Extensive regional variation in the phenology of insects and their response to temperature across North America.

Climate change models often assume similar responses to temperatures across the range of a species, but local adaptation or phenotypic plasticity can lead plants and animals to respond differently to temperature in different parts of their range. To date, there have been few tests of this assumption at the scale of continents, so it is unclear if this is a large-scale problem. Here, we examined the assumption that insect taxa show similar responses to temperature at 96 sites in grassy habitats across North America. We sampled insects with Malaise traps during 2019-2021 (N = 1041 samples) and examined the biomass of insects in relation to temperature and time of season. Our samples mostly contained Diptera (33%), Lepidoptera (19%), Hymenoptera (18%), and Coleoptera (10%). We found strong regional differences in the phenology of insects and their response to temperature, even within the same taxonomic group, habitat type, and time of season. For example, the biomass of nematoceran flies increased across the season in the central part of the continent, but it only showed a small increase in the Northeast and a seasonal decline in the Southeast and West. At a smaller scale, insect biomass at different traps operating on the same days was correlated up to ~75 km apart. Large-scale geographic and phenological variation in insect biomass and abundance has not been studied well, and it is a major source of controversy in previous analyses of insect declines that have aggregated studies from different locations and time periods. Our study illustrates that large-scale predictions about changes in insect populations, and their causes, will need to incorporate regional and taxonomic differences in the response to temperature.

Global human influence maps reveal clear opportunities in conserving Earth's remaining intact terrestrial ecosystems.

Leading up to the Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of the Parties 15, there is momentum around setting bold conservation targets. Yet, it remains unclear how much of Earth's land area remains without significant human influence and where this land is located. We compare four recent global maps of human influences across Earth's land, Anthromes, Global Human Modification, Human Footprint and Low Impact Areas, to answer these questions. Despite using various methodologies and data, these different spatial assessments independently estimate similar percentages of the Earth's terrestrial surface as having very low (20%-34%) and low (48%-56%) human influence. Three out of four spatial assessments agree on 46% of the non-permanent ice- or snow-covered land as having low human influence. However, much of the very low and low influence portions of the planet are comprised of cold (e.g., boreal forests, montane grasslands and tundra) or arid (e.g., deserts) landscapes. Only four biomes (boreal forests, deserts, temperate coniferous forests and tundra) have a majority of datasets agreeing that at least half of their area has very low human influence. More concerning, <1% of temperate grasslands, tropical coniferous forests and tropical dry forests have very low human influence across most datasets, and tropical grasslands, mangroves and montane grasslands also have <1% of land identified as very low influence across all datasets. These findings suggest that about half of Earth's terrestrial surface has relatively low human influence and offers opportunities for proactive conservation actions to retain the last intact ecosystems on the planet. However, though the relative abundance of ecosystem areas with low human influence varies widely by biome, conserving these last intact areas should be a high priority before they are completely lost.

Global areas of low human impact ('Low Impact Areas') and fragmentation of the natural world.

Habitat loss and fragmentation due to human activities is the leading cause of the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Protected areas are the primary response to this challenge and are the cornerstone of biodiversity conservation efforts. Roughly 15% of land is currently protected although there is momentum to dramatically raise protected area targets towards 50%. But, how much land remains in a natural state? We answer this critical question by using open-access, frequently updated data sets on terrestrial human impacts to create a new categorical map of global human influence ('Low Impact Areas') at a 1 km2 resolution. We found that 56% of the terrestrial surface, minus permanent ice and snow, currently has low human impact. This suggests that increased protected area targets could be met in areas minimally impacted by people, although there is substantial variation across ecoregions and biomes. While habitat loss is well documented, habitat fragmentation and differences in fragmentation rates between biomes has received little attention. Low Impact Areas uniquely enabled us to calculate global fragmentation rates across biomes, and we compared these to an idealized globe with no human-caused fragmentation. The land in Low Impact Areas is heavily fragmented, compromised by reduced patch size and core area, and exposed to edge effects. Tropical dry forests and temperate grasslands are the world's most impacted biomes. We demonstrate that when habitat fragmentation is considered in addition to habitat loss, the world's species, ecosystems and associated services are in worse condition than previously reported.

The distribution and numbers of cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) in southern Africa.

