@article{GuttZurellBracegridleetal.2012, author = {Gutt, Julian and Zurell, Damaris and Bracegridle, Thomas J. and Cheung, William and Clark, Melody S. and Convey, Peter and Danis, Bruno and David, Bruno and De Broyer, Claude and di Prisco, Guido and Griffiths, Huw and Laffont, Remi and Peck, Lloyd S. and Pierrat, Benjamin and Riddle, Martin J. and Saucede, Thomas and Turner, John and Verde, Cinzia and Wang, Zhaomin and Grimm, Volker}, title = {Correlative and dynamic species distribution modelling for ecological predictions in the Antarctic a cross-disciplinary concept}, series = {Polar research : a Norwegian journal of Polar research}, volume = {31}, journal = {Polar research : a Norwegian journal of Polar research}, number = {6}, publisher = {Co-Action Publ.}, address = {Jarfalla}, issn = {0800-0395}, doi = {10.3402/polar.v31i0.11091}, pages = {23}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Developments of future scenarios of Antarctic ecosystems are still in their infancy, whilst predictions of the physical environment are recognized as being of global relevance and corresponding models are under continuous development. However, in the context of environmental change simulations of the future of the Antarctic biosphere are increasingly demanded by decision makers and the public, and are of fundamental scientific interest. This paper briefly reviews existing predictive models applied to Antarctic ecosystems before providing a conceptual framework for the further development of spatially and temporally explicit ecosystem models. The concept suggests how to improve approaches to relating species' habitat description to the physical environment, for which a case study on sea urchins is presented. In addition, the concept integrates existing and new ideas to consider dynamic components, particularly information on the natural history of key species, from physiological experiments and biomolecular analyses. Thereby, we identify and critically discuss gaps in knowledge and methodological limitations. These refer to process understanding of biological complexity, the need for high spatial resolution oceanographic data from the entire water column, and the use of data from biomolecular analyses in support of such ecological approaches. Our goal is to motivate the research community to contribute data and knowledge to a holistic, Antarctic-specific, macroecological framework. Such a framework will facilitate the integration of theoretical and empirical work in Antarctica, improving our mechanistic understanding of this globally influential ecoregion, and supporting actions to secure this biodiversity hotspot and its ecosystem services.}, language = {en} } @article{ZiegeHennigeSchulzMueckschetal.2012, author = {Ziege, Madlen and Hennige-Schulz, Carmen and Muecksch, Frauke and Bierbach, David and Tiedemann, Ralph and Streit, Bruno and Plath, Martin}, title = {A comparison of two methods to assess audience-induced changes in male mate choice}, series = {Current zoology}, volume = {58}, journal = {Current zoology}, number = {1}, publisher = {Current Zoology}, address = {Beijing}, issn = {1674-5507}, pages = {84 -- 94}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Multidirectional communicative interactions in social networks can have a profound effect on mate choice behavior. Male Atlantic molly Poecilia mexicana exhibit weaker mating preferences when an audience male is presented. This could be a male strategy to reduce sperm competition risk: interacting more equally with different females may be advantageous because rivals might copy mate choice decisions. In line with this hypothesis, a previous study found males to show a strong audience effect when being observed while exercising mate choice, but not when the rival was presented only before the choice tests. Audience effects on mate choice decisions have been quantified in poeciliid fishes using association preference designs, but it remains unknown if patterns found from measuring association times translate into actual mating behavior. Thus, we created five audience treatments simulating different forms of perceived sperm competition risk and determined focal males' mating