It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Friday, December 20, 2024
Composting aquatic plant battles parasite, boosts incomes in Senegal
Cornell University
ITHACA, N.Y. – Turning aquatic vegetation near agricultural land into compost simultaneously eradicates habitat for disease-carrying snails while improving agricultural output and increasing incomes in northern Senegal, Cornell University researchers have found.
Combining highly detailed biological and microeconomic modeling, the team’s finding has the potential to aid rural residents of the West African nation, who are often caught in a vicious cycle of poverty and disease.
Chris Barrett, professor of applied economics and management at Cornell, is the paper’s senior author.
The researchers show analytically, using data from a previous study, that removal of aquatic vegetation reduces habitat for snails, which carry the infectious helminth (a parasitic worm), while also returning soil nutrients that leach into surface water via runoff to agricultural land. The result, the researchers wrote, is “healthier people, more productive labor, cleaner water, more productive agriculture and higher incomes.”
The helminth schistosomiasis, also known as bilharzia, infects hundreds of millions of people worldwide and has been termed the second-most socioeconomically devastating parasitic disease, after malaria, by the World Health Organization.
The researcher’s modeling of both the economics and the disease ecology was painstaking, but produced valuable information.
“These sorts of models are very sensitive,” Barrett said. “There’s so much feedback that they can blow up very quickly if you don’t calibrate them right. That’s one of the reasons why people commonly don’t attempt this level of granular interactions between the biology and the social science: It’s hard to get it right.”
Barrett said this work can be adapted to other diseases and vectors. And with a changing climate, where and how people become infected will change, too.
“Dengue fever, malaria – these are diseases that are very clearly affected by how humans manage natural landscapes,” he said. “We should not assume that the range of these diseases is going to stay static, and we’re going to have to think carefully about how and where to intervene in ways that don’t upset the stability of the system.”
This research was supported by grants from the National Science Foundation and the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute.
Artificial light can wake sleeping fish and attract predators, changing nighttime coral reef communities, according to new research using novel underwater infrared cameras.
The study, published today in Global Change Biology, was conducted by an international team of scientists from the UK, France, French Polynesia and Chile and the first large-scale experiment to investigate the impact of light pollution on the nightlife of coral reefs.
Lead author, Dr Emma Weschke, from the University of Bristol’s School of Biological Sciences, said: “When the sun sets, coral reefs undergo a dramatic transformation. The vibrant fish we see in the day retreat to sleep among the corals and elusive nocturnal species emerge from caves and cervices in pursuit of prey.”
Senior author, Professor Andy Radford, also from Bristol, added: “The night usually brings a veil of darkness that allows marine life to hide from nocturnal predators. But artificial light generated by human activities exposes coral reef inhabitants to unexpected danger.”
Using purpose built underwater infrared night-vision cameras, the scientists could film the reef at night without interfering with fish behaviour. This is because fish cannot see in infrared.
A larger number of fish species were present on artificially illuminated reefs at night compared to control sites with no artificial light. Further investigation revealed these species were predatory fish—feeding on the zooplankton, small fish and invertebrates.
Dr Weschke said: “Many of the species detected on artificially lit reefs were not nocturnal fish, but those that are only usually active during the day. Finding that light pollution can cause fish to stay awake later than usual is concerning because sleep—like for us—is likely essential for regenerating energy and maintaining fitness.”
Professor Radford explained: “Artificial light makes it much easier for predators to locate and capture prey, reducing their foraging effort. Which is why we think that greater numbers are being attracted to artificially illuminated coral reefs at night.”
The changes observed in the nightlife on the reef were observed after an average of 25 consecutive nights exposure to artificial light. Only a few nights of exposure were not long enough to elicit any noticeable changes in fish communities compared to controls.
“This is positive news as it suggests that there could be low-cost solutions that are quick to implement,” said co-author Professor Steve Simpson, also of Bristol’s School of Biological Sciences. “Reducing the impacts of artificial light could help build resilience on valuable coral reefs.”
Dr Weschke added: “Unlike greenhouse gasses and plastics, artificial light is a pollutant that doesn’t leave a residue when switched off.
“Limiting artificial light in both its intensity and duration, prioritising it for essential needs and reducing aesthetic use, will help reestablish naturally dark nights that marine ecosystems evolved with.”
The work was conducted by researchers from the University of Bristol, UK, Centre de Recherches Insulaires et Observatoire de l’Environnement (CRIOBE), French Polynesia and Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.
