Explore the vast range of titles available.

As concern grows over the environmental costs and ethical implications of intensive factory farming, an increasing number of us are embracing diets and lifestyles free from animal products. Has the time now arrived for us all to reject the exploitation of animals completely and become vegan? Would adopting a wholly plant-based diet be beneficial for our health? How would a majority vegan population affect the global economy and the planet? Does it make any sense to go flexitarian or vegetarian? Molly Watson explores the history, rationale and impact of veganism on an individual, social and global level, and assesses the effects of a mass change in diet on our environment, the economy and our health.

Background Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a prevalent mental health condition affecting millions worldwide, leading to disability and reduced quality of life. MDD poses a global health priority due to its early onset and association with other disabling conditions. Available treatments for MDD exhibit varying effectiveness, and a substantial portion of individuals remain resistant to treatment. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), applied to the left and/or right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), is an alternative treatment strategy for those experiencing treatment-resistant MDD. The objective of this study is to investigate whether this newer form of rTMS, namely theta burst stimulation (TBS), when performed unilaterally or bilaterally, is efficacious in treatment-resistant MDD. Methods In this naturalistic, randomized double-blinded non-inferiority trial, participants with a major depressive episode will be randomized to receive either unilateral (i.e., continuous TBS [cTBS] to the right and sham TBS to the left DLPFC) or bilateral sequential TBS (i.e., cTBS to the right and intermittent TBS [iTBS] to the left DLPFC) delivered 5 days a week for 4–6 weeks. Responders will move onto a 6-month flexible maintenance phase where TBS treatment will be delivered at a decreasing frequency depending on degree of symptom mitigation. Several clinical assessments and neuroimaging and neurophysiological biomarkers will be collected to investigate treatment response and potential associated biomarkers. A non-inferiority analysis will investigate whether bilateral sequential TBS is non-inferior to unilateral TBS and regression analyses will investigate biomarkers of treatment response. We expect to recruit a maximal of 256 participants. This trial is approved by the Research Ethics Board of The Royal's Institute of Mental Health Research (REB# 2,019,071) and will follow the Declaration of Helsinki. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals. Discussion Comprehensive assessment of symptoms and neurophysiological biomarkers will contribute to understanding the differential efficacy of the tested treatment protocols, identifying biomarkers for treatment response, and shedding light into underlying mechanisms of TBS. Our findings will inform future clinical trials and aid in personalizing treatment selection and scheduling for individuals with MDD. Trial registration The trial is registered on https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home (#NCT04142996).

Background Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR) is an increasingly popular cost-effective approach to restore forests for climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation. One ANR strategy is the use of perches to attract avian seed dispersers to degraded landscapes for increased seed supply and seedling establishment. This systematic review sought to determine the effectiveness of artificial, semi-natural, and natural perches in promoting natural forest regeneration, specifically in driving four outcomes: seed richness, seed density, seedling richness, and seedling density. Methods In September 2023, we searched for studies in eight bibliographic sources, which include an organizational library and a web-based search engine, using a refined search string in English. After deduplication, we conducted double screening at title and abstract, then at full text level to check for eligibility (e.g., compared perches versus control). The final list of studies underwent critical appraisal based on risk of bias and method validity, then data extraction. We used Hedges’ g as our effect size and fitted each outcome in a three-level meta-regression model. We also tested the effect of matrix type, bioregion, and precipitation variation as modifiers, and conducted sensitivity analysis based on risk of bias and method validity. Review findings After screening, we accepted a total of 396 studies in 79 articles for the review. The majority of these studies examined seed (49%) and seedling density (28%) outcomes over richness, using mostly natural perches (68%) and, to a lesser frequency, artificial and semi-natural perches. Most studies that included distance to forest edge as a factor reported no effects ( n  = 68). We then analysed 333 studies in a meta-analysis. Results showed that natural perches had overall positive effects in increasing seed and seedling density and richness, while artificial and semi-natural perches were effective only for seed outcomes. We found high heterogeneity in our models, with perch effectiveness affected by matrix type, bioregion, precipitation variation, method specificity, as well as study quality. In general, perches showed robust positive effects in shrublands and grasslands in tropical, subtropical, and mediterranean biomes. Conclusions The use of perches can be an effective ANR strategy to increase seed rain and seedling establishment in a variety of degraded landscapes. We recommend that natural perches be preserved in the matrix, but in areas lacking these natural features, to explore the use of artificial or semi-natural perches to increase seed rain and follow it up with additional treatments, such as soil amelioration and weeding, to improve seedling establishment. Due to insufficient data, we could not analyse the effect of distance to forest edge as a moderator in our meta-regression models. This gap can be addressed by examining perches placed at increasing distances from the edge and having better data sharing practices. We also emphasize a need for improving the quality of reporting, such as variances and detailed methodologies, in order for research to be useful for systematic reviews and meta-analysis.

Background Assisted Natural Regeneration (ANR) is an increasingly popular cost-effective approach to restore forests for climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation. One ANR strategy is the use of perches to attract avian seed dispersers to degraded landscapes for increased seed supply and seedling establishment. This systematic review sought to determine the effectiveness of artificial, semi-natural, and natural perches in promoting natural forest regeneration, specifically in driving four outcomes: seed richness, seed density, seedling richness, and seedling density. Methods In September 2023, we searched for studies in eight bibliographic sources, which include an organizational library and a web-based search engine, using a refined search string in English. After deduplication, we conducted double screening at title and abstract, then at full text level to check for eligibility (e.g., compared perches versus control). The final list of studies underwent critical appraisal based on risk of bias and method validity, then data extraction. We used Hedges’ g as our effect size and fitted each outcome in a three-level meta-regression model. We also tested the effect of matrix type, bioregion, and precipitation variation as modifiers, and conducted sensitivity analysis based on risk of bias and method validity. Review findings After screening, we accepted a total of 396 studies in 79 articles for the review. The majority of these studies examined seed (49%) and seedling density (28%) outcomes over richness, using mostly natural perches (68%) and, to a lesser frequency, artificial and semi-natural perches. Most studies that included distance to forest edge as a factor reported no effects (n = 68). We then analysed 333 studies in a meta-analysis. Results showed that natural perches had overall positive effects in increasing seed and seedling density and richness, while artificial and semi-natural perches were effective only for seed outcomes. We found high heterogeneity in our models, with perch effectiveness affected by matrix type, bioregion, precipitation variation, method specificity, as well as study quality. In general, perches showed robust positive effects in shrublands and grasslands in tropical, subtropical, and mediterranean biomes. Conclusions The use of perches can be an effective ANR strategy to increase seed rain and seedling establishment in a variety of degraded landscapes. We recommend that natural perches be preserved in the matrix, but in areas lacking these natural features, to explore the use of artificial or semi-natural perches to increase seed rain and follow it up with additional treatments, such as soil amelioration and weeding, to improve seedling establishment. Due to insufficient data, we could not analyse the effect of distance to forest edge as a moderator in our meta-regression models. This gap can be addressed by examining perches placed at increasing distances from the edge and having better data sharing practices. We also emphasize a need for improving the quality of reporting, such as variances and detailed methodologies, in order for research to be useful for systematic reviews and meta-analysis.