Cerebrovascular risk factors and preclinical memory decline in healthy APOE ε4 homozygotes

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the effects of cerebrovascular (CV) risk factors on preclinical memory decline in cognitively normal individuals at 3 levels of genetic risk for Alzheimer disease (AD) based on APOE genotype. METHODS: We performed longitudinal neuropsychological testing on an APOE ε4 enriched cohort, ages 21-97. The long-term memory (LTM) score of the Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) was the primary outcome measure. Any of 4 CV risk factors (CVany), including hypercholesterolemia (CHOL), prior cigarette use (CIG), diabetes mellitus (DM), and hypertension (HTN), was treated as a dichotomized variable. We estimated the longitudinal effect of age using statistical models that simultaneously modeled the cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of age on AVLT LTM by APOE genotype, CVany, and the interaction between the two. RESULTS: A total of 74 APOE ε4 homozygotes (HMZ), 239 ε4 heterozygotes (HTZ), and 494 ε4 noncarriers were included. APOE ε4 carrier status showed a significant quadratic effect with age-related LTM decline in all models as previously reported. CVany was associated with further longitudinal AVLT LTM decline in APOE ε4 carriers (p=0.02), but had no effect in noncarriers. When ε4 HTZ and HMZ were considered separately, there was a striking effect in HMZ (p\u3c0.001) but not in HTZ. In exploratory analyses, significant deleterious effects were found for CIG (p=0.001), DM (p=0.03), and HTN (p=0.05) in APOE ε4 carriers only that remained significant only for CIG after correction for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSION: CV risk factors influence age-related memory decline in APOE ε4 HMZ

Biodiversity, Biological Uncertainty, and Setting Conservation Priorities

In a world of massive extinctions where not all taxa can be saved, how ought biologists to decide their preservation priorities? When biologists make recommendations regarding conservation, should their analyses be based on scientific criteria, on public or lay criteria, on economic or some other criteria? As a first step in answering this question, we examine the issue of whether biologists ought to try to save the endangered Florida panther, a well known “glamour” taxon. To evaluate the merits of panther preservation, we examine three important arguments of biologists who are skeptical about the desirability of panther preservation. These arguments are (1) that conservation dollars ought to be spent in more efficient ways than panther preservation; (2) that biologists and conservationists ought to work to preserve species before subspecies; and (3) that biologists and conservationists ought to work to save habitats before species or subspecies. We conclude that, although all three arguments are persuasive, none of them provides convincing grounds for foregoing panther preservation in favor of other, more scientifically significant conservation efforts. Our conclusion is based, in part, on the argument that biologists ought to employ ethical, as well as scientific, rationality in setting conservation priorities and that ethical rationality may provide persuasive grounds for preserving taxa that often are not viewed by biologists as of great importance