Emma Weschke deploying infrared cameras
Credit
Jules Schligler
Still from video of reef at night exposed to artificial light
Credit
Emma Weschke
Paper:
‘Artificial light increases nighttime prevalence of predatory fishes, altering community composition on coral reefs’ by Emma Weschke et al in Global Change Biology.
Ends
DOI: 10.1111/gcb.70002
Journal
Global Change Biology
Method of Research
Experimental study
Subject of Research
Animals
Article Title
Artificial light increases nighttime prevalence of predatory fishes, altering community composition on coral reefs
Article Publication Date
18-Dec-2024
New study highlights the correlation between live corals and fishing yields
Research led by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution predicts lower fishing yields as corals struggle to survive
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
image:
Fish swim among Australia’s Great Barrier Reef. In the past 30 years, coral bleaching caused by ocean warming has contributed to a 19% loss of the world’s coral reef area.
Woods Hole, Mass. (Dec. 19, 2024) - What does a decline in healthy coral reefs mean for fisheries? A new study published in Marine Resource Economics, led by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), examines the correlation between fish yield and live coral habitats. Researchers analyzed the yields of nine fisheries dependent on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef from 2016 to 2020. Results show that substantial losses could occur if the restoration of coral reefs is not prioritized.
In 2024, the Great Barrier Reef experienced one of the worst bleaching events in its history. According to the Australian Marine Institute, an aerial survey of the Great Barrier Marine Park showed bleaching across 73% of surveyed reefs. These vulnerable ecosystems rely on the microscopic algae called zooxanthellae for survival. These algae also contribute to coral’s vibrant colors. Elevated ocean temperatures stress corals, causing them to expel the algae, resulting in bleaching. If warming persists, the algae may not return, leaving the coral bleached and at risk of dying. In the past 30 years, coral bleaching caused by ocean warming has contributed to a 19% loss of the world’s coral reef area.
“This rapid loss of coral will force fish capable of living independently of them to move elsewhere. Less concentrated populations can lead to smaller yields for fisheries,” said Marine (Yaqin) Liu, an environmental economist at WHOI. “For fish that rely on reefs for food or shelter, such as butterflyfish and coral trout, yields will shrink as their populations do.”
The study identifies coral trout and saddletail snappers as the two most vulnerable fisheries, both relying on outer-shelf reefs as their primary habitats. The study shows that if the live coral cover of the Great Barrier Reef were to be reduced from 30% to 25%, the maximum sustainable yield of coral trout would drop by 8% and 19% for saddletail snappers. With a drop of live coral cover from 10% to 5%, the maximum sustainable yield of the coral trout fishery would drop by 27% and saddletail snapper would drop 56%.
"Coral trout and saddletail snapper are part of Queensland, Australia’s line fishery, an industry with $27-31 million gross value,” explained Qingran Li, an assistant professor of economics and financial studies at Clarkson University in New York. “While this methodology of this study does not lend itself to making dollar predictions, we can expect a decline in fishing yields to have substantial economic impacts, such as loss of jobs and reduced export."
As ocean temperatures continue to rise, coral casualty events such as bleaching are more likely to occur. Reefs host 25% of marine life and protect coastal communities from the impacts of major storms. They also support millions in tourism and fishing annually.
“It is important to support claims about climate change with hard data. Responsible fisheries are already safeguarding coral reefs by integrating sustainable approaches, but human impacts like ocean warming and acidification further threaten coral reefs and fisheries yields,” Liu continued. “WHOI’s Reef Solutions Team continues to study and develop innovative ways to restore and strengthen coral reefs, with a goal of taking successful learnings and implementing them globally.”
About Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) is a private, non-profit organization on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, dedicated to marine research, engineering, and higher education. Established in 1930, its primary mission is to understand the ocean and its interaction with the Earth as a whole and to communicate an understanding of the ocean’s role in the changing global environment. WHOI’s pioneering discoveries stem from an ideal combination of science and engineering—one that has made it one of the most trusted and technically advanced leaders in basic and applied ocean research and exploration anywhere. WHOI is known for its multidisciplinary approach, superior ship operations, and unparalleled deep-sea robotics capabilities. We play a leading role in ocean observation and operate the most extensive suite of data-gathering platforms in the world. Top scientists, engineers, and students collaborate on more than 800 concurrent projects worldwide—both above and below the waves—pushing the boundaries of knowledge and possibility. For more information, please visit www.whoi.edu.
