Turning a lost reef ecosystem into a national restoration program.

Achieving a sustainable socioecological future now requires large-scale environmental repair across legislative borders. Yet, enabling large-scale conservation is complicated by policy-making processes that are disconnected from socioeconomic interests, multiple sources of knowledge, and differing applications of policy. We considered how a multidisciplinary approach to marine habitat restoration generated the scientific evidence base, community support, and funding needed to begin the restoration of a forgotten, functionally extinct shellfish reef ecosystem. The key actors came together as a multidisciplinary community of researchers, conservation practitioners, recreational fisher communities, and government bodies that collaborated across sectors to rediscover Australia's lost shellfish reefs and communicate the value of its restoration. Actions undertaken to build a case for large-scale marine restoration included synthesizing current knowledge on Australian shellfish reefs and their historical decline, using this history to tell a compelling story to spark public and political interest, integrating restoration into government policy, and rallying local support through community engagement. Clearly articulating the social, economic, and environmental business case for restoration led to state and national funding for reef restoration to meet diverse sustainability goals (e.g., enhanced biodiversity and fisheries productivity) and socioeconomic goals (e.g., job creation and recreational opportunities). A key lesson learned was the importance of aligning project goals with public and industry interests so that projects could address multiple political obligations. This process culminated in Australia's largest marine restoration initiative and shows that solutions for large-scale ecosystem repair can rapidly occur when socially valued science acts on political opportunities.

Transformación de un Ecosistema Arrecifal Perdido en un Programa Nacional de Restauración Resumen Actualmente se requiere una reparación ambiental a gran escala que atraviese fronteras legislativas para lograr un futuro socio-ecológico sustentable. Aun así, habilitar la conservación a gran escala es complicado debido a los procesos de elaboración de políticas que están desconectadas de los intereses socio-económicos, las múltiples fuentes de conocimiento y las diferentes aplicaciones de las políticas. Consideramos cómo una estrategia multidisciplinaria para la restauración de hábitats marinos generó una base de evidencia científica, apoyo comunitario y el financiamiento necesario para así iniciar la restauración de un ecosistema arrecifal de conchas funcionalmente extinto. Los actores clave formaron una comunidad multidisciplinaria de investigadores, practicantes de la conservación, comunidades de pescadores recreativos y órganos gubernamentales que colaboró con varios sectores para redescubrir los arrecifes perdidos de Australia y comunicó el valor de su restauración. Las acciones realizadas para armar el caso para la restauración marina a gran escala incluyeron la síntesis del conocimiento actual sobre los arrecifes de conchas en Australia y su declinación histórica, el uso de esta historia para contar una narración convincente que active el interés público y político, la integración de la restauración a la política gubernamental y la movilización del apoyo local por medio de la participación comunitaria. Claramente, la articulación del caso del negocio social, económico y ambiental para la restauración llevó al financiamiento estatal y nacional para la restauración arrecifal a cumplir diversos objetivos socio-económicos (p. ej.: creación de empleos, oportunidades recreativas) y de restauración (p. ej.: una productividad realzada de la biodiversidad y las pesquerías). Una lección clave que aprendimos fue lo importante que es alinear los objetivos del proyecto con los intereses públicos y de la industria, de tal manera que los proyectos aborden las múltiples obligaciones políticas. Este proceso culminó con la iniciativa de restauración marina más grande en Australia y demuestra que las soluciones para la reparación de los ecosistemas a gran escala pueden ocurrir rápidamente cuando la ciencia con valor social actúa sobre las oportunidades políticas.

Timing of clinical improvement and symptom resolution in the treatment of major depressive disorder. A replication of findings with the use of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of Hypericum perforatum versus fluoxetine.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to assess for the relationship between timing of clinical improvement and resolution of depressive symptoms during the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). Thirty-nine MDD outpatients who responded following a 12-week, double-blind study comparing Hypericum perforatum, fluoxetine or placebo were included in the analysis. METHODS: Onset of clinical improvement was defined as a 25% decrease in 17-item Hamilton Depression Scale (HDRS-17) scores that was not followed by a subsequent worsening of symptoms. Controlling for baseline symptom severity, we then assessed for the relationship between timing of clinical improvement and depressive symptom severity at endpoint. RESULTS: Among responders, earlier clinical improvement predicted lower HDRS-17 scores at week 12 (p = 0013). This was also true of responders who received active treatment (n = 29, p = 0.0113) but not placebo responders (n = 10; p > 0.05). Finally, patients with an early onset of clinical improvement (occurring during the first 2 weeks) had lower week 12 HDRS-17 scores than patients with a late onset of clinical improvement (p = 0.0404). CONCLUSION: In the present work, earlier as well as early clinical improvement during treatment is predictive of greater symptom resolution at endpoint among responders. This was replicated among patients who received active treatment (either hypericum or fluoxetine) but not placebo.

Evaluation of short-term fallowing as a strategy for the management of recurring organic enrichment under salmon cages.

Rotation of cages within fish farm leases and the subsequent fallowing of areas of seabed is commonly used to allow recovery of infaunal communities following periods of organic enrichment. To investigate the effect of different background environmental conditions on recovery response, two Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) fish farm sites in southeast Tasmania were sampled over two commercial fallowing cycles. Despite similar stocking levels and feed input there were significant differences in the way in which sediment at each farm responded to the cessation of fish stocking. Sediments at both farms showed some improvement in the community structure over a three month fallow period, but the community structure only recovered to that present before stocking not to that at the reference sites. The similarity of the impact sites to the reference sites increased from ca. 25% to 31% at one site and 11% to 27% at the other after fallowing. Rate and extent of recovery were affected by farm location, initial impact of the sediments, and length of fallow period. Initial recovery was faster at the more sheltered site than at the more exposed site, possibly reflecting differences in environmental resilience with the more sheltered location better able to assimilate organic inputs. Accordingly general fallowing management protocols may need to be adapted to reflect differences between sites. The findings of this study suggest that the recovery response of benthic communities can be predicted once baseline conditions are understood.

Assessment of long term change in sediment condition after organic enrichment: defining recovery.

Sediment condition at an Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) culture site in S.E. Tasmania, Australia was evaluated to determine the rate and extent of recovery after removal of farmed fish. By local standards the cage sediment at the start of this survey was markedly degraded but comparison with results from impact studies in Scotland, Canada and Norway suggests that the sediments were considerably less impacted than in northern temperate areas. The impact at the cages diminished rapidly with both time and distance; after only 2 months conditions were markedly improved. The macrobenthos indicated a slower recovery than chemical measures, after 36 months the benthic faunal community structure under the cages still differed from reference conditions even though other sediment measures had recovered. This study highlighted two other key issues in relation to monitoring and management of sediment recovery. First, techniques used to determine impact may not be appropriate for evaluation of recovery. Second, establishment of local baseline standards is extremely important to ensure appropriate evaluation of both impact and recovery.