bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Luedtke, J.

Publications and source records attributed to Luedtke, J..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Testing the predictive performance of comparative extinction risk models to support the global amphibian assessment

Assessing the extinction risk of species through the IUCN Red List is key to guiding conservation policies and reducing biodiversity loss. This process is resource-demanding, however, and requires a continuous update which becomes increasingly difficult as new species are added to the IUCN Red List. The use of automatic methods, such as comparative analyses to predict species extinction risk, can be an efficient alternative to maintaining up to date assessments. Using amphibians as a study group, we predict which species were more likely to change status, in order to suggest species that should be prioritized for reassessment. We used species traits, environmental variables, and proxies of climate and land-use change as predictors of the IUCN Red List category of species. We produced an ensemble prediction of IUCN Red List categories by combining four different model algorithms: Cumulative Link Models (CLM), phylogenetic Generalized Least Squares (PGLS), Random Forests (RF), Neural Networks (NN). By comparing IUCN Red List categories with the ensemble prediction, and accounting for uncertainty among model algorithms, we identified species that should be prioritized for future reassessments due to high prediction versus observation mismatch. We found that CLM and RF performed better than PGLS and NN, but there was not a clear best algorithm. The most important predicting variables across models were species range size, climate change, and landuse change. We propose ensemble modelling of extinction risk as a promising tool for prioritizing species for reassessment while accounting for inherent models uncertainty.

ecology↗

Reproducibility problem with a proposed standard method to measure disinfection efficacy

A collaborative study was carried out in four laboratories to determine the reproducibility of a proposed ASTM International standard method for quantitatively evaluating the efficacy of disinfectants on hard, non-porous surfaces against bacteria. The method, known as the Quantitative Method, has also been suggested as a future regulatory standard for the United States and internationally. The multi-lab study was carried out using Pseudomonas aeruginosa and an alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride antimicrobial product diluted in hard water. Results of the study showed acceptable repeatability in log10 reductions within each laboratory, but unacceptable reproducibility across laboratories despite careful analyst training and standardization of test conditions. A follow-up study ruled out analyst-to-analyst differences as the cause of the poor reproducibility. As it currently exists, the Quantitative Method is not sufficiently reproducible. Ruggedness testing to assess the sensitivity of the method to small changes in operational factors is recommended.

microbiology↗