-
Journal of Economic Entomology Apr 2021Buzz-pollinated plants require visitation from vibration producing bee species to elicit full pollen release. Several important food crops are buzz-pollinated including... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Buzz-pollinated plants require visitation from vibration producing bee species to elicit full pollen release. Several important food crops are buzz-pollinated including tomato, eggplant, kiwi, and blueberry. Although more than half of all bee species can buzz pollinate, the most commonly deployed supplemental pollinator, Apis mellifera L. (Hymenoptera: Apidae; honey bees), cannot produce vibrations to remove pollen. Here, we provide a list of buzz-pollinated food crops and discuss the extent to which they rely on pollination by vibration-producing bees. We then use the most commonly cultivated of these crops, the tomato, Solanum lycopersicum L. (Solanales: Solanaceae), as a case study to investigate the effect of different pollination treatments on aspects of fruit quality. Following a systematic review of the literature, we statistically analyzed 71 experiments from 24 studies across different geopolitical regions and conducted a meta-analysis on a subset of 21 of these experiments. Our results show that both supplemental pollination by buzz-pollinating bees and open pollination by assemblages of bees, which include buzz pollinators, significantly increase tomato fruit weight compared to a no-pollination control. In contrast, auxin treatment, artificial mechanical vibrations, or supplemental pollination by non-buzz-pollinating bees (including Apis spp.), do not significantly increase fruit weight. Finally, we compare strategies for providing bee pollination in tomato cultivation around the globe and highlight how using buzz-pollinating bees might improve tomato yield, particularly in some geographic regions. We conclude that employing native, wild buzz pollinators can deliver important economic benefits with reduced environmental risks and increased advantages for both developed and emerging economies.
Topics: Animals; Bees; Blueberry Plants; Crops, Agricultural; Solanum lycopersicum; Pollen; Pollination
PubMed: 33615362
DOI: 10.1093/jee/toab009 -
The Science of the Total Environment Feb 2021Studies have demonstrated an adverse role of outdoor allergens on respiratory symptoms. It is unknown whether this effect is independent or synergistic of outdoor air...
BACKGROUND
Studies have demonstrated an adverse role of outdoor allergens on respiratory symptoms. It is unknown whether this effect is independent or synergistic of outdoor air pollutants.
METHODS
We systematically reviewed all epidemiological studies that examined interaction effects between counts of outdoor airborne allergens (pollen, fungal spores) and air pollutants, on any respiratory health outcome in children and adults. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Scopus databases. Each study was summarized qualitatively and assessed for quality and risk of bias (International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews, registration number CRD42020162571).
RESULTS
Thirty-five studies were identified (15 timeseries, eight case-crossovers, 11 panels and one cohort study), of which 12 reported a significant statistical interaction between an allergen and air pollutant. Eight interactions were related to asthma outcomes, including one on lung function measures and wheeze, three to medical consultations for pollinosis and one to allergic symptoms (nasal, ocular or bronchial). There was no consensus as to which allergen or air pollutant is more likely to interact. No study investigated whether interactions are stronger in atopic individuals.
CONCLUSION
Despite strong evidence from small experimental studies in humans, only a third of studies identified significant allergen-pollutant interactions using common epidemiological study designs. Exposure misclassification, failure to examine subgroups at risk, inadequate statistical power or absence of population-level effects are possible explanations.
Topics: Adult; Air Pollutants; Air Pollution; Allergens; Child; Cohort Studies; Humans; Pollen
PubMed: 33310575
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143924 -
Environmental Health : a Global Access... Dec 2020Exposure to heat, air pollution, and pollen are associated with health outcomes, including cardiovascular and respiratory disease. Studies assessing the health impacts...
BACKGROUND
Exposure to heat, air pollution, and pollen are associated with health outcomes, including cardiovascular and respiratory disease. Studies assessing the health impacts of climate change have considered increased exposure to these risk factors separately, though they may be increasing simultaneously for some populations and may act synergistically on health. Our objective is to systematically review epidemiological evidence for interactive effects of multiple exposures to heat, air pollution, and pollen on human health.
