyncratic, making it difficult to predict when or why shifts occur. We conclude that the ecological importance of regression coefficients cannot be evaluated with confidence irrespective of whether spatially explicit modelling is used or not. Researchers may have little choice but to be more explicit about the uncertainty of models and more cautious in their interpretation

Erratum to: 36th International Symposium on Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s13054-016-1208-6.]

Measurements of the Higgs boson production and decay rates and coupling strengths using pp collision data at √S=7 and 8 TeV in the ATLAS experiment

Combined analyses of the Higgs boson production and decay rates as well as its coupling strengths to vector bosons and fermions are presented. The combinations include the results of the analyses of the H -> gamma gamma, ZZ*, WW*, Z gamma, b (b) over bar, tau tau and mu mu decay modes, and the constraints on the associated production with a pair of top quarks and on the off-shell coupling strengths of the Higgs boson. The results are based on the LHC proton-proton collision datasets, with integrated luminosities of up to 4.7 fb(-1) at root s = 7 TeV and 20.3 fb(-1) at root s = 8 TeV, recorded by the ATLAS detector in 2011 and 2012. Combining all production modes and decay channels, the measured signal yield, normalised to the Standard Model expectation, is 1.18(-0.14)(+0.15). The observed Higgs boson production and decay rates are interpreted in a leading-order coupling framework, exploring a wide range of benchmark coupling models both with and without assumptions on the Higgs boson width and on the Standard Model particle content in loop processes. The data are found to be compatible with the Standard Model expectations for a Higgs boson at a mass of 125.36 GeV for all models considered

Measurements of long-range near-side angular correlations in √sNN = 5 TeV proton-lead collisions in the forward region

Two-particle angular correlations are studied in proton-lead collisions at a nucleon–nucleon centre-of-mass energy of √sNN = 5 TeV , collected with the LHCb detector at the LHC. The analysis is based on data recorded in two beam configurations, in which either the direction of the proton or that of the lead ion is analysed. The correlations are measured in the laboratory system as a function of relative pseudorapidity, Δη, and relative azimuthal angle, Δϕ, for events in different classes of event activity and for different bins of particle transverse momentum. In high-activity events a long-range correlation on the near side, Δ ϕ ≈ 0 , is observed in the pseudorapidity range 2.0 < η < 4.9 . This measurement of long-range correlations on the near side in proton-lead collisions extends previous observations into the forward region up to η = 4.9 . The correlation increases with growing event activity and is found to be more pronounced in the direction of the lead beam. However, the correlation in the direction of the lead and proton beams are found to be compatible when comparing events with similar absolute activity in the direction analysed

Study of ψ(2S) production and cold nuclear matter effects in pPb collisions at √ sNN = 5 TeV

The production of ψ(2S) mesons is studied in dimuon final states using proton-lead (pPb) collision data collected by the LHCb detector. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 1.6 nb−1. The nucleon-nucleon centre-of-mass energy of the pPb collisions is (Formula presented.) TeV. The measurement is performed using ψ(2S) mesons with transverse momentum less than 14 GeV/c and rapidity y in the ranges 1.5 < y < 4.0 and −5.0 < y < −2.5 in the nucleon-nucleon centre-of-mass system. The forward-backward production ratio and the nuclear modification factor are determined for ψ(2S) mesons. Using the production cross-section results of ψ(2S) and J/ψ mesons from b-hadron decays, the (Formula presented.) cross-section in pPb collisions at (Formula presented.) TeV is obtained

Why Are Outcomes Different for Registry Patients Enrolled Prospectively and Retrospectively? Insights from the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF).

Background: Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result. Methods and Results: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (n = 5069) or prospectively (n = 5501) from 19 countries and then followed prospectively. The retrospectively enrolled cohort comprised patients with established AF (for a least 6, and up to 24 months before enrolment), who were identified retrospectively (and baseline and partial follow-up data were collected from the emedical records) and then followed prospectively between 0-18 months (such that the total time of follow-up was 24 months; data collection Dec-2009 and Oct-2010). In the prospectively enrolled cohort, patients with newly diagnosed AF (≤6 weeks after diagnosis) were recruited between Mar-2010 and Oct-2011 and were followed for 24 months after enrolment. Differences between the cohorts were observed in clinical characteristics, including type of AF, stroke prevention strategies, and event rates. More patients in the retrospectively identified cohort received vitamin K antagonists (62.1% vs. 53.2%) and fewer received non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (1.8% vs . 4.2%). All-cause mortality rates per 100 person-years during the prospective follow-up (starting the first study visit up to 1 year) were significantly lower in the retrospective than prospectively identified cohort (3.04 [95% CI 2.51 to 3.67] vs . 4.05 [95% CI 3.53 to 4.63]; p = 0.016). Conclusions: Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment. Clinical Trial Registration: - URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362)

