Factors limiting the potential range expansion of lodgepole pine in Interior Alaska.

Understanding the factors influencing species range limits is increasingly crucial in anticipating migrations due to human-caused climate change. In the boreal biome, ongoing climate change and the associated increases in the rate, size, and severity of disturbances may alter the distributions of boreal tree species. Notably, Interior Alaska lacks native pine, a biogeographical anomaly that carries implications for ecosystem structure and function. The current range of lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) in the adjacent Yukon Territory may expand into Interior Alaska, particularly with human assistance. Evaluating the potential for pine expansion in Alaska requires testing constraints on range limits such as dispersal limitations, environmental tolerance limits, and positive or negative biotic interactions. In this study, we used field experiments with pine seeds and transplanted seedlings, complemented by model simulations, to assess the abiotic and biotic factors influencing lodgepole pine seedling establishment and growth after fire in Interior Alaska. We found that pine could successfully recruit, survive, grow, and reproduce across our broadly distributed network of experimental sites. Our results show that both mammalian herbivory and competition from native tree species are unlikely to constrain pine growth and that environmental conditions commonly found in Interior Alaska fall well within the tolerance limits for pine. If dispersal constraints are released, lodgepole pine could have a geographically expansive range in Alaska, and once established, its growth is sufficient to support pine-dominated stands. Given the impacts of lodgepole pine on ecosystem processes such as increases in timber production, carbon sequestration, landscape flammability, and reduced forage quality, natural or human-assisted migration of this species is likely to substantially alter responses of Alaskan forest ecosystems to climate change.

Selumetinib for children with neurofibromatosis type 1 and plexiform neurofibromas: A plain language summary of SPRINT.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes a publication about a study called SPRINT. The SPRINT study included 50 children with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and plexiform neurofibroma (PN) that could not be removed with surgery. PNs are tumors that grow along nerves and can cause various problems for children, such as pain, changes to appearance, and muscle weakness. In SPRINT, the study team wanted to learn whether a medication called selumetinib was able to shrink the PN caused by NF1 (also known as NF1-related PN), and if shrinking PNs helped relieve children of the problems caused by it. To assess how selumetinib might help, children had scans to measure the size of their PN, completed questionnaires, and had a variety of other tests done by their doctor. Their caregivers also completed questionnaires about their child. The children took selumetinib capsules twice a day on an empty stomach. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: The results showed that selumetinib was able to shrink the PN for most children (68%). The results also showed that the problems caused by the children's PNs mostly improved while on selumetinib treatment. SPRINT also showed that the side effects of selumetinib were mainly mild and could be managed by doctors. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Before SPRINT, there were not many treatment options for children with NF1 and PN as there were no medications that had been shown to shrink PN, and surgery was not always possible. SPRINT showed that this medication shrinks most PNs and could help children with NF1 and PN. In April 2020, selumetinib was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) because of the results of SPRINT. Selumetinib was the first and, as of February 2024, is the only medicine that can be prescribed by doctors to help children with NF1-related PN. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01362803 (SPRINT) (ClinicalTrials.gov).

The Impact of Gender on Physical Activity Preferences and Barriers in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVES: Current exercise recommendations for people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are based on research involving primarily young, fit male participants. Recent studies have shown possible differences between male and female blood glucose response to exercise, but little is known about whether these differences are sex-related (due to physiological differences between male and female participants) or gender-related (behavioural differences between men and women). METHODS: To better understand gender-based behavioural differences surrounding physical activity (PA), we asked men and women (n=10 each) with T1D to participate in semistructured interviews. Topics discussed included motivation and barriers to exercise, diabetes management strategies, and PA preferences (type, frequency, duration of exercise, etc). Interview transcripts were coded by 2 analysts before being grouped into themes. RESULTS: Six themes were identified impacting participants' PA experience: motivation, fear of hypoglycemia, time lost to T1D management, medical support for PA, the role of technology in PA accessibility, and desire for more community. Gender differences were found in motivations, medical support, and desire for more community. Women were more motivated by directional weight dissatisfaction, and men were more motivated to stay in shape. Men felt less supported by their health-care providers than women. Women more often preferred to exercise in groups, and sought more community surrounding T1D and PA. CONCLUSION: Although men and women with T1D experience similar barriers around PA, there are differences in motivation, desire for community, and perceived support from medical providers.

The Use of Hyaluronidase in Aesthetic Practice: A Comparative Study of Practitioner Usage in Elective and Emergency Situations.

BACKGROUND: Hyaluronic acids (HAs) continue to be the fillers of choice worldwide and their popularity is growing. Adverse events (AEs) are able to be resolved through the use of hyaluronidase (HYAL). However, routine HYAL use has been at issue due to perceived safety issues. OBJECTIVES: There are currently no guidelines on the use of HYAL in aesthetic practice, leading to variability in storage, preparation, skin testing, and beliefs concerning AEs. This manuscript interrogated the use of this agent in daily practice. METHODS: A 39-question survey concerning HYAL practice was completed by 264 healthcare practitioners: 244 from interrogated databases and 20 from the consensus panel. Answers from those in the database were compared to those of the consensus panel. RESULTS: Compared to the database group, the consensus group was more confident in the preparation of HYAL, kept reconstituted HYAL for longer, and was less likely to skin test for HYAL sensitivity and more likely to treat with HYAL in an emergency, even in those with a wasp or bee sting anaphylactic history. Ninety-two percent of all respondents had never observed an acute reaction to HYAL. Just over 1% of respondents had ever observed anaphylaxis. Five percent of practitioners reported longer-term adverse effects, including 3 respondents who reported loss of deep tissues. Consent before injecting HA for the possible requirement of HYAL was always obtained by 74% of practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Hyaluronidase would appear to be an essential agent for anyone injecting hyaluronic acid filler. However, there is an absence of evidence-based recommendations with respect to the concentration, dosing, and treatment intervals of HYAL, and these should ideally be available.