Perspective

Agriculture and biodiversity: a better balance benefits both

  • Sustainable agriculture is an important component of many of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals agreed upon by the UN in 2015 (https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs). However, the trend in agriculture is moving in the opposite, non-sustainable direction. Agriculture is one of the major drivers of biodiversity loss. Next to biodiversity loss due to habitat destruction by conversion of natural lands into agriculture, intensification of agriculture has led to a strong decline of specific farmland biodiversity. Furthermore, many agricultural landscapes face pollution by pesticides and fertilizers, and encounter depleted soils and erosion due to unsustainable farming practices. This is threatening not only biodiversity but also complete ecosystems and the ecosystem services on which agriculture itself depends. Moreover, the pressure of feeding an increasing number of people in combination with a change in diets towards more animal protein puts a lot of additional pressure on the current available agricultural lands and nature areas.
    We propose a holistic approach that contributes to the development and implementation of sustainable agricultural practices that both make use and support biodiversity and ecosystem services both in agricultural and in semi-natural areas. An agricultural system based on the full potential of (functional agro) biodiversity provides opportunities to create a resilient system in which both food production and nature can thrive.

    Citation: Jan Willem Erisman, Nick van Eekeren, Jan de Wit, Chris Koopmans, Willemijn Cuijpers, Natasja Oerlemans, Ben J. Koks. Agriculture and biodiversity: a better balance benefits both[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2016, 1(2): 157-174. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2016.2.157

    Related Papers:

    [1] Terri Rebmann, Kristin D. Wilson, Travis Loux, Ayesha Z. Iqbal, Eleanor B. Peters, Olivia Peavler . Outcomes, Approaches, and Challenges to Developing and Passing a Countywide Mandatory Vaccination Policy: St. Louis County’s Experience with Hepatitis A Vaccine for Food Service Personnel. AIMS Public Health, 2016, 3(1): 116-130. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2016.1.116
    [2] Maria Mercedes Ferreira Caceres, Juan Pablo Sosa, Jannel A Lawrence, Cristina Sestacovschi, Atiyah Tidd-Johnson, Muhammad Haseeb UI Rasool, Vinay Kumar Gadamidi, Saleha Ozair, Krunal Pandav, Claudia Cuevas-Lou, Matthew Parrish, Ivan Rodriguez, Javier Perez Fernandez . The impact of misinformation on the COVID-19 pandemic. AIMS Public Health, 2022, 9(2): 262-277. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2022018
    [3] Sheikh Mohd Saleem, Sudip Bhattacharya . Reducing the infectious diseases burden through “life course approach vaccination” in India—a perspective. AIMS Public Health, 2021, 8(3): 553-562. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2021045
    [4] Henry V. Doctor . Assessing Antenatal Care and Newborn Survival in Sub-Saharan Africa within the Context of Renewed Commitments to Save Newborn Lives. AIMS Public Health, 2016, 3(3): 432-447. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2016.3.432
    [5] Akari Miyazaki, Naoko Kumada Deguchi, Tomoko Omiya . Difficulties and distress experienced by Japanese public health nurses specializing in quarantine services when dealing with COVID-19: A qualitative study in peri-urban municipality. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(2): 235-251. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023018
    [6] Peng Wang, Zhenyi Li, Alice Jones, Michael E. Bodner, Elizabeth Dean . Discordance between lifestyle-related health behaviors and beliefs of urban mainland Chinese: A questionnaire study with implications for targeting health education. AIMS Public Health, 2019, 6(1): 49-66. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2019.1.49
    [7] Safaa Badi, Loai Abdelgadir Babiker, Abdullah Yasseen Aldow, Almigdad Badr Aldeen Abas, Mazen Abdelhafiez Eisa, Mohamed Nour Abu-Ali, Wagass Abdelrhman Abdella, Mohamed Elsir Marzouq, Musaab Ahmed, Abubakr Ali M Omer, Mohamed H Ahmed . Knowledge and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccination in Sudan: A cross-sectional study. AIMS Public Health, 2023, 10(2): 310-323. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2023023
    [8] Samer A Kharroubi, Marwa Diab-El-Harake . Sex differences in COVID-19 mortality: A large US-based cohort study (2020–2022). AIMS Public Health, 2024, 11(3): 886-904. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024045
    [9] Niclas Olofsson . A life course model of self-reported violence exposure and illhealth with a public health problem perspective. AIMS Public Health, 2014, 1(1): 9-24. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2014.1.9
    [10] Malik Sallam, Kholoud Al-Mahzoum, Lujain Alkandari, Aisha Shabakouh, Asmaa Shabakouh, Abiar Ali, Fajer Alenezi, Muna Barakat . Descriptive analysis of TikTok content on vaccination in Arabic. AIMS Public Health, 2025, 12(1): 137-161. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2025010
  • Sustainable agriculture is an important component of many of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals agreed upon by the UN in 2015 (https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs). However, the trend in agriculture is moving in the opposite, non-sustainable direction. Agriculture is one of the major drivers of biodiversity loss. Next to biodiversity loss due to habitat destruction by conversion of natural lands into agriculture, intensification of agriculture has led to a strong decline of specific farmland biodiversity. Furthermore, many agricultural landscapes face pollution by pesticides and fertilizers, and encounter depleted soils and erosion due to unsustainable farming practices. This is threatening not only biodiversity but also complete ecosystems and the ecosystem services on which agriculture itself depends. Moreover, the pressure of feeding an increasing number of people in combination with a change in diets towards more animal protein puts a lot of additional pressure on the current available agricultural lands and nature areas.
    We propose a holistic approach that contributes to the development and implementation of sustainable agricultural practices that both make use and support biodiversity and ecosystem services both in agricultural and in semi-natural areas. An agricultural system based on the full potential of (functional agro) biodiversity provides opportunities to create a resilient system in which both food production and nature can thrive.


