More Like this

1. Integrating microbiome science and evolutionary medicine into animal health and conservation

   https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.13030  

   Bornbusch, Sally L.; Power, Michael L.; Schulkin, Jay; Drea, Christine M.; Maslanka, Michael T.; Muletz‐Wolz, Carly R. (November 2023, Biological Reviews)

   ABSTRACT Microbiome science has provided groundbreaking insights into human and animal health. Similarly, evolutionary medicine – the incorporation of eco‐evolutionary concepts into primarily human medical theory and practice – is increasingly recognised for its novel perspectives on modern diseases. Studies of host–microbe relationships have been expanded beyond humans to include a wide range of animal taxa, adding new facets to our understanding of animal ecology, evolution, behaviour, and health. In this review, we propose that a broader application of evolutionary medicine, combined with microbiome science, can provide valuable and innovative perspectives on animal care and conservation. First, we draw on classic ecological principles, such as alternative stable states, to propose an eco‐evolutionary framework for understanding variation in animal microbiomes and their role in animal health and wellbeing. With a focus on mammalian gut microbiomes, we apply this framework to populations of animals under human care, with particular relevance to the many animal species that suffer diseases linked to gut microbial dysfunction (e.g. gut distress and infection, autoimmune disorders, obesity). We discuss diet and microbial landscapes (i.e. the microbes in the animal's external environment), as two factors that are (i) proposed to represent evolutionary mismatches for captive animals, (ii) linked to gut microbiome structure and function, and (iii) potentially best understood from an evolutionary medicine perspective. Keeping within our evolutionary framework, we highlight the potential benefits – and pitfalls – of modern microbial therapies, such as pre‐ and probiotics, faecal microbiota transplants, and microbial rewilding. We discuss the limited, yet growing, empirical evidence for the use of microbial therapies to modulate animal gut microbiomes beneficially. Interspersed throughout, we propose 12 actionable steps, grounded in evolutionary medicine, that can be applied to practical animal care and management. We encourage that these actionable steps be paired with integration of eco‐evolutionary perspectives into our definitions of appropriate animal care standards. The evolutionary perspectives proposed herein may be best appreciated when applied to the broad diversity of species under human care, rather than when solely focused on humans. We urge animal care professionals, veterinarians, nutritionists, scientists, and others to collaborate on these efforts, allowing for simultaneous care of animal patients and the generation of valuable empirical data. 

   more » « less
2. Priorities, opportunities, and challenges for integrating microorganisms into Earth system models for climate change prediction

   https://doi.org/10.1128/mbio.00455-24  

   Lennon, J. T.; Abramoff, R. Z.; Allison, S. D.; Burckhardt, R. M.; DeAngelis, K. M.; Dunne, J. P.; Frey, S. D.; Friedlingstein, P.; Hawkes, C. V.; Hungate, B. A.; et al (May 2024, mBio)

   Buchan, Alison (Ed.)

   ABSTRACT Climate change jeopardizes human health, global biodiversity, and sustainability of the biosphere. To make reliable predictions about climate change, scientists use Earth system models (ESMs) that integrate physical, chemical, and biological processes occurring on land, the oceans, and the atmosphere. Although critical for catalyzing coupled biogeochemical processes, microorganisms have traditionally been left out of ESMs. Here, we generate a “top 10” list of priorities, opportunities, and challenges for the explicit integration of microorganisms into ESMs. We discuss the need for coarse-graining microbial information into functionally relevant categories, as well as the capacity for microorganisms to rapidly evolve in response to climate-change drivers. Microbiologists are uniquely positioned to collect novel and valuable information necessary for next-generation ESMs, but this requires data harmonization and transdisciplinary collaboration to effectively guide adaptation strategies and mitigation policy. 

   more » « less
3. Early-career setback and future career impact

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-12189-3  

   Wang, Yang; Jones, Benjamin F.; Wang, Dashun (October 2019, Nature Communications)

   Abstract Setbacks are an integral part of a scientific career, yet little is known about their long-term effects. Here we examine junior scientists applying for National Institutes of Health R01 grants. By focusing on proposals fell just below and just above the funding threshold, we compare near-miss with narrow-win applicants, and find that an early-career setback has powerful, opposing effects. On the one hand, it significantly increases attrition, predicting more than a 10% chance of disappearing permanently from the NIH system. Yet, despite an early setback, individuals with near misses systematically outperform those with narrow wins in the longer run. Moreover, this performance advantage seems to go beyond a screening mechanism, suggesting early-career setback appears to cause a performance improvement among those who persevere. Overall, these findings are consistent with the concept that “what doesn’t kill me makes me stronger,” which may have broad implications for identifying, training and nurturing junior scientists. 

   more » « less
4. Pain and Laboratory Animals: Publication Practices for Better Data Reproducibility and Better Animal Welfare

   https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0155001  

   Larry Carbone, Jamie Austin (May 2016, PloS one)

