Ecological networks: Pursuing the shortest path, however narrow and crooked

International audienceRepresenting data as networks cuts across all sub-disciplines in ecology and evolutionary biology. Besides providing a compact representation of the interconnections between agents, network analysis allows the identification of especially important nodes, according to various metrics that often rely on the calculation of the shortest paths connecting any two nodes. While the interpretation of a shortest paths is straightforward in binary, unweighted networks, whenever weights are reported, the calculation could yield unexpected results. We analyzed 129 studies of ecological networks published in the last decade that use shortest paths, and discovered a methodological inaccuracy related to the edge weights used to calculate shortest paths (and related centrality measures), particularly in interaction networks. Specifically, 49% of the studies do not report sufficient information on the calculation to allow their replication, and 61% of the studies on weighted networks may contain errors in how shortest paths are calculated. Using toy models and empirical ecological data, we show how to transform the data prior to calculation and illustrate the pitfalls that need to be avoided. We conclude by proposing a five-point checklist to foster best-practices in the calculation and reporting of centrality measures in ecology and evolution studies. The last two decades have witnessed an exponential increase in the use of graph analysis in ecological and conservation studies (see refs. 1,2 for recent introductions to network theory in ecology and evolution). Networks (graphs) represent agents as nodes linked by edges representing pairwise relationships. For instance, a food web can be represented as a network of species (nodes) and their feeding relationships (edges) 3. Similarly, the spatial dynamics of a metapopulation can be analyzed by connecting the patches of suitable habitat (nodes) with edges measuring dispersal between patches 4. Data might either simply report the presence/absence of an edge (binary, unweighted networks), or provide a strength for each edge (weighted networks). In turn, these weights can represent a variety of ecologically-relevant quantities, depending on the system being described. For instance, edge weights can quantify interaction frequency (e.g., visitation networks 5), interaction strength (e.g., per-capita effect of one species on the growth rate of another 3), carbon-flow between trophic levels 6 , genetic similarity 7 , niche overlap (e.g., number of shared resources between two species 8), affinity 9 , dispersal probabilities (e.g., the rate at which individuals of a population move between patches 10), cost of dispersal between patches (e.g., resistance 11), etc. Despite such large variety of ecological network representations, a common task is the identification of nodes of high importance, such as keystone species in a food web, patches acting as stepping stones in a dispersal network , or genes with pleiotropic effects. The identification of important nodes is typically accomplished through centrality measures 5,12. Many centrality measures has been proposed, each probing complementary aspects of node-to-node relationships 13. For instance, Closeness centrality 14,15 highlights nodes that are "near" to all othe

WHO global research priorities for antimicrobial resistance in human health

The WHO research agenda for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in human health has identified 40 research priorities to be addressed by the year 2030. These priorities focus on bacterial and fungal pathogens of crucial importance in addressing AMR, including drug-resistant pathogens causing tuberculosis. These research priorities encompass the entire people-centred journey, covering prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of antimicrobial-resistant infections, in addition to addressing the overarching knowledge gaps in AMR epidemiology, burden and drivers, policies and regulations, and awareness and education. The research priorities were identified through a multistage process, starting with a comprehensive scoping review of knowledge gaps, with expert inputs gathered through a survey and open call. The priority setting involved a rigorous modified Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative approach, ensuring global representation and applicability of the findings. The ultimate goal of this research agenda is to encourage research and investment in the generation of evidence to better understand AMR dynamics and facilitate policy translation for reducing the burden and consequences of AMR

WHO global research priorities for antimicrobial resistance in human health

The WHO research agenda for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in human health has identified 40 research priorities to be addressed by the year 2030. These priorities focus on bacterial and fungal pathogens of crucial importance in addressing AMR, including drug-resistant pathogens causing tuberculosis. These research priorities encompass the entire people-centred journey, covering prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of antimicrobial-resistant infections, in addition to addressing the overarching knowledge gaps in AMR epidemiology, burden and drivers, policies and regulations, and awareness and education. The research priorities were identified through a multistage process, starting with a comprehensive scoping review of knowledge gaps, with expert inputs gathered through a survey and open call. The priority setting involved a rigorous modified Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative approach, ensuring global representation and applicability of the findings. The ultimate goal of this research agenda is to encourage research and investment in the generation of evidence to better understand AMR dynamics and facilitate policy translation for reducing the burden and consequences of AMR

AMR in low-resource settings: Médecins Sans Frontières bridges surveillance gaps by developing a turnkey solution, the Mini-Lab

Background In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), data related to antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are often inconsistently collected. Humanitarian, private and non-governmental medical organizations (NGOs), working with or in parallel to public medical systems, are sometimes present in these contexts. Yet, what is the role of NGOs in the fight against AMR, and how can they contribute to AMR data collection in contexts where reporting is scarce? How can context-adapted, high-quality clinical bacteriology be implemented in remote, challenging and underserved areas of the world? Objectives The aim was to provide an overview of AMR data collection challenges in LMICs and describe one initiative, the Mini-Lab project developed by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), that attempts to partially address them. Sources We conducted a literature review using PubMed and Google scholar databases to identify peer-reviewed research and grey literature from publicly available reports and websites. Content We address the necessity of and difficulties related to obtaining AMR data in LMICs, as well as the role that actors outside of public medical systems can play in the collection of this information. We then describe how the Mini-Lab can provide simplified bacteriological diagnosis and AMR surveillance in challenging settings. Implications NGOs are responsible for a large amount of healthcare provision in some very low-resourced contexts. As a result, they also have a role in AMR control, including bacteriological diagnosis and the collection of AMR-related data. Actors outside the public medical system can actively contribute to implementing and adapting clinical bacteriology in LMICs and can help improve AMR surveillance and data collection