10 research outputs found
Neonatal Androgenization Exacerbates Alcohol-Induced Liver Injury in Adult Rats, an Effect Abrogated by Estrogen
Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) affects millions of people worldwide and is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. However, fewer than 10% of heavy drinkers progress to later stages of injury, suggesting other factors in ALD development, including environmental exposures and genetics. Females display greater susceptibility to the early damaging effects of ethanol. Estrogen (E2) and ethanol metabolizing enzymes (cytochrome P450, CYP450) are implicated in sex differences of ALD. Sex steroid hormones are developmentally regulated by the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis, which controls sex-specific cycling of gonadal steroid production and expression of hepatic enzymes. The aim of this study was to determine if early postnatal inhibition of adult cyclic E2 alters ethanol metabolizing enzyme expression contributing to the development of ALD in adulthood. An androgenized rat model was used to inhibit cyclic E2 production. Control females (Ctrl), androgenized females (Andro) and Andro females with E2 implants were administered either an ethanol or isocalorically-matched control Lieber-DeCarli diet for four weeks and liver injury and CYP450 expression assessed. Androgenization exacerbated the deleterious effects of ethanol demonstrated by increased steatosis, lipid peroxidation, profibrotic gene expression and decreased antioxidant defenses compared to Ctrl. Additionally, CYP2E1 expression was down-regulated in Andro animals on both diets. No change was observed in CYP1A2 protein expression. Further, continuous exogenous administration of E2 to Andro in adulthood attenuated these effects, suggesting that E2 has protective effects in the androgenized animal. Therefore, early postnatal inhibition of cyclic E2 modulates development and progression of ALD in adulthood
Conserving large carnivores: dollars and fence
Conservationists often advocate for landscape approaches to wildlife management while others argue for physical separation between protected species and human communities, but direct empirical comparisons of these alternatives are scarce. We relate African lion population densities and population trends to contrasting management practices across 42 sites in 11 countries. Lion populations in fenced reserves are significantly closer to their estimated carrying capacities than unfenced populations. Whereas fenced reserves can maintain lions at 80% of their potential densities on annual management budgets of 2000 km−2 to attain half their potential densities. Lions in fenced reserves are primarily limited by density dependence, but lions in unfenced reserves are highly sensitive to human population densities in surrounding communities, and unfenced populations are frequently subjected to density-independent factors. Nearly half the unfenced lion populations may decline to near extinction over the next 20–40 years
Conserving large carnivores : dollars and fence
Conservationists often advocate for landscape approaches to wildlife management while others argue for physical separation between protected species and human communities, but direct empirical comparisons of these alternatives are scarce. We relate African lion population densities and population trends to contrasting management practices across 42 sites in 11 countries. Lion populations in fenced reserves are significantly closer to their estimated carrying capacities than unfenced populations. Whereas fenced reserves can maintain lions at 80% of their potential densities on annual management budgets of 2000 km−2 to attain half their potential densities. Lions in fenced reserves are primarily limited by density dependence, but lions in unfenced reserves are highly sensitive to human population densities in surrounding communities, and unfenced populations are frequently subjected to density-independent factors. Nearly half the unfenced lion populations may decline to near extinction over the next 20–40 years.Research funded by Adrian Gardiner/Mantis Collection (AL), African Wildlife Foundation (SB,LF), Wendy Arnold (LF), Arthur Blank Family Foundation (LF), Australian Research Council - DP0987528 (KZ), Australian Research Council – LP0990395 (SG), Banovich Wildscapes Foundation (LF), Bateleurs (RS), Boesak Kruger Fund (LF,AL), Born Free (SB,SC), Michael Calvin (LF), Charles Darwin University (STG,KKZ), Cheryl Grunbock & Martin King Foundation (LF), Chicago Board of Trade for Endangered Species (RG), Columbus Zoo (SB,TC,RG,LF), Conservation Force (LF,PF), Dallas Ecological Foundation (LF), Dallas Safari Club (LF), Darwin Initiative for Biodiversity (AL), Paul Davies (SMD), Denver Zoo (LF), Directors of Ongava Game Reserve (KJS), Disney Worldwide Conservation Fund (CMB,KSB,CP,RS), Dominion Oil (EOO, AP), Earthwatch Institute #5123 (SMK,BP), Fairplay Foundation (CMB,KSB), Fauna & Flora International (CMB,KSB), Flora Family Foundation (LF), Frankenberg Foundation (AL), Stephen Gold (LF), Green Trust WWF-SA (RS), GTZ/Pendjari Project (EAS), Hluhluwe Tourism Assoc. (RS), Houston Zoo (CMB,KSB,JWMcN), Idea Wild (HBr), Kenya Wildlife Service (SK), Lakeside Foundation (SMD), Lee & Juliet Folger Foundation (JWMcN), Lillian Jean Kaplan Foundation (AL), Lion Ore (KN), Bruce Ludwig (LF), Malilangwe Trust (BC), Mara Conservancy (BH), MGM Grand Hotel (CP,RS), Mohamed Bin Zayed Species Fund (HHdeI), N. & R. Myhrvold (JWMcN), National Geographic Big Cat Initiative (HHdeI,JWMcN), National Geographic Society (SB,HBr,TC,LF,RG,CP), National Research Foundation (RS), Netherlands Committee for IUCN (HHdeI), Netherlands Support Program for the Garoua Wildlife School (HBa), NSF (LF,JS), NSF DEB-0 613 730(DMacN), NSF DEB-1 020 479(CP), Okavango Wildlife Society (KN), Ol Pejeta Ranch Ltd. (NG,CN), Panthera (GB,CMB,KSB,HBr,LF, LH,BK, PL,AL,CP,EOO,AP,EAS), Panthera Kaplan Awards Program (ACB,LF), PG Allen Family Foundation (JWMcN), Philadelphia Zoological Society (LF,KN,KS), Porini Camp Amboseli (LF), Potrero Nuevo Fund (LF), Predator Conservation Trust (CMB,KSB), Rann Safaris (CW,HW), Rufford Foundation (CMB,KSB,LF,KN), Rufford-Maurice-Laing Foundation (AL), Kathy Ruttenberg (AP), Safari South (C&HW), San Francisco Zoo (LF), SCI Foundation (LF), Seaworld/Busch Gardens Conservation Foundation (SB,LF), Technology and Human Resources for Industry Programme, SA (RS), Thandiza Foundation and the Rotterdam Zoo (KN), Tshwane University of Technology – Faculty Research Committee (PF), Tshwane University of Technology – Postgraduate Scholarship Programme (SMM), Tusk Trust (JWMcN), University of KwaZulu-Natal (RS), US Forest Service (AP), US National Cancer Institute (LF), Van Tienhoven Foundation (HBa), Jonathan Vannini (LF), Vectronic Aerospace (LF), West Midlands Safari Park (KS), Debby Wettlaufer (LF), Wild about Cats (RS), Wild Entrust International (JWMcN), Wildlife Conservation Network (CMB,KSB,LF), Wildlife Conservation Society (CMB,KSB,LF,BK,EOO,AP), Wildlife Conservation Trust KZN (RS), Wildlife Direct (LF), Wildlife Division of the Forestry Commission of Ghana (ACB), Woodland Park Zoo (JWMcN) and World Wide Fund for Nature (HHdeI).http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1461-0248hb201
The performance of African protected areas for lions and their prey
Using surveys of experts associated with 186 sites across 24 countries, we assessed the effectiveness of African protected areas (PAs) at conserving lions and their prey, identified factors that influence conservation effectiveness, and identified patterns in the severity of various threats. Less than one third of sampled PAs conserve lions at ≥ 50% of their estimated carrying capacity (K), and less than half conserve lion prey species at ≥ 50% of K. Given adequate management, PAs could theoretically support up to 4x × the total extant population of wild African lions (~ 83,000), providing a measurable benchmark for future conservation efforts. The performance of PAs shows marked geographic variation, and in several countries there is a need for a significant elevation in conservation effort. Bushmeat poaching was identified as the most serious threat to both lions and to wildlife in general. The severity of threats to wildlife in PAs and the performance of prey populations were best predicted by geographic-socioeconomic variables related to the size of PAs, whether people were settled within PAs, human/livestock densities in neighbouring areas and national economic indicators. However, conservation outcomes for lions were best explained by management variables. PAs tended to be more effective for conserving lions and/or their prey where management budgets were higher, where photographic tourism was the primary land use, and, for prey, where fencing was present. Lions and prey fared less well relative to their estimated potential carrying capacities in poorer countries, where people were settled within PAs and where PAs were used for neither photographic tourism nor trophy hunting
Mechanism of acute pancreatitis complicated with injury of intestinal mucosa barrier*
Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common acute abdomen in clinic with a rapid onset and dangerous pathogenetic condition. AP can cause an injury of intestinal mucosa barrier, leading to translocation of bacteria or endotoxin through multiple routes, bacterial translocation (BT), gutorigin endotoxaemia, and secondary infection of pancreatic tissue, and then cause systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) or multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS), which are important factors influencing AP’s severity and mortality. Meanwhile, the injury of intestinal mucosa barrier plays a key role in AP’s process. Therefore, it is clinically important to study the relationship between the injury of intestinal mucosa barrier and AP. In addition, many factors such as microcirculation disturbance, ischemical reperfusion injury, excessive release of inflammatory mediators and apoptosis may also play important roles in the damage of intestinal mucosa barrier. In this review, we summarize studies on mechanisms of AP