Assessing fishing and marine biodiversity changes using fishers' perceptions: the Spanish Mediterranean and Gulf of Cadiz case study.

BACKGROUND: The expansion of fishing activities has intensively transformed marine ecosystems worldwide. However, available time series do not frequently cover historical periods. METHODOLOGY: Fishers' perceptions were used to complement data and characterise changes in fishing activity and exploited ecosystems in the Spanish Mediterranean Sea and Gulf of Cadiz. Fishers' interviews were conducted in 27 fishing harbours of the area, and included 64 fishers from ages between 20 to >70 years old to capture the experiences and memories of various generations. Results are discussed in comparison with available independent information using stock assessments and international convention lists. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: According to fishers, fishing activity substantially evolved in the area with time, expanding towards deeper grounds and towards areas more distant from the coast. The maximum amount of catch ever caught and the weight of the largest species ever captured inversely declined with time. Fishers (70%) cited specific fishing grounds where depletion occurred. They documented ecological changes of marine biodiversity during the last half of the century: 94% reported the decline of commercially important fish and invertebrates and 61% listed species that could have been extirpated, with frequent mentions to cartilaginous fish. Declines and extirpations were in line with available quantitative evaluations from stock assessments and international conventions, and were likely linked to fishing impacts. Conversely, half of interviewed fishers claimed that several species had proliferated, such as cephalopods, jellyfish, and small-sized fish. These changes were likely related to trophic cascades due to fishing and due to climate change effects. The species composition of depletions, local extinctions and proliferations showed differences by region suggesting that regional dynamics are important when analysing biodiversity changes. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Using fishers' perceptions, fishing and ecological changes in the study area were documented. The recovery of local ecological knowledge provides valuable information complementing quantitative monitoring and evaluation surveys.

Expression of membrane-bound mucins (MUC1 and MUC4) and secreted mucins (MUC2, MUC5AC, MUC5B, MUC6 and MUC7) in mucoepidermoid carcinomas of salivary glands.

Mucins are glycoproteins normally synthesized by a variety of secretory epithelial cells. The aim of this study was to investigate the expression of mucins (MUC1, MUC2, MUC4, MUC5AC, MUCB, MUC6, MUC7) in mucoepidermoid carcinomas, the most frequent malignant tumor of salivary glands. Forty mucoepidermoid carcinomas and twenty-two normal salivary glands were studied for these mucins by immunohistochemistry from formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded material. Normal salivary glands frequently expressed MUC1 and MUC4, mainly in ductal cells; MUC5B and MUC7 stained mucous and serous acini respectively of submandibular and minor salivary glands; and MUC5AC and MUC2 were poorly detected in excretory ducts. All mucoepidermoid carcinomas expressed MUC1, and 38/40 tumors expressed MUC4. Both membrane-bound mucins stained membranes and cytoplasm of all cell types (epidermoid, intermediate, mucous, clear and columnar). MUC5AC and MUC5B stained glandular differentiated cells in most tumors (29/40 and 33/40 cases, respectively). MUC6 was positive in 13/40 tumors, and both MUC2 and MUC7 in only 2/40 tumors. The high expression of MUC1 was related to high histologic grades, high recurrence and metastasis rates and a shorter disease-free interval (P < 0.05). Conversely, MUC4 high expression was mainly related to low-grade tumors, lower recurrence rates and a longer disease-free interval (P < 0.05). In conclusion, mucoepidermoid carcinomas of salivary glands usually express MUC1, MUC4, MUC5AC and MUC5B; less frequently MUC6; and rarely MUC2 and MUC7. This mucin expression pattern can be useful for diagnostic purposes. Therefore, MUC1 expression is related to tumor progression and worse prognosis, whereas MUC4 expression is related to a better prognosis.