Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time, and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space. While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes, vast areas of the tropics remain understudied. In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity, but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases. To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge, it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Utilização de gonadotrofina coriônica humana e cipionato de estradiol associado ao dispositivo de liberação controlada de drogas para sincronização de ovulação em cabras da raça Saanen

Dezesseis cabras nulíparas da raça Saanen foram distribuídas em dois grupos de tratamentos (T1 e T2) para sincronização da ovulação. Inicialmente, ambos os tratamento consistiram na aplicação concomitante do dispositivo de liberação controlada de drogas (CIDR-G®), de 5mg de dinoprost e de 1mg de cipionato de estradiol (CE) (dia 0). No quarto dia aplicaram-se 250UI de eCG e no quinto dia retirou-se o CIDR-G®. As cabras do T1 (n=8) receberam 1mg de CE 24 horas depois da retirada do CIDR-G® e as do T2 (n=8) receberam 250UI de hCG 30 horas após. Sete cabras do T1 e oito do T2 entraram em estro depois da retirada do CIDR-G®. Cabras que receberam hCG permaneceram em estro por 42,0± 6,9 horas e as que receberam CE por 45,0± 5,5 horas (P>0,05). As características ovulatórias não foram influenciadas pelos tratamentos. O intervalo da retirada do CIDR-G® à ovulação para ambos os protocolos de sincronização da ovulação não diferiu (P>0,05) entre tratamentos. As ovulações promovidas pelo CE ocorreram em menor intervalo de tempo.Saanen nuliparous female goats were distributed in two experimental groups of eight animals each to synchronize the ovulation. on day zero, all animals were treated with controlled internal drug release (CIDR-G®), dinoprost (5mg) and estradiol cipionate (EC; 1mg). on day 4, all animals were treated with eCG (250IU), and on day 5 the CIDR-G® was removed. Group 1 (T1) received 1mg of EC and Group 2 (T2) received 250IU of hCG, 24 and 30 hours after CIDR-G® removal, respectively. Onset of estrus was observed in 7 and 8 goats of T1 and T2 groups, respectively. hCG treated goats remained in estrus for 42±6.9 hours, whereas EC-treated goats remained in estrus for 45±5.5 hours (P>0.05). None of the studied ovulatory characteristics were affected by treatments. The intervals between CIDR-G® removal and ovulation in T1 and T2 groups were similar. Both hCG and EC were equally efficient on inducing ovulation synchronically