Antarctica and surrounding waters are often considered pristine, but may be subject to local pollution from tourism, fishing and governmental research programme activities. In particular, the ...quantification of microplastic pollution within the Antarctic Treaty area (south of latitude 60°S) has received little attention. We examined microplastic particle concentrations in sediment samples from 20 locations up to 7 km from Rothera Research Station. The highest concentrations of microplastic (<5 particles 10 ml−1) were recorded in sediment collected near the station sewage treatment plant outfall. The concentrations were similar to levels recorded in shallow and deep sea marine sediments outside Antarctica. The detected microplastics had characteristics similar to those commonly produced by clothes washing. We recommend further research on microplastics around Antarctic stations to inform policy discussions and the development of appropriate management responses.
•The Antarctica environment is remote and pristine compared to other regions.•Microplastics were detected in marine sediments around Rothera Research Station.•Microplastic levels were comparable with those found in marine sediments worldwide.•A likely source was treated laundry grey water from the station sewage outfall.•Further microplastics research would inform Antarctic policy and management.
It was thought that the Southern Ocean was relatively free of microplastic contamination; however, recent studies and citizen science projects in the Southern Ocean have reported microplastics in ...deep-sea sediments and surface waters. Here we reviewed available information on microplastics (including macroplastics as a source of microplastics) in the Southern Ocean. We estimated primary microplastic concentrations from personal care products and laundry, and identified potential sources and routes of transmission into the region. Estimates showed the levels of microplastic pollution released into the region from ships and scientific research stations were likely to be negligible at the scale of the Southern Ocean, but may be significant on a local scale. This was demonstrated by the detection of the first microplastics in shallow benthic sediments close to a number of research stations on King George Island. Furthermore, our predictions of primary microplastic concentrations from local sources were five orders of magnitude lower than levels reported in published sampling surveys (assuming an even dispersal at the ocean surface). Sea surface transfer from lower latitudes may contribute, at an as yet unknown level, to Southern Ocean plastic concentrations. Acknowledging the lack of data describing microplastic origins, concentrations, distribution and impacts in the Southern Ocean, we highlight the urgent need for research, and call for routine, standardised monitoring in the Antarctic marine system.
Display omitted
•The Antarctic marine system is considered pristine compared to other regions.•Microplastics are present in Antarctic waters but available data are scarce.•Local sources of primary microplastic do not explain reported concentrations.•Plastic originating from outside the region may contribute to Antarctic pollution.•Standardised monitoring of microplastic in Antarctic waters is needed urgently.
To date, Antarctica is the only continent to have escaped the COVID-19 pandemic. This was facilitated by the continent's isolation and low human presence, combined with the global emergence of the ...pandemic at the end of the Antarctic summer season and the rapid action of those national governmental operators and other actors still active on and around the continent during the early phases of the outbreak. Here, we consider the implications of the pandemic for Antarctic governance, national operator logistics, science, tourism and the fishing industry, as well as for Antarctic environmental protection. Global disruption will result in a temporary decrease in human activity in Antarctica, in turn leading to a reduction in environmental impacts for a period, but also a reduced capacity to respond to environmental incidents. Given the diversity of transmission routes and vectors, preventing the introduction of the virus will be difficult, even with stringent quarantine procedures in place, and the risks and implications of virus transmission to Antarctic wildlife are largely unknown. With control of the pandemic a major global challenge, international cooperation will be essential if Antarctica is to remain free of coronavirus.
Intensive human exploitation of the Antarctic fur seal (
Arctocephalus gazella
) in its primary population centre on sub-Antarctic South Georgia, as well as on other sub-Antarctic islands and parts ...of the South Shetland Islands, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries rapidly brought populations to the brink of extinction. The species has now recovered throughout its original distribution. Non-breeding and yearling seals, almost entirely males, from the South Georgia population now disperse in the summer months far more widely and in higher numbers than there is evidence for taking place in the pre-exploitation era. Large numbers now haul out in coastal terrestrial habitats in the South Orkney Islands and also along the north-east and west coast of the Antarctic Peninsula to at least Marguerite Bay. In these previously less- or non-visited areas, the seals cause levels of damage likely never to have been experienced previously to fragile terrestrial habitats through trampling and over-fertilisation, as well as eutrophication of sensitive freshwater ecosystems. This increased area of summer impact is likely to have further synergies with aspects of regional climate change, including reduction in extent and duration of sea ice permitting seals access farther south, and changes in krill abundance and distribution. The extent and conservation value of terrestrial habitats and biodiversity now threatened by fur seal distribution expansion, and the multiple anthropogenic factors acting in synergy both historically and to the present day, present a new and as yet unaddressed challenge to the agencies charged with ensuring the protection and conservation of Antarctica’s unique ecosystems.