    1. Introduction

    In late 2014 and early 2015 a measles outbreak occurred in California that began when an unvaccinated 11-year old with an active infection visited a theme park. The disease was subsequently observed in 24 States (not all of which were linked to the California outbreak), with a total of 188 new cases identified in that year [1]. This outbreak was declared over on April 17, 2015. About 88 percent of the earliest cases of measles in California occurred among children who were either unvaccinated, or who had unknown or undocumented vaccine status [2]. The virus type in the California outbreak was identified as B3, which is the same virus type that caused a measles outbreak in the Philippines in 2014, and which has been linked to measles cases in 14 other countries since the California outbreak began.

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lists 16 vaccine-preventable diseases—measles among them [3]. Prior to vaccinations in the U.S., 20% of those who developed measles, required hospitalization; poliomyelitis caused about 15,000 cases of paralysis every year; about 85% of infants born to mothers infected with rubella during the first trimester had serious birth defects; and the total estimated morbidity count associated with diseases that are now vaccine preventable was more than 1.1 million cases every year [4]. Although vaccinations have long been known to reduce morbidity and save lives [5], the recent outbreak of measles in the United States has been linked directly to the rise of an anti-vaccination movement [6]. Vaccination rates for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) in the U.S. are now as low as 50%-86%; well below the threshold of 96%-99% required to achieve herd immunity [7].

    If the anti-vaccination movement gains any additional traction, developed and developing nations will have taken a dangerous step backward in protecting public health, especially that of children. There are many ways to re-emphasize the health benefits of vaccinations, but one novel approach that represents a perfect example of applied demography in public health is to illustrate how many lives have been saved, and how many people are alive today, as a result of a single breakthrough in the chain of historical events that led to the development and successful dissemination of live attenuated viral vaccines. 1 Here we illustrate how the discovery and use of a single cell strain used to grow most viral vaccines in use today (WI-38 [8] and a later derivative [9]), has already had a powerful impact on human life on an order of magnitude that is unprecedented in the history of public health. 2 This direct application of applied demography will shed new light on (1) the importance of vaccines in saving lives, (2) the chain of fortuitous events that occurred to create a public health breakthrough of this magnitude and, (3) make clear that the anti-vaccination movement represents a serious threat to a proven public health intervention.