Assessing the numbers and distribution of threatened species is a central challenge in conservation, often made difficult because the species of concern are rare and elusive. For some predators, this may be compounded by their being sparsely distributed over large areas. Such is the case with the cheetah Acinonyx jubatus. The IUCN Red List process solicits comments, is democratic, transparent, widely-used, and has recently assessed the species. Here, we present additional methods to that process and provide quantitative approaches that may afford greater detail and a benchmark against which to compare future assessments. The cheetah poses challenges, but also affords unique opportunities. It is photogenic, allowing the compilation of thousands of crowd-sourced data. It is also persecuted for killing livestock, enabling estimation of local population densities from the numbers persecuted. Documented instances of persecution in areas with known human and livestock density mean that these data can provide an estimate of where the species may or may not occur in areas without observational data. Compilations of extensive telemetry data coupled with nearly 20,000 additional observations from 39 sources show that free-ranging cheetahs were present across approximately 789,700 km2 of Namibia, Botswana, South Africa, and Zimbabwe (56%, 22%, 12% and 10% respectively) from 2010 to 2016, with an estimated adult population of 3,577 animals. We identified a further 742,800 km2 of potential cheetah habitat within the study region with low human and livestock densities, where another ∼3,250 cheetahs may occur. Unlike many previous estimates, we make the data available and provide explicit information on exactly where cheetahs occur, or are unlikely to occur. We stress the value of gathering data from public sources though these data were mostly from well-visited protected areas. There is a contiguous, transboundary population of cheetah in southern Africa, known to be the largest in the world. We suggest that this population is more threatened than believed due to the concentration of about 55% of free-ranging individuals in two ecoregions. This area overlaps with commercial farmland with high persecution risk; adult cheetahs were removed at the rate of 0.3 individuals per 100 km2 per year. Our population estimate for confirmed cheetah presence areas is 11% lower than the IUCN's current assessment for the same region, lending additional support to the recent call for the up-listing of this species from vulnerable to endangered status.

Relative effectiveness of selected preenrichment media for the detection of Salmonella from leafy green produce and herbs.

Four buffered preenrichment media (BAX® System MP Media (BAX)), Universal Preenrichment Broth (UPB), modified Buffered Peptone Water (mBPW), and Buffered Peptone Water (BPW)) were compared with lactose broth (LB) in the Bacteriological Analytical Manual's (BAM) Salmonella culture method for the analysis of 9 leafy green produce and herb types. Artificially contaminated test portions were pre-enriched in each medium and the results were analyzed statistically using Fisher's Exact 2-tailed F test (p < 0.05) with pairwise comparisons. There was no difference in recovery of Salmonella from curly parsley and basil among the five media (p > 0.05). UPB was consistently among the most effective media for recovery of Salmonella from the nine produce types; however, S. Typhimurium and S. Newport were isolated from cabbage more frequently with mBPW than with UPB (p < 0.05). Comparisons of the results among the preenrichment media from all experimental trials, with leafy green produce and herbs, demonstrate that Salmonella is more effectively detected and isolated using buffered enrichments than with the currently recommended LB (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences among the buffered preenrichments for the detection of Salmonella-positive test portions of the produce tested (BAX (160 Salmonella-positive test portions/480 test portions), UPB (176/480), mBPW (184/480), BPW (169/480), LB (128/480))(p > 0.05).

The global decline of cheetah Acinonyx jubatus and what it means for conservation.

Establishing and maintaining protected areas (PAs) are key tools for biodiversity conservation. However, this approach is insufficient for many species, particularly those that are wide-ranging and sparse. The cheetah Acinonyx jubatus exemplifies such a species and faces extreme challenges to its survival. Here, we show that the global population is estimated at ∼7,100 individuals and confined to 9% of its historical distributional range. However, the majority of current range (77%) occurs outside of PAs, where the species faces multiple threats. Scenario modeling shows that, where growth rates are suppressed outside PAs, extinction rates increase rapidly as the proportion of population protected declines. Sensitivity analysis shows that growth rates within PAs have to be high if they are to compensate for declines outside. Susceptibility of cheetah to rapid decline is evidenced by recent rapid contraction in range, supporting an uplisting of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List threat assessment to endangered. Our results are applicable to other protection-reliant species, which may be subject to systematic underestimation of threat when there is insufficient information outside PAs. Ultimately, conserving many of these species necessitates a paradigm shift in conservation toward a holistic approach that incentivizes protection and promotes sustainable human-wildlife coexistence across large multiple-use landscapes.

