The current experiment aimed to determine the proportion of wild-caught possums from previously poisoned and non-poisoned populations that developed aversions to 1080 baits. In addition, we aimed to identify the bait characteristics mediating the ongoing aversions. In an initial test, animals from areas previously exposed to a 1080 control-operation avoided 1080 baits (60–80%), whereas few naive animals (0–20%) avoided these baits. The baits comprised a green-dyed, cinnamon-lured cereal loaded with 0.08% 1080. As a result of the exposure to the toxic baits, over 80% of the naive animals subsequently developed aversions to those baits. Sixty-nine of these averse animals were allocated to one of 16 bait-treatment groups in a factorial design balanced for population, sex, age and bodyweight. Each bait was characterised by four factors: (a) presence or absence of 1080, (b) presence or absence of green dye, (c) lure type (cinnamon or orange), and (d) bait type (No. 7 or carrot). The presence or absence of 1080 or green dye did not influence the degree of bait avoidance. Lure type had a significant effect on consumption, with 53% of possums avoiding an orange bait compared with 73% for cinnamon baits. Bait type also had a significant effect on avoidance rates, with carrot baits being avoided by 42% of possums compared with 83% for No. 7 baits. Changing the bait type would appear to hold the greatest promise for overcoming aversions by possums to cereal bait.
Complex interventions are commonly used in the health and social care services, public health practice, and other areas of social and economic policy that have consequences for health. Such interventions are delivered and evaluated at different levels, from individual to societal. Examples include a new surgical procedure, the redesign of a health care programme, and a change in welfare policy. The UK Medical Research Council (MRC) published a framework for researchers and research funders on developing and evaluating complex interventions in 2000 and revised guidance in 2006.[1] Although these documents continue to be widely used and are now accompanied by a range of more detailed guidance on specific aspects of the research process,[2–5] there have been important conceptual, methodological and theoretical developments since 2006. These developments have been addressed in a new framework commissioned by the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) and the MRC.[6] The framework aims to help researchers work with other stakeholders to identify the key questions about complex interventions, and to design and conduct research with a diversity of perspectives and appropriate choice of methods. ; The work was funded by the NIHR (Department of Health and Social Care 73514) and Medical Research Council (MRC). Additional time on the study was funded by grants from the MRC for Kathryn Skivington (MC_UU_12017/11, MC_UU_00022/3), Lynsay Matthews, Sharon Anne Simpson, Laurence Moore (MC_UU_12017/14, MC_UU_00022/1), Peter Craig (MC_UU_12017/15, MC_UU_00022/2), Martin White (MC_UU_12015/6 and MC_UU_00006/7). Additional time on the study was also funded by grants from the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorates for Kathryn Skivington (SPHSU11 and SPHSU18), Lynsay Matthews, Sharon Anne Simpson and Laurence Moore (SPHSU14 and SPHSU16), and Peter Craig (SPHSU13 and SPHSU15). Kathryn Skivington and Sharon Anne Simpson were also supported by an MRC Strategic Award (MC_PC_13027). JBl received ...
The human response to the COVID-19 pandemic set in motion an unprecedented shift in human activity with unknown long-term effects. The impacts in marine systems are expected to be highly dynamic at local and global scales. However, in comparison to terrestrial ecosystems, we are not well-prepared to document these changes in marine and coastal environments. The problems are two-fold: 1) manual and siloed data collection and processing, and 2) reliance on marine professionals for observation and analysis. These problems are relevant beyond the pandemic and are a barrier to understanding rapidly evolving blue economies, the impacts of climate change, and the many other changes our modern-day oceans are undergoing. The "Our Ocean in COVID-19" project, which aims to track human-ocean interactions throughout the pandemic, uses the new eOceans platform (eOceans.app) to overcome these barriers. Working at local scales, a global network of ocean scientists and citizen scientists are collaborating to monitor the ocean in near real-time. The purpose of this paper is to bring this project to the attention of the marine conservation community, researchers, and the public wanting to track changes in their area. As our team continues to grow, this project will provide important baselines and temporal patterns for ocean conservation, policy, and innovation as society transitions towards a new normal. It may also provide a proof-of-concept for real-time, collaborative ocean monitoring that breaks down silos between academia, government, and at-sea stakeholders to create a stronger and more democratic blue economy with communities more resilient to ocean and global change. ; This is a multi-sector project that has a wide range of collaborations. We thank all project partners including the home institutions of the principal investigators and the industry partners who are spreading the word about the project including The Moreton Bay Foundation (Australia), Live Ningaloo (Australia), Cairns Emergency Vets (Australia), Project Manaia (Austria), Calabaza Sailing Cruises (Barbados), Ocean Eyes (Chile), Chile Divers (Chile), Chile Mio (Chile), Pintarroja (Chile), Panthalassa (Chile),Centro de Buceo (Chile), Fundacion Mar y Ciencia (Chile), Ocean Missions (Iceland), Gili Shark Conservation (Indonesia), Niyama (Maldives), Gozo Azul (Mozambique), Guinjata Dive Centre (Mozambique), Tropical Research & Conservation Centre (Nigeria), National Aquarium of New Zealand, Sustainable Ōtautahi Christchurch (New Zealand), Mar Nosso (Portugal), Canana, Pura Vida Diving (Spain), Club de Buceo (Spain), Manta Diver (Spain), Deep Ocean Diver (Spain), Thalassa Boat Tours (Thailand), Ocean Sanctuaries (US), The Adventure Boat (US), Wild Side Hawaii (US), Off The Grid Ocean Adventures (US), Pacific Marine Charters (US), Oceans Forward (US). ; There is no funding to acknowledge at this time. eOceans is solely owned by CWP and is sponsoring the project.
Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted routine hospital services globally. This study estimated the total number of adult elective operations that would be cancelled worldwide during the 12 weeks of peak disruption due to COVID-19. Methods: A global expert response study was conducted to elicit projections for the proportion of elective surgery that would be cancelled or postponed during the 12 weeks of peak disruption. A Bayesian β-regression model was used to estimate 12-week cancellation rates for 190 countries. Elective surgical case-mix data, stratified by specialty and indication (surgery for cancer versus benign disease), were determined. This case mix was applied to country-level surgical volumes. The 12-week cancellation rates were then applied to these figures to calculate the total number of cancelled operations. Results: The best estimate was that 28 404 603 operations would be cancelled or postponed during the peak 12 weeks of disruption due to COVID-19 (2 367 050 operations per week). Most would be operations for benign disease (90·2 per cent, 25 638 922 of 28 404 603). The overall 12-week cancellation rate would be 72·3 per cent. Globally, 81·7 per cent of operations for benign conditions (25 638 922 of 31 378 062), 37·7 per cent of cancer operations (2 324 070 of 6 162 311) and 25·4 per cent of elective caesarean sections (441 611 of 1 735 483) would be cancelled or postponed. If countries increased their normal surgical volume by 20 per cent after the pandemic, it would take a median of 45 weeks to clear the backlog of operations resulting from COVID-19 disruption. Conclusion: A very large number of operations will be cancelled or postponed owing to disruption caused by COVID-19. Governments should mitigate against this major burden on patients by developing recovery plans and implementing strategies to restore surgical activity safely.