METHODS
We systematically searched electronic literature databases (last search, April 29, 2019) for studies reporting quantitative measurements of associations between at least two of the exposures and mortality from any cause and cardiovascular and respiratory morbidity and mortality specifically. Following the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology, we evaluated the risk of bias of individual studies and the overall quality and strength of evidence.
RESULTS
We found 56 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, six measured air pollution, heat, and pollen; 39 measured air pollution and heat; 10 measured air pollution and pollen; and one measured heat and pollen. Nearly all studies were at risk of bias from exposure assessment error. However, consistent exposure-response across studies led us to conclude that there is overall moderate quality and sufficient evidence for synergistic effects of heat and air pollution. We concluded that there is overall low quality and limited evidence for synergistic effects from simultaneous exposure to (1) air pollution, pollen, and heat; and (2) air pollution and pollen. With only one study, we were unable to assess the evidence for synergistic effects of heat and pollen.
CONCLUSIONS
If synergistic effects between heat and air pollution are confirmed with additional research, the health impacts from climate change-driven increases in air pollution and heat exposure may be larger than previously estimated in studies that consider these risk factors individually.
Topics: Air Pollution; Cardiovascular Diseases; Hot Temperature; Humans; Pollen; Respiratory Tract Diseases
PubMed: 33287833
DOI: 10.1186/s12940-020-00681-z -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Asthma is a common long-term respiratory disease affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Approximately half of people with asthma have an important... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a common long-term respiratory disease affecting approximately 300 million people worldwide. Approximately half of people with asthma have an important allergic component to their disease, which may provide an opportunity for targeted treatment. Sublingual immunotherapy (SLIT) aims to reduce asthma symptoms by delivering increasing doses of an allergen (e.g. house dust mite, pollen extract) under the tongue to induce immune tolerance. Fifty-two studies were identified and synthesised in the original Cochrane Review in 2015, but questions remained about the safety and efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy for people with asthma.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of sublingual immunotherapy compared with placebo or standard care for adults and children with asthma.
SEARCH METHODS
The original searches for trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and reference lists of all primary studies and review articles found trials up to 25 March 2015. The most recent search for trials for the current update was conducted on 29 October 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included parallel randomised controlled trials, irrespective of blinding or duration, that evaluated sublingual immunotherapy versus placebo or as an add-on to standard asthma management. We included both adults and children with asthma of any severity and with any allergen-sensitisation pattern. We included studies that recruited participants with asthma, rhinitis, or both, providing at least 80% of trial participants had a diagnosis of asthma. We selected outcomes to reflect recommended outcomes for asthma clinical trials and those most important to people with asthma. Primary outcomes were asthma exacerbations requiring a visit to the emergency department (ED) or admission to hospital, validated measures of quality of life, and all-cause serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were asthma symptom scores, exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, response to provocation tests, and dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the search results for included trials, extracted numerical data, and assessed risk of bias, all of which were cross-checked for accuracy. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion. We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) using study participants as the unit of analysis; we analysed continuous data as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) using random-effects models. We considered the strength of evidence for all primary and secondary outcomes using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
Sixty-six studies met the inclusion criteria for this update, including 52 studies from the original review. Most studies were double-blind and placebo-controlled, varied in duration from one day to three years, and recruited participants with mild or intermittent asthma, often with comorbid allergic rhinitis. Twenty-three studies recruited adults and teenagers; 31 recruited only children; three recruited both; and nine did not specify. The pattern of reporting and results remained largely unchanged from the original review despite 14 further studies and a 50% increase in participants studied (5077 to 7944). Reporting of primary efficacy outcomes to measure the impact of SLIT on asthma exacerbations and quality of life was infrequent, and selective reporting may have had a serious effect on the completeness of the evidence; 16 studies did not contribute any data, and a further six studies could only be included in a post hoc analysis of all adverse events. Allocation procedures were generally not well described; about a quarter of the studies were at high risk of performance or detection bias (or both); and participant attrition was high or unknown in around half of the studies. The primary outcome in most studies did not align with those of interest to the review (mostly asthma or rhinitis symptoms), and only two small studies reported our primary outcome of exacerbations requiring an ED or hospital visit; the pooled estimate from these studies suggests SLIT may reduce exacerbations compared with placebo or usual care, but the evidence is very uncertain (OR 0.