Satellites reveal Earth's seasonally shifting dust emission sources.

Establishing mineral dust impacts on Earth's systems requires numerical models of the dust cycle. Differences between dust optical depth (DOD) measurements and modelling the cycle of dust emission, atmospheric transport, and deposition of dust indicate large model uncertainty due partially to unrealistic model assumptions about dust emission frequency. Calibrating dust cycle models to DOD measurements typically in North Africa, are routinely used to reduce dust model magnitude. This calibration forces modelled dust emissions to match atmospheric DOD but may hide the correct magnitude and frequency of dust emission events at source, compensating biases in other modelled processes of the dust cycle. Therefore, it is essential to improve physically based dust emission modules. Here we use a global collation of satellite observations from previous studies of dust emission point source (DPS) dichotomous frequency data. We show that these DPS data have little-to-no relation with MODIS DOD frequency. We calibrate the albedo-based dust emission model using the frequency distribution of those DPS data. The global dust emission uncertainty constrained by DPS data (±3.8 kg m-2 y-1) provides a benchmark for dust emission model development. Our calibrated model results reveal much less global dust emission (29.1 ± 14.9 Tg y-1) than previous estimates, and show seasonally shifting dust emission predominance within and between hemispheres, as opposed to a persistent North African dust emission primacy widely interpreted from DOD measurements. Earth's largest dust emissions, proceed seasonally from East Asian deserts in boreal spring, to Middle Eastern and North African deserts in boreal summer and then Australian shrublands in boreal autumn-winter. This new analysis of dust emissions, from global sources of varying geochemical properties, have far-reaching implications for current and future dust-climate effects. For more reliable coupled representation of dust-climate projections, our findings suggest the need to re-evaluate dust cycle modelling and benefit from the albedo-based parameterisation.

Concomitant Treatment with Voriconazole and Flucloxacillin: A Combination to Avoid.

BACKGROUND: Voriconazole is an antifungal drug used as one of the first-line treatments for invasive aspergillosis. This drug is extensively metabolized, predominantly via cytochrome P450 enzymes. An interaction between flucloxacillin and voriconazole, leading to subtherapeutic voriconazole concentrations, has previously been reported. We aimed to demonstrate that flucloxacillin independently influences voriconazole exposure. METHODS: Patients from three Belgian hospitals, treated with a combination of voriconazole and flucloxacillin, were included in this retrospective study. Voriconazole concentrations were collected both in a timeframe with and without flucloxacillin co-treatment. Multivariate analyses were performed to study the independent effect of flucloxacillin treatment on voriconazole exposure and the possible influence of the flucloxacillin dose. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included in this study and 145 trough concentrations (51 with, and 94 without concomitant flucloxacillin treatment) were analyzed. The median (IQR) voriconazole trough concentration sampled during flucloxacillin co-treatment was 0.5 (0-1.8) mg/L, whereas samples without flucloxacillin co-treatment had a median (IQR) voriconazole trough concentration of 3.5 (1.7-5.1) mg/L (p = 0.002), while receiving similar voriconazole doses. Subtherapeutic concentrations (<1 mg/L) were observed in 69% and 7% of the samples with flucloxacillin co-treatment versus samples without flucloxacillin co-treatment, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study shows that flucloxacillin co-treatment independently decreases voriconazole exposure. Caution is needed when these two drugs are administered simultaneously.

Incorporating social dimensions in planning, managing and evaluating environmental projects.

Most conservation research aims to inform management of environmental challenges, but scientific evidence is used inconsistently in environmental programmes and practice. We used semi-structured retrospective interviews to ask 12 environmental scientists and 14 practitioners (land managers, park rangers, project managers and planners from natural resource management agencies) about factors that facilitated and hindered the use of scientific input during 15 environmental projects. We used the common factors from interviews to develop a process model describing how scientific input informs programmes and practice. The model emphasised the social dimensions of environmental projects which are often overlooked when these projects are planned, managed and evaluated. It highlighted the pivotal role of relationships in achieving outcomes which include creating practical, useful products and tools, and robust, credible and trusted evidence. By clarifying the process of how scientific knowledge informs environmental programmes and practice, the model enabled us to provide guidance about how to undertake transdisciplinary work and suggest indicators to track progress. Although derived from environmental projects, the guidance is likely to apply to other fields, particularly where different disciplines work together.

A 68-year old male presenting with rhabdomyolysis-associated acute kidney injury following concomitant use of elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and pravastatin/fenofibrate: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: We present what we believe to be the first case in the literature of rhabdomyolysis-induced renal failure caused by a probable drug interaction between elvitegravir/cobicistat/emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF) and pravastatin/fenofibrate. CASE PRESENTATION: A 68-year old Caucasian man presented with progressive pain in both legs two weeks after commencing treatment with EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF. He was found to have biochemical evidence of rhabdomyolysis and acute renal failure. CONCLUSION: We emphasize the need for post marketing surveillance of adverse effects of new products. Pharmacokinetic studies are necessary to investigate the levels of pravastatin in patients taking COBI and fenofibrate with and without other comorbidities. Meanwhile, we suggest that creatine kinase levels should be monitored and patients advised to report myalgias when using concomitant EVG/COBI/FTC/TDF and pravastatin/fenofibrate. This case serves as an important reminder to use estimated glomerular filtration rates rather than serum creatinine levels when choosing new medications. If potentially nephrotoxic combinations are started in patients with borderline estimated glomerular filtration rates, it may be prudent to check these filtration rates more frequently than usual. In patients with reduced estimated glomerular filtration rates, potentially nephrotoxic combinations should be avoided wherever possible.

Soil organic carbon dust emission: an omitted global source of atmospheric CO2.

Soil erosion redistributes soil organic carbon (SOC) within terrestrial ecosystems, to the atmosphere and oceans. Dust export is an essential component of the carbon (C) and carbon dioxide (CO(2)) budget because wind erosion contributes to the C cycle by removing selectively SOC from vast areas and transporting C dust quickly offshore; augmenting the net loss of C from terrestrial systems. However, the contribution of wind erosion to rates of C release and sequestration is poorly understood. Here, we describe how SOC dust emission is omitted from national C accounting, is an underestimated source of CO(2) and may accelerate SOC decomposition. Similarly, long dust residence times in the unshielded atmospheric environment may considerably increase CO(2) emission. We developed a first approximation to SOC enrichment for a well-established dust emission model and quantified SOC dust emission for Australia (5.83 Tg CO(2)-e yr(-1)) and Australian agricultural soils (0.4 Tg CO(2)-e yr(-1)). These amount to underestimates for CO(2) emissions of ≈10% from combined C pools in Australia (year = 2000), ≈5% from Australian Rangelands and ≈3% of Australian Agricultural Soils by Kyoto Accounting. Northern hemisphere countries with greater dust emission than Australia are also likely to have much larger SOC dust emission. Therefore, omission of SOC dust emission likely represents a considerable underestimate from those nations' C accounts. We suggest that the omission of SOC dust emission from C cycling and C accounting is a significant global source of uncertainty. Tracing the fate of wind-eroded SOC in the dust cycle is therefore essential to quantify the release of CO(2) from SOC dust to the atmosphere and the contribution of SOC deposition to downwind C sinks.