Researchers make stunning discovery after studying wildlife living near wineries: 'Can be further enhanced'
A team of researchers from the HUN-REN Center for Ecological Research and the University of Milan recently established a connection between vineyard ecosystems and local bird and bat species. The HUN-REN Center's mission is to support biodiversity research, and it is resolute in the understanding that a more informed public can make better environmental decisions.
Published in the Journal of Applied Ecology, their study addressed one part of the ongoing problem of habitat reconfiguration — that is, when natural landscapes are repurposed into human-oriented mechanisms. In an agricultural context specifically, it's crucial that we maintain a balance between crop yields for human needs and ecological sustainability, a balance these researchers aimed to identify within vineyards.
In addition to being land-replenishing pollinators, birds and bats serve as natural predators, keeping pests in check while supporting beneficial arthropod species. Per Phys.org, it's a predisposition that can serve to our benefit as well, when it comes to vineyards and other agricultural endeavors — and by monitoring and recording bird and bat activity against arthropod activity across various Hungarian vineyards, these researchers worked to prove just that.
By demonstrating that predatory birds and bats regulate pest populations on behalf of farmers, the team is encouraging the protection of these species by vineyard management, hoping that humans can work with birds and bats rather than allowing vineyards to devolve into sites of human-animal conflict.
The researchers called for the sustenance of these agricultural projects without the use of synthetic pesticides — after all, why turn to polluting and often harmful chemicals when the natural solution is just as effective, requires fewer resources, and brings about less contamination to the air and soil?
Uncontrolled pesticide use not only leaks toxic contaminants into the soil to kill pests, but also leaves lingering traces in the affected plants and the atmosphere of the region, posing risks to human health.
Exposure through the food we eat and the air we breathe leaves us vulnerable to a variety of health concerns, ranging from reproductive damage to cancers. Moreover, the ripple effects of pesticides have lowered biodiversity around the world, destablizing ecosystems.
The HUN-REN Center seeks to make its ecological findings more mainstream, bridging the gap between the discipline of environmental research and the average individual.
If more of us can become cognizant of the issues infiltrating every step of our daily lives — from the pollutants we consume to the wine we drink — we can prove better-equipped to encourage our environmental authorities to address them. HUN-REN, specifically, is involved closely with the European Union.
Research author Péter Batáry summed it up for Phys.org: "Pest control services can be further enhanced through organic management, which avoids herbicides and synthetic insecticides, thereby facilitating the colonization of beneficial arthropods and strengthening pest predation pressure in vineyards."
Do you worry about pesticides in your food?
All the time
Sometimes
Not really
I only eat organic
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
44 minutes ago
- Medscape
Diverse Early-Life Diet Linked to Lower Celiac Disease Risk
TOPLINE: Greater food variety in a child's second year of life — but not healthy eating — was linked to a reduced subsequent risk for celiac disease. METHODOLOGY: Researchers analysed data from an observational, longitudinal, population-based cohort study in Norway to examine associations between dietary diversity and healthy eating in the second year of life and the subsequent risk for celiac disease. Pregnant women were invited to participate between 1999 and 2008, and dietary data of toddlers were collected from their caregivers at 18 months of age. They used the dietary diversity score (0-4) to assess variation in dietary intake and the Healthy Eating Index (0-36) to assess children's diet quality, with higher scores indicating more varied diets and healthier foods, respectively. The diagnosis of celiac disease was on the basis of registry data and responses to questionnaires collected at ages 7 and 8 years regarding the presence of celiac disease. TAKEAWAY: Of 64,536 children followed up to a mean age of 16.1 years, 1033 (1.6%; 60.4% girls) were diagnosed with celiac disease (mean age at diagnosis, 8.6 years). Higher dietary diversity at 18 months of age was associated with a lower subsequent risk for celiac disease (adjusted odds ratio per SD increase, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85-0.98) after adjusting for gluten intake, iron supplementation, and early-life infections. No significant association was found between healthy eating and the subsequent risk for celiac disease. IN PRACTICE: "These findings may indicate an interplay between the variation of the diet, gluten amounts, and infections as part of the celiac disease exposome that should be further investigated," the authors wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Elin M. Hård af Segerstad, PhD, Department of Pediatric Research, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. It was published online on July 16, 2025, in Clinical Nutrition. LIMITATIONS: The 18-month dietary questionnaire provided limited and variable detail across food groups. Levels of food processing and saturated fat intake were not considered. Participant selection was skewed towards more educated women with healthier eating habits, potentially introducing bias. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program. One author was supported by the South East Norway Health Authorities. The cohort study was supported by the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services and the Ministry of Education and Research. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Medscape
44 minutes ago
- Medscape
Low Apgar Scores Predict Poor Outcomes in Premature Infants
TOPLINE: A 5-minute Apgar score < 7 was significantly associated with increased risks for in-hospital mortality, severe intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), retinopathy of prematurity (ROP), and prolonged hospital stay among infants born very preterm (VPT). METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a prospective population-based cohort study of liveborn infants born VPT from the EPICE-SHIPS cohort. This study included 7900 liveborn infants born VPT between 22 + 0 and 31 + 6 weeks of gestation across 19 regions in 11 European countries. Data on maternal and perinatal characteristics, management, and neonatal outcomes were collected from patient records. Adjusted associations between 5-minute Apgar scores < 7 and adverse neonatal outcomes were analysed; researchers tested for interactions by the country-level prevalence of an Apgar score < 7, categorised as low (14%-16%), medium (19%-22%), and high (28%-40%) groups. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, severe IVH (> grade 2), cystic periventricular leukomalacia (cPVL), necrotising enterocolitis, late-onset infection, ROP (≥ stage 3), BPD (moderate/severe), and prolonged hospital stay. TAKEAWAY: A 5-minute Apgar score < 7 was observed in 20.2% of infants born VPT, varying widely across countries from 14% to 40%. A low Apgar score (< 7) was strongly associated with a higher risk for in-hospital mortality than a high Apgar score (≥ 7; 35.7% vs 6.9%; adjusted relative risk [RR], 2.24; 95% CI, 1.95-2.58), with consistent risk observed across all country groups. A low Apgar score was associated with increased risks for severe IVH (RR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.33-1.96), ROP (RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.09-1.82), cPVL (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.00-1.96), BPD (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.20-1.51), and prolonged hospital stay (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.26-1.63). Associations with IVH, BPD, and prolonged hospital stay were stronger among countries with a lower prevalence of low Apgar scores (test of interaction P = .04 for IVH, P = .09 for BPD, and P = .43 for prolonged hospital stay). IN PRACTICE: "[Low Apgar scores'] interactions with adverse outcomes demand caution when using the Apgar score in prognostic models for clinical care and research without local validation," the authors wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Harald Ehrhardt, MD, Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, University Medical Centre Ulm, Ulm, Germany. It was published online on July 15, 2025, in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology. LIMITATIONS: The study's data were collected in 2011-2012, and clinical practices may have evolved since then. Variations in how Apgar scores were assigned across different centres, the lack of data on postnatal resuscitation efforts, and a mostly White European cohort may have limited generalisability. DISCLOSURES: This work was supported by the European Union's (EU's) Seventh Framework Programme and the EU's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. Some authors reported receiving funding from the EU and Swedish Foundation related to the study, and others reported receiving unrelated grants and serving unpaid roles in paediatric organisations and advisory boards. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Medscape
44 minutes ago
- Medscape
COVID-19 Pandemic Tied to Accelerated Brain Aging
The COVID-19 pandemic may have accelerated brain aging, even among people who avoided becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2, new research suggested. By comparing longitudinal brain scans from healthy adults, researchers found that the average person's brain appeared to age by nearly 6 months for every year lived during the pandemic. 'What surprised me most was that even people who hadn't had COVID showed significant increases in brain aging rates,' lead author Ali-Reza Mohammadi-Nejad, PhD, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, England, said in a statement. 'It really shows how much the experience of the pandemic itself, everything from isolation to uncertainty, may have affected our brain health,' Mohammadi-Nejad said. The study was published online on July 22 in Nature Communications . UK Biobank Data In addition to the well-documented respiratory and systemic manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 infection, compelling evidence has highlighted the ability of the virus to attack the central nervous system. Studies have shown high rates of fatigue, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and cognitive impairment in COVID-19 survivors. Research has also revealed potential associations between COVID-19, cognitive decline, brain changes, and the molecular signatures of brain aging. Mohammadi-Nejad and colleagues investigated the pandemic's impact on brain aging using longitudinal brain MRI data from 996 healthy adults participating in the UK Biobank study. Some participants had scans before and after the pandemic (the pandemic group); others, only before the pandemic (control group). They used advanced imaging and machine learning to estimate each person's 'brain age'— how old their brain appeared to be compared to their actual age. They used brain scans from 15,334 healthy individuals to develop a brain age model. Results showed that even with initially matched brain age gaps (predicted brain age vs chronological age) and matched for a range of health markers, the pandemic significantly accelerated brain aging. On average, the pandemic group showed a 5.5-month higher deviation of brain age gap at the second timepoint compared with the control group. In the pandemic group, increased brain age correlated with lower scores on standard cognitive tests, which might help explain why some people who had COVID-19 have shown impaired cognition, researchers said. Accelerated brain aging was more pronounced in males and those from deprived socio-demographic backgrounds and these deviations existed regardless of SARS-CoV-2 infection. 'Our findings provide valuable insight into how the COVID-19 pandemic affected brain health, demonstrating that the general pandemic effects alone, without infection, exerted a substantial detrimental effect on brain health, augmented by biosocial factors (age, health, and social inequalities) in a healthy middle-aged to older population,' the investigators note. 'Notably, the extent of accelerated brain aging over a matched pre-pandemic control group, observed in grey and white matter, was similar in both noninfected and infected sub-cohorts,' they noted. Interpret Cautiously In a statement from the UK nonprofit Science Media Center several experts weighed in on the results. 'While this is a very carefully conducted analysis, we have to be cautious with interpretation,' said Masud Husain, DPhil, BMBCh, FMedSci, professor of neurology & cognitive neuroscience, University of Oxford, Oxford, England. 'The brain age difference between the two groups (as indexed by brain scanning) was on average only 5 months, and difference in cognitive performance between groups was only on the total time taken to complete one of the tests. Is this really going to make a significant difference in everyday life?' Husain wondered. 'Furthermore, the time between scans was much shorter in the people scanned before and after the pandemic compared to those who had both scans before the pandemic. We therefore don't know if brain aging would have recovered if more time elapsed,' Husain said. Maxime Taquet, MBBCh, PhD, associate professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, said, 'It is important to note that the majority of people showed brain aging at the expected rate.' Nonetheless, Taquet said the findings raise 'important questions about the long-term neurological impact of the pandemic, whether due to infection itself or the broader psychological and social stress it caused.' Eugene Duff, PhD, Department of Brain Sciences, Imperial College London, London, England, cautioned that 'as an observational study it is not possible to fully exclude that factors unrelated to the pandemic could contribute to the observed acceleration. 'While the events of the pandemic were exceptional, this work demonstrates the stark effects that the conditions of an individual's life may have on brain and cognitive health, and the value of careful dissection of the myriad of local and global factors contributing to these conditions.'