preferences by scoring pre-mating (nipping) and mating behavior (gonopodial thrusting). Nipping did not reflect the pattern that was found when association preferences were measured, while a very similar pattern was uncovered in thrusting behavior. The strongest response was observed when the audience could eavesdrop on the focal male's behavior. A reduction in the strength of focal males' preferences was also seen after the rival male had an opportunity to mate with the focal male's preferred mate. In comparison, the reduction of mating preferences in response to an audience was greater when measuring association times than actual mating behavior. While measuring direct sexual interactions between the focal male and both stimulus females not only the male's motivational state is reflected but also females' behavior such as avoidance of male sexual harassment.}, language = {en} } @article{LimFriemelMarumetal.2013, author = {Lim, Sze Chern and Friemel, Martin and Marum, Justine E. and Tucker, Elena J. and Bruno, Damien L. and Riley, Lisa G. and Christodoulou, John and Kirk, Edwin P. and Boneh, Avihu and DeGennaro, Christine M. and Springer, Michael and Mootha, Vamsi K. and Rouault, Tracey A. and Leimk{\"u}hler, Silke and Thorburn, David R. and Compton, Alison G.}, title = {Mutations in LYRM4, encoding ironsulfur cluster biogenesis factor ISD11, cause deficiency of multiple respiratory chain complexes}, series = {Human molecular genetics}, volume = {22}, journal = {Human molecular genetics}, number = {22}, publisher = {Oxford Univ. Press}, address = {Oxford}, issn = {0964-6906}, doi = {10.1093/hmg/ddt295}, pages = {4460 -- 4473}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Ironsulfur clusters (ISCs) are important prosthetic groups that define the functions of many proteins. Proteins with ISCs (called ironsulfur or FeS proteins) are present in mitochondria, the cytosol, the endoplasmic reticulum and the nucleus. They participate in various biological pathways including oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS), the citric acid cycle, iron homeostasis, heme biosynthesis and DNA repair. Here, we report a homozygous mutation in LYRM4 in two patients with combined OXPHOS deficiency. LYRM4 encodes the ISD11 protein, which forms a complex with, and stabilizes, the sulfur donor NFS1. The homozygous mutation (c.203GT, p.R68L) was identified via massively parallel sequencing of 1000 mitochondrial genes (MitoExome sequencing) in a patient with deficiency of complexes I, II and III in muscle and liver. These three complexes contain ISCs. Sanger sequencing identified the same mutation in his similarly affected cousin, who had a more severe phenotype and died while a neonate. Complex IV was also deficient in her skeletal muscle. Several other FeS proteins were also affected in both patients, including the aconitases and ferrochelatase. Mutant ISD11 only partially complemented for an ISD11 deletion in yeast. Our in vitro studies showed that the l-cysteine desulfurase activity of NFS1 was barely present when co-expressed with mutant ISD11. Our findings are consistent with a defect in the early step of ISC assembly affecting a broad variety of FeS proteins. The differences in biochemical and clinical features between the two patients may relate to limited availability of cysteine in the newborn period and suggest a potential approach to therapy.}, language = {en} } @article{MerzBassoFischeretal.2022, author = {Merz, Bruno and Basso, Stefano and Fischer, Svenja and Lun, David and Bloeschl, Guenter and Merz, Ralf and Guse, Bjorn and Viglione, Alberto and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Macdonald, Elena and Wietzke, Luzie and Schumann, Andreas}, title = {Understanding heavy tails of flood peak distributions}, series = {Water resources research}, volume = {58}, journal = {Water resources research}, number = {6}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0043-1397}, doi = {10.1029/2021WR030506}, pages = {37}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Statistical distributions of flood peak discharge often show heavy tail behavior, that is, extreme floods are more likely to occur than would be predicted