   Scientists who perform major survival surgery on laboratory animals face a dual welfare and methodological challenge: how to choose surgical anesthetics and post-operative analgesics that will best control animal suffering, knowing that both pain and the drugs that manage pain can all affect research outcomes. Scientists who publish full descriptions of animal procedures allow critical and systematic reviews of data, demonstrate their adherence to animal welfare norms, and guide other scientists on how to conduct their own studies in the field. We investigated what information on animal pain management a reasonably diligent scientist might find in planning for a successful experiment. To explore how scientists in a range of fields describe their management of this ethical and methodological concern, we scored 400 scientific articles that included major animal survival surgeries as part of their experimental methods, for the completeness of information on anesthesia and analgesia. The 400 articles (250 accepted for publication pre-2011, and 150 in 2014–15, along with 174 articles they reference) included thoracotomies, craniotomies, gonadectomies, organ transplants, peripheral nerve injuries, spinal laminectomies and orthopedic procedures in dogs, primates, swine, mice, rats and other rodents. We scored articles for Publication Completeness (PC), which was any mention of use of anesthetics or analgesics; Analgesia Use (AU) which was any use of post-surgical analgesics, and Analgesia Completeness (a composite score comprising intra-operative analgesia, extended post-surgical analgesia, and use of multimodal analgesia). 338 of 400 articles were PC. 98 of these 338 were AU, with some mention of analgesia, while 240 of 338 mentioned anesthesia only but not postsurgical analgesia. Journals’ caliber, as measured by their 2013 Impact Factor, had no effect on PC or AU. We found no effect of whether a journal instructs authors to consult the ARRIVE publishing guidelines published in 2010 on PC or AC for the 150 mouse and rat articles in our 2014–15 dataset. None of the 302 articles that were silent about analgesic use included an explicit statement that analgesics were withheld, or a discussion of how pain management or untreated pain might affect results. We conclude that current scientific literature cannot be trusted to present full detail on use of animal anesthetics and analgesics. We report that publication guidelines focus more on other potential sources of bias in experimental results, under-appreciate the potential for pain and pain drugs to skew data, PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0155001 May 12, 2016 1 / 24 a11111 OPEN ACCESS Citation: Carbone L, Austin J (2016) Pain and Laboratory Animals: Publication Practices for Better Data Reproducibility and Better Animal Welfare. PLoS ONE 11(5): e0155001. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0155001 Editor: Chang-Qing Gao, Central South University, CHINA Received: December 29, 2015 Accepted: April 22, 2016 Published: May 12, 2016 Copyright: © 2016 Carbone, Austin. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files. Authors may be contacted for further information. Funding: This study was funded by the United States National Science Foundation Division of Social and Economic Sciences. Award #1455838. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. and thus mostly treat pain management as solely an animal welfare concern, in the jurisdiction of animal care and use committees. At the same time, animal welfare regulations do not include guidance on publishing animal data, even though publication is an integral part of the cycle of research and can affect the welfare of animals in studies building on published work, leaving it to journals and authors to voluntarily decide what details of animal use to publish. We suggest that journals, scientists and animal welfare regulators should revise current guidelines and regulations, on treatment of pain and on transparent reporting of treatment of pain, to improve this dual welfare and data-quality deficiency. 

   more » « less
5. Pathogens and planetary change

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s44358-024-00005-w  

   Carlson, Colin J; Brookson, Cole B; Becker, Daniel J; Cummings, Caroline A; Gibb, Rory; Halliday, Fletcher W; Heckley, Alexis M; Huang, Zheng_Y X; Lavelle, Torre; Robertson, Hailey; et al (January 2025, Nature Reviews Biodiversity)

   Emerging infectious diseases, biodiversity loss, and anthropogenic environmental change are interconnected crises with massive social and ecological costs. In this Review, we discuss how pathogens and parasites are responding to global change, and the implications for pandemic prevention and biodiversity conservation. Ecological and evolutionary principles help to explain why both pandemics and wildlife die-offs are becoming more common; why land-use change and biodiversity loss are often followed by an increase in zoonotic and vector-borne diseases; and why some species, such as bats, host so many emerging pathogens. To prevent the next pandemic, scientists should focus on monitoring and limiting the spread of a handful of high-risk viruses, especially at key interfaces such as farms and live-animal markets. But to address the much broader set of infectious disease risks associated with the Anthropocene, decision-makers will need to develop comprehensive strategies that include pathogen surveillance across species and ecosystems; conservation-based interventions to reduce human–animal contact and protect wildlife health; health system strengthening; and global improvements in epidemic preparedness and response. Scientists can contribute to these efforts by filling global gaps in disease data, and by expanding the evidence base for disease–driver relationships and ecological interventions. 

   more » « less