scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 2054-5703

Royal Society Open Science 

Royal Society
About: Royal Society Open Science is an academic journal published by Royal Society. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Medicine & Population. It has an ISSN identifier of 2054-5703. It is also open access. Over the lifetime, 5201 publications have been published receiving 84112 citations.

Papers published on a yearly basis

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is shown that deep-sea sediments are a likely sink for microplastics, and the dominance of microfibres points to a previously underreported and unsampled plastic fraction.
Abstract: Marine debris, mostly consisting of plastic, is a global problem, negatively impacting wildlife, tourism and shipping. However, despite the durability of plastic, and the exponential increase in its production, monitoring data show limited evidence of concomitant increasing concentrations in marine habitats. There appears to be a considerable proportion of the manufactured plastic that is unaccounted for in surveys tracking the fate of environmental plastics. Even the discovery of widespread accumulation of microscopic fragments (microplastics) in oceanic gyres and shallow water sediments is unable to explain the missing fraction. Here, we show that deep-sea sediments are a likely sink for microplastics. Microplastic, in the form of fibres, was up to four orders of magnitude more abundant (per unit volume) in deep-sea sediments from the Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea and Indian Ocean than in contaminated sea-surface waters. Our results show evidence for a large and hitherto unknown repository of microplastics. The dominance of microfibres points to a previously underreported and unsampled plastic fraction. Given the vastness of the deep sea and the prevalence of microplastics at all sites we investigated, the deep-sea floor appears to provide an answer to the question-where is all the plastic?

1,292 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A clear link between susceptibility to misinformation and both vaccine hesitancy and a reduced likelihood to comply with health guidance measures is demonstrated, and interventions which aim to improve critical thinking and trust in science may be a promising avenue for future research.
Abstract: Misinformation about COVID-19 is a major threat to public health. Using five national samples from the UK (n = 1050 and n = 1150), Ireland (n = 700), the USA (n = 700), Spain (n = 700) and Mexico (n = 700), we examine predictors of belief in the most common statements about the virus that contain misinformation. We also investigate the prevalence of belief in COVID-19 misinformation across different countries and the role of belief in such misinformation in predicting relevant health behaviours. We find that while public belief in misinformation about COVID-19 is not particularly common, a substantial proportion views this type of misinformation as highly reliable in each country surveyed. In addition, a small group of participants find common factual information about the virus highly unreliable. We also find that increased susceptibility to misinformation negatively affects people's self-reported compliance with public health guidance about COVID-19, as well as people's willingness to get vaccinated against the virus and to recommend the vaccine to vulnerable friends and family. Across all countries surveyed, we find that higher trust in scientists and having higher numeracy skills were associated with lower susceptibility to coronavirus-related misinformation. Taken together, these results demonstrate a clear link between susceptibility to misinformation and both vaccine hesitancy and a reduced likelihood to comply with health guidance measures, and suggest that interventions which aim to improve critical thinking and trust in science may be a promising avenue for future research.

797 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The metabarcoding approach presented here is non-invasive, more efficient, more cost-effective and more sensitive than the traditional survey methods and has the potential to serve as an alternative tool for biodiversity monitoring that revolutionizes natural resource management and ecological studies of fish communities on larger spatial and temporal scales.
Abstract: We developed a set of universal PCR primers (MiFish-U/E) for metabarcoding environmental DNA (eDNA) from fishes. Primers were designed using aligned whole mitochondrial genome (mitogenome) sequence...

685 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, it is shown that if the false discovery rate is less than 5%, then a three-sigma rule must be used to ensure that the result is p≤0.001.
Abstract: If you use p=0.05 to suggest that you have made a discovery, you will be wrong at least 30% of the time. If, as is often the case, experiments are underpowered, you will be wrong most of the time. This conclusion is demonstrated from several points of view. First, tree diagrams which show the close analogy with the screening test problem. Similar conclusions are drawn by repeated simulations of t-tests. These mimic what is done in real life, which makes the results more persuasive. The simulation method is used also to evaluate the extent to which effect sizes are over-estimated, especially in underpowered experiments. A script is supplied to allow the reader to do simulations themselves, with numbers appropriate for their own work. It is concluded that if you wish to keep your false discovery rate below 5%, you need to use a three-sigma rule, or to insist on p≤0.001. And never use the word ‘significant’.

508 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigated risk perception and self-reported engagement in protective behaviours in 1591 United States-based individuals cross-sectionally and longitudinally over the first week of the pandemic.
Abstract: Efforts to change behaviour are critical in minimizing the spread of highly transmissible pandemics such as COVID-19. However, it is unclear whether individuals are aware of disease risk and alter their behaviour early in the pandemic. We investigated risk perception and self-reported engagement in protective behaviours in 1591 United States-based individuals cross-sectionally and longitudinally over the first week of the pandemic. Subjects demonstrated growing awareness of risk and reported engaging in protective behaviours with increasing frequency but underestimated their risk of infection relative to the average person in the country. Social distancing and hand washing were most strongly predicted by the perceived probability of personally being infected. However, a subgroup of individuals perceived low risk and did not engage in these behaviours. Our results highlight the importance of risk perception in early interventions during large-scale pandemics.

465 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
2023293
2022594
2021619
2020664
2019707
20181,017