Conservation planning in an uncertain climate: Identifying projects that remain valuable and feasible across future scenarios

Conservation actors face the challenge of allocating limited resources despite uncertainty about future climate conditions. In many cases, the potential value and feasibility of proposed projects vary across climate scenarios. A key goal is to identify areas where conservation outcomes can balance both environmental and human needs. We developed a conservation prioritization framework that jointly considers the value and feasibility of candidate projects across future climate scenarios. We then applied this framework to the challenge of meeting environmental flow targets across the Red River basin of the south-central United States. To estimate the conservation feasibility of meeting environmental flow goals in a river reach in each climate scenario, we used a basin-wide hydrologic planning tool to quantify the reduction in societal water usage needed to meet environmental flow targets. To estimate the biodiversity value of each river reach in each climate scenario, we used climate-driven species distribution models and species’ conservation status. We found that river reaches in the east-central portion of the basin may be good candidates for conservation investments, because they had high biodiversity value and high sociopolitical feasibility in all future climate scenarios. In contrast, sites in the arid western reaches of the basin had high biodiversity value, but low feasibility of achieving environmental flow goals. Our framework should have broad applicability given that the value and feasibility of conservation projects vary across climate scenarios in ecosystems around the world. It may serve as a coarse filter to identify sites for more detailed analyses and could be integrated with complementarity-based approaches to conservation planning to balance species’ representation across projects. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article

The dynamics of mature and emerging freshwater conservation programs

Conservation programs range from small, place-based initiatives to large, bureaucracy-heavy systems. The dynamics of these programs vary greatly. New initiatives may experience exponential growth, but participation and spending in mature programs may rise and fall in response to a number of factors. Here, we analyze historical patterns of participation and spending across five freshwater conservation programs in the United States. Our analysis highlights fundamental differences between emerging programs, which may experience exponential or logistic growth, and mature programs with slower growth, in which changes in participation may be driven by a number of internal and exogenous factors. We propose that changes in the number and spatial distribution of conservation projects are associated with four key factors: changes in legislation that open new funding streams; shifting priorities of actors; changes in the policies or management of a program that align it with new funding opportunities; and increases in individuals’ willingness to participate in a program as it grows. These programmatic shifts represent windows of opportunity for strategically reorienting conservation programs to leverage newly-available resources. Given that large, mature conservation programs support biodiversity and ecosystem services worldwide, comparison of their dynamics with those of emerging programs may reveal key opportunities for maximizing the benefits of investments in these programs.SW was supported by a Nancy L. Mergler Dissertation Completion Fellowship at OU. Financial support was provided by the University of Oklahoma Libraries’ Open Access Fund.Ye

Beyond the Band-Aid Approach: An Alliance Party Perspective Upon the Belfast Agreement

In the absence of a ready-made solution that could be adopted by the people of Northern Ireland, or a magical formula from the British and Irish Governments, the only alternative lay in locally-mandated political parties negotiating a political agreement. This alternative in turn entailed a common recognition that the zero-sum politics of winner takes all ultimately leaves everyone a loser. An accommodation, while requiring each party to sacrifice some of its aspirations, stood to benefit Northern Ireland society as a whole

Blockade of the co-inhibitory molecule PD-1 unleashes ILC2-dependent antitumor immunity in melanoma

International audienceGroup 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) are essential to maintain tissue homeostasis. In cancer, ILC2s can harbor both pro-tumorigenic and anti-tumorigenic functions, but we know little about their underlying mechanisms or whether they could be clinically relevant or targeted to improve patient outcomes. Here, we found that high ILC2 infiltration in human melanoma was associated with a good clinical prognosis. ILC2s are critical producers of the cytokine granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor, which coordinates the recruitment and activation of eosinophils to enhance antitumor responses. Tumor-infiltrating ILC2s expressed programmed cell death protein-1, which limited their intratumoral accumulation, proliferation and antitumor effector functions. This inhibition could be overcome in vivo by combining interleukin-33-driven ILC2 activation with programmed cell death protein-1 blockade to significantly increase antitumor responses. Together, our results identified ILC2s as a critical immune cell type involved in melanoma immunity and revealed a potential synergistic approach to harness ILC2 function for antitumor immunotherapies

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline