Refine
Language
- English (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (6)
Keywords
Institute
The establishment and maintenance of protected areas (PAs) is viewed as a key action in delivering post-2020 biodiversity targets. PAs often need to meet multiple objectives, ranging from biodiversity protection to ecosystem service provision and climate change mitigation, but available land and conservation funding is limited. Therefore, optimizing resources by selecting the most beneficial PAs is vital. Here, we advocate for a flexible and transparent approach to selecting protected areas based on multiple objectives, and illustrate this with a decision support tool on a global scale. The tool allows weighting and prioritization of different conservation objectives according to user-specified preferences, as well as real-time comparison of the selected areas that result from such different priorities. We apply the tool across 1347 terrestrial PAs and highlight frequent trade-offs among different objectives, e.g., between species protection and ecosystem integrity. Outputs indicate that decision makers frequently face trade-offs among conflicting objectives. Nevertheless, we show that transparent decision-support tools can reveal synergies and trade-offs associated with PA selection, thereby helping to illuminate and resolve land-use conflicts embedded in divergent societal and political demands and values.
The establishment and maintenance of protected areas(PAs) is viewed as a key action in delivering post-2020 biodiversity targets. PAs often need to meet a multitude of objectives, ranging from biodiversity protection to ecosystem service provision and climate change mitigation. As available land and conservation funding are limited, optimizing resources by selecting the most beneficial PAs is vital. Here we present a decision support tool that enables a flexible approach to PA selection on a global scale, allowing different conservation objectives to be weighted and prioritized according to user-specified preferences. We apply the tool across 1347 terrestrial PAs and highlight frequent trade-offs among different objectives, e.g., between biodiversity protection and ecosystem integrity. These results indicate that decision makers must usually decide among conflicting objectives. To assist this our decision support tool provides an explicitly value-based approach that can help resolve such conflicts by considering divergent societal and political demands and values.
Establishing and maintaining protected areas (PAs) is a key action in delivering post-2020 biodiversity targets. PAs often need to meet multiple objectives, ranging from biodiversity protection to ecosystem service provision and climate change mitigation, but available land and conservation funding is limited. Therefore, optimizing resources by selecting the most beneficial PAs is vital. Here, we advocate for a flexible and transparent approach to selecting PAs based on multiple objectives, and illustrate this with a decision support tool on a global scale. The tool allows weighting and prioritization of different conservation objectives according to user-specified preferences as well as real-time comparison of the outcome. Applying the tool across 1,346 terrestrial PAs, we demonstrate that decision makers frequently face trade-offs among conflicting objectives, e.g., between species protection and ecosystem integrity. Nevertheless, we show that transparent decision support tools can reveal synergies and trade-offs associated with PA selection, thereby helping to illuminate and resolve land-use conflicts embedded in divergent societal and political demands and values.
Background: H5N1 influenza vaccines, including live intranasal, appear to be relatively less immunogenic compared to seasonal analogs. The main influenza virus surface glycoprotein hemagglutinin (HA) of highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses (HPAIV) was shown to be more susceptible to acidic pH treatment than that of human or low pathogenic avian influenza viruses. The acidification machinery of the human nasal passageway in response to different irritation factors starts to release protons acidifying the mucosal surface (down to pH of 5.2). We hypothesized that the sensitivity of H5 HA to the acidic environment might be the reason for the low infectivity and immunogenicity of intranasal H5N1 vaccines for mammals. Methodology/Principal Findings: We demonstrate that original human influenza viruses infect primary human nasal epithelial cells at acidic pH (down to 5.4), whereas H5N1 HPAIVs lose infectivity at pH <= 5.6. The HA of A/Vietnam/1203/04 was modified by introducing the single substitution HA2 58K -> I, decreasing the pH of the HA conformational change. The H5N1 reassortants containing the indicated mutation displayed an increased resistance to acidic pH and high temperature treatment compared to those lacking modification. The mutation ensured a higher viral uptake as shown by immunohistochemistry in the respiratory tract of mice and 25 times lower mouse infectious dose50. Moreover, the reassortants keeping 58K -> I mutation designed as a live attenuated vaccine candidate lacking an NS1 gene induced superior systemic and local antibody response after the intranasal immunization of mice. Conclusion/Significance: Our finding suggests that an efficient intranasal vaccination with a live attenuated H5N1 virus may require a certain level of pH and temperature stability of HA in order to achieve an optimal virus uptake by the nasal epithelial cells and induce a sufficient immune response. The pH of the activation of the H5 HA protein may play a substantial role in the infectivity of HPAIVs for mammals.