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 1.20; n = 108; very low-certainty evidence). Nine studies reporting quality of life could not be combined in a meta-analysis and, whilst the direction of effect mostly favoured SLIT, the effects were often uncertain and small. SLIT likely does not increase SAEs compared with placebo or usual care, and analysis by risk difference suggests no more than 1 in 100 people taking SLIT will have a serious adverse event (RD -0.0004, 95% CI -0.0072 to 0.0064; participants = 4810; studies = 29; moderate-certainty evidence). Regarding secondary outcomes, asthma symptom and medication scores were mostly measured with non-validated scales, which precluded meaningful meta-analysis or interpretation, but there was a general trend of SLIT benefit over placebo. Changes in ICS use (MD -17.13 µg/d, 95% CI -61.19 to 26.93; low-certainty evidence), exacerbations requiring oral steroids (studies = 2; no events), and bronchial provocation (SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.82; low-certainty evidence) were not often reported. Results were imprecise and included the possibility of important benefit or little effect and, in some cases, potential harm from SLIT. More people taking SLIT had adverse events of any kind compared with control (OR 1.99, 95% CI 1.49 to 2.67; high-certainty evidence; participants = 4251; studies = 27), but events were usually reported to be transient and mild. Lack of data prevented most of the planned subgroup and sensitivity analyses.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Despite continued study in the field, the evidence for important outcomes such as exacerbations and quality of life remains too limited to draw clinically useful conclusions about the efficacy of SLIT for people with asthma. Trials mostly recruited mixed populations with mild and intermittent asthma and/or rhinitis and focused on non-validated symptom and medication scores. The review findings suggest that SLIT may be a safe option for people with well-controlled mild-to-moderate asthma and rhinitis who are likely to be at low risk of serious harm, but the role of SLIT for people with uncontrolled asthma requires further evaluation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Animals; Asthma; Child; Disease Progression; Hospitalization; Humans; Placebos; Pollen; Pyroglyphidae; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinitis, Allergic; Sublingual Immunotherapy
PubMed: 32926419
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011293.pub3 -
Environmental Research Oct 2020Exposure to Plant Protection Products, PPPs, (fungicides, herbicides and insecticides) is a significant stressor for bees and other pollinators, and has recently been...
Exposure to Plant Protection Products, PPPs, (fungicides, herbicides and insecticides) is a significant stressor for bees and other pollinators, and has recently been the focus of intensive debate and research. Specifically, exposure through contaminated pollen and nectar is considered pivotal, as it presents the highest risk of PPP exposure across all bee species. However, the actual risk that multiple PPP residues might pose to non-target species is difficult to assess due to the lack of clear evidence of their actual concentrations. To consolidate the existing knowledge of field-realistic residues detected in pollen and nectar directly collected from plants, we performed a systematic literature review of studies over the past 50 years (1968-2018). We found that pollen was the matrix most frequently evaluated and, of the compounds investigated, the majority were detected in pollen samples. Although the overall most studied category of PPPs were the neonicotinoid insecticides, the compounds with the highest median concentrations of residues in pollen were: the broad spectrum carbamate carbofuran (1400 ng/g), the fungicide and nematicide iprodione (524 ng/g), and the organophosphate insecticide dimethoate (500 ng/g). In nectar, the highest median concentration of PPP residues detected were dimethoate (1595 ng/g), chlorothalonil (76 ng/g), and the insecticide phorate (53.5 ng/g). Strong positive correlation was observed between neonicotinoid residues in pollen and nectar of cultivated plant species. The maximum concentrations of several compounds detected in nectar and pollen were estimated to exceed the LD for honey bees, bumble bees and four solitary bee species, by several orders of magnitude. However, there is a paucity of information for the biggest part of the world and there is an urgent need to expand the range of compounds evaluated in PPP studies.
Topics: Animals; Bees; Insecticides; Neonicotinoids; Pesticide Residues; Plant Nectar; Pollen; Pollination
PubMed: 32795671
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109873 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jun 2020The urban forest is a green infrastructure system that delivers multiple environmental, economic, social and health services, and functions in cities. Environmental...
