Determination of estrogenic activity by LYES-assay (yeast estrogen screen-assay assisted by enzymatic digestion with lyticase)

In order to enhance the sensitivity and the speed of the yeast estrogen screen (YES)-assay, which has been established in many laboratories for the determination of estrogenic activity of compounds and environmental samples, the LYES-assay, a modified version of the YES-assay including a digestion step with the enzyme lyticase, was developed. With the LYES-assay the estrogenic activities of natural (17β-estradiol E2 and estrone), synthetic (17-ethinylestradiol EE2) and pharmaceutical estrogens (diethylstilbestrol DES) as well as xenoestrogens (4-nonylphenol NP and five parabens) were determined and compared with the results obtained by other in vitro-assays namely the conventional YES-assay, the E-Screen-assay (MCF-7 breast tumor cell proliferation) and a receptor binding-assay (RB) with human estrogen receptors hER- and hER-β. In the case of E2 the LYES-assay had a significantly lower limit of quantification (LOQ) than the conventional YES-assay and even two orders of magnitude lower than the RB-assay. Compared to the E-Screen-assay the LOQ of the LYES-assay was almost one order of magnitude higher. The time required to perform the LYES-assay was as little as seven hours compared to three to five days for the conventional YES-assay. Thus, the LYES-assay is a very good alternative to existing estrogenic in vitro-assays, since it has a good sensitivity, is cheap and much faster than the other assays.     

Combining qualitative and quantitative understanding for exploring cross-sectoral climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability in Europe

Climate change will affect all sectors of society and the environment at all scales, ranging from the continental to the national and local. Decision-makers and other interested citizens need to be able to access reliable science-based information to help them respond to the risks of climate change impacts and assess opportunities for adaptation. Participatory integrated assessment (IA) tools combine knowledge from diverse scientific disciplines, take account of the value and importance of stakeholder ‘lay insight’ and facilitate a two-way iterative process of exploration of ‘what if’s’ to enable decision-makers to test ideas and improve their understanding of the complex issues surrounding adaptation to climate change. This paper describes the conceptual design of a participatory IA tool, the CLIMSAVE IA Platform, based on a professionally facilitated stakeholder engagement process. The CLIMSAVE (climate change integrated methodology for cross-sectoral adaptation and vulnerability in Europe) Platform is a user-friendly, interactive web-based tool that allows stakeholders to assess climate change impacts and vulnerabilities for a range of sectors, including agriculture, forests, biodiversity, coasts, water resources and urban development. The linking of models for the different sectors enables stakeholders to see how their interactions could affect European landscape change. The relationship between choice, uncertainty and constraints is a key cross-cutting theme in the conduct of past participatory IA. Integrating scenario development processes with an interactive modelling platform is shown to allow the exploration of future uncertainty as a structural feature of such complex problems, encouraging stakeholders to explore adaptation choices within real-world constraints of future resource availability and environmental and institutional capacities, rather than seeking the ‘right’ answers.     

Association Between NCAP Ratings and Real-World Rear Seat Occupant Risk of Injury

Objective: Several studies have evaluated the correlation between U.S. or Euro New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) ratings and injury risk to front seat occupants, in particular driver injuries. Conversely, little is known about whether NCAP 5-star ratings predict real-world risk of injury to restrained rear seat occupants. The NHTSA has identified rear seat occupant protection as a specific area under consideration for improvements to its NCAP. In order to inform NHTSA's efforts, we examined how NCAP's current 5-star rating system predicts risk of moderate or greater injury among restrained rear seat occupants in real-world crashes.

Methods: We identified crash-involved vehicles, model year 2004–2013, in NASS-CDS (2003–2012) with known make and model and nonmissing occupant information. We manually matched these vehicles to their NCAP star ratings using data on make, model, model year, body type, and other identifying information. The resultant linked NASS-CDS and NCAP database was analyzed to examine associations between vehicle ratings and rear seat occupant injury risk; risk to front seat occupants was also estimated for comparison. Data were limited to restrained occupants and occupant injuries were defined as any injury with a maximum Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) score of 2 or greater.

