Generation of reproductively mature offspring from the endangered green and golden bell frog Litoria aurea using cryopreserved spermatozoa.

Amphibians are becoming increasingly reliant on captive breeding programs for continued survival. Assisted reproductive technologies including gamete cryopreservation and IVF can help reduce costs of breeding programs, provide insurance against extinction and assist genetic rescue in wild populations. However, the use of these technologies to produce reproductively mature offspring has only been demonstrated in a few non-model species. We aimed to optimise sperm cryopreservation in the threatened frog Litoria aurea and generate mature offspring from frozen-thawed spermatozoa by IVF. We tested three concentrations (1.4, 2.1 and 2.8M) of the cryoprotectants dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO) and glycerol with 0.3M sucrose. Using DMSO was more likely to result in recovery of sperm motility, vitality and acrosome integrity than glycerol, regardless of concentration, with forward progressive motility being most sensitive to damage. The lowest concentrations of 1.4 and 2.1M provided the best protection regardless of cryoprotectant type. Spermatozoa cryopreserved in 2.1M DMSO outperformed spermatozoa cryopreserved in equivalent concentrations of glycerol in terms of their ability to fertilise ova, resulting in higher rates of embryos hatching and several individuals reaching sexual maturity. We have demonstrated that sperm cryopreservation and subsequent offspring generation via IVF is a feasible conservation tool for L. aurea and other threatened amphibians.

Epigenetic differences at the HTR2A locus in progressive multiple sclerosis patients.

The pathology of progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) is poorly understood. We have previously assessed DNA methylation in the CD4+ T cells of relapsing-remitting (RR) MS patients compared to healthy controls and identified differentially methylated regions (DMRs) in HLA-DRB1 and RNF39. This study aimed to investigate the DNA methylation profiles of the CD4+ T cells of progressive MS patients. DNA methylation was measured in two separate case/control cohorts using the Illumina 450K/EPIC arrays and data was analysed with the Chip Analysis Methylation Pipeline (ChAMP). Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were assessed using the Illumina Human OmniExpress24 arrays and analysed using PLINK. Expression was assessed using the Illumina HT12 array and analysed in R using a combination of Limma and Illuminaio. We identified three DMRs at HTR2A, SLC17A9 and HDAC4 that were consistent across both cohorts. The DMR at HTR2A is located within the bounds of a haplotype block; however, the DMR remained significant after accounting for SNPs in the region. No expression changes were detected in any DMRs. HTR2A is differentially methylated in progressive MS independent of genotype. This differential methylation is not evident in RRMS, making it a potential biomarker of progressive disease.

Deconstructing compassionate conservation.

Compassionate conservation focuses on 4 tenets: first, do no harm; individuals matter; inclusivity of individual animals; and peaceful coexistence between humans and animals. Recently, compassionate conservation has been promoted as an alternative to conventional conservation philosophy. We believe examples presented by compassionate conservationists are deliberately or arbitrarily chosen to focus on mammals; inherently not compassionate; and offer ineffective conservation solutions. Compassionate conservation arbitrarily focuses on charismatic species, notably large predators and megaherbivores. The philosophy is not compassionate when it leaves invasive predators in the environment to cause harm to vastly more individuals of native species or uses the fear of harm by apex predators to terrorize mesopredators. Hindering the control of exotic species (megafauna, predators) in situ will not improve the conservation condition of the majority of biodiversity. The positions taken by so-called compassionate conservationists on particular species and on conservation actions could be extended to hinder other forms of conservation, including translocations, conservation fencing, and fertility control. Animal welfare is incredibly important to conservation, but ironically compassionate conservation does not offer the best welfare outcomes to animals and is often ineffective in achieving conservation goals. Consequently, compassionate conservation may threaten public and governmental support for conservation because of the limited understanding of conservation problems by the general public.

Deconstrucción de la Conservación Compasiva Resumen La conservación compasiva se enfoca en cuatro principios: no causar daño; los individuos importan; la integración de los animales individualmente; y la coexistencia pacífica entre los humanos u los animales. Recientemente, la conservación compasiva ha sido promovida como una alternativa a la filosofía convencional de la conservación. Creemos que los ejemplos presentados por los conservacionistas compasivos han sido elegidos arbitraria o deliberadamente por estar enfocados en los mamíferos; por ser inherentes y no compasivos; y por ofrecer soluciones de conservación poco efectivas. La conservación compasiva se enfoca arbitrariamente en las especies carismáticas, principalmente los grandes depredadores y los megaherbívoros. La filosofía no es compasiva cuando deja que los depredadores invasores dentro del ambiente causen daño a un vasto número de individuos nativos o usa el miedo al daño por superdepredadores para aterrorizar a los mesodepredadores. El entorpecimiento del control de especies exóticas (megafauna, depredadores) in situ no mejorará las condiciones de conservación de la mayoría de la biodiversidad, incluso si los conservacionistas compasivos no dañan a los individuos exóticos. Las posiciones que toman los llamados conservacionistas compasivos sobre especies particulares y sobre las acciones de conservación podrían extenderse para entorpecer otros tipos de conservación, incluyendo las reubicaciones, el encercado para la conservación y el control de la fertilidad. El bienestar animal es increíblemente importante para la conservación e irónicamente, la conservación compasiva no ofrece los mejores resultados de bienestar para los animales y comúnmente es poco efectiva en el logro de los objetivos de conservación. Como consecuencia, la conservación compasiva puede poner en peligro el apoyo público y del gobierno que tiene la conservación debido al entendimiento poco limitado que tiene el público general sobre los problemas de conservación.