Modeling of Soybean under Present and Future Climates in Mozambique

Citation: Talacuece, M. A. D., Justino, F. B., Rodrigues, R. D., Flores, M. E. P., Nascimento, J. G., & Santos, E. A. (2016). Modeling of Soybean under Present and Future Climates in Mozambique. Climate, 4(2), 14. doi:10.3390/cli4020031This study aims to calibrate and validate the generic crop model (CROPGRO-Soybean) and estimate the soybean yield, considering simulations with different sowing times for the current period (1990-2013) and future climate scenario (2014-2030). The database used came from observed data, nine climate models of CORDEX (Coordinated Regional climate Downscaling Experiment)-Africa framework and MERRA (Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications) reanalysis. The calibration and validation data for the model were acquired in field experiments, carried out in the 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 growing seasons in the experimental area of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) in Angonia, Mozambique. The yield of two soybean cultivars: Tgx 1740-2F and Tgx 1908-8F was evaluated in the experiments and modeled for two distinct CO2 concentrations. Our model simulation results indicate that the fertilization effect leads to yield gains for both cultivars, ranging from 11.4% (Tgx 1908-8F) to 15% (Tgx 1740-2Fm) when compared to the performance of those cultivars under current CO2 atmospheric concentration. Moreover, our results show that MERRA, the RegCM4 (Regional Climatic Model version 4) and CNRM-CM5 (Centre National de Recherches Meteorologiques - Climatic Model version 5) models provided more accurate estimates of yield, while others models underestimate yield as compared to observations, a fact that was demonstrated to be related to the model's capability of reproducing the precipitation and the surface radiation amount

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear un derstanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5–7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8–11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world’s most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepre sented in biodiversity databases.13–15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may elim inate pieces of the Amazon’s biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological com munities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple or ganism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region’s vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most ne glected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lostinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Pervasive gaps in Amazonian ecological research

Biodiversity loss is one of the main challenges of our time,1,2 and attempts to address it require a clear understanding of how ecological communities respond to environmental change across time and space.3,4 While the increasing availability of global databases on ecological communities has advanced our knowledge of biodiversity sensitivity to environmental changes,5,6,7 vast areas of the tropics remain understudied.8,9,10,11 In the American tropics, Amazonia stands out as the world's most diverse rainforest and the primary source of Neotropical biodiversity,12 but it remains among the least known forests in America and is often underrepresented in biodiversity databases.13,14,15 To worsen this situation, human-induced modifications16,17 may eliminate pieces of the Amazon's biodiversity puzzle before we can use them to understand how ecological communities are responding. To increase generalization and applicability of biodiversity knowledge,18,19 it is thus crucial to reduce biases in ecological research, particularly in regions projected to face the most pronounced environmental changes. We integrate ecological community metadata of 7,694 sampling sites for multiple organism groups in a machine learning model framework to map the research probability across the Brazilian Amazonia, while identifying the region's vulnerability to environmental change. 15%–18% of the most neglected areas in ecological research are expected to experience severe climate or land use changes by 2050. This means that unless we take immediate action, we will not be able to establish their current status, much less monitor how it is changing and what is being lost

Characterization of age-related microstructural changes in locus coeruleus and substantia nigra pars compacta.

Locus coeruleus (LC) and substantia nigra pars compacta (SNpc) degrade with normal aging, but not much is known regarding how these changes manifest in MRI images, or whether these markers predict aspects of cognition. Here, we use high-resolution diffusion-weighted MRI to investigate microstructural and compositional changes in LC and SNpc in young and older adult cohorts, as well as their relationship with cognition. In LC, the older cohort exhibited a significant reduction in mean and radial diffusivity, but a significant increase in fractional anisotropy compared with the young cohort. We observed a significant correlation between the decrease in LC mean, axial, and radial diffusivities and measures examining cognition (Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test delayed recall) in the older adult cohort. This observation suggests that LC is involved in retaining cognitive abilities. In addition, we observed that iron deposition in SNpc occurs early in life and continues during normal aging

