University of Stirling

About: University of Stirling is a education organization based out in Stirling, Stirling, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Polyunsaturated fatty acid. The organization has 7722 authors who have published 20549 publications receiving 732940 citations. The organization is also known as: Stirling University.

Catastrophic ape decline in western equatorial Africa

Abstract: Because rapidly expanding human populations have devastated gorilla (Gorilla gorilla) and common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) habitats in East and West Africa, the relatively intact forests of western equatorial Africa have been viewed as the last stronghold of African apes1. Gabon and the Republic of Congo alone are thought to hold roughly 80% of the world's gorillas2 and most of the common chimpanzees1. Here we present survey results conservatively indicating that ape populations in Gabon declined by more than half between 1983 and 2000. The primary cause of the decline in ape numbers during this period was commercial hunting, facilitated by the rapid expansion of mechanized logging. Furthermore, Ebola haemorrhagic fever is currently spreading through ape populations in Gabon and Congo and now rivals hunting as a threat to apes. Gorillas and common chimpanzees should be elevated immediately to ‘critically endangered’ status. Without aggressive investments in law enforcement, protected area management and Ebola prevention, the next decade will see our closest relatives pushed to the brink of extinction.

The relationships between stocking density and welfare in farmed rainbow trout

Abstract: There is increasing public, governmental and commercial interest in the welfare of intensively farmed fish and stocking density has been highlighted as an area of particular concern. Here we draw scientific attention and debate to this emerging research field by reviewing the evidence for effects of density on rainbow trout. Although no explicit reference to ‘welfare’ has been made, there are 43 studies which have examined the effects of density on production and physiological parameters of rainbow trout. Increasing stocking density does not appear to cause prolonged crowding stress in rainbow trout. However, commonly reported effects of increasing density are reductions in food conversion efficiency, nutritional condition and growth, and an increase in fin erosion. Such changes are indicative of a reduced welfare status—although the magnitude of the effects has tended to be dependent upon study-specific conditions. Systematic observations on large scale commercial farms are therefore required, rather than extrapolation of these mainly small-scale experimental findings. There is dispute as to the cause of the observed effects of increasing density, with water quality deterioration and/or an increase in aggressive behaviour being variously proposed. Both causes can theoretically generate the observed effects of increasing density, and the relative contribution of the two causes may depend upon the specific conditions. However, documentation of the relationship between density and the effects of aggressive behaviour at relevant commercial densities is lacking. Consequently only inferential evidence exists that aggressive behaviour generates the observed effects of increasing density, whereas there is direct experimental evidence that water quality degradation is responsible. Nevertheless, there are contradictory recommendations in the literature for key water quality parameters to ensure adequate welfare status. The potential for welfare to be detrimentally affected by non-aggressive behavioural interactions (abrasion, collision, obstruction) and low densities (due to excessive aggressive behaviour and a poor feeding response) have been largely overlooked. Legislation directly limiting stocking density is likely to be unworkable, and a more practical option might be to prescribe acceptable levels of water quality, health, nutritional condition and behavioural indicators.

Long term maintenance of weight loss with non-surgical interventions in obese adults: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials

Abstract: Objective To systematically review and describe currently available approaches to supporting maintenance of weight loss in obese adults and to assess the evidence for the effectiveness of these interventions. Design Systematic review with meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Study selection Studies were identified through to January 2014. Randomised trials of interventions to maintain weight loss provided to initially obese adults (aged ≥18) after weight loss of ≥5% body weight with long term (≥12 months) follow-up of weight change (main outcome) were included. Study appraisal and synthesis Potential studies were screened independently and in duplicate; study characteristics and outcomes were extracted. Meta-analyses were conducted to estimate the effects of interventions on weight loss maintenance with the inverse variance method and a random effects model. Results are presented as mean differences in weight change, with 95% confidence intervals. Results 45 trials involving 7788 individuals were included. Behavioural interventions focusing on both food intake and physical activity resulted in an average difference of −1.56 kg (95% confidence interval −2.27 to −0.86 kg; 25 comparisons, 2949 participants) in weight regain compared with controls at 12 months. Orlistat combined with behavioural interventions resulted in a −1.80 kg (−2.54 to −1.06; eight comparisons, 1738 participants) difference compared with placebo at 12 months. All orlistat studies reported higher frequencies of adverse gastrointestinal events in the experimental compared with placebo control groups. A dose-response relation for orlistat treatment was found, with 120 mg doses three times a day leading to greater weight loss maintenance (−2.34 kg, −3.03 to −1.65) compared with 60 mg and 30 mg three times a day (−0.70 kg, 95% confidence interval −1.92 to 0.52), P=0.02. Conclusions Behavioural interventions that deal with both diet and physical activity show small but significant benefits on weight loss maintenance.