Leopard (Panthera pardus) status, distribution, and the research efforts across its range.

The leopard's (Panthera pardus) broad geographic range, remarkable adaptability, and secretive nature have contributed to a misconception that this species might not be severely threatened across its range. We find that not only are several subspecies and regional populations critically endangered but also the overall range loss is greater than the average for terrestrial large carnivores. To assess the leopard's status, we compile 6,000 records at 2,500 locations from over 1,300 sources on its historic (post 1750) and current distribution. We map the species across Africa and Asia, delineating areas where the species is confirmed present, is possibly present, is possibly extinct or is almost certainly extinct. The leopard now occupies 25-37% of its historic range, but this obscures important differences between subspecies. Of the nine recognized subspecies, three (P. p. pardus, fusca, and saxicolor) account for 97% of the leopard's extant range while another three (P. p. orientalis, nimr, and japonensis) have each lost as much as 98% of their historic range. Isolation, small patch sizes, and few remaining patches further threaten the six subspecies that each have less than 100,000 km(2) of extant range. Approximately 17% of extant leopard range is protected, although some endangered subspecies have far less. We found that while leopard research was increasing, research effort was primarily on the subspecies with the most remaining range whereas subspecies that are most in need of urgent attention were neglected.

Evaluation and comparison of rapid methods for the detection of Salmonella in naturally contaminated pine nuts using different pre enrichment media.

Foodborne outbreaks, involving pine nuts and peanut butter, illustrate the need to rapidly detect Salmonella in low moisture foods. However, the current Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM) culture method for Salmonella, using lactose broth (LB) as a pre enrichment medium, has not reliably supported real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) assays for certain foods. We evaluated two qPCR assays in LB and four other pre enrichment media: buffered peptone water (BPW), modified BPW (mBPW), Universal Pre enrichment broth (UPB), and BAX(®) MP media to detect Salmonella in naturally-contaminated pine nuts (2011 outbreak). A four-way comparison among culture method, Pathatrix(®) Auto, VIDAS(®) Easy SLM, and qPCR was conducted. Automated DNA extraction techniques were compared with manual extraction methods (boiling or InstaGene™). There were no significant differences (P > 0.05) among the five pre enrichment media for pine nuts using the culture method. While both qPCR assays produced significantly (P ≤ 0.05) higher false negatives in 24 h pre enriched LB than in the other four media, they were as sensitive as the culture method in BPW, mBPW, UPB, and BAX media. The VIDAS Easy and qPCR were equivalent; Pathatrix was the least effective method. The Automatic PrepSEQ™ DNA extraction, using 1000 µL of pre enrichment, was as effective as manual extraction methods.

Recovery of Salmonella from internally and externally contaminated whole tomatoes using several different sample preparation procedures.

Studies were conducted to determine the relative effectiveness of whole soak [current Bacteriological Analytical Manual-(BAM) Salmonella method], quarter, stomach, and blend methods for the recovery of Salmonella organisms from internally and externally contaminated tomatoes. Tomatoes were subjected to three inoculation methods: surface inoculation, internal inoculation by injection, and immersion with single Salmonella serovars. The inoculation levels ranged from 1 to 100 CFU/tomato for surface and injection inoculation or 1 to 100 CFU/mL for immersion inoculation. Tomatoes were held for 3 days after inoculation at 2-6 degrees C prior to initiation of analysis. Contaminated tomatoes were soaked, quartered, stomached, and blended in appropriate portions of Universal Pre-enrichment broth, and incubated for 24 h at 35 +/- 2 degrees C. The BAM Salmonella culture method was followed thereafter, and tomatoes were treated as a low-microbial-load food. The stomaching procedure was significantly (P < 0.05) more effective than the whole soak procedure for recovery of internalized Salmonella from tomatoes (by injection). The blending procedure was arithmetically superior to the stomaching procedure for detection of internalized Salmonella from tomatoes (by immersion). The blending procedure showed the same effectiveness as the whole soak procedure for the detection of Salmonella on tomato surfaces. Comparisons between test portion-to-broth ratios (weight to volume) showed that a 1:3 test portion-to-broth ratio had a better buffering capacity for blended tomatoes than a 1:1 test portion-to-broth ratio. It is recommended that the current whole soak BAM tomato sample preparation procedure be replaced with a blending procedure and a 1:3 test portion-to-broth ratio.