Balancing making a difference with making a living in the conservation sector

Goals play important roles in people's lives because they focus attention, mobilize effort, and sustain motivation. Understanding conservationists’ satisfaction with goal progress may provide insights into real-world environmental trends and flag risks to their well-being and motivation. We asked 2694 conservationists working globally how satisfied they were with progress toward goals important to them. We then explored how this satisfaction varied among groups, including demographic and occupational. Finally, we looked at respondents' experiences associated with goal-progress satisfaction. Many (94.0%) indicated that making a meaningful contribution to conservation was an important goal for them, and over half were satisfied or very satisfied in this area (52.5%). However, respondents were generally dissatisfied with progress on collective conservation goals (e.g., stopping species loss). Some groups were more likely to report dissatisfaction than others. For instance, those in conservation for longer tended to be less satisfied with collective goal progress (log odds –0.21, 95% credibility interval [CI] –0.32 to –0.10), but practitioners reported greater satisfaction (log odds 0.38, 95% CI 0.15–0.60). Likewise, those who were more optimistic in life (log odds 0.24, 95% CI 0.17–0.32), male (log odds 0.25, 95% CI 0.10–0.41), and working in conservation practice (log odds 0.25, 95% CI 0.08–0.43) reported greater satisfaction with individual goal progress. Free-text responses suggested widespread dissatisfaction with livelihood goals, particularly related to job security and adequate compensation. Although contributing to conservation appeared to be a source of satisfaction, slow goal progress in other areas––particularly around making a living––looked to be a source of distress and demotivation. Employers, funders, professional societies, and others should consider ways to help those in the sector make a difference while making a satisfactory living by, for example, prioritizing conservationists′ well-being when allocating funding. This support could include avoiding exploitative practices, fostering supportive work environments, and celebrating positive outcomes.     

Does the antidiabetic drug metformin affect embryo development and the health of brown trout (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Salmo trutta</Emphasis> f. <Emphasis Type="Italic">fario</Emphasis>)?

Background

Due to the rising number of type 2 diabetes patients, the antidiabetic drug, metformin is currently among those pharmaceuticals with the highest consumption rates worldwide. Via sewage-treatment plants, metformin enters surface waters where it is frequently detected in low concentrations (µg/L). Since possible adverse effects of this substance in aquatic organisms have been insufficiently explored to date, the aim of this study was to investigate the impact of metformin on health and development in brown trout (Salmo trutta f. fario) and its microbiome.

Results

Brown trout embryos were exposed to 0, 1, 10, 100 and 1000 µg/L metformin over a period from 48 days post fertilisation (dpf) until 8 weeks post-yolk sac consumption at 7 °C (156 dpf) and 11 °C (143 dpf). Chemical analyses in tissues of exposed fish showed the concentration-dependent presence of metformin in the larvae. Mortality, embryonic development, body length, liver tissue integrity, stress protein levels and swimming behaviour were not influenced. However, compared to the controls, the amount of hepatic glycogen was higher in larvae exposed to metformin, especially in fish exposed to the lowest metformin concentration of 1 µg/L, which is environmentally relevant. At higher metformin concentrations, the glycogen content in the liver showed a high variability, especially for larvae exposed to 1000 µg/L metformin. Furthermore, the body weight of fish exposed to 10 and 100 µg/L metformin at 7 °C and to 1 µg/L metformin at 11 °C was decreased compared with the respective controls. The results of the microbiome analyses indicated a shift in the bacteria distribution in fish exposed to 1 and 10 µg/L metformin at 7 °C and to 100 µg/L metformin at 11 °C, leading to an increase of Proteobacteria and a reduction of Firmicutes and Actinobacteria.

Conclusions

Overall, weight reduction and the increased glycogen content belong to the described pharmaceutical effects of the drug in humans, but this study showed that they also occur in brown trout larvae. The impact of a shift in the intestinal microbiome caused by metformin on the immune system and vitality of the host organism should be the subject of further research before assessing the environmental relevance of the pharmaceutical.

     

Projecting biodiversity benefits of conservation behavior-change programs

Biodiversity loss is driven by human behavior, but there is uncertainty about the effectiveness of behavior-change programs in delivering benefits to biodiversity. To demonstrate their value, the biodiversity benefits and cost-effectiveness of behavior changes that directly or indirectly affect biodiversity need to be quantified. We adapted a structured decision-making prioritization tool to determine the potential biodiversity benefits of behavior changes. As a case study, we examined two hypothetical behavior-change programs––wildlife gardening and cat containment––by asking experts to consider the behaviors associated with these programs that directly and indirectly affect biodiversity. We assessed benefits to southern brown bandicoot (Isoodon obesulus) and superb fairy-wren (Malurus cyaneus) by eliciting from experts estimates of the probability of each species persisting in the landscape given a range of behavior-change scenarios in which uptake of the behaviors varied. We then compared these estimates to a business-as-usual scenario to determine the relative biodiversity benefit and cost-effectiveness of each scenario. Experts projected that the behavior-change programs would benefit biodiversity and that benefits would rise with increasing uptake of the target behaviors. Biodiversity benefits were also predicted to accrue through indirect behaviors, although experts disagreed about the magnitude of additional benefit provided. Scenarios that combined the two behavior-change programs were estimated to provide the greatest benefits to species and be most cost-effective. Our method could be used in other contexts and potentially at different scales and advances the use of prioritization tools to guide conservation behavior-change programs.     

Correction to: Effect of gervital in attenuating hepatotoxicity caused by methotrexate or azathioprine in adult albino rats

Environmental Science and Pollution Research -