| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Fernandez-Rozadilla, Ceres, et al.
(author)
-
Deciphering colorectal cancer genetics through multi-omic analysis of 100,204 cases and 154,587 controls of European and east Asian ancestries
- 2023
-
In: Nature Genetics. - : Nature Publishing Group. - 1061-4036 .- 1546-1718. ; 55, s. 89-99
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of mortality worldwide. We conducted a genome-wide association study meta-analysis of 100,204 CRC cases and 154,587 controls of European and east Asian ancestry, identifying 205 independent risk associations, of which 50 were unreported. We performed integrative genomic, transcriptomic and methylomic analyses across large bowel mucosa and other tissues. Transcriptome- and methylome-wide association studies revealed an additional 53 risk associations. We identified 155 high-confidence effector genes functionally linked to CRC risk, many of which had no previously established role in CRC. These have multiple different functions and specifically indicate that variation in normal colorectal homeostasis, proliferation, cell adhesion, migration, immunity and microbial interactions determines CRC risk. Crosstissue analyses indicated that over a third of effector genes most probably act outside the colonic mucosa. Our findings provide insights into colorectal oncogenesis and highlight potential targets across tissues for new CRC treatment and chemoprevention strategies.
|
|
| 4. |
- Lázaro-González, Alba, et al.
(author)
-
Revegetation through seeding or planting : a worldwide systematic map
- 2023
-
In: Journal of Environmental Management. - : Elsevier. - 0301-4797 .- 1095-8630. ; 337
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Roughly 2 billion ha of land are degraded and in need of ecological restoration worldwide. Active restoration frequently involves revegetation, which leads to the dilemma of whether to conduct direct seeding or to plant nursery-grown seedlings. The choice of revegetation method can regulate plant survival and performance, with economic implications that ultimately feed back to our capacity to conduct restoration. We followed a peer-reviewed protocol to develop a systematic map that collates, describes and catalogues the available studies on how seeding compares to planting in achieving restoration targets. We compiled a database with the characteristics of all retrieved studies, which can be searched to identify studies of particular locations and habitats, objectives of restoration, plant material, technical aspects, and outcomes measured. The search was made in eight languages and retrieved 3355 publications, of which 178 were retained. The systematic map identifies research gaps, such as a lack of studies in the global South, in tropical rainforests, and covering a long time period, which represent opportunities to expand field-based research. Additionally, many studies overlooked reporting on important technical aspects such as seed provenance and nursery cultivation methods, and others such as watering or seedling protection were more frequently applied for planting than for seeding, which limits our capacity to learn from past research. Most studies measured outcomes related to the target plants but avoided measuring general restoration outcomes or economic aspects. This represents a relevant gap in research, as the choice of revegetation method is greatly based on economic aspects and the achievement of restoration goals goes beyond the establishment of plants. Finally, we identified a substantial volume of studies conducted in temperate regions and over short periods (0–5 y). This research cluster calls for a future in-depth synthesis, potentially through meta-analysis, to reveal the overall balance between seeding and planting and assess whether the response to this question is mediated by species traits, environmental characteristics, or technical aspects. Besides identifying research clusters and gaps, the systematic map database allows managers to find the most relevant scientific literature on the appropriateness of seeding vs. planting for particular conditions, such as certain species or habitats.
|
|
| 5. |
- Pulido, Fernando, et al.
(author)
-
Widespread latitudinal asymmetry in the performance of marginal populations : A meta-analysis
- 2023
-
In: Global Ecology and Biogeography. - : Wiley. - 1466-822X .- 1466-8238. ; 32:6, s. 842-854
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Aim: Range shifts are expected to occur when populations at one range margin perform better than those at the other margin, yet no global trend in population performances at range margins has been demonstrated empirically across a wide range of taxa and biomes. Here we test the prediction that, if impacts of ongoing climate change on performance in marginal populations are widespread, then populations from the high-latitude margin (HLM) should perform as well as or better than central populations, whereas low-latitude margin (LLM) populations should perform worse.Location: Global.Time period: 1995–2019.Major taxa studied: Plants and animals.Methods: To test our prediction, we used a meta-analysis to quantify empirical support for asymmetry in the performance of high- and low-latitude margin populations compared to central populations. Performance estimates (survival, reproduction, or lifetime fitness) for populations occurring in their natural environment were derived from 51 papers involving 113 margin-centre comparisons from 54 species and 705 populations from the Americas, Europe, Africa and Australia. We then related these performance differences to climatic differences among populations. We also tested whether patterns are consistent across taxonomic kingdoms (plants vs animals) and across realms (marine vs terrestrial).Results: Populations at margins performed significantly worse than central populations, and this trend was primarily driven by the low-latitude margin. Although the difference was of small magnitude, it was largely consistent across biological kingdoms and realms. Differences in performance were weakly (p = .08) related to the difference in average temperatures between central and marginal populations.Main conclusions: The observed asymmetry in performance in marginal populations is consistent with predictions about the effects of global climate change, though further research is needed to confirm the effect of climate. It indicates that changes in demographic rates in marginal populations can serve as early-warning signals of impending range shifts.
|
|
| 6. |
- Thomas, Minta, et al.
(author)
-
Combining Asian and European genome-wide association studies of colorectal cancer improves risk prediction across racial and ethnic populations
- 2023
-
In: Nature Communications. - : Springer Nature. - 2041-1723. ; 14:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have great potential to guide precision colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention by identifying those at higher risk to undertake targeted screening. However, current PRS using European ancestry data have sub-optimal performance in non-European ancestry populations, limiting their utility among these populations. Towards addressing this deficiency, we expand PRS development for CRC by incorporating Asian ancestry data (21,731 cases; 47,444 controls) into European ancestry training datasets (78,473 cases; 107,143 controls). The AUC estimates (95% CI) of PRS are 0.63(0.62-0.64), 0.59(0.57-0.61), 0.62(0.60-0.63), and 0.65(0.63-0.66) in independent datasets including 1681-3651 cases and 8696-115,105 controls of Asian, Black/African American, Latinx/Hispanic, and non-Hispanic White, respectively. They are significantly better than the European-centric PRS in all four major US racial and ethnic groups (p-values < 0.05). Further inclusion of non-European ancestry populations, especially Black/African American and Latinx/Hispanic, is needed to improve the risk prediction and enhance equity in applying PRS in clinical practice.
|
|
| 7. |
- Thomas, M, et al.
(author)
-
Combining Asian-European Genome-Wide Association Studies of Colorectal Cancer Improves Risk Prediction Across Race and Ethnicity
- 2023
-
In: medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences. - : Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have great potential to guide precision colorectal cancer (CRC) prevention by identifying those at higher risk to undertake targeted screening. However, current PRS using European ancestry data have sub-optimal performance in non-European ancestry populations, limiting their utility among these populations. Towards addressing this deficiency, we expanded PRS development for CRC by incorporating Asian ancestry data (21,731 cases; 47,444 controls) into European ancestry training datasets (78,473 cases; 107,143 controls). The AUC estimates (95% CI) of PRS were 0.63(0.62-0.64), 0.59(0.57-0.61), 0.62(0.60-0.63), and 0.65(0.63-0.66) in independent datasets including 1,681-3,651 cases and 8,696-115,105 controls of Asian, Black/African American, Latinx/Hispanic, and non-Hispanic White, respectively. They were significantly better than the European-centric PRS in all four major US racial and ethnic groups (p-values<0.05). Further inclusion of non-European ancestry populations, especially Black/African American and Latinx/Hispanic, is needed to improve the risk prediction and enhance equity in applying PRS in clinical practice.
|
|
