Adaptive and maladaptive consequences of “matching habitat choice:” lessons from a rapidly-evolving butterfly metapopulation

Relationships between biased dispersal and local adaptation are currently debated. Here, I show how prior work on wild butterflies casts a novel light on this topic. “Preference” is defined as the set of likelihoods of accepting particular resources after encountering them. So defined, butterfly oviposition preferences are heritable habitat adaptations distinct from both habitat preference and biased dispersal, but influencing both processes. When a butterfly emigrates after its oviposition preference begins to reduce realized fecundity, the resulting biased dispersal is analogous to that occurring when a fish emigrates after its morphological habitat adaptations reduce its feeding rate. I illustrate preference-biased dispersal with examples from metapopulations of Melitaea cinxia and Euphydryas editha. E. editha were feeding on a well-defended host, Pedicularis, when humans created patches in which Pedicularis was killed and a less-defended host, Collinsia, was rendered phenologically available. Patch-specific natural selection favoured oviposition on Collinsia in logged (“clearing”) patches and on Pedicularis in undisturbed open forest. Quantitative variation in post-alighting oviposition preference was heritable, and evolved to be consistently different between patch types. This difference was driven more by biased dispersal than by spatial variation of natural selection. Insects developing on Collinsia in clearings retained adaptations to Pedicularis in clutch size, geotaxis and oviposition preference, forcing them to choose between emigrating in search of forest habitats with Pedicularis or staying and failing to find their preferred host. Insects that stayed suffered reduction of realized fecundity after delayed oviposition on Collinsia. Those that emigrated suffered even greater fitness penalty from consistently low offspring survival on Pedicularis. Paradoxically, most emigrants reduced both their own fitness and that of the recipient populations by dispersing from a benign natal habitat to which they were maladapted into a more demanding habitat to which they were well-adapted. “Matching habitat choice” reduced fitness when evolutionary lag rendered traditional cues unreliable in a changing environment

The role of beta-lactamase-producing-bacteria in mixed infections

Beta-lactamase-producing bacteria (BLPB) can play an important role in polymicrobial infections. They can have a direct pathogenic impact in causing the infection as well as an indirect effect through their ability to produce the enzyme beta-lactamase. BLPB may not only survive penicillin therapy but can also, as was demonstrated in in vitro and in vivo studies, protect other penicillin-susceptible bacteria from penicillin by releasing the free enzyme into their environment. This phenomenon occurs in upper respiratory tract, skin, soft tissue, surgical and other infections. The clinical, in vitro, and in vivo evidence supporting the role of these organisms in the increased failure rate of penicillin in eradication of these infections and the implication of that increased rate on the management of infections is discussed

Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact.

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a "Green List of Species" (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species' progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species' viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species' recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard