Browsing by Author "Collins AL"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Freshwater invertebrate responses to fine sediment stress: A multi-continent perspective
    (John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2024-01) McKenzie M; Brooks A; Callisto M; Collins AL; Durkota JM; Death RG; Jones JI; Linares MS; Matthaei CD; Monk WA; Murphy JF; Wagenhoff A; Wilkes M; Wood PJ; Mathers KL
    Excessive fine sediment (particles <2 mm) deposition in freshwater systems is a pervasive stressor worldwide. However, understanding of ecological response to excess fine sediment in river systems at the global scale is limited. Here, we aim to address whether there is a consistent response to increasing levels of deposited fine sediment by freshwater invertebrates across multiple geographic regions (Australia, Brazil, New Zealand and the UK). Results indicate ecological responses are not globally consistent and are instead dependent on both the region and the facet of invertebrate diversity considered, that is, taxonomic or functional trait structure. Invertebrate communities of Australia were most sensitive to deposited fine sediment, with the greatest rate of change in communities occurring when fine sediment cover was low (below 25% of the reach). Communities in the UK displayed a greater tolerance with most compositional change occurring between 30% and 60% cover. In both New Zealand and Brazil, which included the most heavily sedimented sampled streams, the communities were more tolerant or demonstrated ambiguous responses, likely due to historic environmental filtering of invertebrate communities. We conclude that ecological responses to fine sediment are not generalisable globally and are dependent on landscape filters with regional context and historic land management playing important roles.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Protein quality as a complementary functional unit in life cycle assessment (LCA).
    (Springer Nature, 2022-12-28) McAuliffe GA; Takahashi T; Beal T; Huppertz T; Leroy F; Buttriss J; Collins AL; Drewnowski A; McLaren SJ; Ortenzi F; van der Pols JC; van Vliet S; Lee MRF
    GOAL AND THEORETICAL COMMENTARY: A number of recent life cycle assessment (LCA) studies have concluded that animal-sourced foods should be restricted-or even avoided-within the human diet due to their relatively high environmental impacts (particularly those from ruminants) compared with other protein-rich foods (mainly protein-rich plant foods). From a nutritional point of view, however, issues such as broad nutrient bioavailability, amino acid balances, digestibility and even non-protein nutrient density (e.g., micronutrients) need to be accounted for before making such recommendations to the global population. This is especially important given the contribution of animal sourced foods to nutrient adequacy in the global South and vulnerable populations of high-income countries (e.g., children, women of reproductive age and elderly). Often, however, LCAs simplify this reality by using 'protein' as a functional unit in their models and basing their analyses on generic nutritional requirements. Even if a 'nutritional functional unit' (nFU) is utilised, it is unlikely to consider the complexities of amino acid composition and subsequent protein accretion. The discussion herein focuses on nutritional LCA (nLCA), particularly on the usefulness of nFUs such as 'protein,' and whether protein quality should be considered when adopting the nutrient as an (n)FU. Further, a novel and informative case study is provided to demonstrate the strengths and weaknesses of protein-quality adjustment. CASE STUDY METHODS: To complement current discussions, we present an exploratory virtual experiment to determine how Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Scores (DIAAS) might play a role in nLCA development by correcting for amino acid quality and digestibility. DIAAS is a scoring mechanism which considers the limiting indispensable amino acids (IAAs) within an IAA balance of a given food (or meal) and provides a percentage contribution relative to recommended daily intakes for IAA and subsequent protein anabolism; for clarity, we focus only on single food items (4 × animal-based products and 4 × plant-based products) in the current case exemplar. Further, we take beef as a sensitivity analysis example (which we particularly recommend when considering IAA complementarity at the meal-level) to elucidate how various cuts of the same intermediary product could affect the interpretation of nLCA results of the end-product(s). RECOMMENDATIONS: First, we provide a list of suggestions which are intended to (a) assist with deciding whether protein-quality correction is necessary for a specific research question and (b) acknowledge additional uncertainties by providing mitigating opportunities to avoid misinterpretation (or worse, dis-interpretation) of protein-focused nLCA studies. We conclude that as relevant (primary) data availability from supply chain 'gatekeepers' (e.g., international agri-food distributors and processors) becomes more prevalent, detailed consideration of IAA provision of contrasting protein sources needs to be acknowledged-ideally quantitatively with DIAAS being one example-in nLCA studies utilising protein as a nFU. We also contend that future nLCA studies should discuss the complementarity of amino acid balances at the meal-level, as a minimum, rather than the product level when assessing protein metabolic responses of consumers. Additionally, a broader set of nutrients should ideally be included when evaluating "protein-rich foods" which provide nutrients that extend beyond amino acids, which is of particular importance when exploring dietary-level nLCA.