    1 Our focus in this manuscript is only on live attenuated viral vaccines because we're using the development of a single cell strain (WI-38) critical in their creation as a unique way to illustrate the global health impacts of vaccines in general. This paper is not intended to serve as a review of all vaccine production techniques (such as DNA or recombinant methods), which are acknowledged to be critically important links in the chain of events that led to the successful creation and dissemination of vaccines.

    2 We use WI-38 as a point of reference because of its specific link to certain vaccines early in the vaccine movement, and because its development in the early 1960's served as a catalyst for the field. Full credit for the life-saving effects of vaccines belongs to the breakthroughs, scientific advances, and hard work of countless scientists and health care providers, all of whom together contributed to building the chain of vaccine development and use.

    A Brief History of Vaccinations

    Throughout most of human history, living a long life was rare because communicable diseases killed most people before the age of ten [10]. It wasn't until the discovery and dissemination of public health measures (broadly defined as indoor living and working environments, cooking [which kills pathogenic organisms], hand washing, refrigeration, sewage treatment and waste removal, clean water, and medical interventions (such as vaccinations) that the duration of life attained by many in both developed and developing nations, increased dramatically.

    Among the countless critical developments in the history of public health, one of the earliest and most important was the scientific status conferred to vaccination through the work of Edward Jenner in 1796 [11]. Prior to Jenner's discovery that dairymaids exposed to cowpox were immune to smallpox, inoculation (referred to as variolation at the time) was a common practice. This required the inoculator to lance a pustule on someone with active cowpox, and deliver the inoculant subcutaneously to a person previously unexposed. Not everyone benefitted from this procedure and some even died as a result. Jenner's discovery was that exposure to the milder cowpox conferred protection from smallpox - a related but usually lethal communicable disease.

    Vaccination is now one of the foundational legs of public health. In the 20th century, the top eight infectious diseases that are now amenable to treatment through viral and bacterial vaccines (smallpox, measles, whooping cough (pertussis), tetanus, meningitis, Hepatitis B, diphtheria and poliomyelitis) accounted for an estimated 600 million deaths and countless more cases of disability. Vaccines in use today are responsible for annually saving an estimated 3 million lives worldwide, and many more are saved from permanent disability. In spite of documented health and longevity benefits of vaccination, 3 an estimated 1.4 million children under the age of 5 still die every year due to lack of access to vaccines [12].

    3 As an example of what happens when vaccination stops, consider that in 1974 about 80% of Japanese children received pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine. That year there were only 393 cases of whooping cough in the entire country, and not a single pertussis-related death. Then immunization rates for children dropped to 10 percent. In 1979, more than 13,000 people had whooping cough and 41 died. When routine vaccination was resumed, the disease numbers dropped again (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/whatifstop.htm#final).

    Critical to the modern success story of vaccinations, was a series of events required to transform the discovery that vaccines worked, to actually developing, testing, and administering them to large segments of the population. 4 The chain of discovery behind vaccine development includes: (1) isolating the etiological agent that causes a disease (a virus in the example discussed here); (2) developing a method of enabling the virus to reproduce so that sufficient progeny are produced to make a vaccine (viruses are obligate intracellular parasites that are unable to reproduce without a living cell as a host); (3) attenuating or killing the virus so it can no longer produce disease; (4) purifying the vaccine; (5) testing the vaccine for safety and efficacy; (6) storing and transporting it safely (this may require refrigeration); and then (7) distributing it to the population. A break in any one of these links in the chain of events for vaccine development and use, and the entire system fails. The focus of this analysis will be on step # 2 in this chain of events—the development of a live cell strain used to grow viruses.

    4 The focus of this analysis will be on human virus vaccines only, although it is acknowledged that bacterial vaccines for typhoid, tetanus, pertussis, pneumonia and other bacterial diseases have had a large impact on saving and extending lives.

    In the early development of the poliomyelitis vaccines, the first to be prepared in a cell culture, cells isolated from monkey kidneys (and never transferred from the first or primary vessel) were used to grow the viruses. However, it was discovered that these primary cells were often contaminated with dangerous viruses common to monkeys [13]. One contaminant, S.V. 40, was capable of producing tumors in laboratory animals and transforming cultured normal human cells into cancer cells [14]. Other contaminants were either lethal for vaccine workers or could produce pathology [15]. It was recognized in the early 1960s that step #2 in the chain of virus vaccine development was a critical step for creating safe and efficacious vaccines [16,17].

    The first human cell strain used for the production of licensed human virus vaccines, was WI-38 developed by one of us (L.H.) at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia in 1962. Unlike primary cell cultures, WI-38 is passaged from one vessel to additional vessels ad seriatim, thus producing almost unlimited numbers of cells from a single source for the manufacture of many human virus vaccines. Because a single cell strain can be frozen for indefinite periods of time, WI-38 has been frozen for 55 years, which is the longest period of time that normal human cells have been frozen. Of great importance, and unlike primary cells, WI-38 was exhaustively tested for safety and efficacy before use [18]. Freezing primary cells for testing is impractical. Since the early 1960's, the vast majority of human virus vaccines have been grown in WI-38 or its derivatives, 5 making its discovery and continued use a critical innovation in the historical chain of events required for vaccine development [19]. Unlike monkey kidney primary cultures, the importance of WI-38 is that (1) it is derived from a single donor, (2) it is free from contaminating viruses, and (3) it can be frozen for indefinite periods of time and tested for safety and efficacy before use in large scale vaccine manufacture [20]. WI-38 was distributed by Dr. Hayflick gratis to the world's human virus vaccine manufacturers.

    5 It is important to acknowledge that other uncontaminated human cell strains were subsequently developed. These were established years after the original development of WI-38 was described and used to develop and produce vaccines (e.g, the MRC-5 cell strain was developed in 1970 in the U.K). We consider WI-38 and MRC-5 together in this analysis because they were both important in the historical developments of virus vaccines for public health.

    Here we illustrate the unique contribution of the WI-38 cell strain to all human virus vaccines administered globally since the strains' origin in 1962, and the impact of these vaccinations on global trends in number of deaths averted and fetal deaths avoided due to the use of the WI-38 based Rubella vaccine. This example of applied demographic research is designed to illustrate how a demographic analysis, when applied to cell biology, yields unique insights into the value of public health interventions and the challenges posed by threats to public health that continue to emerge in the modern era.


    2. Data and Methods

    Vaccines for the following virus-based diseases were developed using WI-38: poliomyelitis, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella (chicken pox), herpes zoster, 6 adenovirus, rabies and Hepatitis A. Reliable estimates of the number of pre-vaccine annual cases and deaths from most of these diseases in the United States have been published [21]. Due to annual variability in the prevalence and death rate from each disease, 1960 was chosen as a single frame of reference for estimating the health impact of the vaccines. Prevalence rates and disease-specific death rates were held constant from 1960 through 2015 as a way to assess the hypothetical impact of vaccine dissemination on vaccine-preventable cases and deaths. That is, it was assumed that prevalence rates and death rates from these diseases observed in 1960 would have prevailed annually through 2015 in the absence of vaccines, thus reflecting the independent effect of growing population size on disease prevalence. Since vaccines were introduced in different years beginning in 1963, only those years from vaccine introduction to 2015 were used in each case (for example, the prevalence rate of poliomyelitis observed in 1960 was 36,110 cases per 3.04 million people in the U.S., see Table 1, this rate was assumed to apply annually to the observed U.S. population from 1963 through 2015). Cases and deaths were then summed between year of vaccine introduction and 2015 as an estimate of the cumulative health impactof the vaccine. Vaccine coverage was assumed to be 95 percent.

