Search

Preference assessments identify foods that might be valued by an animal but do not capture differences in the magnitude of value. In combination with demand, the more effort required to acquire the commodity – the more valued and likely it is to function as an effective reinforcer for use in dog training. In the current experiment, two preference assessments' applicability was measured using a combination of choice assessment and effortful runway task. Eight dogs experienced a paired stimulus preference assessment and multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments combined with a 3-m runway task. The preference assessments identified different most-preferred foods, but the same least-preferred foods. The reinforcer assessment results showed that the dogs moved faster to obtain their most preferred food as identified by the multiple stimulus without replacement assessment compared to the most preferred foods identified in the paired stimulus assessment. The paired- or multiple-stimulus-without-replacement preference assessments identified highly valued foods; however, the applicability of that commodity as a reinforcer was not independent of the assessment method. To ensure accurate reinforcer identification and consistency, a preference assessment should be conducted under similar conditions to that experienced when the reinforcer is used in training. Overall, the multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessment would be more useful to trainers, owners or scientists wanting to identify high-value foods for their animals to function as effective reinforcers for the elicitation of behaviors in a training context.

Preference assessments identify foods that might be valued by an animal but do not capture differences in the magnitude of value. In combination with demand, the more effort required to acquire the commodity – the more valued and likely it is to function as an effective reinforcer for use in dog training. In the current experiment, two preference assessments' applicability was measured using a combination of choice assessment and effortful runway task. Eight dogs experienced a paired stimulus preference assessment and multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessments combined with a 3-m runway task. The preference assessments identified different most-preferred foods, but the same least-preferred foods. The reinforcer assessment results showed that the dogs moved faster to obtain their most preferred food as identified by the multiple stimulus without replacement assessment compared to the most preferred foods identified in the paired stimulus assessment. The paired- or multiple-stimulus-without-replacement preference assessments identified highly valued foods; however, the applicability of that commodity as a reinforcer was not independent of the assessment method. To ensure accurate reinforcer identification and consistency, a preference assessment should be conducted under similar conditions to that experienced when the reinforcer is used in training. Overall, the multiple stimulus without replacement preference assessment would be more useful to trainers, owners or scientists wanting to identify high-value foods for their animals to function as effective reinforcers for the elicitation of behaviors in a training context.

A national movement to change bail and pretrial detention is underway.[1] In California, bail reform advocates have attempted to pass Senate Bill 10 which would radically alter the state’s trial court administration of bail.[2] Advocates claim that reform is necessary because detention rates are too high and that the current bail system unfairly penalizes the poor.  Although the effort failed to pass last year, it regained strength after the Judicial Council and Governor Brown endorsed the concept of bail reform.[3] The bail reform debate took a radical turn in a recent decision made by the California Court of Appeals.  In In Re Humphrey, the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office filed a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that judges in California violated a defendant’s due process rights by failing to inquire about a defendant’s ability to post bail and whether there could be less restrictive conditions of release.[4] Representing a stark departure from legal precedent, the Court of Appeals and the California Attorney General agreed with the defense’s argument that judges are required to make these inquiries.[5] In light of these changes, this Article argues that: (1) detention rates are not nearly as high as reformers portray, and specifically in Los Angeles County, those held in jail are the very defendants we want, and are constitutionally required, to detain; (2) bail reform advocates have unscrupulously used Humphrey to exploit the public’s fear that indigent defendants are unfairly placed in custody for minor crimes; and (3) the California Court of Appeals and the California Attorney General undermined the state’s constitutional public safety protection provisions by ignoring legal precedent and finding that the current bail system violated due process. [1].        Jurisdictions including, New Mexico, Kentucky, New Jersey, and Washington, D.C., have all adopted or considered measures to end money bail.  See, e.g., Jon Schuppe, POST BAIL, NBC News (Aug 22, 2017), https://www.nbcnews.com/specials/bail-reform [https://perma.cc/BN85-FGWE]. [2].        S.B. 10, 2017–2018 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2017). (Reference made to S.B. 10 in this Article refer to the original draft of the legislation.  Since the writing of this Article, an amended version of S.B. 10 was passed by the legislature and signed into law by Governor Brown.  This Article does not refer or reflect any views as to the amended version of S.B. 10.) [3].        Governor Brown, Chief Justice Cantil-Sakauye, Senator Hertzberg and Assemblymember Bonta Commit to Work Together on Reforms to California’s Bail System (Aug. 25, 2017), https://newsroom.courts.ca.gov/news/chief-justice-issues-statement-on-bail-reform [https://perma.cc/BR5H-5BTR]. [4].        In re Humphrey, 228 Cal. Rptr. 3d 513 (Ct. App. 2018). [5].        Id. at 518.

Invertebrate-derived DNA (iDNA) from terrestrial haematophagous leeches has recently been proposed as a powerful non-invasive tool with which to detect vertebrate species and thus to survey their populations. However, to date little attention has been given to whether and how this, or indeed any other iDNA-derived data, can be combined with state-of-the-art analytical tools to estimate wildlife abundances, population dynamics and distributions. In this review, we discuss the challenges that face the application of existing analytical methods such as site-occupancy and spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models to terrestrial leech iDNA, in particular, possible violations of key assumptions arising from factors intrinsic to invertebrate parasite biology. Specifically, we review the advantages and disadvantages of terrestrial leeches as a source of iDNA and summarize the utility of leeches for presence, occupancy, and spatial capture-recapture models. The main source of uncertainty that attends species detections derived from leech gut contents is attributable to uncertainty about the spatio-temporal sampling frame, since leeches retain host-blood for months and can move after feeding. Subsequently, we briefly address how the analytical challenges associated with leeches may apply to other sources of iDNA. Our review highlights that despite the considerable potential of leech (and indeed any) iDNA as a new survey tool, further pilot studies are needed to assess how analytical methods can overcome or not the potential biases and assumption violations of the new field of iDNA. Specifically we argue that studies to compare iDNA sampling with standard survey methods such as camera trapping, and those to improve our knowledge on leech (and other invertebrate parasite) physiology, taxonomy, and ecology will be of immense future value.

