Comparison of Dolphins' Body and Brain Measurements with Four Other Groups of Cetaceans Reveals Great Diversity

We compared mature dolphins with 4 other groupings of mature cetaceans. With a large data set, we found great brain diversity among 5 different taxonomic groupings. The dolphins in our data set ranged in body mass from about 40 to 6,750 kg and in brain mass from 0.4 to 9.3 kg. Dolphin body length ranged from 1.3 to 7.6 m. In our combined data set from the 4 other groups of cetaceans, body mass ranged from about 20 to 120,000 kg and brain mass from about 0.2 to 9.2 kg, while body length varied from 1.21 to 26.8 m. Not all cetaceans have large brains relative to their body size. A few dolphins near human body size have human-sized brains. On the other hand, the absolute brain mass of some other cetaceans is only one-sixth as large. We found that brain volume relative to body mass decreases from Delphinidae to a group of Phocoenidae and Monodontidae, to a group of other odontocetes, to Balaenopteroidea, and finally to Balaenidae. We also found the same general trend when we compared brain volume relative to body length, except that the Delphinidae and Phocoenidae-Monodontidae groups do not differ significantly. The Balaenidae have the smallest relative brain mass and the lowest cerebral cortex surface area. Brain parts also vary. Relative to body mass and to body length, dolphins also have the largest cerebellums. Cortex surface area is isometric with brain size when we exclude the Balaenidae. Our data show that the brains of Balaenidae are less convoluted than those of the other cetaceans measured. Large vascular networks inside the cranial vault may help to maintain brain temperature, and these nonbrain tissues increase in volume with body mass and with body length ranging from 8 to 65% of the endocranial volume. Because endocranial vascular networks and other adnexa, such as the tentorium cerebelli, vary so much in different species, brain size measures from endocasts of some extinct cetaceans may be overestimates. Our regression of body length on endocranial adnexa might be used for better estimates of brain volume from endocasts or from endocranial volume of living species or extinct cetaceans

Comparison of Dolphins' Body and Brain Measurements with Four Other Groups of Cetaceans Reveals Great Diversity

We compared mature dolphins with 4 other groupings of mature cetaceans. With a large data set, we found great brain diversity among 5 different taxonomic groupings. The dolphins in our data set ranged in body mass from about 40 to 6,750 kg and in brain mass from 0.4 to 9.3 kg. Dolphin body length ranged from 1.3 to 7.6 m. In our combined data set from the 4 other groups of cetaceans, body mass ranged from about 20 to 120,000 kg and brain mass from about 0.2 to 9.2 kg, while body length varied from 1.21 to 26.8 m. Not all cetaceans have large brains relative to their body size. A few dolphins near human body size have human-sized brains. On the other hand, the absolute brain mass of some other cetaceans is only one-sixth as large. We found that brain volume relative to body mass decreases from Delphinidae to a group of Phocoenidae and Monodontidae, to a group of other odontocetes, to Balaenopteroidea, and finally to Balaenidae. We also found the same general trend when we compared brain volume relative to body length, except that the Delphinidae and Phocoenidae-Monodontidae groups do not differ significantly. The Balaenidae have the smallest relative brain mass and the lowest cerebral cortex surface area. Brain parts also vary. Relative to body mass and to body length, dolphins also have the largest cerebellums. Cortex surface area is isometric with brain size when we exclude the Balaenidae. Our data show that the brains of Balaenidae are less convoluted than those of the other cetaceans measured. Large vascular networks inside the cranial vault may help to maintain brain temperature, and these nonbrain tissues increase in volume with body mass and with body length ranging from 8 to 65% of the endocranial volume. Because endocranial vascular networks and other adnexa, such as the tentorium cerebelli, vary so much in different species, brain size measures from endocasts of some extinct cetaceans may be overestimates. Our regression of body length on endocranial adnexa might be used for better estimates of brain volume from endocasts or from endocranial volume of living species or extinct cetaceans

Global Surgery 2030: a roadmap for high income country actors

The Millennium Development Goals have ended and the Sustainable Development Goals have begun, marking a shift in the global health landscape. The frame of reference has changed from a focus on 8 development priorities to an expansive set of 17 interrelated goals intended to improve the well-being of all people. In this time of change, several groups, including the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery, have brought a critical problem to the fore: 5 billion people lack access to safe, affordable surgical and anaesthesia care when needed. The magnitude of this problem and the world's new focus on strengthening health systems mandate reimagined roles for and renewed commitments from high income country actors in global surgery. To discuss the way forward, on 6 May 2015, the Commission held its North American launch event in Boston, Massachusetts. Panels of experts outlined the current state of knowledge and agreed on the roles of surgical colleges and academic medical centres; trainees and training programmes; academia; global health funders; the biomedical devices industry, and news media and advocacy organisations in building sustainable, resilient surgical systems. This paper summarises these discussions and serves as a consensus statement providing practical advice to these groups. It traces a common policy agenda between major actors and provides a roadmap for maximising benefit to surgical patients worldwide. To close the access gap by 2030, individuals and organisations must work collectively, interprofessionally and globally. High income country actors must abandon colonial narratives and work alongside low and middle income country partners to build the surgical systems of the future