Improved risk stratification of patients with atrial fibrillation: an integrated GARFIELD-AF tool for the prediction of mortality, stroke and bleed in patients with and without anticoagulation.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an accurate, web-based tool for stratifying patients with atrial fibrillation to facilitate decisions on the potential benefits/risks of anticoagulation, based on mortality, stroke and bleeding risks. DESIGN: The new tool was developed, using stepwise regression, for all and then applied to lower risk patients. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2-VASc using 30-fold cross-validation to control for overfitting. External validation was undertaken in an independent dataset, Outcome Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF). PARTICIPANTS: Data from 39 898 patients enrolled in the prospective GARFIELD-AF registry provided the basis for deriving and validating an integrated risk tool to predict stroke risk, mortality and bleeding risk. RESULTS: The discriminatory value of the GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc for patients with or without anticoagulation. C-statistics (95% CI) for all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism and haemorrhagic stroke/major bleeding (treated patients) were: 0.77 (0.76 to 0.78), 0.69 (0.67 to 0.71) and 0.66 (0.62 to 0.69), respectively, for the GARFIELD-AF risk models, and 0.66 (0.64-0.67), 0.64 (0.61-0.66) and 0.64 (0.61-0.68), respectively, for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). In very low to low risk patients (CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (men) and 1 or 2 (women)), the CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (for bleeding) scores offered weak discriminatory value for mortality, stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding. C-statistics for the GARFIELD-AF risk tool were 0.69 (0.64 to 0.75), 0.65 (0.56 to 0.73) and 0.60 (0.47 to 0.73) for each end point, respectively, versus 0.50 (0.45 to 0.55), 0.59 (0.50 to 0.67) and 0.55 (0.53 to 0.56) for CHA2DS2-VASc (or HAS-BLED for bleeding). Upon validation in the ORBIT-AF population, C-statistics showed that the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was effective for predicting 1-year all-cause mortality using the full and simplified model for all-cause mortality: C-statistics 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77) and 0.75 (0.73 to 0.77), respectively, and for predicting for any stroke or systemic embolism over 1 year, C-statistics 0.68 (0.62 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS: Performance of the GARFIELD-AF risk tool was superior to CHA2DS2-VASc in predicting stroke and mortality and superior to HAS-BLED for bleeding, overall and in lower risk patients. The GARFIELD-AF tool has the potential for incorporation in routine electronic systems, and for the first time, permits simultaneous evaluation of ischaemic stroke, mortality and bleeding risks. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier for GARFIELD-AF (NCT01090362) and for ORBIT-AF (NCT01165710)

Two-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: results from GARFIELD-AF.

AIMS: The relationship between outcomes and time after diagnosis for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is poorly defined, especially beyond the first year. METHODS AND RESULTS: GARFIELD-AF is an ongoing, global observational study of adults with newly diagnosed NVAF. Two-year outcomes of 17 162 patients prospectively enrolled in GARFIELD-AF were analysed in light of baseline characteristics, risk profiles for stroke/systemic embolism (SE), and antithrombotic therapy. The mean (standard deviation) age was 69.8 (11.4) years, 43.8% were women, and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.3 (1.6); 60.8% of patients were prescribed anticoagulant therapy with/without antiplatelet (AP) therapy, 27.4% AP monotherapy, and 11.8% no antithrombotic therapy. At 2-year follow-up, all-cause mortality, stroke/SE, and major bleeding had occurred at a rate (95% confidence interval) of 3.83 (3.62; 4.05), 1.25 (1.13; 1.38), and 0.70 (0.62; 0.81) per 100 person-years, respectively. Rates for all three major events were highest during the first 4 months. Congestive heart failure, acute coronary syndromes, sudden/unwitnessed death, malignancy, respiratory failure, and infection/sepsis accounted for 65% of all known causes of death and strokes for <10%. Anticoagulant treatment was associated with a 35% lower risk of death. CONCLUSION: The most frequent of the three major outcome measures was death, whose most common causes are not known to be significantly influenced by anticoagulation. This suggests that a more comprehensive approach to the management of NVAF may be needed to improve outcome. This could include, in addition to anticoagulation, interventions targeting modifiable, cause-specific risk factors for death. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362