BackgroundNew drug treatments, clinical trials, and standards of quality for assessment of evidence justify an update of evidence-based recommendations for the pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), we revised the Special Interest Group on Neuropathic Pain (NeuPSIG) recommendations for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain based on the results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsBetween April, 2013, and January, 2014, NeuPSIG of the International Association for the Study of Pain did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind studies of oral and topical pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain, including studies published in peer-reviewed journals since January, 1966, and unpublished trials retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of pharmaceutical companies. We used number needed to treat (NNT) for 50% pain relief as a primary measure and assessed publication bias; NNT was calculated with the fixed-effects Mantel-Haenszel method.Findings229 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Analysis of publication bias suggested a 10% overstatement of treatment effects. Studies published in peer-reviewed journals reported greater effects than did unpublished studies (r(2) 9·3%, p=0·009). Trial outcomes were generally modest: in particular, combined NNTs were 6·4 (95% CI 5·2-8·4) for serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, mainly including duloxetine (nine of 14 studies); 7·7 (6·5-9·4) for pregabalin; 7·2 (5·9-9·21) for gabapentin, including gabapentin extended release and enacarbil; and 10·6 (7·4-19·0) for capsaicin high-concentration patches. NNTs were lower for tricyclic antidepressants, strong opioids, tramadol, and botulinum toxin A, and undetermined for lidocaine patches. Based on GRADE, final quality of evidence was moderate or high for all treatments apart from lidocaine patches; tolerability and safety, and values and preferences were higher for topical drugs; and cost was lower for tricyclic antidepressants and tramadol. These findings permitted a strong recommendation for use and proposal as first-line treatment in neuropathic pain for tricyclic antidepressants, serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, pregabalin, and gabapentin; a weak recommendation for use and proposal as second line for lidocaine patches, capsaicin high-concentration patches, and tramadol; and a weak recommendation for use and proposal as third line for strong opioids and botulinum toxin A. Topical agents and botulinum toxin A are recommended for peripheral neuropathic pain only.InterpretationOur results support a revision of the NeuPSIG recommendations for the pharmacotherapy of neuropathic pain. Inadequate response to drug treatments constitutes a substantial unmet need in patients with neuropathic pain. Modest efficacy, large placebo responses, heterogeneous diagnostic criteria, and poor phenotypic profiling probably account for moderate trial outcomes and should be taken into account in future studies.FundingNeuPSIG of the International Association for the Study of Pain.

Invertebrate-derived DNA (iDNA) from terrestrial haematophagous leeches has recently been proposed as a powerful non-invasive tool with which to detect vertebrate species and thus to survey their populations. However, to date little attention has been given to whether and how this, or indeed any other iDNA-derived data, can be combined with state-of-the-art analytical tools to estimate wildlife abundances, population dynamics and distributions. In this review, we discuss the challenges that face the application of existing analytical methods such as site-occupancy and spatial capture-recapture (SCR) models to terrestrial leech iDNA, in particular, possible violations of key assumptions arising from factors intrinsic to invertebrate parasite biology. Specifically, we review the advantages and disadvantages of terrestrial leeches as a source of iDNA and summarize the utility of leeches for presence, occupancy, and spatial capture-recapture models. The main source of uncertainty that attends species detections derived from leech gut contents is attributable to uncertainty about the spatio-temporal sampling frame, since leeches retain host-blood for months and can move after feeding. Subsequently, we briefly address how the analytical challenges associated with leeches may apply to other sources of iDNA. Our review highlights that despite the considerable potential of leech (and indeed any) iDNA as a new survey tool, further pilot studies are needed to assess how analytical methods can overcome or not the potential biases and assumption violations of the new field of iDNA. Specifically we argue that studies to compare iDNA sampling with standard survey methods such as camera trapping, and those to improve our knowledge on leech (and other invertebrate parasite) physiology, taxonomy, and ecology will be of immense future value.

The kelp bass fishery is arguably the most important recreational fishery in southern California, with more documented landings than that of any other species in the region since 1936. However, long term declines in catch-per-unit effort over the past several decades led to progressive management of the species by the California Department of Fish and Game, most notably with the recent implementation of an extensive network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) spanning from Point Conception to the Mexico and United States border. Achieving a balance between ecological and socioeconomic objectives is at best challenging, and often results in a tension between protection and fishing, currently being realized by those anglers engaged in the kelp bass fishery. While the benefits of protection may be realized in the long-term, many of the costs, often economic in nature, may be incurred initially. For the kelp bass angling community in southern California, these economic costs are being felt by a current reduction in the non-market values associated with fishing for the species, including a reduction in days spent on the water, perceived increased vessel congestion, and the belief that smaller fish will be caught as a result of the MPAs. This conclusion was drawn from analysis of data that was gathered over several months via a survey distributed throughout the kelp bass angling community in southern California. Nonetheless, this devaluation may be limited to the short term, with the potential for MPAs to foster improved fishing conditions over the long-term.