The urban forest is a green infrastructure system that delivers multiple environmental, economic, social and health services, and functions in cities. Environmental benefits of urban trees are well understood, but no review to date has examined how urban trees affect human health. This review provides a comprehensive summary of existing literature on the health impacts of urban trees that can inform future research, policy, and nature-based public health interventions. A systematic search used keywords representing human health, environmental health, and urban forestry. Following screening and appraisal of several thousand articles, 201 studies were conceptually sorted into a three-part framework. Reducing Harm, representing 41% of studies, includes topics such as air pollution, ultraviolet radiation, heat exposure, and pollen. Restoring Capacities, at 31%, includes attention restoration, mental health, stress reduction, and clinical outcomes. Building Capacities, at 28%, includes topics such as birth outcomes, active living, and weight status. The studies that were reviewed show substantial heterogeneity in purpose and method yet indicate important health outcomes associated with people's exposure to trees. This review will help inform future research and practice, and demonstrates why urban forest planning and management should strategically promote trees as a social determinant of public health.
Topics: Cities; Forestry; Forests; Humans; Trees; Ultraviolet Rays; Urban Health
PubMed: 32570770
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17124371 -
PloS One 2020Existing evidence on the relationship between childhood lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) and the subsequent atopy development is controversial. We aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Existing evidence on the relationship between childhood lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) and the subsequent atopy development is controversial. We aimed to investigate an association between viral LRTI at <5 years and the development of atopy at > 2 years.
METHODS
We conducted a search at Embase, Pubmed, Web of Science, and Global Index Medicus. We collected data from the included articles. We estimated the odds ratio and the 95% confidence intervals with a random effect model. We determined factors associated with atopy development after childhood LRTI using univariate and multivariate meta-regression analyses. We recorded this systematic review at PROSPERO with the number CRD42018116955.
RESULTS
We included 24 studies. There was no relationship between viral LRTI at <5 years and skin prick test-diagnosed-atopy (OR = 1.2, [95% CI = 0.7-2.0]), unknown diagnosed-atopy (OR = 0.7, [95% CI = 0.4-1.3]), atopic dermatitis (OR = 1.2, [95% CI = 0.9-1.6]), hyperreactivity to pollen (OR = 0.8, [95% CI = 0.3-2.7]), food (OR = 0.8, [95% CI = 0.3-2.5]), or house dust mite (OR = 1.1, [95% CI = 0.6-2.2]). Although not confirmed in all studies with a symmetric distribution of the 23 confounding factors investigated, the overall analyses showed that there was a relationship between childhood viral LRTI at < 5 years and serum test diagnosed-atopy (OR = 2.0, [95% CI = 1.0-4.1]), allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (OR = 1.7, [95% CI = 1.1-2.9]), hyperreactivity diagnosed by serum tests with food (OR = 5.3, [1.7-16.7]) or inhaled allergens (OR = 4.2, [95% CI = 2.1-8.5]), or furred animals (OR = 0.6, [95% CI = 0.5-0.9]).
CONCLUSION
These results suggest that there is no association between viral LRTI at < 5 years and the majority of categories of atopy studied during this work. These results, however, are not confirmed for the remaining categories of atopy and more particularly those diagnosed by serum tests. There is a real need to develop more accurate atopy diagnostic tools.
Topics: Allergens; Animals; Asthma; Child; Conjunctivitis, Allergic; Dermatitis, Atopic; Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus; Humans; Pollen; Respiratory Tract Infections; Rhinitis, Allergic; Skin Tests; Time Factors
PubMed: 32330171
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0231816 -
BMJ Open Jan 2020Several studies have assessed effects of short-term exposure to pollen on allergic and asthmatic manifestations. The evidence is inconclusive, and no meta-analysis has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Several studies have assessed effects of short-term exposure to pollen on allergic and asthmatic manifestations. The evidence is inconclusive, and no meta-analysis has been published.
OBJECTIVE
To synthesise the evidence on the relations between short-term pollen exposure and the risk of allergic and asthmatic manifestations.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed and Scopus databases up to the end of August 2018. In addition, we reviewed the reference lists of relevant articles. Two authors independently evaluated the eligible articles and extracted relevant information in a structured form. We calculated summary effect estimates (EE) based on the study-specific ORs and regression coefficients (β) by applying both fixed-effects and random-effects models.