The Recent Climate Record: What It Can and Cannot Tell Us

While a great deal of climate data have been gathered over the past hundred years, there remains a number of problems limiting our ability to fully utilize these data in reconstructing the climate of the past century. This is particularly true for research demanding high precision and/or detailed local or regional-scale climate analyses. In this review we consider our ability to quantify climate change with respect to near-surface air temperature (measured 1.25-2 m above ground), sea surface temperature, .precipitation, snow cover, sea ice, and vegetation measured from space and the Earth\u27s surface. Among the data issues we discuss are calibration, observing practices, urbanization, station changes, data representativeness, data access, and areal coverage. The \u27diversity of measurements over the past century and the new monitoring system being introduced via space-based and surface-based platfonns offer an unparalleled opportunity for global monitoring;but to quantify climate change, we must tackle such issues as changing retrieval algorithms, relatively short periods of record, satellite Earth location precision, incompatibility with previous conventional historical observations, calibration, and potentially overwhelming data volumes. A new specialty within the climate field is beginning to emerge to address these problems. Despite the litany of problems the instrumented climate record can tell us a great deal about the spatial distribution and secular trends in temperature and precipitation over many areas of the world. In the future a blend of many data types and observing systems will be necessary to better quantify climate change. These large data sets will have to be made accessible to scientists in such a way that allows them an opportunity to check the veracity of their hypotheses and predictions regarding climate change

Effect of general anaesthesia on functional outcome in patients with anterior circulation ischaemic stroke having endovascular thrombectomy versus standard care: a meta-analysis of individual patient data

Background: General anaesthesia (GA) during endovascular thrombectomy has been associated with worse patient outcomes in observational studies compared with patients treated without GA. We assessed functional outcome in ischaemic stroke patients with large vessel anterior circulation occlusion undergoing endovascular thrombectomy under GA, versus thrombectomy not under GA (with or without sedation) versus standard care (ie, no thrombectomy), stratified by the use of GA versus standard care. Methods: For this meta-analysis, patient-level data were pooled from all patients included in randomised trials in PuMed published between Jan 1, 2010, and May 31, 2017, that compared endovascular thrombectomy predominantly done with stent retrievers with standard care in anterior circulation ischaemic stroke patients (HERMES Collaboration). The primary outcome was functional outcome assessed by ordinal analysis of the modified Rankin scale (mRS) at 90 days in the GA and non-GA subgroups of patients treated with endovascular therapy versus those patients treated with standard care, adjusted for baseline prognostic variables. To account for between-trial variance we used mixed-effects modelling with a random effect for trials incorporated in all models. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane method. The meta-analysis was prospectively designed, but not registered. Findings: Seven trials were identified by our search; of 1764 patients included in these trials, 871 were allocated to endovascular thrombectomy and 893 were assigned standard care. After exclusion of 74 patients (72 did not undergo the procedure and two had missing data on anaesthetic strategy), 236 (30%) of 797 patients who had endovascular procedures were treated under GA. At baseline, patients receiving GA were younger and had a shorter delay between stroke onset and randomisation but they had similar pre-treatment clinical severity compared with patients who did not have GA. Endovascular thrombectomy improved functional outcome at 3 months both in patients who had GA (adjusted common odds ratio (cOR) 1·52, 95% CI 1·09–2·11, p=0·014) and in those who did not have GA (adjusted cOR 2·33, 95% CI 1·75–3·10, p<0·0001) versus standard care. However, outcomes were significantly better for patients who did not receive GA versus those who received GA (covariate-adjusted cOR 1·53, 95% CI 1·14–2·04, p=0·0044). The risk of bias and variability between studies was assessed to be low. Interpretation: Worse outcomes after endovascular thrombectomy were associated with GA, after adjustment for baseline prognostic variables. These data support avoidance of GA whenever possible. The procedure did, however, remain effective versus standard care in patients treated under GA, indicating that treatment should not be withheld in those who require anaesthesia for medical reasons