by commonly used distributions that have exponential asymptotic behavior. This heavy tail behavior may surprise flood managers and citizens, as human intuition tends to expect light tail behavior, and the heaviness of the tails is very difficult to predict, which may lead to unnecessarily high flood damage. Despite its high importance, the literature on the heavy tail behavior of flood distributions is rather fragmented. In this review, we provide a coherent overview of the processes causing heavy flood tails and the implications for science and practice. Specifically, we propose nine hypotheses on the mechanisms causing heavy tails in flood peak distributions related to processes in the atmosphere, the catchment, and the river system. We then discuss to which extent the current knowledge supports or contradicts these hypotheses. We also discuss the statistical conditions for the emergence of heavy tail behavior based on derived distribution theory and relate them to the hypotheses and flood generation mechanisms. We review the degree to which the heaviness of the tails can be predicted from process knowledge and data. Finally, we recommend further research toward testing the hypotheses and improving the prediction of heavy tails.}, language = {en} } @article{DuethmannBolchFarinottietal.2015, author = {Duethmann, Doris and Bolch, Tobias and Farinotti, Daniel and Kriegel, David and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Merz, Bruno and Pieczonka, Tino and Jiang, Tong and Su, Buda and G{\"u}ntner, Andreas}, title = {Attribution of streamflow trends in snow and glacier melt-dominated catchments of the Tarim River, Central Asia}, series = {Water resources research}, volume = {51}, journal = {Water resources research}, number = {6}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {0043-1397}, doi = {10.1002/2014WR016716}, pages = {4727 -- 4750}, year = {2015}, abstract = {Observed streamflow of headwater catchments of the Tarim River (Central Asia) increased by about 30\% over the period 1957-2004. This study aims at assessing to which extent these streamflow trends can be attributed to changes in air temperature or precipitation. The analysis includes a data-based approach using multiple linear regression and a simulation-based approach using a hydrological model. The hydrological model considers changes in both glacier area and surface elevation. It was calibrated using a multiobjective optimization algorithm with calibration criteria based on glacier mass balance and daily and interannual variations of discharge. The individual contributions to the overall streamflow trends from changes in glacier geometry, temperature, and precipitation were assessed using simulation experiments with a constant glacier geometry and with detrended temperature and precipitation time series. The results showed that the observed changes in streamflow were consistent with the changes in temperature and precipitation. In the Sari-Djaz catchment, increasing temperatures and related increase of glacier melt were identified as the dominant driver, while in the Kakshaal catchment, both increasing temperatures and increasing precipitation played a major role. Comparing the two approaches, an advantage of the simulation-based approach is the fact that it is based on process-based relationships implemented in the hydrological model instead of statistical links in the regression model. However, data-based approaches are less affected by model parameter and structural uncertainties and typically fast to apply. A complementary application of both approaches is recommended.