Historical biogeography of the leopard (Panthera pardus) and its extinct Eurasian populations

Background: Resolving the historical biogeography of the leopard (Panthera pardus) is a complex issue, because patterns inferred from fossils and from molecular data lack congruence. Fossil evidence supports an African origin, and suggests that leopards were already present in Eurasia during the Early Pleistocene. Analysis of DNA sequences however, suggests a more recent, Middle Pleistocene shared ancestry of Asian and African leopards. These contrasting patterns led researchers to propose a two-stage hypothesis of leopard dispersal out of Africa: an initial Early Pleistocene colonisation of Asia and a subsequent replacement by a second colonisation wave during the Middle Pleistocene. The status of Late Pleistocene European leopards within this scenario is unclear: were these populations remnants of the first dispersal, or do the last surviving European leopards share more recent ancestry with their African counterparts? Results: In this study, we generate and analyse mitogenome sequences from historical samples that span the entire modern leopard distribution, as well as from Late Pleistocene remains. We find a deep bifurcation between African and Eurasian mitochondrial lineages (~ 710 Ka), with the European ancient samples as sister to all Asian lineages (~ 483 Ka). The modern and historical mainland Asian lineages share a relatively recent common ancestor (~ 122 Ka), and we find one Javan sample nested within these. Conclusions: The phylogenetic placement of the ancient European leopard as sister group to Asian leopards suggests that these populations originate from the same out-of-Africa dispersal which founded the Asian lineages. The coalescence time found for the mitochondrial lineages aligns well with the earliest undisputed fossils in Eurasia, and thus encourages a re-evaluation of the identification of the much older putative leopard fossils from the region. The relatively recent ancestry of all mainland Asian leopard lineages suggests that these populations underwent a severe population bottleneck during the Pleistocene. Finally, although only based on a single sample, the unexpected phylogenetic placement of the Javan leopard could be interpreted as evidence for exchange of mitochondrial lineages between Java and mainland Asia, calling for further investigation into the evolutionary history of this subspecies

Neurostimulation for Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction

Background. Loss of normal bowel function caused by nerve injury, neurological disease or congenital defects of the nervous system is termed neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD). It usually includes combinations of fecal incontinence, constipation, abdominal pain and bloating. When standard treatment of NBD fails surgical procedures are often needed. Neurostimulation has also been investigated, but no consensus exists about efficacy or clinical use. Methods. A systematic literature search of NBD treated by sacral anterior root stimulation (SARS), sacral nerve stimulation (SNS), peripheral nerve stimulation, magnetic stimulation, and nerve re-routing was made in Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Results. SARS improves bowel function in some patients with complete spinal cord injury (SCI). Nerve re-routing is claimed to facilitate defecation through mechanical stimulation of dermatomes in patients with complete or incomplete SCI or myelomeningocele. SNS can reduce NBD in selected patients with a variety of incomplete neurological lesions. Peripheral stimulation using electrical stimulation or magnetic stimulation may represent non-invasive alternatives. Conclusion. Numerous methods of neurostimulation to treat NBD have been investigated in pilot studies or retrospective studies. Therefore, larger controlled trials with well-defined inclusion criteria and endpoints are recommended before widespread clinical use of neurostimulation against NBD

Neurostimulation for Neurogenic Bowel Dysfunction

Background. Loss of normal bowel function caused by nerve injury, neurological disease or congenital defects of the nervous system is termed neurogenic bowel dysfunction (NBD). It usually includes combinations of fecal incontinence, constipation, abdominal pain and bloating. When standard treatment of NBD fails surgical procedures are often needed. Neurostimulation has also been investigated, but no consensus exists about efficacy or clinical use. Methods. A systematic literature search of NBD treated by sacral anterior root stimulation (SARS), sacral nerve stimulation (SNS), peripheral nerve stimulation, magnetic stimulation, and nerve re-routing was made in Pubmed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library. Results. SARS improves bowel function in some patients with complete spinal cord injury (SCI). Nerve re-routing is claimed to facilitate defecation through mechanical stimulation of dermatomes in patients with complete or incomplete SCI or myelomeningocele. SNS can reduce NBD in selected patients with a variety of incomplete neurological lesions. Peripheral stimulation using electrical stimulation or magnetic stimulation may represent non-invasive alternatives. Conclusion. Numerous methods of neurostimulation to treat NBD have been investigated in pilot studies or retrospective studies. Therefore, larger controlled trials with well-defined inclusion criteria and endpoints are recommended before widespread clinical use of neurostimulation against NBD