Results: We linked 95% of vehicles in NASS-CDS to a specific vehicle in NCAP. The 18,218 vehicles represented an estimated 6 million vehicles with over 9 million occupants. Rear seat passengers accounted for 12.4% of restrained occupants. The risk of injury in all crashes for restrained rear seat occupants was lower in vehicles with a 5-star driver rating in frontal impact tests (1.4%) than with 4 or fewer stars (2.6%, P =.015); results were similar for the frontal impact passenger rating (1.3% vs. 2.4%, P =.024). Conversely, side impact driver and passenger crash tests were not associated with rear seat occupant injury risk (driver test: 1.7% for 5-star vs. 1.8% for 1–4 stars; passenger test: 1.6% for 5 stars vs 1.8% for 1–4 stars).

Conclusions: Current frontal impact test procedures provide some degree of discrimination in real-world rear seat injury risk among vehicles with 5 compared to fewer than 5 stars. However, there is no evidence that vehicles with a 5-star side impact passenger rating, which is the only crash test procedure to include an anthropomorphic test dummy (ATD) in the rear, demonstrate lower risks of injury in the rear than vehicles with fewer than 5 stars. These results support prioritizing modifications to the NCAP program that specifically evaluate rear seat injury risk to restrained occupants of all ages.     

A framework for habitat monitoring and climate change modelling: construction and validation of the Environmental Stratification of Estonia

Environmental stratifications provide the framework for efficient surveillance and monitoring of biodiversity and ecological resources, as well as modelling exercises. An obstacle for agricultural landscape monitoring in Estonia has been the lack of a framework for the objective selection of monitoring sites. This paper describes the construction and testing of the Environmental Stratification of Estonia (ESE). Principal components analysis was used to select the variables that capture the most amount of variation. Seven climate variables and topography were selected and subsequently subjected to the ISODATA clustering routine in order to produce relatively homogeneous environmental strata. The ESE contains eight strata, which have been described in terms of soil, land cover and climatic parameters. In order to assess the reliability of the stratification procedure for the selection of monitoring sites, the ESE was compared with the previous map of Landscape Regions of Estonia and correlated with five environmental data sets. All correlations were significant. The stratification has therefore already been used to extend the current series of samples in agricultural landscapes into a more statistically robust series of monitoring sites. The potential for applying climate change scenarios to assess the shifts in the strata and associated ecological impacts is also examined.     

Evaluating the Effect of a Mechanical Adjunct to Improve the Installation of Child Restraint Systems to Vehicles

Objectives: We explored if an alternative CRS design that utilized a mechanical adjunct to amplify the force applied to the adult seat belt (intervention CRS) results in more accurate and secure attachment between the CRS and the vehicle compared to similar CRS models that use LATCH or the existing adult seat belt. We conducted three separate studies to address this question and additionally explored: (1) the contribution of prior CRS installation experience (Study 1), (2) the value-added of CRS labeling (Study 2), and (3) paper-based vs. video instructions (Study 3).

Methods: In Studies 1 and 2 we assessed a forward facing combination CRS design (intervention CRS) compared to a commercially available LATCH equipped model (control CRS) and in Study 3 we conducted a similar study using a convertible model of both the intervention and control CRS. Participants installed both CRS in a contemporary minivan and could choose which type of attachment to use for the control CRS (LATCH or seat belt); order of installation was counter-balanced. Evaluators systematically examined installations for accuracy and security.

Results: Study 1: A greater proportion of participants in both the experienced and inexperienced groups was able to securely install the intervention CRS compared to the control CRS: (45% vs. 16%, p =.0001 for experienced) and (37% vs. 6%, p =.003 for inexperienced). No differences between the CRS were observed for accuracy of installation in either user group. Study 2: A greater proportion of participants were able to securely install the enhanced intervention CRS compared to the control CRS: (62% vs. 9%, p =.001). The intervention CRS demonstrated reduced installation accuracy: (30% vs. 61%, p =.001). Study 3: A greater proportion of participants was able to securely install the intervention CRS compared to the control CRS: 79% vs. 66% p =.03, but this effect was smaller than in the previous studies. Participants were less likely to achieve an accurate installation with the intervention CRS compared to the control CRS: 54% vs. 79%, p =.004. Common accuracy errors in each study included twisting or misrouting the seatbelt when installing the intervention CRS.