}, language = {en} } @article{MerzKuhlickeKunzetal.2020, author = {Merz, Bruno and Kuhlicke, Christian and Kunz, Michael and Pittore, Massimiliano and Babeyko, Andrey and Bresch, David N. and Domeisen, Daniela I. and Feser, Frauke and Koszalka, Inga and Kreibich, Heidi and Pantillon, Florian and Parolai, Stefano and Pinto, Joaquim G. and Punge, Heinz J{\"u}rgen and Rivalta, Eleonora and Schr{\"o}ter, Kai and Strehlow, Karen and Weisse, Ralf and Wurpts, Andreas}, title = {Impact forecasting to support emergency management of natural hazards}, series = {Reviews of geophysics}, volume = {58}, journal = {Reviews of geophysics}, number = {4}, publisher = {American Geophysical Union}, address = {Washington}, issn = {8755-1209}, doi = {10.1029/2020RG000704}, pages = {52}, year = {2020}, abstract = {Forecasting and early warning systems are important investments to protect lives, properties, and livelihood. While early warning systems are frequently used to predict the magnitude, location, and timing of potentially damaging events, these systems rarely provide impact estimates, such as the expected amount and distribution of physical damage, human consequences, disruption of services, or financial loss. Complementing early warning systems with impact forecasts has a twofold advantage: It would provide decision makers with richer information to take informed decisions about emergency measures and focus the attention of different disciplines on a common target. This would allow capitalizing on synergies between different disciplines and boosting the development of multihazard early warning systems. This review discusses the state of the art in impact forecasting for a wide range of natural hazards. We outline the added value of impact-based warnings compared to hazard forecasting for the emergency phase, indicate challenges and pitfalls, and synthesize the review results across hazard types most relevant for Europe.}, language = {en} } @misc{TarasovaMerzKissetal.2019, author = {Tarasova, Larisa and Merz, Ralf and Kiss, Andrea and Basso, Stefano and Bl{\"o}chl, G{\"u}nter and Merz, Bruno and Viglione, Alberto and Pl{\"o}tner, Stefan and Guse, Bj{\"o}rn and Schumann, Andreas and Fischer, Svenja and Ahrens, Bodo and Anwar, Faizan and B{\´a}rdossy, Andr{\´a}s and B{\"u}hler, Philipp and Haberlandt, Uwe and Kreibich, Heidi and Krug, Amelie and Lun, David and M{\"u}ller-Thomy, Hannes and Pidoto, Ross and Primo, Cristina and Seidel, Jochen and Vorogushyn, Sergiy and Wietzke, Luzie}, title = {Causative classification of river flood events}, series = {Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews : Water}, volume = {6}, journal = {Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews : Water}, number = {4}, publisher = {Wiley}, address = {Hoboken}, issn = {2049-1948}, doi = {10.1002/wat2.1353}, pages = {23}, year = {2019}, abstract = {A wide variety of processes controls the time of occurrence, duration, extent, and severity of river floods. Classifying flood events by their causative processes may assist in enhancing the accuracy of local and regional flood frequency estimates and support the detection and interpretation of any changes in flood occurrence and magnitudes. This paper provides a critical review of existing causative classifications of instrumental and preinstrumental series of flood events, discusses their validity and applications, and identifies opportunities for moving toward more comprehensive approaches. So far no unified definition of causative mechanisms of flood events exists. Existing frameworks for classification of instrumental and preinstrumental series of flood events adopt different perspectives: hydroclimatic (large-scale circulation patterns and atmospheric state at the time of the event), hydrological (catchment scale precipitation patterns and antecedent catchment state), and hydrograph-based (indirectly considering generating mechanisms through their effects on hydrograph characteristics). All of these approaches intend to capture the flood generating mechanisms and are useful for characterizing the flood processes at various spatial and temporal scales. However, uncertainty analyses with respect to indicators, classification methods, and data to assess the robustness of the classification are rarely performed which limits the transferability across different geographic regions. It is argued that more rigorous testing is needed. There are opportunities for extending classification methods to include indicators of space-time dynamics of rainfall, antecedent wetness, and routing effects, which will make the classification schemes even more useful for understanding and estimating floods. This article is categorized under: Science of Water > Water Extremes Science of Water > Hydrological Processes