4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Environmental impact of tsetse eradication in Senegal

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The sterile insect technique is an environment friendly control tactic and is very species specific. It is not a stand-alone technique and has been used mostly in combination with other control tactics within an area-wide integrated pest management strategy. For a period of eight years, the direct impact of a campaign to eradicate a population of the tsetse fly Glossina palpalis gambiensis in Senegal was monitored using a set of fruit-feeding insect species (Cetoniinae and Nymphalidae) that served as ecological indicators of the health of the ecosystem. Here we show that the eradication campaign had very limited impacts on the apparent densities of the most frequent species as well as three diversity indexes during the reduction phase involving insecticides but reverted to pre-intervention levels as soon as the release of the sterile male insects started. These results greatly expand our understanding of the impact of vector eradication campaigns on non-target species.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Human African trypanosomiasis.

          Human African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness) is a parasitic infection that almost invariably progresses to death unless treated. Human African trypanosomiasis caused devastating epidemics during the 20th century. Thanks to sustained and coordinated efforts over the past 15 years, the number of reported cases has fallen to an historically low level. Fewer than 3000 cases were reported in 2015, and the disease is targeted for elimination by WHO. Despite these recent successes, the disease is still endemic in parts of sub-Saharan Africa, where it is a considerable burden on rural communities, most notably in central Africa. Since patients are also reported from non-endemic countries, human African trypanosomiasis should be considered in differential diagnosis for travellers, tourists, migrants, and expatriates who have visited or lived in endemic areas. In the absence of a vaccine, disease control relies on case detection and treatment, and vector control. Available drugs are suboptimal, but ongoing clinical trials provide hope for safer and simpler treatments.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The database of the PREDICTS (Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems) project

            Abstract The PREDICTS project—Projecting Responses of Ecological Diversity In Changing Terrestrial Systems (www.predicts.org.uk)—has collated from published studies a large, reasonably representative database of comparable samples of biodiversity from multiple sites that differ in the nature or intensity of human impacts relating to land use. We have used this evidence base to develop global and regional statistical models of how local biodiversity responds to these measures. We describe and make freely available this 2016 release of the database, containing more than 3.2 million records sampled at over 26,000 locations and representing over 47,000 species. We outline how the database can help in answering a range of questions in ecology and conservation biology. To our knowledge, this is the largest and most geographically and taxonomically representative database of spatial comparisons of biodiversity that has been collated to date; it will be useful to researchers and international efforts wishing to model and understand the global status of biodiversity.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Mitigating climate change: the role of domestic livestock.

              Livestock contribute directly (i.e. as methane and nitrous oxide (N2O)) to about 9% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and around 3% of UK emissions. If all parts of the livestock production lifecycle are included (fossil fuels used to produce mineral fertilizers used in feed production and N2O emissions from fertilizer use; methane release from the breakdown of fertilizers and from animal manure; land-use changes for feed production and for grazing; land degradation; fossil fuel use during feed and animal production; fossil fuel use in production and transport of processed and refrigerated animal products), livestock are estimated to account for 18% of global anthropogenic emissions, but less than 8% in the UK. In terms of GHG emissions per unit of livestock product, monogastric livestock are more efficient than ruminants; thus in the UK, while sheep and cattle accounted for 32% of meat production in 2006, they accounted for 48% of GHG emissions associated with meat production. More efficient management of grazing lands and of manure can have a direct impact in decreasing emissions. Improving efficiency of livestock production through better breeding, health interventions or improving fertility can also decrease GHG emissions through decreasing the number of livestock required per unit product. Increasing the energy density of the diet has a dual effect, decreasing both direct emissions and the numbers of livestock per unit product, but, as the demands for food increase in response to increasing human population and a better diet in some developing countries, there is increasing competition for land for food v. energy-dense feed crops. Recalculating efficiencies of energy and protein production on the basis of human-edible food produced per unit of human-edible feed consumed gave higher efficiencies for ruminants than for monogastric animals. The policy community thus have difficult decisions to make in balancing the negative contribution of livestock to the environment against the positive benefit in terms of food security. The animal science community have a responsibility to provide an evidence base which is objective and holistic with respect to these two competing challenges.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                j.bouyer@iaea.org
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                30 December 2019
                30 December 2019
                2019
                : 9
                : 20313
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0134 2190, GRID grid.14416.36, Institut Sénégalais de Recherches Agricoles, Laboratoire National d’Elevage et de Recherches Vétérinaires, ; BP 2057 Dakar, Hann Sénégal
                [2 ]Ministère de l’Elevage et des Productions animales, Direction des Services Vétérinaires, BP 45677 Dakar, Sénégal
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0403 8399, GRID grid.420221.7, Insect Pest Control Laboratory, Joint FAO/IAEA Programme of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture, ; A-1400 Vienna, Austria
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2153 9871, GRID grid.8183.2, Unité Mixte de Recherche ‘Interactions hôtes-vecteurs-parasites-environnement dans les maladies tropicales négligées dues aux trypanosomatides’, Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), ; 34398 Montpellier, France
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2153 9871, GRID grid.8183.2, Unité Mixte de Recherche ‘Animal, Santé, Territoires, Risques et Ecosystèmes’, Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD), ; 34398 Montpellier, France
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4816-9812
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1913-416X
                Article
                56919
                10.1038/s41598-019-56919-5
                6937335
                31889138
                34fd360e-7364-4732-98a9-f8a384912979
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 8 September 2019
                : 4 December 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/100010663, EC | EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020 | H2020 Priority Excellent Science | H2020 European Research Council (H2020 Excellent Science - European Research Council);
                Award ID: 682387
                Award Recipient :
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Uncategorized
                environmental biotechnology,conservation biology
                Uncategorized
                environmental biotechnology, conservation biology

                Comments

                Comment on this article