| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Fehlinger, Lena, et al.
(författare)
-
The ecological role of permanent ponds in Europe : a review of dietary linkages to terrestrial ecosystems via emerging insects
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Inland Waters. - : Taylor & Francis. - 2044-2041 .- 2044-205X. ; 13:1, s. 30-46
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Permanent ponds are valuable freshwater systems and biodiversity hotspots. They provide diverse ecosystem services (ESs), including water quality improvement and supply, food provisioning, and biodiversity support, despite significant pressure from multiple anthropogenic stressors and the impacts of ongoing global change. However, ponds are largely overlooked in management plans and legislation, and ecological research has focused on large freshwater ecosystems, such as rivers or lakes. Protection of ponds is often insufficient or indirectly provided via associated habitats such as wetlands. This situation is likely exacerbated by the lack of a full-scale understanding of the importance of ponds. In this review, we provide a detailed overview of permanent ponds across Europe, including their usages and the biodiversity they support. By discussing the concepts of pondscape and metacommunity theory, we highlight the importance of connectivity among and between ponds and identified fluxes of emerging insects as another ES of ponds. Those insects are rich in essential nutrients such as polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), delivered through them to the terrestrial environment; however, the extent and impact of this ES remains largely unexplored. Several potential stressors, especially related to ongoing global change, that influence pond diversity and integrity are discussed. We provide our insights on future pond management. Adaptive measures, taking into account the pond system per se within the pondscape, are the most promising to mitigate the loss of natural ponds and restore and conserve natural small waterbodies as refuges and diversity hotspots in increasingly urbanized landscapes.
|
|
| 10. |
- Karras, Dimitrios, et al.
(författare)
-
Effectiveness of Teriparatide in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis and Glucocorticoid Use : 3-Year Results from the EFOS Study
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Journal of Rheumatology. - : The Journal of Rheumatology. - 0315-162X .- 1499-2752. ; 39:3, s. 600-609
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective. To describe clinical fracture rates, back pain, and health-related quality of life (HROOL) in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who are receiving glucocorticoids (GC), during a 36-month study of teriparatide treatment for up to 18 months, with an additional 18-month followup period when patients were receiving other osteoporosis medications. Methods. A prospective, multinational, observational study. Data for clinical fractures, back pain (by visual analog scale; VAS) and HRQOL (by EQ-5D) were collected over 36 months. Fracture data were summarized in 6-month segments and analyzed using logistic regression with repeated measures. Changes from baseline in back pain VAS and EQ-VAS were analyzed. Results. Of 1581 enrolled women with followup data, 294 (18.6%) had antecedents of GC use. Of these, 49 (16.7%) patients sustained a total of 69 fractures during the 36-month study period. Adjusted odds of fracture were significantly decreased during the last year of followup compared with the first 6 months of teriparatide treatment: an 81% decrease in the 24 to < 30-month period (p < 0.05), and an 89% decrease in the 30 to < 36-month period (p < 0.05). There were significant reductions in back pain and improvements in HRQOL in both groups of GC users and nonusers. Conclusion. Postmenopausal women with severe osteoporosis receiving GC, who were treated with teriparatide for up to 18 months, showed a reduced incidence of clinical fractures during the third year while receiving sequential osteoporosis treatments compared with the first 6 months, together with reduced back pain and improved HRQOL. Our results should be interpreted in the context of an uncontrolled observational study in a routine clinical setting.
|
|