Science of Water > Methods}, language = {en} } @techreport{BrodeurMikolaCooketal.2024, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Brodeur, Abel and Mikola, Derek and Cook, Nikolai and Brailey, Thomas and Briggs, Ryan and Gendre, Alexandra de and Dupraz, Yannick and Fiala, Lenka and Gabani, Jacopo and Gauriot, Romain and Haddad, Joanne and Lima, Goncalo and Ankel-Peters, J{\"o}rg and Dreber, Anna and Campbell, Douglas and Kattan, Lamis and Fages, Diego Marino and Mierisch, Fabian and Sun, Pu and Wright, Taylor and Connolly, Marie and Hoces de la Guardia, Fernando and Johannesson, Magnus and Miguel, Edward and Vilhuber, Lars and Abarca, Alejandro and Acharya, Mahesh and Adjisse, Sossou Simplice and Akhtar, Ahwaz and Lizardi, Eduardo Alberto Ramirez and Albrecht, Sabina and Andersen, Synve Nygaard and Andlib, Zubaria and Arrora, Falak and Ash, Thomas and Bacher, Etienne and Bachler, Sebastian and Bacon, F{\´e}lix and Bagues, Manuel and Balogh, Timea and Batmanov, Alisher and Barschkett, Mara and Basdil, B. Kaan and Dower, Jaromneda and Castek, Ondrej and Caviglia-Harris, Jill and Strand, Gabriella Chauca and Chen, Shi and Chzhen, Asya and Chung, Jong and Collins, Jason and Coppock, Alexander and Cordeau, Hugo and Couillard, Ben and Crechet, Jonathan and Crippa, Lorenzo and Cui, Jeanne and Czymara, Christian and Daarstad, Haley and Dao, Danh Chi and Dao, Dong and Schmandt, Marco David and Linde, Astrid de and Melo, Lucas De and Deer, Lachlan and Vera, Micole De and Dimitrova, Velichka and Dollbaum, Jan Fabian and Dollbaum, Jan Matti and Donnelly, Michael and Huynh, Luu Duc Toan and Dumbalska, Tsvetomira and Duncan, Jamie and Duong, Kiet Tuan and Duprey, Thibaut and Dworschak, Christoph and Ellingsrud, Sigmund and Elminejad, Ali and Eissa, Yasmine and Erhart, Andrea and Etingin-Frati, Giulian and Fatemi-Pour, Elaheh and Federice, Alexa and Feld, Jan and Fenig, Guidon and Firouzjaeiangalougah, Mojtaba and Fleisje, Erlend and Fortier-Chouinard, Alexandre and Engel, Julia Francesca and Fries, Tilman and Fortier, Reid and Fr{\´e}chet, Nadjim and Galipeau, Thomas and Gallegos, Sebasti{\´a}n and Gangji, Areez and Gao, Xiaoying and Garnache, Clo{\´e} and G{\´a}sp{\´a}r, Attila and Gavrilova, Evelina and Ghosh, Arijit and Gibney, Garreth and Gibson, Grant and Godager, Geir and Goff, Leonard and Gong, Da and Gonz{\´a}lez, Javier and Gretton, Jeremy and Griffa, Cristina and Grigoryeva, Idaliya and Grtting, Maja and Guntermann, Eric and Guo, Jiaqi and Gugushvili, Alexi and Habibnia, Hooman and H{\"a}ffner, Sonja and Hall, Jonathan D. and Hammar, Olle and Kordt, Amund Hanson and Hashimoto, Barry and Hartley, Jonathan S. and Hausladen, Carina I. and Havr{\´a}nek, Tom{\´a}š and Hazen, Jacob and He, Harry and Hepplewhite, Matthew and Herrera-Rodriguez, Mario and Heuer, Felix and Heyes, Anthony and Ho, Anson T. Y. and Holmes, Jonathan and Holzknecht, Armando and Hsu, Yu-Hsiang Dexter and Hu, Shiang-Hung and Huang, Yu-Shiuan and Huebener, Mathias and Huber, Christoph and Huynh, Kim P. and Irsova, Zuzana and Isler, Ozan and Jakobsson, Niklas and Frith, Michael James and Jananji, Rapha{\"e}l and Jayalath, Tharaka A. and Jetter, Michael and John, Jenny and Forshaw, Rachel Joy and Juan, Felipe and Kadriu, Valon and Karim, Sunny and Kelly, Edmund and Dang, Duy Khanh Hoang and Khushboo, Tazia and Kim, Jin and Kjellsson, Gustav and Kjelsrud, Anders and Kotsadam, Andreas and Korpershoek, Jori and Krashinsky, Lewis and Kundu, Suranjana and Kustov, Alexander and Lalayev, Nurlan and Langlois, Audr{\´e}e and Laufer, Jill and Lee-Whiting, Blake and Leibing, Andreas and Lenz, Gabriel and Levin, Joel and Li, Peng and Li, Tongzhe and Lin, Yuchen and Listo, Ariel and Liu, Dan and Lu, Xuewen and Lukmanova, Elvina and Luscombe, Alex and Lusher, Lester R. and Lyu, Ke and Ma, Hai and M{\"a}der, Nicolas and Makate, Clifton and Malmberg, Alice and Maitra, Adit and Mandas, Marco and Marcus, Jan and Margaryan, Shushanik and M{\´a}rk, Lili and Martignano, Andres and Marsh, Abigail and Masetto, Isabella and McCanny, Anthony and McManus, Emma and McWay, Ryan and Metson, Lennard and Kinge, Jonas Minet and Mishra, Sumit and Mohnen, Myra and M{\"o}ller, Jakob and Montambeault, Rosalie