About Clarkson University
Clarkson University is a proven leader in technological education, research, innovation, and sustainable economic development. With its main campus in Potsdam, N.Y., and additional graduate programs and research facilities in the Capital Region and Hudson Valley, Clarkson faculty have a direct impact on more than 7,800 students annually through nationally recognized undergraduate and graduate STEM-designated degrees in engineering, business, science, and health professions; executive education, industry-relevant credentials, and K-12 STEM programs. Alumni earn salaries among the top 2% in the nation: one in five already leads in the c-suite. To learn more go to www.clarkson.edu
Of the more than 30 locales at which deep-sea hydrothermal plumes have been detected along ultra-slow spreading mid-ocean ridges [MORs] to date, the nature of more than 90% has only been inferred from water column plume signals coupled with seafloor mapping and/or petrologic sampling. Where detailed studies have been carried out, “a diversity of styles of venting has been found, beyond what had previously been reported. This expansion of the geodiversity of hydrothermal sites has continued into the Arctic Ocean, first with the Aurora hydrothermal field [in the Gakkel Ridge] and now with this study.”
“Hydrogen-rich vents like Polaris have a lot more chemical potential energy available for life than any other kinds of vents, bang per buck. The microbial diversity you get when there is that much energy available also is really quite impressive and distinct from most ordinary hydrothermal vents,” said journal co-author Chris German, senior scientist in the Department of Geology and Geophysics at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI).
“The discoveries we have made here are particularly important because they reassure us that we could go and search for life on other ocean worlds beyond Earth in a credible and meaningful way, based on what we now know,” added German, who also is principal investigator for the Exploring Ocean Worlds project, which is a cornerstone for NASA’s Network for Ocean Worlds program. German added that findings from Polaris also underscore the need for improved approaches for exploring hydrothermal plumes on Earth to properly classify their underlying sources.
“It is both fascinating and inspiring to study seafloor geologic processes in the Arctic Ocean, one of the least-explored places on Earth,” said journal article lead author Elmar Albers, a postdoctoral investigator in the Department of Geology and Geophysics at WHOI. Albers’ work over the past two years has been supported by a Feodor Lynen Postdoctoral Fellowship from the Alexander von Humboldt (AvH) Foundation, hosted by Chris German at WHOI. “The insights we gained from the Polaris hydrothermal system were unexpected, with major implications for hydrothermal exploration in other oceans. We are excited to learn what other surprises the Arctic holds in the future.”
“Understanding the distribution of life in the universe starts here at home in exploring the places and ways that life thrives on Earth,” said Becky McCauley Rench, Astrobiology Program Scientist at NASA headquarters. “The work of this team amplifies the importance of expanding our knowledge of our home planet and applying those lessons as we search the solar system and universe for answers about whether we are alone. What we learn here, in the Arctic or anywhere on Earth, is directly applied to our successful exploration at other worlds, like Europa and Enceladus, and beyond.”
This work was funded primarily through NASA’s PSTAR program at WHOI and by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, the Helmholtz Association and the Max Planck Society in Germany.
Authors:
Elmar Albersa,b,*,1, Alexander Diehla,b, Jessica N. Fitzsimmonsc, Laramie T. Jensenc,d, Frieder Kleine, Jill McDermottf, Autun Purserg, Jeffrey S. Seewalde, Maren Walterb,h, Gunter Wegenerb,i, Wolfgang Bacha,b, Antje Boetiusa,b,g,i, Christopher R. Germanj
Affiliations:
aFaculty of Geosciences, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
bMARUM – Center for Marine Environmental Sciences, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
cDepartment of Oceanography, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA
dPolar Science Center, Applied Physics Lab, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
eDepartment of Marine Chemistry & Geochemistry, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA
fDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, USA
gAlfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Bremerhaven, Germany
hInstitute of Environmental Physics, University of Bremen, Bremen, German
iMax Planck Institute for Marine Microbiology, Bremen, Germany
jDepartment of Geology & Geophysics, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA
*Corresponding author
About Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) is a private, non-profit organization on Cape Cod, Massachusetts, dedicated to marine research, engineering, and higher education. Established in 1930, its primary mission is to understand the ocean and its interaction with the Earth as a whole, and to communicate an understanding of the ocean’s role in the changing global environment. WHOI’s pioneering discoveries stem from an ideal combination of science and engineering—one that has made it one of the most trusted and technically advanced leaders in basic and applied ocean research and exploration anywhere. WHOI is known for its multidisciplinary approach, superior ship operations, and unparalleled deep-sea robotics capabilities. We play a leading role in ocean observation and operate the most extensive suite of data-gathering platforms in the world. Top scientists, engineers, and students collaborate on more than 800 concurrent projects worldwide—both above and below the waves—pushing the boundaries of knowledge and possibility. For more information, please visit www.whoi.edu
Hydrothermal Vent Field Aurora
By studying hydrothermal vent fields such as Aurora, scientists hope to also learn more about Saturn’s moon Enceladus. Black smoker vents such as this one at Aurora discharge fluids up to 370°C.
Credit
Chris German/NUI, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Robotic Arm sampling
A127°C vent is sampled using a robotic arm. Scientists dubbed it “Lander” related to a NASA Europa Mission Concept study.
Credit
Chris German/NUI Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Ultramafic-influenced submarine venting on basaltic seafloor at the Polaris site, 87°N, Gakkel Ridge
Article Publication Date
18-Dec-2024
Comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials demonstrate beef can be enjoyed in variety of heart-healthy diets
Gold standard nutrition research shows unprocessed beef does not elevate cardiovascular disease risk factors
Indiana University School of Public Health
A recently published, comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis has added to the growing body of evidence showing that beef can be enjoyed in a heart-healthy diet. Specifically, research consistently demonstrated that eating two (3-ounce) servings of unprocessed beef, on average, in a daily dietary pattern had no significant impact on most cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. The study, “Beef Consumption and Cardiovascular Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials,” was published in Current Developments in Nutrition. Importantly, this systematic review and meta-analysis assessed randomized human clinical trials, which are well-established as being the gold-standard nutrition research that should inform public health recommendations, such as the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Experts often stress the importance of dietary guidance being based on the highest quality research to inform evidence-based recommendations that can effectively improve public health. However, given the challenges with conducting long-term randomized controlled trials (RCTs), guidance is often based on observational evidence that does not prove cause and effect – and which often inconsistently classifies food. Red meat is a broad category that includes many different meats of varying fat content and levels of processing. Combining this variety of meats into one group can lead to oversimplified recommendations, such as “eat less red meat,” and overlooks potential benefits of individual red meats, such as lean beef.
The study authors noted that, in both observational studies and RCTs assessing dietary components and/or patterns on cardiometabolic outcomes, “red meat” is a large category including both unprocessed and processed products, as well as a range of items such as beef, pork, lamb and even some types of poultry that are frequently clustered together under the umbrella term “red meat.” In this meta-analysis, 20 RCTs were assessed, which included a variety of dietary patterns with unprocessed or minimally processed beef.
“Given the disparity of products in the ‘red meat’ category, study methods that group all red meats together can lead to overly generalized findings,” said Kevin C. Maki, PhD, Adjunct Professor and Dean’s Eminent Scholar, Indiana University School of Public Health-Bloomington, and co-lead of this study. “However, when high-quality clinical trials analyze unprocessed or minimally processed beef as part of various dietary patterns, results have generally indicated that beef consumption has no adverse effects on traditional risk factors for cardiovascular disease.”
Key findings included:
Beef intake did not impact blood pressure or most lipoprotein-related variables, including total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides, non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein (apo) A, apo B, and very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (VLDL-C).
Unprocessed beef contains more cholesterol-lowering or neutral fatty acids than cholesterol-raising fatty acids, so beef intake did not significantly affect most blood lipids, apolipoproteins, or blood pressures compared to diets with little to no beef.
Beef consumption had a small, but statistically significant effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), corresponding to about 2.7 mg/dL higher LDL-C in diets containing more beef compared to low or no beef diets. However, testing of the contribution of each individual study to the overall findings showed that one study, where baseline values for LDL-C were already lower prior to consuming beef, was the primary influence of this result. When this study was removed from the analysis, the effect on LDL-C was no longer significant.
The average amount of beef in the “higher” beef treatments was about 5.7 ounces, or approximately 2 servings/day. On average, American adults (19 years and older) consume 1.6 ounces of total beef each day.