    6 Herpes zoster will not be included in this analysis because of complications associated with assessing its prevalence and the effectiveness of the WI-38 based vaccine.

    Table 1. Viral diseases treated with vaccines prepared using the WI-38 cell strain or its derivatives, year each vaccine was introduced, annual cases, pre-vaccine annual deaths, and cases and deaths averted or treated from each disease from year of introduction to 2015 (with 95% coverage).
    DiseaseYear
    Introduced
    Vaccine
    annual cases
    (U.S., 1960)
    Pre-vaccine
    annual deaths
    (U.S.)
    Cases averted
    or treated with
    95% coverage
    Deaths
    averted with
    95% coverage
    Poliomyelitis196336,1105,8652,547,045413,692
    Measles1969-70530,21744034,137,12928,329
    Mumps1967162,3443910,792,3172,593
    Rubella196947,745173,073,9811,095
    Varicella
    (chicken pox)
    1995-964,085,120107133,691,8073,436
    Hepatitis A1996117,3331373,674,9884,291
    Rabies#197418,000-10,000,000-
    Adenovirus *196411,138-375,619-
    Total (U.S.)5,017,0076,603198,292,887453,435
    Estimates of cases and deaths were obtained from the following sources:
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/G/cases-deaths.pdf
    Roush SW, Murphy TV (2007) JAMA 298: 2155-2163.
    http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=209448.
    Population estimates were obtained from the following sources:
    http://www.census.gov/population/international/data/worldpop/table_population.php.
    http://www.census.gov/prod/cen1990/cph2/cph-2-1-1.pdf.
    # The majority of cases of rabies treated with the WI-38 based vaccine occurred after the disease appeared rather than as a preventative measure (http://www.rightdiagnosis.com/r/rabies/stats.htm). The value of the WI-38 based rabies vaccine was that it eliminated the painful side effects associated with the previous vaccine made in neuronal tissue.
    * The adenovirus was developed in 1966 and first administered to military personnel in 1971. Estimates provided here assume .04% of the total U.S. population served in the armed forces annually; prevalence of adenovirus among military forces is 1.1% annually; and these calculations apply only for the years 1971-1999 and 2011-2016 when the WI-38 related adenovirus vaccine was administered.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    3. Results

    The estimated total number of cases of poliomyelitis, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, adenovirus, rabies, and hepatitis A averted or treated in the U.S. alone due to the introduction of vaccines developed with the WI-38 cell strain, is 198 million (Table 1). The estimated total number of deaths averted from these same diseases in the U.S. is approximately 450,000. In 1964-65, rubella caused 11,000 fetal deaths in the U.S. [22]. This implies that the rubella vaccine introduced in 1969 averted approximately 633,000 fetal deaths in the U.S. since it was first introduced.

    Although it is not possible to generate precise global estimates of cases and deaths averted due to the use of vaccines based exclusively on the WI-38 cell strain or its derivatives, a rough approximation may be obtained by assuming (very conservatively) 7 that the prevalence rates and death rates for these diseases observed in the U.S. apply equally to the entire human population. Under this assumption, the estimated total number of cases of poliomyelitis, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, adenovirus, rabies and hepatitis A averted or treated due to the introduction of vaccines developed with the WI-38 cell strain and its derivatives, is about 4.5 billion globally (720 million in Africa; 387 million in Latin America and the Caribbean; 2.7 billion in Asia; and 455 million in Europe). 8 The estimated total number of deaths averted from these same diseases is about 10.3 million (1.6 million in Africa; 886 thousand in Latin America and the Caribbean; 6.2 million in Asia; and 1.0 million in Europe).

    7 The true number of cases and deaths averted is likely to be orders of magnitude greater than this because prevalence and death rates from these diseases are typically higher in developing nations, but these numbers are sufficient to illustrate the minimum health impact of these vaccines.