In the present work, three different techniques are used to separate ice-nucleating particles (INP) and ice particle residuals (IPR) from non-ice-active particles: the Ice Selective Inlet (ISI) and the Ice Counterflow Virtual Impactor (Ice-CVI), which sample ice particles from mixed phase clouds and allow for the analysis of the residuals, as well as the combination of the Fast Ice Nucleus Chamber (FINCH) and the Ice Nuclei Pumped Virtual Impactor (IN-PCVI), which provides ice-activating conditions to aerosol particles and extracts the activated ones for analysis. The collected particles were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis to determine their size, chemical composition and mixing state. Samples were taken during January/February 2013 at the High Alpine Research Station Jungfraujoch. All INP/IPR-separating techniques had considerable abundances (median 20–70%) of contamination artifacts (ISI: Si-O spheres, probably calibration aerosol; Ice-CVI: Al-O particles; FINCH + IN-PCVI: steel particles). Also, potential measurement artifacts (soluble material) occurred (median abundance < 20%). After removal of the contamination particles, silicates and Ca-rich particles, carbonaceous material and metal oxides were the major INP/IPR particle types separated by all three techniques. Minor types include soot and Pb-bearing particles. Sea-salt and sulfates were identified by all three methods as INP/IPR. Lead was identified in less than 10% of the INP/IPR. It was mainly present as an internal mixture with other particle types, but also external lead-rich particles were found. Most samples showed a maximum of the INP/IPR size distribution at 400 nm geometric diameter. In a few cases, a second super-micron maximum was identified. Soot/carbonaceous material and metal oxides were present mainly in the submicron range. ISI and FINCH yielded silicates and Ca-rich particles mainly with diameters above 1 μm, while the Ice-CVI also sampled many submicron particles. Probably owing to the different meteorological conditions, the INP/IPR composition was highly variable on a sample to sample basis. Thus, some part of the discrepancies between the different techniques may result from the (unavoidable) non-parallel sampling. The observed differences of the particles group abundances as well as the mixing state of INP/IPR point to the need of further studies to better understand the influence of the separating techniques on the INP/IPR chemical composition.
During January/February 2013, at the High Alpine Research Station Jungfraujoch a measurement campaign was carried out, which was centered on atmospheric ice-nucleating particles (INP) and ice particle residuals (IPR). Three different techniques for separation of INP and IPR from the non-ice-active particles are compared. The Ice Selective Inlet (ISI) and the Ice Counterflow Virtual Impactor (Ice-CVI) sample ice particles from mixed phase clouds and allow for the analysis of the residuals. The combination of the Fast Ice Nucleus Chamber (FINCH) and the Ice Nuclei Pumped Counterflow Virtual Impactor (IN-PCVI) provides ice-activating conditions to aerosol particles and extracts the activated INP for analysis.Collected particles were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis to determine size, chemical composition and mixing state. All INP/IPR-separating techniques had considerable abundances (median 20 – 70 %) of instrumental contamination artifacts (ISI: Si-O spheres, probably calibration aerosol; Ice-CVI: Al-O particles; FINCH+IN-PCVI: steel particles). Also, potential sampling artifacts (e.g., pure soluble material) occurred with a median abundance of < 20 %. While these could be explained as IPR by ice break-up, for INP their IN-ability pathway is less clear. After removal of the contamination artifacts, silicates and Ca-rich particles, carbonaceous material and metal oxides were the major INP/IPR particle types separated by all three techniques. Soot was a minor contributor. Lead was detected in less than 10 % of the particles, of which the majority were internal mixtures with other particle types. Sea-salt and sulfates were identified by all three methods as INP/IPR. Most samples showed a maximum of the INP/IPR size distribution at 400 nm geometric diameter. In a few cases, a second super-micron maximum was identified. Soot/carbonaceous material and metal oxides were present mainly in the submicron range. ISI and FINCH yielded silicates and Ca-rich particles mainly with diameters above 1 μm, while the Ice-CVI also separated many submicron IPR. As strictly parallel sampling could not be performed, a part of the discrepancies between the different techniques may result from variations in meteorological conditions and subsequent INP/IPR composition. The observed differences in the particle group abundances as well as in the mixing state of INP/IPR express the need for further studies to better understand the influence of the separating techniques on the INP/IPR chemical
composition.