Accounting for molecular stochasticity in systematic revisions: species limits and phylogeny of Paroaria

Different frameworks have been proposed for using molecular data in systematic revisions, but there is ongoing debate on their applicability, merits and shortcomings. In this paper we examine the fit between morphological and molecular data in the systematic revision of Paroaria, a group of conspicuous songbirds endemic to South America. We delimited species based on examination of > 600 specimens, and developed distance-gap, and distance- and character-based coalescent simulations to test species limits with molecular data. The morphological and molecular data collected were then analyzed using parsimony, maximum likelihood, and Bayesian phylogenetics. The simulations were better at evaluating the new species limits than using genetic distances. Species diversity within Paroaria had been underestimated by 60%, and the revised genus comprises eight species. Phylogenetic analyses consistently recovered a congruent topology for the most recently derived species in the genus, but the most basal divergences were not resolved with these data. The systematic and phylogenetic hypotheses developed here are relevant to both setting conservation priorities and understanding the biogeography of South America. 
&#xa

The Impact of ICT on Adolescents' Perceptions and Consumption of Substances

This paper reports the results of a three-month randomized controlled trial to estimate the impact of an Internet and mobile telephone short message service (SMS) intervention on adolescents’ information about substances and rates of consumption. A low percentage of participants logged on to the Web platform, but most participants were reached through e-mails and SMS. It is found that the intervention was able to affect awareness that certain substances are drugs, but no significant changes in consumption habits were found.Randomized trial, Drugs, Smoking, Alcohol

The impact of ICT on adolescent's perception and consumption of substances

Considerando el potencial de las intervenciones basadas en las tecnología de la información sobre los jóvenes, se realiza una prueba controlada para conocer el impacto de estas tecnologías (Internet y SMS) en las percepciones de los adolescentes respecto al conocimiento y consumo de drogas, así como comportamientos relacionados al mismo. La población objetivo fueron estudiantes de tercero y cuarto de liceo de colegios privados de Montevide

Parrots and Palms: Analyzing Data to Determine Best Management Strategies and Sustainable Harvest Levels

This exercise1 presents a scenario and raw data on a realistic conflict between parrot conservation and palm tree harvest. It requires that students analyze data very comparable to what would be gathered in the field, to: 1) construct a life tables for the palm and parrot, 2) extract vital statistics about both the palm and parrot population from the life tables, 3) estimate maximum sustainable yield for both species, and 4) make a decision about the sustainability of harvest intensity. It illustrates the importance of data analysis skills for conservation

The State of Capacity Development Evaluation in Biodiversity Conservation and Natural Resource Management

Capacity development is critical to long-term conservation success, yet we lack a robust and rigorous understanding of how well its effects are being evaluated. A comprehensive summary of who is monitoring and evaluating capacity development interventions, what is being evaluated and how, would help in the development of evidence-based guidance to inform design and implementation decisions for future capacity development interventions and evaluations of their effectiveness. We built an evidence map by reviewing peer-reviewed and grey literature published since 2000, to identify case studies evaluating capacity development interventions in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management. We used inductive and deductive approaches to develop a coding strategy for studies that met our criteria, extracting data on the type of capacity development intervention, evaluation methods, data and analysis types, categories of outputs and outcomes assessed, and whether the study had a clear causal model and/or used a systems approach. We found that almost all studies assessed multiple outcome types: most frequent was change in knowledge, followed by behaviour, then attitude. Few studies evaluated conservation outcomes. Less than half included an explicit causal model linking interventions to expected outcomes. Half of the studies considered external factors that could influence the efficacy of the capacity development intervention, and few used an explicit systems approach. We used framework synthesis to situate our evidence map within the broader literature on capacity development evaluation. Our evidence map (including a visual heat map) highlights areas of low and high representation in investment in research on the evaluation of capacity development

The state of capacity development evaluation in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management

Capacity development is critical to long-term conservation success, yet we lack a robust and rigorous understanding of how well its effects are being evaluated. A comprehensive summary of who is monitoring and evaluating capacity development interventions, what is being evaluated and how, would help in the development of evidence-based guidance to inform design and implementation decisions for future capacity development interventions and evaluations of their effectiveness. We built an evidence map by reviewing peer-reviewed and grey literature published since 2000, to identify case studies evaluating capacity development interventions in biodiversity conservation and natural resource management. We used inductive and deductive approaches to develop a coding strategy for studies that met our criteria, extracting data on the type of capacity development intervention, evaluation methods, data and analysis types, categories of outputs and outcomes assessed, and whether the study had a clear causal model and/or used a systems approach. We found that almost all studies assessed multiple outcome types: most frequent was change in knowledge, followed by behaviour, then attitude. Few studies evaluated conservation outcomes. Less than half included an explicit causal model linking interventions to expected outcomes. Half of the studies considered external factors that could influence the efficacy of the capacity development intervention, and few used an explicit systems approach. We used framework synthesis to situate our evidence map within the broader literature on capacity development evaluation. Our evidence map (including a visual heat map) highlights areas of low and high representation in investment in research on the evaluation of capacity development

Good Practices in the Co-Production of Knowledge: Working Well Together in Environmental Change Research

This living document proposes good relational practices to support climate change researchers in and beyond the Columbia University Climate School in their efforts to pursue and practice knowledge co-production in their climate-related scholarship, research, and practice. For the purpose of this document, climate researchers are anyone from any background who contributes, in any form, to enhancing our shared understanding, strategies, and responses to climate change. Although this document is focused on research, it also importantly provides communities (Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike), private sector organizations, and others who are carrying out and connected to climate-related work a window into how climate researchers might interact with them, how they can further advocate on their own behalf through the language and aspirations of co-production, and how they can anticipate interacting with researchers through co-production relational way. The document starts with a brief introduction and description of what it does and does not intend to communicate. It then transitions into a framework for good relational practices in knowledge co-production generated through an extensive review of co-production literature in the climate sciences, one-on-one conversations with 9 Columbia University affiliated researchers and practitioners, and a 2.5 day convening with 36 contributors, including Columbia researchers, Indigenous leaders, government representatives, the private sector, and external academics. The framework brings together 28 relational principles and 22 recommended good relational practices, which are summarized under the framework section. The principles and practices are then filtered into 30 reflexive questions, or points of reflection, climate researchers can ask themselves to help use and learn from the good relational practices. The principles, good practices and points of reflection are categorized into 6 interrelated pillars of co-production: The people theme brings attention to the ways in which individual and group identities shape the direction of knowledge co-production efforts. The purpose theme represents the meanings and motivations associated with knowledge co-production. The power theme refers to how power and power relations are understood and enacted through and around efforts to co-produce knowledge. The politics theme centers on the effects of policies and politics on knowledge co-production work at different scales. The pathways theme focuses on tools, approaches, and strategies used to co-produce knowledge in relevant, rigorous, and meaningful ways. The progress theme embodies the broad aspiration that knowledge co-production will catalyze transformative change, whether societal, scientific, cultural, or otherwise. The guidelines are followed with two sections about the motivations for this document and a condensed overview of the history and development of co-production within the environmental and climate sciences. The last section, Steps towards ‘good relational practices’, details how information was gathered and summarized for this document. Drawing from this information, climate researchers are encouraged to use, learn from, and reflect on the information in this document to consider why and how knowledge co-production may or may not be appropriate for their climate-related research