RESULTS
26 studies met the a priori eligibility criteria, and 12 of them provided sufficient information for the meta-analysis. The summary EE related to 10 grains per m³ increase in pollen exposure showed an 1% increase (EE 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02) in the risk of lower respiratory symptoms and a 2% increase (EE 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.03) in the risk of any allergic or asthmatic symptom. Correspondingly, the risk of upper respiratory symptoms and ocular symptoms increased 7% (EE 1.07, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.09) and 11% (EE 1.11, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.17), respectively, in relation to such pollen exposure. Short-term exposure to pollen did not show any significant effect on daily lung function levels.
CONCLUSION
Our results provide new evidence that short-term pollen exposure significantly increases the risks of allergic and asthmatic symptoms.
Topics: Allergens; Asthma; Environmental Exposure; Humans; Hypersensitivity; Pollen; Prevalence; Respiratory Function Tests; Risk Factors; Seasons; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 31924628
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029069 -
JMIR MHealth and UHealth Jul 2019With the large amount of material that is readily available on the internet, there are endless opportunities for electronic health-literate patients to obtain and learn... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
With the large amount of material that is readily available on the internet, there are endless opportunities for electronic health-literate patients to obtain and learn new information. Although novel, a Web- or mobile-based program can be a powerful way to engage adolescents and young adults (AYAs). The ongoing engagement of AYAs with chronic disease is vital not only to empower them but also to ensure a smooth transition from pediatric to adult health care.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to evaluate the current evidence on Web- or mobile-based interventions designed for AYAs.
METHODS
This review was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42018096487. A systematic search of MEDLINE Complete, EMBASE, and CINAHL Complete was conducted on April 10, 2019, for studies that examined the perspectives of transition-age patients about technology-based interventions, the process involved in intervention development, or the evaluation of intervention efficacy. For each study, the comprehensiveness of reporting was appraised. The Downs and Black checklist was used for intervention efficacy trials, the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist was used for qualitative work, and a 16-item tool developed by Tong et al was used for questionnaire research.
RESULTS
The search uncovered 29 relevant studies, which included qualitative studies (n=14), intervention efficacy studies (n=7), questionnaire studies (n=4), mixed qualitative and questionnaire studies (n=2), and a mixed qualitative and pilot randomized controlled trial study (n=1). The reporting comprehensiveness score of questionnaires was rated considerably lower (n=6, 13%-57% [2/16-8/14]) than the scores of intervention efficacy trials (n=8, 48%-85% [13/27-23/27]) and qualitative research (n=17, 40%-93% [8.5/21-19.5/21]). AYAs were receptive to obtaining information via a website or mobile app. An intervention was more likely to be perceived as useful by AYAs when there was a concerted effort to involve AYAs and subject matter experts in the process of intervention design, as opposed to relying solely on the AYAs or the experts alone. The preferred medium of intervention delivery varied greatly for AYAs, ranging from static text to audiovisual materials. However, AYAs considered being concise was the most important aspect. Across different conditions, AYAs were interested in receiving information on diverse topics, such as anxiety and stress management, dealing with insurance, and having social relationships. Patients also requested for disease-specific information, such as weather forecasts and pollen levels for patients with asthma and information related to the pretransplant period for organ transplant recipients. Meta-analyses showed no significant group differences across time on quality of life, self-efficacy, and self-management.
CONCLUSIONS
Owing to the lack of intervention efficacy trials, no conclusion can be drawn if an intervention delivered via a mobile app is better than that delivered via a website. However, through this systematic review, it is confirmed that AYAs were receptive to receiving medical information electronically.
Topics: Access to Information; Adolescent; Adult; Anxiety; Child; Child, Preschool; Chronic Disease; Female; Humans; Internet; Internet-Based Intervention; Learning; Male; Mobile Applications; Qualitative Research; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self Efficacy; Self-Management; Stress, Psychological; Surveys and Questionnaires; Technology; Young Adult
PubMed: 31322129
DOI: 10.2196/12042