One hundred priority questions for advancing seagrass conservation in Europe

17 pages, 2 figures.-- Open AccessSeagrass meadows provide numerous ecosystem services including biodiversity, coastal protection, and carbon sequestration. In Europe, seagrasses can be found in shallow sheltered waters along coastlines, in estuaries & lagoons, and around islands, but their distribution has declined. Factors such as poor water quality, coastal modification, mechanical damage, overfishing, land-sea interactions, climate change and disease have reduced the coverage of Europe’s seagrasses necessitating their recovery. Research, monitoring and conservation efforts on seagrass ecosystems in Europe are mostly uncoordinated and biased towards certain species and regions, resulting in inadequate delivery of critical information for their management. Here, we aim to identify the 100 priority questions, that if addressed would strongly advance seagrass monitoring, research and conservation in Europe. Using a Delphi method, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with seagrass experience from across Europe and with diverse seagrass expertise participated in the process that involved the formulation of research questions, a voting process and an online workshop to identify the final list of the 100 questions. The final list of questions covers areas across nine themes: Biodiversity & Ecology; Ecosystem services; Blue carbon; Fishery support; Drivers, Threats, Resilience & Response; Monitoring & Assessment; Conservation & Restoration; Governance, Policy & Management; and Communication. Answering these questions will fill current knowledge gaps and place European seagrass onto a positive trajectory of recoveryThis project was initiated and carried out under the EuroSea project using funding from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Oragnisation. Additional support was from the UK Natural Environment Research Council RESOW grant to Swansea University (NE/V016385/1). The EuroSea project is funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 862626. Thanks to Toste Tanhua and Emma Heslop for their supporting this process. Thanks are due to FCT/MCTES for the financial support to CESAM (UIDB/50017/2020 + UIDP/50017/2020 + LA/P/0094/2020), through PT national funds. Financial support from Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Technologia was also provided through the research contract to A.I. Sousa (CEECIND/00962/2017)Peer reviewe

Ocean Decade Vision 2030 White Papers – Challenge 2: Protect and Restore Ecosystems and Biodiversity.

This draft White Paper has been prepared as part of the Vision 2030 process being undertaken in the framework of the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. The Vision 2030 process aims to achieve a common and tangible measure of success for each of the ten Ocean Decade Challenges by 2030. From a starting point of existing initiatives underway in the Ocean Decade and beyond, and through a lens of priority user needs, the process determines priority datasets, critical gaps in science and knowledge, and needs in capacity development, infrastructure and technology required for each Challenge to ensure that it can be fulfilled by the end of the Ocean Decade in 2030. The results of the process will contribute to the scoping of future Decade Actions, identification of resource mobilization priorities, and ensuring the ongoing relevance of the Challenges over time. The process identifies achievable recommendations that can be implemented in the context of the Decade, or more broadly before 2030 to achieve the identified strategic ambition and indicators that will be used to measure progress. This draft White Paper is one of a series of ten White Papers all of which have been authored by an expert Working Group. Accompanied by a synthesis report authored by the Decade Coordination Unit, this white paper was discussed at the 2024 Ocean Decade Conference (Barcelona. Spain). Input received from diverse groups through public consultation and at the Conference was reviewed and incorporated as relevant

One hundred priority questions for advancing seagrass conservation in Europe

Societal Impact StatementSeagrass ecosystems are of fundamental importance to our planet and wellbeing. Seagrasses are marine flowering plants, which engineer ecosystems that provide a multitude of ecosystem services, for example, blue foods and carbon sequestration. Seagrass ecosystems have largely been degraded across much of their global range. There is now increasing interest in the conservation and restoration of these systems, particularly in the context of the climate emergency and the biodiversity crisis. The collation of 100 questions from experts across Europe could, if answered, improve our ability to conserve and restore these systems by facilitating a fundamental shift in the success of such work.SummarySeagrass meadows provide numerous ecosystem services including biodiversity, coastal protection, and carbon sequestration. In Europe, seagrasses can be found in shallow sheltered waters along coastlines, in estuaries & lagoons, and around islands, but their distribution has declined. Factors such as poor water quality, coastal modification, mechanical damage, overfishing, land-sea interactions, climate change and disease have reduced the coverage of Europe's seagrasses necessitating their recovery. Research, monitoring and conservation efforts on seagrass ecosystems in Europe are mostly uncoordinated and biased towards certain species and regions, resulting in inadequate delivery of critical information for their management. Here, we aim to identify the 100 priority questions, that if addressed would strongly advance seagrass monitoring, research and conservation in Europe. Using a Delphi method, researchers, practitioners, and policymakers with seagrass experience from across Europe and with diverse seagrass expertise participated in the process that involved the formulation of research questions, a voting process and an online workshop to identify the final list of the 100 questions. The final list of questions covers areas across nine themes: Biodiversity & Ecology; Ecosystem services; Blue carbon; Fishery support; Drivers, Threats, Resilience & Response; Monitoring & Assessment; Conservation & Restoration; Governance, Policy & Management; and Communication. Answering these questions will fill current knowledge gaps and place European seagrass onto a positive trajectory of recovery.Seagrass ecosystems are of fundamental importance to our planet and wellbeing. Seagrasses are marine flowering plants which engineer ecosystems that provide a multitude of ecosystem services, for example, blue foods and carbon sequestration. Seagrass ecosystems have largely been degraded across much of their global range. There is now increasing interest in the conservation and restoration of these systems, particularly in the context of the climate emergency and the biodiversity crisis. The collation of 100 questions from experts across Europe could, if answered, improve our ability to conserve and restore these systems by facilitating a fundamental shift in the success of such work. imagePeer reviewe

Colorectal Endoscopic Stenting Trial (CReST) for obstructing left-sided colorectal cancer: randomized clinical trial

Background Colorectal cancer often presents with obstruction needing urgent, potentially life-saving decompression. The comparative efficacy and safety of endoluminal stenting versus emergency surgery as initial treatment for such patients is uncertain. Methods Patients with left-sided colonic obstruction and radiological features of carcinoma were randomized to endoluminal stenting using a combined endoscopic/fluoroscopic technique followed by elective surgery 1–4 weeks later, or surgical decompression with or without tumour resection. Treatment allocation was via a central randomization service using a minimization procedure stratified by curative intent, primary tumour site, and severity score (Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation). Co-primary outcome measures were duration of hospital stay and 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were stoma formation, stenting completion and complication rates, perioperative morbidity, 6-month survival, 3-year recurrence, resource use, adherence to chemotherapy, and quality of life. Analyses were undertaken by intention to treat. Results Between 23 April 2009 and 22 December 2014, 245 patients from 39 hospitals were randomized. Stenting was attempted in 119 of 123 allocated patients (96.7 per cent), achieving relief of obstruction in 98 of 119 (82.4 per cent). For the 89 per cent treated with curative intent, there were no significant differences in 30-day postoperative mortality (3.6 per cent (4 of 110) versus 5.6 per cent (6 of 107); P = 0.48), or duration of hospital stay (median 19 (i.q.r. 11–34) versus 18 (10–28) days; P = 0.94) between stenting followed by delayed elective surgery and emergency surgery. Among patients undergoing potentially curative treatment, stoma formation occurred less frequently in those allocated to stenting than those allocated to immediate surgery (47 of 99 (47.5 per cent) versus 72 of 106 (67.9 per cent); P = 0.003). There were no significant differences in perioperative morbidity, critical care use, quality of life, 3-year recurrence or mortality between treatment groups. Conclusion Stenting as a bridge to surgery reduces stoma formation without detrimental effects. Registration number: ISRCTN13846816 (http://www.controlled-trials.com)