| 1. |
- Downey, Harriet, et al.
(författare)
-
Training future generations to deliver evidence-based conservation and ecosystem management
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Ecological Solutions and Evidence. - : Wiley. - 2688-8319. ; 2:1
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- 1. To be effective, the next generation of conservation practitioners and managers need to be critical thinkers with a deep understanding of how to make evidence-based decisions and of the value of evidence synthesis.2. If, as educators, we do not make these priorities a core part of what we teach, we are failing to prepare our students to make an effective contribution to conservation practice.3. To help overcome this problem we have created open access online teaching materials in multiple languages that are stored in Applied Ecology Resources. So far, 117 educators from 23 countries have acknowledged the importance of this and are already teaching or about to teach skills in appraising or using evidence in conservation decision-making. This includes 145 undergraduate, postgraduate or professional development courses.4. We call for wider teaching of the tools and skills that facilitate evidence-based conservation and also suggest that providing online teaching materials in multiple languages could be beneficial for improving global understanding of other subject areas.
|
|
| 2. |
- Cole, Lorna J., et al.
(författare)
-
A critical analysis of the potential for EU Common Agricultural Policy measures to support wild pollinators on farmland
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of Applied Ecology. - : Wiley. - 0021-8901 .- 1365-2664. ; 57:4, s. 681-694
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Agricultural intensification and associated loss of high-quality habitats are key drivers of insect pollinator declines. With the aim of decreasing the environmental impact of agriculture, the 2014 EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) defined a set of habitat and landscape features (Ecological Focus Areas: EFAs) farmers could select from as a requirement to receive basic farm payments. To inform the post-2020 CAP, we performed a European-scale evaluation to determine how different EFA options vary in their potential to support insect pollinators under standard and pollinator-friendly management, as well as the extent of farmer uptake. A structured Delphi elicitation process engaged 22 experts from 18 European countries to evaluate EFAs options. By considering life cycle requirements of key pollinating taxa (i.e. bumble bees, solitary bees and hoverflies), each option was evaluated for its potential to provide forage, bee nesting sites and hoverfly larval resources. EFA options varied substantially in the resources they were perceived to provide and their effectiveness varied geographically and temporally. For example, field margins provide relatively good forage throughout the season in Southern and Eastern Europe but lacked early-season forage in Northern and Western Europe. Under standard management, no single EFA option achieved high scores across resource categories and a scarcity of late season forage was perceived. Experts identified substantial opportunities to improve habitat quality by adopting pollinator-friendly management. Improving management alone was, however, unlikely to ensure that all pollinator resource requirements were met. Our analyses suggest that a combination of poor management, differences in the inherent pollinator habitat quality and uptake bias towards catch crops and nitrogen-fixing crops severely limit the potential of EFAs to support pollinators in European agricultural landscapes. Policy Implications. To conserve pollinators and help protect pollination services, our expert elicitation highlights the need to create a variety of interconnected, well-managed habitats that complement each other in the resources they offer. To achieve this the Common Agricultural Policy post-2020 should take a holistic view to implementation that integrates the different delivery vehicles aimed at protecting biodiversity (e.g. enhanced conditionality, eco-schemes and agri-environment and climate measures). To improve habitat quality we recommend an effective monitoring framework with target-orientated indicators and to facilitate the spatial targeting of options collaboration between land managers should be incentivised.
|
|
| 3. |
- Alejandre, Elizabeth M., et al.
(författare)
-
Characterization Factors to Assess Land Use Impacts on Pollinator Abundance in Life Cycle Assessment
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Environmental Science and Technology. - : American Chemical Society (ACS). - 0013-936X .- 1520-5851. ; 57:8, s. 3445-3454
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- While wild pollinators play a key role in global food production, their assessment is currently missing from the most commonly used environmental impact assessment method, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). This is mainly due to constraints in data availability and compatibility with LCA inventories. To target this gap, relative pollinator abundance estimates were obtained with the use of a Delphi assessment, during which 25 experts, covering 16 nationalities and 45 countries of expertise, provided scores for low, typical, and high expected abundance associated with 24 land use categories. Based on these estimates, this study presents a set of globally generic characterization factors (CFs) that allows translating land use into relative impacts to wild pollinator abundance. The associated uncertainty of the CFs is presented along with an illustrative case to demonstrate the applicability in LCA studies. The CFs based on estimates that reached consensus during the Delphi assessment are recommended as readily applicable and allow key differences among land use types to be distinguished. The resulting CFs are proposed as the first step for incorporating pollinator impacts in LCA studies, exemplifying the use of expert elicitation methods as a useful tool to fill data gaps that constrain the characterization of key environmental impacts.
|
|
| 4. |
- Reulen, Raoul C, et al.
(författare)
-
Risk Factors for Primary Bone Cancer After Childhood Cancer : A PanCare Childhood and Adolescent Cancer Survivor Care and Follow-Up Studies Nested Case-Control Study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. - 0732-183X .- 1527-7755. ; 41:21, s. 3735-3746
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- PURPOSE: Radiation to the bone and exposure to alkylating agents increases the risk of bone cancer among survivors of childhood cancer, but there is uncertainty regarding the risks of bone tissue radiation doses below 10 Gy and the dose-response relationship for specific types of chemotherapy.METHODS: Twelve European countries contributed 228 cases and 228 matched controls to a nested case-control study within a cohort of 69,460 5-year survivors of childhood cancer. Odds ratios (ORs) of developing bone cancer for different levels of cumulative radiation exposure and cumulative doses of specific types of chemotherapy were calculated. Excess ORs were calculated to investigate the shape and extent of any dose-response relationship.RESULTS: The OR associated with bone tissue exposed to 1-4 Gy was 4.8-fold (95% CI, 1.2 to 19.6) and to 5-9 Gy was 9.6-fold (95% CI, 2.4 to 37.4) compared with unexposed bone tissue. The OR increased linearly with increasing dose of radiation ( P trend < .001) up to 78-fold (95% CI, 9.2 to 669.9) for doses of ≥40 Gy. For cumulative alkylating agent doses of 10,000-19,999 and ≥20,000 mg/m 2, the radiation-adjusted ORs were 7.1 (95% CI, 2.2 to 22.8) and 8.3 (95% CI, 2.8 to 24.4), respectively, with independent contributions from each of procarbazine, ifosfamide, and cyclophosphamide. Other cytotoxics were not associated with bone cancer. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, we demonstrate-for the first time-that the risk of bone cancer is increased 5- to 10-fold after exposure of bone tissue to cumulative radiation doses of 1-9 Gy. Alkylating agents exceeding 10,000 mg/m 2 increase the risk 7- to 8-fold, particularly following procarbazine, ifosfamide, and cyclophosphamide. These substantially elevated risks should be used to develop/update clinical follow-up guidelines and survivorship care plans.
|
|
