5 resultados para POTENTIAL RISK
em Plymouth Marine Science Electronic Archive (PlyMSEA)
Resumo:
Recent changes in the seasonal timing (phenology) of familiar biological events have been one of the most conspicuous signs of climate change. However, the lack of a standardized approach to analysing change has hampered assessment of consistency in such changes among different taxa and trophic levels and across freshwater, terrestrial and marine environments. We present a standardized assessment of 25 532 rates of phenological change for 726 UK terrestrial, freshwater and marine taxa. The majority of spring and summer events have advanced, and more rapidly than previously documented. Such consistency is indicative of shared large scale drivers. Furthermore, average rates of change have accelerated in a way that is consistent with observed warming trends. Less coherent patterns in some groups of organisms point to the agency of more local scale processes and multiple drivers. For the first time we show a broad scale signal of differential phenological change among trophic levels; across environments advances in timing were slowest for secondary consumers, thus heightening the potential risk of temporal mismatch in key trophic interactions. If current patterns and rates of phenological change are indicative of future trends, future climate warming may exacerbate trophic mismatching, further disrupting the functioning, persistence and resilience of many ecosystems and having a major impact on ecosystem services.
Resumo:
The transmission of water-borne pathogens typically occurs by a faecal–oral route, through inhalation of aerosols, or by direct or indirect contact with contaminated water. Previous molecular-based studies have identified viral particles of zoonotic and human nature in surface waters. Contaminated water can lead to human health issues, and the development of rapid methods for the detection of pathogenic microorganisms is a valuable tool for the prevention of their spread. The aims of this work were to determine the presence and identity of representative human pathogenic enteric viruses in water samples from six European countries by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (q-PCR) and to develop two quantitative PCR methods for Adenovirus 41 and Mammalian Orthoreoviruses. A 2-year survey showed that Norovirus, Mammalian Orthoreovirus and Adenoviruses were the most frequently identified enteric viruses in the sampled surface waters. Although it was not possible to establish viability and infectivity of the viruses considered, the detectable presence of pathogenic viruses may represent a potential risk for human health. The methodology developed may aid in rapid detection of these pathogens for monitoring
Resumo:
The transmission of water-borne pathogens typically occurs by a faecal–oral route, through inhalation of aerosols, or by direct or indirect contact with contaminated water. Previous molecular-based studies have identified viral particles of zoonotic and human nature in surface waters. Contaminated water can lead to human health issues, and the development of rapid methods for the detection of pathogenic microorganisms is a valuable tool for the prevention of their spread. The aims of this work were to determine the presence and identity of representative human pathogenic enteric viruses in water samples from six European countries by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (q-PCR) and to develop two quantitative PCR methods for Adenovirus 41 and Mammalian Orthoreoviruses. A 2-year survey showed that Norovirus, Mammalian Orthoreovirus and Adenoviruses were the most frequently identified enteric viruses in the sampled surface waters. Although it was not possible to establish viability and infectivity of the viruses considered, the detectable presence of pathogenic viruses may represent a potential risk for human health. The methodology developed may aid in rapid detection of these pathogens for monitoring
Resumo:
The Healthy and Biologically Diverse Seas Evidence Group (HBDSEG) has been tasked with providing the technical advice for the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) with respect to descriptors linked to biodiversity. A workshop was held in London to address one of the Research and Development (R&D) proposals entitled: ‘Mapping the extent and distribution of habitats using acoustic and remote techniques, relevant to indicators for area/extent/habitat loss.’ The aim of the workshop was to identify, define and assess the feasibility of potential indicators of benthic habitat distribution and extent, and identify the R&D work which could be required to fully develop these indicators. The main points that came out of the workshop were: (i) There are many technical aspects of marine habitat mapping that still need to be resolved if cost-effective spatial indicators are to be developed. Many of the technical aspects that need addressing surround issues of consistency, confidence and repeatability. These areas should be tackled by the JNCC Habitat Mapping and Classification Working Group and the HBDSEG Seabed Mapping Working Group. (ii) There is a need for benthic ecologists (through the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup and the JNCC Marine Indicators Group) to finalise the list of habitats for which extent and/or distribution indicators should be considered for development, building upon the recommendations from this report. When reviewing the list of indicators, benthic habitats could also be distinguished into those habitats that are defined/determined primarily by physical parameters (although including biological assemblages) (e.g. subtidal shallow sand) and those defined primarily by their biological assemblage (e.g. seagrass beds). This distinction is important as some anthropogenic pressures may influence the biological component of the ecosystem despite not having a quantifiable effect on the physical habitat distribution/extent. (iii) The scale and variety of UK benthic habitats makes any attempt to undertake comprehensive direct mapping exercises prohibitively expensive (especially where there is a need for repeat surveys for assessment). There is a clear need therefore to develop a risk-based approach that uses indirect indicators (e.g. modelling), such as habitats at risk from pressures caused by current human activities, to develop priorities for information gathering. The next steps that came out of the workshop were: (i) A combined approach should be developed by the JNCC Marine Indicators Group together with the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup, which will compile and ultimately synthesise all the criteria used by the three different groups from the workshop. The agreed combined approach will be used to undertake a final review of the habitats considered during the workshop, and to evaluate any remaining habitats in order to produce a list of habitats for indicator development for which extent and/or distribution indicators could be appropriate. (ii) The points of advice raised at this workshop, alongside the combined approach aforementioned, and the final list of habitats for extent and/or distribution indicator development will be used to develop a prioritised list of actions to inform the next round of R&D proposals for benthic habitat indicator development in 2014. This will be done through technical discussions within JNCC and the relevant HBDSEG Subgroups. The preparation of recommendations by these groups should take into account existing work programmes, and consider the limited resources available to undertake any further R&D work.
Resumo:
Invasive alien species (IAS) are considered one of the greatest threats to biodiversity, particularly through their interactions with other drivers of change. Horizon scanning, the systematic examination of future potential threats and opportunities, leading to prioritization of IAS threats is seen as an essential component of IAS management. Our aim was to consider IAS that were likely to impact on native biodiversity but were not yet established in the wild in Great Britain. To achieve this, we developed an approach which coupled consensus methods (which have previously been used for collaboratively identifying priorities in other contexts) with rapid risk assessment. The process involved two distinct phases: 1. Preliminary consultation with experts within five groups (plants, terrestrial invertebrates, freshwater invertebrates, vertebrates and marine species) to derive ranked lists of potential IAS. 2. Consensus-building across expert groups to compile and rank the entire list of potential IAS. Five hundred and ninety-one species not native to Great Britain were considered. Ninety-three of these species were agreed to constitute at least a medium risk (based on score and consensus) with respect to them arriving, establishing and posing a threat to native biodiversity. The quagga mussel, Dreissena rostriformis bugensis, received maximum scores for risk of arrival, establishment and impact; following discussions the unanimous consensus was to rank it in the top position. A further 29 species were considered to constitute a high risk and were grouped according to their ranked risk. The remaining 63 species were considered as medium risk, and included in an unranked long list. The information collated through this novel extension of the consensus method for horizon scanning provides evidence for underpinning and prioritizing management both for the species and, perhaps more importantly, their pathways of arrival. Although our study focused on Great Britain, we suggest that the methods adopted are applicable globally.