Consistent evidence from previously published RCTs demonstrates that 1-2 servings of lean beef can be enjoyed daily as part of a heart-healthy diet. For example, the Beef in an Optimal Lean Diet (BOLD) study was a landmark clinical trial demonstrating how subjects who included 4-5.4 ounces of lean beef into a Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH)-style dietary pattern rich in other healthy foods like vegetables, fruits, whole grains and low-fat dairy maintained normal cholesterol levels.
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs are regarded as the highest quality evidence, as they synthesize data from multiple relevant, rigorously controlled studies. In addition, it is well-established that bias can influence the findings of meta-analyses that pool results from clinical trials; therefore, several sources of potential bias were evaluated in this investigation. Of note, 71% of studies funded by the beef industry had a low risk of bias compared to only 40% of studies not funded by the beef industry.
“This research is a rigorous review of high-quality evidence, which can be useful for informing accurate and reliable public health guidance about unprocessed beef in healthy dietary patterns,” added Dr. Maki. “Our findings suggest that beef may be enjoyed in a variety of heart-healthy diets.”
This research was funded by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), a contractor to the Beef Checkoff. NCBA was not involved in the study design, data collection and analysis, or publication of the findings.
Beef Consumption and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
COI Statement
KCM reports financial support was provided by Beef Checkoff and a relationship with Beef Checkoff that includes funding grants. The other authors report no conflicts of interest.
Are particle emissions from offshore wind farms harmful for blue mussels?
In a laboratory experiment, research team investigates the potential effects of particle emissions
Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research
After several years of service under harsh weather conditions, the rotor blades of offshore wind parks are subjected to degradation and surface erosion, releasing sizeable quantities of particle emissions into the environment. A team of researchers led by the Alfred Wegener Institute has now investigated the effects of these particle on blue mussels – a species also being considered for the multi-use of wind parks for aquaculture. In the experiment, the mussels absorbed metals from the rotor blades’ coatings, as the team describes in a study just released in the journal Science of the Total Environment, where they also discuss the potential physiological effects.
In a laboratory-based pilot study, a team of researchers explored the potential effects of rotor blade emissions on the physiology of blue mussels. To do so, the material from these rotor blades was ground to a particle size small enough for the mussels to ingest. “We exposed the mussels to varying particle concentrations and took samples after predefined exposure durations,” explains Dr Gisela Lannig, the study’s project head and an eco-physiologist at the Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research (AWI). In addition, the researchers carried out physiological measurements to detect metabolic changes in the animals. Tissue samples from the mussels were subsequently tested for inorganic elements, particularly metals, at the laboratories of the Helmholtz Centre Hereon.
“Our experiment was a worst-case scenario, in which the blue mussels were exposed to high particle concentrations for up to 14 consecutive days. The mussels displayed moderate to pronounced uptake of metals, particularly barium and chromium,” reports Dr Daria Bedulina, a fellow eco-physiologist and postdoctoral candidate at the AWI. “When it came to the physiological examinations, there was no clear result. However, the findings on metabolic changes in the mussels indicate potential short-term effects on their neuroendocrine system and amino-acid metabolism. Further studies are therefore urgently needed, especially with regard to the long-term effects on mussels.”
In addition to the AWI and Hereon, the study includes contributions from researchers at the Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy Systems (IWES), who provided the material from the rotor blades and shared their expertise on the amount of eroded material. The outcomes show that offshore wind parks constitute a new anthropogenic burden for the marine environment: according to the study, the polymer particle emissions from rotor blades, produced by the degradation and surface erosion of the blades’ coatings and core material, should not be underestimated. Mussel species like the blue mussel studied here play a key role in coastal ecosystems. Mussel beds offer e.g. habitats and breeding grounds for a range of marine fauna, promote biodiversity, and, given the animals’ role as filter feeders, preserve water quality. Microplastics and pollutants can accumulate in the animals’ tissues.
“With regard to the multi-use of offshore wind parks to breed mussels for human consumption, comprehensive investigations that combine controlled lab experiments and fieldwork are urgently needed in order to definitively rule out possible effects on human health,” explains Gisela Lannig. Yet the current pilot study, she adds, is far from providing a comprehensive and reliable picture of the potential risks posed by offshore wind farms for the marine environment. This requires extensive short-term and long-term studies, together with an integrative approach that assesses the parameters at different biological levels and life stages. Given the necessary and desirable expansion of renewable energy sources and multi-use of offshore wind parks for aquaculture, this type of research is essential.
