| 491. |
|
|
| 492. |
- Potts, Simon G., et al.
(författare)
-
Developing European conservation and mitigation tools for pollination services: approaches of the STEP (Status and Trends of European Pollinators) project
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Journal of Apicultural Research. - 0021-8839 .- 2078-6913. ; 50:2, s. 152-164
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Pollinating insects form a key component of European biodiversity, and provide a vital ecosystem service to crops and wild plants. There is growing evidence of declines in both wild and domesticated pollinators, and parallel declines in plants relying upon them. The STEP project (Status and Trends of European Pollinators, 2010-2015, www.step-project.net) is documenting critical elements in the nature and extent of these declines, examining key functional traits associated with pollination deficits, and developing a Red List for some European pollinator groups. Together these activities are laying the groundwork for future pollinator monitoring programmes. STEP is also assessing the relative importance of potential drivers of pollinator declines, including climate change, habitat loss and fragmentation, agrochemicals, pathogens, alien species, light pollution, and their interactions. We are measuring the ecological and economic impacts of declining pollinator services and floral resources, including effects on wild plant populations, crop production and human nutrition. STEP is reviewing existing and potential mitigation options, and providing novel tests of their effectiveness across Europe. Our work is building upon existing and newly developed datasets and models, complemented by spatially-replicated campaigns of field research to fill gaps in current knowledge. Findings are being integrated into a policy-relevant framework to create evidence-based decision support tools. STEP is establishing communication links to a wide range of stakeholders across Europe and beyond, including policy makers, beekeepers, farmers, academics and the general public. Taken together, the STEP research programme aims to improve our understanding of the nature, causes, consequences and potential mitigation of declines in pollination services at local, national, continental and global scales.
|
|
| 493. |
|
|
| 494. |
- Rasmussen, Claus, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluating competition for forage plants between honey bees and wild bees in Denmark
- 2021
-
Ingår i: PLoS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 16:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A recurrent concern in nature conservation is the potential competition for forage plants between wild bees and managed honey bees. Specifically, that the highly sophisticated system of recruitment and large perennial colonies of honey bees quickly exhaust forage resources leading to the local extirpation of wild bees. However, different species of bees show different preferences for forage plants. We here summarize known forage plants for honey bees and wild bee species at national scale in Denmark. Our focus is on floral resources shared by honey bees and wild bees, with an emphasis on both threatened wild bee species and foraging specialist species. Across all 292 known bee species from Denmark, a total of 410 plant genera were recorded as forage plants. These included 294 plant genera visited by honey bees and 292 plant genera visited by different species of wild bees. Honey bees and wild bees share 176 plant genera in Denmark. Comparing the pairwise niche overlap for individual bee species, no significant relationship was found between their overlap and forage specialization or conservation status. Network analysis of the bee-plant interactions placed honey bees aside from most other bee species, specifically the module containing the honey bee had fewer links to any other modules, while the remaining modules were more highly inter-connected. Despite the lack of predictive relationship from the pairwise niche overlap, data for individual species could be summarized. Consequently, we have identified a set of operational parameters that, based on a high foraging overlap (>70%) and unfavorable conservation status (Vulnerable+Endangered+Critically Endangered), can guide both conservation actions and land management decisions in proximity to known or suspected populations of these species.
|
|
| 495. |
|
|
| 496. |
|
|
| 497. |
|
|
| 498. |
- Rattu, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying and appraising outcome measures for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Valid outcome measures are imperative to evaluate treatment response, yet the suitability of existing endpoints for severe asthma is unclear. This review aimed to identify outcome measures for severe asthma and appraise the quality of their measurement properties.MethodsA literature search was performed to identify “candidate” outcome measures published between 2018–2020 (PROSPERO, CRD42020204437). A modified Delphi exercise was conducted to select “key” outcome measures within healthcare professional, patient, pharmaceutical, and regulatory stakeholder groups. Initial validation studies for “key” measures were rated against modified quality criteria from COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). The evidence was discussed at multi-stakeholder meetings to ratify “priority” outcome measures. Subsequently, four bibliographic databases were searched from inception to identify development and validation studies for these endpoints. Two reviewers screened records, extracted data, assessed their methodological quality, and graded the evidence according to COSMIN.Results96 outcome measures were identified as “candidates”, 55 as “key”, and 24 as “priority” for severe asthma; including clinical, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, asthma control, and composite. 32 studies reported measurement properties of 17 “priority” endpoints from the latter three domains. Only SAQ and C-ACT were developed with input from severe asthma patients. The certainty of evidence was “low” to “very low” for most “priority” endpoints across all measurement properties, and none fulfilled all quality standards.ConclusionOnly two outcome measures had robust developmental data for severe asthma. This review informed development of core outcome measures sets for severe asthma.
|
|
| 499. |
- Rattu, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Identifying and appraising outcome measures for severe asthma: a systematic review
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The European respiratory journal. - : European Respiratory Society (ERS). - 1399-3003 .- 0903-1936. ; 61:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Valid outcome measures are imperative to evaluate treatment response, yet the suitability of existing endpoints for severe asthma is unclear. This review aimed to identify outcome measures for severe asthma and appraise the quality of their measurement properties.MethodsA literature search was performed to identify “candidate” outcome measures published between 2018–2020 (PROSPERO, CRD42020204437). A modified Delphi exercise was conducted to select “key” outcome measures within healthcare professional, patient, pharmaceutical, and regulatory stakeholder groups. Initial validation studies for “key” measures were rated against modified quality criteria from COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). The evidence was discussed at multi-stakeholder meetings to ratify “priority” outcome measures. Subsequently, four bibliographic databases were searched from inception to identify development and validation studies for these endpoints. Two reviewers screened records, extracted data, assessed their methodological quality, and graded the evidence according to COSMIN.Results96 outcome measures were identified as “candidates”, 55 as “key”, and 24 as “priority” for severe asthma; including clinical, healthcare utilisation, quality of life, asthma control, and composite. 32 studies reported measurement properties of 17 “priority” endpoints from the latter three domains. Only SAQ and C-ACT were developed with input from severe asthma patients. The certainty of evidence was “low” to “very low” for most “priority” endpoints across all measurement properties, and none fulfilled all quality standards.ConclusionOnly two outcome measures had robust developmental data for severe asthma. This review informed development of core outcome measures sets for severe asthma.
|
|
| 500. |
|
|