and Montpetit, S{\´e}bastien and Morin, Louis-Philippe and Morris, Todd and Moser, Scott and Motoki, Fabio and Muehlenbachs, Lucija and Musulan, Andreea and Musumeci, Marco and Nabin, Munirul and Nchare, Karim and Neubauer, Florian and Nguyen, Quan M. P. and Nguyen, Tuan and Nguyen-Tien, Viet and Niazi, Ali and Nikolaishvili, Giorgi and Nordstrom, Ardyn and N{\"u}, Patrick and Odermatt, Angela and Olson, Matt and ien, Henning and {\"O}lkers, Tim and Vert, Miquel Oliver i. and Oral, Emre and Oswald, Christian and Ousman, Ali and {\"O}zak, {\"O}mer and Pandey, Shubham and Pavlov, Alexandre and Pelli, Martino and Penheiro, Romeo and Park, RyuGyung and Martel, Eva P{\´e}rez and Petrovičov{\´a}, Tereza and Phan, Linh and Prettyman, Alexa and Proch{\´a}zka, Jakub and Putri, Aqila and Quandt, Julian and Qiu, Kangyu and Nguyen, Loan Quynh Thi and Rahman, Andaleeb and Rea, Carson H. and Reiremo, Adam and Ren{\´e}e, La{\"e}titia and Richardson, Joseph and Rivers, Nicholas and Rodrigues, Bruno and Roelofs, William and Roemer, Tobias and Rogeberg, Ole and Rose, Julian and Roskos-Ewoldsen, Andrew and Rosmer, Paul and Sabada, Barbara and Saberian, Soodeh and Salamanca, Nicolas and Sator, Georg and Sawyer, Antoine and Scates, Daniel and Schl{\"u}ter, Elmar and Sells, Cameron and Sen, Sharmi and Sethi, Ritika and Shcherbiak, Anna and Sogaolu, Moyosore and Soosalu, Matt and Srensen, Erik and Sovani, Manali and Spencer, Noah and Staubli, Stefan and Stans, Renske and Stewart, Anya and Stips, Felix and Stockley, Kieran and Strobel, Stephenson and Struby, Ethan and Tang, John and Tanrisever, Idil and Yang, Thomas Tao and Tastan, Ipek and Tatić, Dejan and Tatlow, Benjamin and Seuyong, F{\´e}raud Tchuisseu and Th{\´e}riault, R{\´e}mi and Thivierge, Vincent and Tian, Wenjie and Toma, Filip-Mihai and Totarelli, Maddalena and Tran, Van-Anh and Truong, Hung and Tsoy, Nikita and Tuzcuoglu, Kerem and Ubfal, Diego and Villalobos, Laura and Walterskirchen, Julian and Wang, Joseph Taoyi and Wattal, Vasudha and Webb, Matthew D. and Weber, Bryan and Weisser, Reinhard and Weng, Wei-Chien and Westheide, Christian and White, Kimberly and Winter, Jacob and Wochner, Timo and Woerman, Matt and Wong, Jared and Woodard, Ritchie and Wroński, Marcin and Yazbeck, Myra and Yang, Gustav Chung and Yap, Luther and Yassin, Kareman and Ye, Hao and Yoon, Jin Young and Yurris, Chris and Zahra, Tahreen and Zaneva, Mirela and Zayat, Aline and Zhang, Jonathan and Zhao, Ziwei and Yaolang, Zhong}, title = {Mass reproducibility and replicability}, series = {I4R discussion paper series}, journal = {I4R discussion paper series}, number = {107}, publisher = {Institute for Replication}, address = {Essen}, issn = {2752-1931}, pages = {250}, year = {2024}, abstract = {This study pushes our understanding of research reliability by reproducing and replicating claims from 110 papers in leading economic and political science journals. The analysis involves computational reproducibility checks and robustness assessments. It reveals several patterns. First, we uncover a high rate of fully computationally reproducible results (over 85\%). Second, excluding minor issues like missing packages or broken pathways, we uncover coding errors for about 25\% of studies, with some studies containing multiple errors. Third, we test the robustness of the results to 5,511 re-analyses. We find a robustness reproducibility of about 70\%. Robustness reproducibility rates are relatively higher for re-analyses that introduce new data and lower for re-analyses that change the sample or the definition of the dependent variable. Fourth, 52\% of re-analysis effect size estimates are smaller than the original published estimates and the average statistical significance of a re-analysis is 77\% of the original. Lastly, we rely on six teams of researchers working independently to answer eight additional research questions on the determinants of robustness reproducibility. Most teams find a negative relationship between replicators' experience and reproducibility, while finding no relationship between reproducibility and the provision of intermediate or even raw data combined with the necessary cleaning codes.}, language = {en} }