Trait modality distribution of aquatic macrofauna communities as explained by pesticides and water chemistry

Analyzing functional species’ characteristics (species traits) that represent physiological, life history and morphological characteristics of species help understanding the impacts of various stressors on aquatic communities at field conditions. This research aimed to study the combined effects of pesticides and other environmental factors (temperature, dissolved oxygen, dissolved organic carbon, floating macrophytes cover, phosphate, nitrite, and nitrate) on the trait modality distribution of aquatic macrofauna communities. To this purpose, a field inventory was performed in a flower bulb growing area of the Netherlands with significant variation in pesticides pressures. Macrofauna community composition, water chemistry parameters and pesticide concentrations in ditches next to flower bulb fields were determined. Trait modalities of nine traits (feeding mode, respiration mode, locomotion type, resistance form, reproduction mode, life stage, voltinism, saprobity, maximum body size) likely to indicate pesticides impacts were analyzed. According to a redundancy analysis, phosphate -and not pesticides- constituted the main factor structuring the trait modality distribution of aquatic macrofauna. The functional composition could be ascribed for 2–4 % to pesticides, and for 3–11 % to phosphate. The lack of trait responses to pesticides may indicate that species may have used alternative strategies to adapt to ambient pesticides stress. Biomass of animals exhibiting trait modalities related to feeding by predation and grazing, presence of diapause form or dormancy, reproduction by free clutches and ovoviviparity, life stage of larvae and pupa, was negatively correlated to the concentration of phosphate. Hence, despite the high pesticide pollution in the area, variation in nutrient-related stressors seems to be the dominant driver of the functional composition of aquatic macrofauna assembly in agricultural ditches.     

Does Oil Rich in Alpha-Linolenic Fatty Acid Cause the Same Immune Modulation as Fish Oil in Walker 256 Tumor-Bearing Rats?

Objective: Polyunsaturated fatty acids n-3 (PUFA n-3) have shown effects in reducing tumor growth, in particular eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) abundantly present in fish oil (FO). When these fatty acids are provided in the diet, they alter the functions of the cells, particularly in tumor and immune cells. However, the effects of α-linolenic fatty acid (ALA), which is the precursor of EPA and DHA, are controversial. Thus, our objective was to test the effect of this parental fatty acid. Methods: Non-tumor-bearing and tumor-bearing Wistar rats (70 days) were supplemented with 1 g/kg body weight of FO or Oro Inca® (OI) oil (rich in ALA). Immune cells function, proliferation, cytokine production, and subpopulation profile were evaluated. Results: We have shown that innate immune cells enhanced phagocytosis capacity, and increased processing and elimination of antigens. Moreover, there was a decrease in production of pro-inflammatory cytokines (tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin 6 (IL-6)) by macrophages. Lymphocytes showed decreased proliferation capacity, increased cluster of differentiation 8 (CD8⁺) subpopulation, and increased TNF-α production. Conclusions: Oil rich in ALA caused similar immune modulation in cancer when compared with FO.     

Lifitegrast clinical efficacy for treatment of signs and symptoms of dry eye disease across three randomized controlled trials

Objective: Report efficacy findings from three clinical trials (one phase 2 and two phase 3 [OPUS-1, OPUS-2]) of lifitegrast ophthalmic solution 5.0% for treatment of dry eye disease (DED).

Research design and methods: Three 84-day, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trials. Adults (≥18 years) with DED were randomized (1:1) to lifitegrast 5.0% or matching placebo. Changes from baseline to day 84 in signs and symptoms of DED were analyzed.

Main outcome measures: Phase 2, pre-specified endpoint: inferior corneal staining score (ICSS; 0–4); OPUS-1, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and visual-related function subscale (0–4 scale); OPUS-2, coprimary endpoints: ICSS and eye dryness score (EDS, VAS; 0–100).

Results: Fifty-eight participants were randomized to lifitegrast 5.0% and 58 to placebo in the phase 2 trial; 293 to lifitegrast and 295 to placebo in OPUS-1; 358 to lifitegrast and 360 to placebo in OPUS-2. In participants with mild-to-moderate baseline DED symptomatology, lifitegrast improved ICSS versus placebo in the phase 2 study (treatment effect, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.05–0.65; p?=?0.0209) and OPUS-1 (effect, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10–0.38; p?=?0.0007). Among more symptomatic participants (baseline EDS ≥40, recent artificial tear use), lifitegrast improved EDS versus placebo in a post hoc analysis of OPUS-1 (effect, 13.34; 95% CI, 2.35–24.33; nominal p?=?0.0178) and in OPUS-2 (effect, 12.61; 95% CI, 8.51–16.70; p?<?0.0001).

Limitations: Trials were conducted over 12 weeks; efficacy beyond this period was not assessed.

Conclusions: Across three trials, lifitegrast improved ICSS in participants with mild-to-moderate baseline symptomatology in two studies, and EDS in participants with moderate-to-severe baseline symptomatology in two studies. Based on the overall findings from these trials, lifitegrast shows promise as a new treatment option for signs and symptoms of DED.