The ‘I see you’ prey–predator signal of Apis cerana is innate

An ‘I see you’ (ISY) prey–predator signal can co-evolve when such a signal benefits both prey and predator. The prey benefits if, by producing the signal, the predator is likely to break off an attack. The predator benefits if it is informed by the signal that the prey is aware of its presence and can break off what is likely to be an unsuccessful and potentially costly hunt. Because the signal and response co-evolve in two species, the behaviour underlying an ISY signal is expected to have a strong genetic component and cannot be entirely learned. An example of an ISY signal is the ‘shimmering’ behaviour performed by Asian hive bee workers in the presence of their predator Vespa velutina. To test the prediction that bee–hornet signalling is heritable, we let honey bee workers of two species emerge in an incubator so that they had never been exposed to V. velutina. In Apis cerana, the shimmering response developed 48 h post-emergence, was strong after 72 h and increased further over 2 weeks. In contrast, A. mellifera, which has evolved in the absence of Asian hornets, did not produce the shimmering signal. In control tests, A. cerana workers exposed to a non-threatening butterfly did not respond with the shimmering signal.     

Primary prevention for worker health and safety: cleaner production and toxics use reduction in Massachusetts

Worker health and safety and environmental protection are not always considered simultaneously when attempting to reduce or eliminate hazardous materials from our environment. Cleaner Production-Pollution Prevention (CPPP), as primary prevention, has the ability to shift worker health and safety strategies from control to prevention, where exposure prevention precedes exposure control. This paper evaluates the effect of Cleaner Production-Pollution Prevention in the form of toxics use reduction (TUR) on worker health and safety at three printed wire board facilities covered under the Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Act. In-depth case study analysis, including an assessment of each facility’s health and safety status, explores the root causes of the worker health and safety changes attributable to the TUR interventions. By exploring the relationship between worker health and safety and environmental protection within the corporate structure; we can identify the factors driving companies to reduce toxics both inside and outside of their plants, as a single concern.While traditionally there have been divergent paths of practice for worker health and safety and environmental protection, the two are closely connected. It is important, however, to consider the implications of risk transfer/shifting between the general and work environment. In order to avoid this risk shifting, worker health and safety perspectives and goals must be more clearly incorporated into the Cleaner Production-Pollution Prevention/TUR management system. This study opens a dialog around the effects of environmental intervention programs on worker health and safety. We realize now that while CPPP/TUR reduces exposure to toxic substances in the general environment, it also offers unique opportunities to reaffirm primary prevention principles in the work environment.     

Extending null scenarios with Faddy distributions in a probabilistic randomization protocol for presence-absence data

Environmental and Ecological Statistics - Navarro and Manly (Popul Ecol 51:505–512, 2009) (NM) have proposed a randomization protocol for null model analysis of species occurrences at...