Conclusions: Our results suggest that novel CRS designs that utilize mechanical advantage to facilitate attachment of the CRS to the vehicle result in a tighter installation compared to LATCH equipped models, but an increase in accuracy errors occurred.     

Offsetting impacts of development on biodiversity and ecosystem services

Ambio - Offsetting—trading losses in one place for commensurate gains in another—is a tool used to mitigate environmental impacts of development. Biodiversity and carbon are the most...     

Archetypical patterns and trajectories of land systems in Europe

Regional Environmental Change - Assessments of land-system change have dominantly focused on conversions among broad land-use categories, whereas intensity changes within these categories have...     

Seabird mortality induced by land‐based artificial lights

Artificial lights at night cause high mortality of seabirds, one of the most endangered groups of birds globally. Fledglings of burrow‐nesting seabirds, and to a lesser extent adults, are attracted to and then grounded (i.e., forced to land) by lights when they fly at night. We reviewed the current state of knowledge of seabird attraction to light to identify information gaps and propose measures to address the problem. Although species in families such as Alcidae and Anatidae can be grounded by artificial light, the most affected seabirds are petrels and shearwaters (Procellariiformes). At least 56 species of Procellariiformes, more than one‐third of them (24) threatened, are subject to grounding by lights. Seabirds grounded by lights have been found worldwide, mainly on oceanic islands but also at some continental locations. Petrel breeding grounds confined to formerly uninhabited islands are particularly at risk from light pollution due to tourism and urban sprawl. Where it is impractical to ban external lights, rescue programs of grounded birds offer the most immediate and employed mitigation to reduce the rate of light‐induced mortality and save thousands of birds every year. These programs also provide useful information for seabird management. However, these data are typically fragmentary, biased, and uncertain and can lead to inaccurate impact estimates and poor understanding of the phenomenon of seabird attraction to lights. We believe the most urgently needed actions to mitigate and understand light‐induced mortality of seabirds are estimation of mortality and effects on populations; determination of threshold light levels and safe distances from light sources; documentation of the fate of rescued birds; improvement of rescue campaigns, particularly in terms of increasing recovery rates and level of care; and research on seabird‐friendly lights to reduce attraction.     

Towards a spatially explicit and quantitative vulnerability assessment of environmental change in Europe

Over the next century, society will increasingly be confronted with the impacts of global change (e.g. pollution, land use changes, and climate change). Multiple scenarios provide us with a range of possible changes in socio-economic trends, land uses and climate (i.e. exposure) and allow us to assess the response of ecosystems and changes in the services they provide (i.e. potential impacts). Since vulnerability to global change is less when society is able to adapt, it is important to provide decision makers with tools that will allow them to assess and compare the vulnerability of different sectors and regions to global change, taking into account exposure and sensitivity, as well as adaptive capacity. This paper presents a method that allows quantitative spatial analyses of the vulnerability of the human-environment system on a European scale. It is a first step towards providing stakeholders and policy makers with a spatially explicit portfolio of comparable projections of ecosystem services, providing a basis for discussion on the sustainable management of Europe’s natural resources.

A spatially explicit and quantitative vulnerability assessment of ecosystem service change in Europe

Environmental change alters ecosystem functioning and may put the provision of services to human at risk. This paper presents a spatially explicit and quantitative assessment of the corresponding vulnerability for Europe, using a new framework designed to answer multidisciplinary policy relevant questions about the vulnerability of the human-environment system to global change. Scenarios were constructed for a range of possible changes in socio-economic trends, land uses and climate. These scenarios were used as inputs in a range of ecosystem models in order to assess the response of ecosystem function as well as the changes in the services they provide. The framework was used to relate the impacts of changing ecosystem service provision for four sectors in relation to each other, and to combine them with a simple, but generic index for societal adaptive capacity. By allowing analysis of different sectors, regions and development pathways, the vulnerability assessment provides a basis for discussion between stakeholders and policymakers about sustainable management of Europe’s natural resources. Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.