Parasitoids indicate major climate-induced shifts in arctic communities.

Climatic impacts are especially pronounced in the Arctic, which as a region is warming twice as fast as the rest of the globe. Here, we investigate how mean climatic conditions and rates of climatic change impact parasitoid insect communities in 16 localities across the Arctic. We focus on parasitoids in a widespread habitat, Dryas heathlands, and describe parasitoid community composition in terms of larval host use (i.e., parasitoid use of herbivorous Lepidoptera vs. pollinating Diptera) and functional groups differing in their closeness of host associations (koinobionts vs. idiobionts). Of the latter, we expect idiobionts-as being less fine-tuned to host development-to be generally less tolerant to cold temperatures, since they are confined to attacking hosts pupating and overwintering in relatively exposed locations. To further test our findings, we assess whether similar climatic variables are associated with host abundances in a 22 year time series from Northeast Greenland. We find sites which have experienced a temperature rise in summer while retaining cold winters to be dominated by parasitoids of Lepidoptera, with the reverse being true for the parasitoids of Diptera. The rate of summer temperature rise is further associated with higher levels of herbivory, suggesting higher availability of lepidopteran hosts and changes in ecosystem functioning. We also detect a matching signal over time, as higher summer temperatures, coupled with cold early winter soils, are related to high herbivory by lepidopteran larvae, and to declines in the abundance of dipteran pollinators. Collectively, our results suggest that in parts of the warming Arctic, Dryas is being simultaneously exposed to increased herbivory and reduced pollination. Our findings point to potential drastic and rapid consequences of climate change on multitrophic-level community structure and on ecosystem functioning and highlight the value of collaborative, systematic sampling effort.

Sequencing of VDJ genes in Lepus americanus confirms a correlation between VHn expression and the leporid species continent of origin.

Leporid VH genes used in the generation of their primary antibody repertoire exhibit highly divergent lineages. For the European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) four VHa lineages have been described, the a1, a2, a3 and a4. Hares (Lepus spp.) and cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus) express one VHa lineage each, the a2L and the a5, respectively, along with a more ancient lineage, the Lepus spp. sL and S. floridanus sS. Both the European rabbit and the Lepus europaeus use a third lineage, VHn, in a low proportion of their VDJ rearrangements. The VHn genes are a conserved ancestral polymorphism that is being maintained in the leporid genome.Their usage in a low proportion of VDJ rearrangements by both European rabbit and L. europaeus but not S. floridanus has been argued to be a remnant of an ancient European leporid immunologic response to pathogens. To address this hypothesis, in this study we sequenced VDJ rearranged genes for another North American leporid, L. americanus. Our results show that L. americanus expressed these genes less frequently and in a highly modified fashion compared to the European Lepus species. Our results suggest that the American leporid species use a different VH repertoire than the European species which may be related with an immune adaptation to different environmental conditions, such as different pathogenic agents.

The evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?

Peer review is pivotal to science and academia, as it represents a widely accepted strategy for ensuring quality control in scientific research. Yet, the peer-review system is poorly adapted to recent changes in the discipline and current societal needs. We provide historical context for the cultural lag that governs peer review that has eventually led to the system's current structural weaknesses (voluntary review, unstandardized review criteria, decentralized process). We argue that some current attempts to upgrade or otherwise modify the peer-review system are merely sticking-plaster solutions to these fundamental flaws, and therefore are unlikely to resolve them in the long term. We claim that for peer review to be relevant, effective, and contemporary with today's publishing demands across scientific disciplines, its main components need to be redesigned. We propose directional changes that are likely to improve the quality, rigour, and timeliness of peer review, and thereby ensure that this critical process serves the community it was created for.