Varenicline for long term smoking cessation in patients with COPD

Background: Quitting smoking is key for patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Standard recommendations for quitting smoking are implemented for COPD as well. Varenicline Tartrate (VT) is the most effective drug to help quit smoking, but few studies have analysed its effectiveness. Aim of the study: To determine the Abstinence Rate (AR) at 12 months, in COPD and non-COPD smokers. Methods: Observational study in 31 COPD (post bronchodilator-BD FEV1/FVC <0.70) and in 63 non-COPD smokers, were invited to receive treatment with Varenicline Tartrate (VT). Fourteen subjects with COPD and 46 non-COPD subjects received additionally Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy (CBT). Abstinence rate (AR) was validated by exhaled carbon monoxide CO (COe), in addition to a phone or face-to-face interview. Motivation score was measured with a visual analogue scale (MS). Results: Differences between COPD and non-COPD, mean FEV1/FVC ratio 0.52 ± 0.10 vs. 0.90 ± 0.15, age 60 ± 10 vs. 47 ± 10 years, smoking pack-years 37 ± 3.5 vs. 22 ± 12, and COe 16 ± 11 vs. 12 ± 9 ppm were statistically significant (p < 0.05); for MS the score was 93 ± 11 vs. 93 ± 11 and for attempts to quit (AQ) 2 ± 2 vs. 2 ± 3 were not. AR was not significantly different at 12 months (61.2 vs. 42.8% p = 0.072). Motivation was the only significant one-year AR predictor. Conclusions: COPD smokers had a similar response (higher tendency) to VT regardless of the presence of airflow obstruction and stronger nicotine addiction

Efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies, sotrovimab and BRII-196 plus BRII-198, for adults hospitalised with COVID-19 (TICO): a randomised controlled trial

We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of two neutralising monoclonal antibody therapies (sotrovimab [Vir Biotechnology and GlaxoSmithKline] and BRII-196 plus BRII-198 [Brii Biosciences]) for adults admitted to hospital for COVID-19 (hereafter referred to as hospitalised) with COVID-19. In this multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, clinical trial (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19 [TICO]), adults (aged ≥18 years) hospitalised with COVID-19 at 43 hospitals in the USA, Denmark, Switzerland, and Poland were recruited. Patients were eligible if they had laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 symptoms for up to 12 days. Using a web-based application, participants were randomly assigned (2:1:2:1), stratified by trial site pharmacy, to sotrovimab 500 mg, matching placebo for sotrovimab, BRII-196 1000 mg plus BRII-198 1000 mg, or matching placebo for BRII-196 plus BRII-198, in addition to standard of care. Each study product was administered as a single dose given intravenously over 60 min. The concurrent placebo groups were pooled for analyses. The primary outcome was time to sustained clinical recovery, defined as discharge from the hospital to home and remaining at home for 14 consecutive days, up to day 90 after randomisation. Interim futility analyses were based on two seven-category ordinal outcome scales on day 5 that measured pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications of COVID-19. The safety outcome was a composite of death, serious adverse events, incident organ failure, and serious coinfection up to day 90 after randomisation. Efficacy and safety outcomes were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly assigned to treatment who started the study infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04501978. Between Dec 16, 2020, and March 1, 2021, 546 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to sotrovimab (n=184), BRII-196 plus BRII-198 (n=183), or placebo (n=179), of whom 536 received part or all of their assigned study drug (sotrovimab n=182, BRII-196 plus BRII-198 n=176, or placebo n=178; median age of 60 years [IQR 50–72], 228 [43%] patients were female and 308 [57%] were male). At this point, enrolment was halted on the basis of the interim futility analysis. At day 5, neither the sotrovimab group nor the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group had significantly higher odds of more favourable outcomes than the placebo group on either the pulmonary scale (adjusted odds ratio sotrovimab 1·07 [95% CI 0·74–1·56]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 0·98 [95% CI 0·67–1·43]) or the pulmonary-plus complications scale (sotrovimab 1·08 [0·74–1·58]; BRII-196 plus BRII-198 1·00 [0·68–1·46]). By day 90, sustained clinical recovery was seen in 151 (85%) patients in the placebo group compared with 160 (88%) in the sotrovimab group (adjusted rate ratio 1·12 [95% CI 0·91–1·37]) and 155 (88%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group (1·08 [0·88–1·32]). The composite safety outcome up to day 90 was met by 48 (27%) patients in the placebo group, 42 (23%) in the sotrovimab group, and 45 (26%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group. 13 (7%) patients in the placebo group, 14 (8%) in the sotrovimab group, and 15 (9%) in the BRII-196 plus BRII-198 group died up to day 90. Neither sotrovimab nor BRII-196 plus BRII-198 showed efficacy for improving clinical outcomes among adults hospitalised with COVID-19. US National Institutes of Health and Operation Warp Spee