Clearer understanding is needed of the premises underlying SI and how it relates to food-system priorities.

Summary Livestock production both contributes to and is affected by climate change. In addition to the physiological effects of higher temperatures on individual animals, the consequences of climate change are likely to include increased risk that geographically restricted rare breed populations will be badly affected by disturbances. Indirect effects may be felt via ecosystem changes that alter the distribution of animal diseases or affect the supply of feed. Breeding goals may have to be adjusted to account for higher temperatures, lower quality diets and greater disease challenge. Species and breeds that are well adapted to such conditions may become more widely used. Climate change mitigation strategies, in combination with ever increasing demand for food, may also have an impact on breed and species utilization, driving a shift towards monogastrics and breeds that are efficient converters of feed into meat, milk and eggs. This may lead to the neglect of the adaptation potential of local breeds in developing countries. Given the potential for significant future changes in production conditions and in the objectives of livestock production, it is essential that the value provided by animal genetic diversity is secured. This requires better characterization of breeds, production environments and associated knowledge; the compilation of more complete breed inventories; improved mechanisms to monitor and respond to threats to genetic diversity; more effective in situ and ex situ conservation measures; genetic improvement programmes targeting adaptive traits in high‐output and performance traits in locally adapted breeds; increased support for developing countries in their management of animal genetic resources; and wider access to genetic resources and associated knowledge.

We compared the efficacy and safety of ondansetron (GR 38032F), a selective antagonist of serotonin S3 receptors, with that of placebo in controlling the nausea and vomiting induced by cisplatin treatment in 28 patients with cancer. The patients received either three intravenous doses of ondansetron (0.15 mg per kilogram of body weight) or normal saline (placebo) at four-hour intervals, beginning 30 minutes before the administration of cisplatin. Nausea and vomiting were markedly diminished in the group given ondansetron. The median time to the first episode of emesis was 2.8 hours in the placebo group and 11.6 hours in the ondansetron group (P less than 0.001); the median number of episodes in 24 hours was 5.5 in the placebo group and 1.5 in the ondansetron group (P less than 0.001); the mean (+/- SEM) number of regurgitations or dry heaves per episode was 3.2 +/- 0.5 in the placebo group and 1.17 +/- 0.1 in the ondansetron group (P less than 0.001). None of the 14 patients given ondansetron, but 12 of 14 given placebo, required treatment with antiemetic-rescue agents for the control of nausea and vomiting. There were no adverse effects attributable to ondansetron. The urinary excretion of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid, the main metabolite of serotonin, was increased in all patients two to six hours after they received cisplatin chemotherapy, and the increases paralleled the episodes of emesis. We conclude that ondansetron is an effective and safe agent for controlling the nausea and vomiting induced by cisplatin treatment. We suggest that cisplatin treatment increases the release of serotonin from enterochromaffin cells, and that ondansetron acts by blocking S3 receptors for serotonin.

No abstract

Crossbreeding, considering either terminal or rotational crossing, synthetic breed creation or breed replacement, is often promoted as an efficient strategy to increase farmers' income through the improvement of productivity of local livestock in developing countries. Sustainability of crossbreeding is however frequently challenged by constraints such as poor adaptation to the local environment or lack of logistic support. In this review, we investigate factors that may influence the long-term success or the failure of crossbreeding programs, based on the scientific literature and country reports submitted for The Second Report on the State of the World's Animal Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Crossbreeding activities vary widely across species and countries. Its sustainability is dependent on different prerequisites such as continual access to adequate breeding stock (especially after the end of externally funded crossbreeding projects), the opportunity of improved livestock to express their genetic potential (e.g. through providing proper inputs) and integration within a reliable market chain. As formal crossbreeding programs are often associated with adoption of other technologies, they can be a catalyst for innovation and development for smallholders. Given the increasing global demand for animal products, as well as the potential environmental consequences of climate change, there is a need for practical research to improve the implementation of long-term crossbreeding programs in developing countries.