Antarctica is experiencing significant ecological and environmental change, which may facilitate the establishment of non‐native marine species. Non‐native marine species will interact with other ...anthropogenic stressors affecting Antarctic ecosystems, such as climate change (warming, ocean acidification) and pollution, with irreversible ramifications for biodiversity and ecosystem services. We review current knowledge of non‐native marine species in the Antarctic region, the physical and physiological factors that resist establishment of non‐native marine species, changes to resistance under climate change, the role of legislation in limiting marine introductions, and the effect of increasing human activity on vectors and pathways of introduction. Evidence of non‐native marine species is limited: just four marine non‐native and one cryptogenic species that were likely introduced anthropogenically have been reported freely living in Antarctic or sub‐Antarctic waters, but no established populations have been reported; an additional six species have been observed in pathways to Antarctica that are potentially at risk of becoming invasive. We present estimates of the intensity of ship activity across fishing, tourism and research sectors: there may be approximately 180 vessels and 500+ voyages in Antarctic waters annually. However, these estimates are necessarily speculative because relevant data are scarce. To facilitate well‐informed policy and management, we make recommendations for future research into the likelihood of marine biological invasions in the Antarctic region.
Are there non‐native marine species in Antarctica? With over 500 visits from more than 180 vessels annually and rapidly changing environmental conditions, Antarctica appears to be increasingly vulnerable to impacts from non‐native marine species. We explore factors that influence the likelihood of non‐native marine species establishing in the Antarctic region, present new estimates for human activity, and make recommendations to researchers, environmental managers and policy makers.
Background
The objective of the current study was to provide insight into the effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) on breast cancer screening, breast surgery, and genetics consultations.
...Methods
User data from a risk assessment company were collected from February 2 to April 11, 2020. The use of risk assessment was used as a proxy for the use of 3 breast cancer services, namely, breast imaging, breast surgery, and genetics consultation. Changes in the use of these services during the study period were analyzed.
Results
All 3 services experienced significant declines after the COVID‐19 outbreak. The decline in breast surgery began during the week of March 8, followed by breast imaging and genetics consultation (both of which began during the week of March 15). Breast imaging experienced the most significant reduction, with an average weekly decline of 61.7% and a maximum decline of 94.6%. Breast surgery demonstrated an average weekly decline of 20.5%. When surgical consultation was stratified as breast cancer versus no breast cancer, the decrease among in non–breast cancer patients was more significant than that of patients with breast cancer (a decline of 66.8% vs 11.5% from the pre‐COVID average weekly volume for non–breast cancer patients and patients with breast cancer, respectively). During the week of April 5, use of genetics consultations dropped to 39.9% of the average weekly volumes before COVID‐19.
Conclusions
COVID‐19 has had a significant impact on the number of patients undergoing breast cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment.
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) has had a significant impact on the number of patients undergoing breast cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment in the United States. In the current study, user data from a risk assessment company were collected from February 2 to April 11, 2020, with the use of risk assessment used as a proxy to analyze changes in the use of 3 breast cancer services: breast imaging, breast surgery, and genetics consultation.
Human footprint models allow visualization of human spatial pressure across the globe. Up until now, Antarctica has been omitted from global footprint models, due possibly to the lack of a permanent ...human population and poor accessibility to necessary datasets. Yet Antarctic ecosystems face increasing cumulative impacts from the expanding tourism industry and national Antarctic operator activities, the management of which could be improved with footprint assessment tools. Moreover, Antarctic ecosystem dynamics could be modelled to incorporate human drivers. Here we present the first model of estimated human footprint across predominantly ice-free areas of Antarctica. To facilitate integration into global models, the Antarctic model was created using methodologies applied elsewhere with land use, density and accessibility features incorporated. Results showed that human pressure is clustered predominantly in the Antarctic Peninsula, southern Victoria Land and several areas of East Antarctica. To demonstrate the practical application of the footprint model, it was used to investigate the potential threat to Antarctica's avifauna by local human activities. Relative footprint values were recorded for all 204 of Antarctica's Important Bird Areas (IBAs) identified by BirdLife International and the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR). Results indicated that formal protection of avifauna under the Antarctic Treaty System has been unsystematic and is lacking for penguin and flying bird species in some of the IBAs most vulnerable to human activity and impact. More generally, it is hoped that use of this human footprint model may help Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting policy makers in their decision making concerning avifauna protection and other issues including cumulative impacts, environmental monitoring, non-native species and terrestrial area protection.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
PDF
