Search

There are many reasons why it is important that we find ways to conserve, and better utilize natural enemies of invertebrate crop pests. Currently, measures of natural enemy impact are rarely incorporated into studies that purport to examine pest control. Most studies examine pest and natural enemy presence and/or abundance and then qualitatively infer impact. While this provides useful data to address a range of ecological questions, a measure of impact is critical for guiding pest management decision-making. Often some very simple techniques can be used to obtain an estimate of natural enemy impact. We present examples of field-based studies that have used cages, barriers to restrict natural enemy or prey movement, direct observation of natural enemy attack, and sentinel prey items to estimate mortality. The measure of natural enemy impact used in each study needs to be tailored to the needs of farmers and the specific pest problems they face. For example, the magnitude of mortality attributed to natural enemies may be less important than the timing and consistency of that mortality between seasons. Tailoring impact assessments will lead to research outcomes that do not simply provide general information about how to conserve natural enemies, but how to use these natural enemies as an integral part of decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The pattern of symptoms of knee osteoarthritis has been thought to be indicative of specific compartment involvement. This study investigated whether there was a true correlation between patellofemoral joint (PFJ) symptoms and unicompartmental patellofemoral arthritis. Materials and Methods: A prospective analysis of 34 patients rendered to be suffering from PFJ osteoarthritis and subsequently undergoing unicompartmental patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) was performed. A control cohort of 32 patients suffering from medial tibiofemoral joint (MTFJ) osteoarthritis was included in the analysis. Four questions derived from the Oxford knee score questionnaire, traditionally deemed to be indicative of PFJ osteoarthritis, were combined to create a PFJ subscore and statistically analyzed for their potential relationship with PFJ osteoarthritis and outcomes following PFA. Results: The PFJ subscore indicated slightly worse pathology in patients undergoing PFA compared to MTFJ replacement, but the difference was not significant (9.7 and 9.6, respectively; p=0.851). The improvement in PFJ symptoms was higher in those undergoing PFA compared to MTFJ surgery; however, the difference was not statistically significant (3.7 and 2.2 respectively, p=0.074). Conclusions: We were unable to prove that these symptoms were predictive of PFJ pathology in the preoperative setting, nor were they useful in interpreting which symptoms would likely improve following PFA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]