    8 Estimated by taking the fractional proportion of the total population from each of these regions from population estimates provided by the Population Reference Bureau (prb.org), and assuming that the prevalence rates and death rates for these diseases observed in the U.S., apply equally to the entire human population. While it is possible to use the fractional proportion of the total population contained within each of these regions annually since the early 1960s for such an estimate, we do not want to give a false sense of precision by doing so. As noted above, the prevalence and death rates from the U.S. are likely to be lower than that observed in developing nations where most of the global population resides, so the estimates provided here are likely to be very conservative. While all nations are represented in the global estimates, not all nations are represented by the regional data provided here.


    4. Discussion

    The history of public health is filled with success stories, but each success has met with significant challenges. In the case of Edward Jenner's work on a vaccine for smallpox, he was first attacked and ridiculed for his ideas and, of course, later vindicated. The modern rise of the anti-vaccine movement accelerated with a manuscript published in 1998 claiming that the MMR vaccine caused developmental disorders in children [23]. Even though that article was retracted by the journal that published it [24], evidence suggests that a significant and dangerously high percentage of the U.S. population either delays or refuses vaccinations for their children within the first 24 months of life [25].

    The fact remains that humanity now experiences longer and healthier lives than at any time in history, in large measure, because of the development and dissemination of vaccines that prevent most of the fatal and disabling communicable diseases that plagued our species for millennia. There is no medication, lifestyle change, public health innovation, or medical procedure ever developed that has even come close to the life-saving, life-extending, and primary prevention benefits associated with vaccines. The initial primary beneficiaries of vaccine development and dissemination have been children, and these benefits have accrued for every generation since vaccines first became widely available. In fact, as those saved from dying early in life live into their working years, national economies also benefit as linkages between the health and wealth of nations has been well established [26].

    Each discovery or breakthrough in the chain of events that led to vaccines becoming a public health success story may have occurred eventually. However, timing is important, and there is no question that when the WI-38 cell strain became available in 1962, it was fortuitously discovered at the same time that the primary monkey kidney cells used to manufacture the poliomyelitis vaccines were found to have been contaminated. Thus, the use of WI-38 represented a catalyst for subsequent vaccine development. In fact, the success of the research that resulted in the development of WI-38 in 1962 occurred when federal research funds were not prohibited for use in studying the biology of tissue derived from aborted human fetuses. However, during several subsequent presidential administrations, that prohibition was enforced. If that prohibition had been in effect in 1962, it is unlikely that in the subsequent 55 years, there would be billions of people who benefitted from virus vaccines produced in WI-38.

    A delay of even one year in the development of an uncontaminated cell strain for vaccine development would have cost humanity millions of lives and countless more cases of vaccine preventable morbidity. Today, a majority of the world's 7.5 billion people have been vaccinated against viral diseases with the use of the WI-38 cell strain and its derivatives. Nearly everyone born in the developed world since 1962 received at least one vaccine manufactured with the WI-38 cell strain, along with a growing proportion of the population in developing nations. WI-38 and its derivatives are still in use for producing many viral vaccines that are distributed worldwide today.

    Billions of people are alive today who would otherwise have either died in childhood or who would have been crippled or disabled by vaccine preventable diseases. The World Health Organization estimates that all immunizations now available avert about 2.5 million deaths among children every year, but many more lives could still be saved if vaccines were universally available. In fact, it is ironic that the rubella vaccine (which is produced in theWI-38 cell strain that originated from an aborted human fetus) is vigorously opposed by anti-choice advocates, even though this vaccine prevented over 633,000 miscarriages in the U.S. alone, and countless more across the globe, and it has prevented tens of millions of clinical health issues in children (e.g., encephalitis, autism, deafness, diabetes, etc.) linked to congenital rubella syndrome [27].

    Given the extent to which vaccines were made available to today's generation of reproducing adults when they were children, it is likely that most of the people involved in today's anti-vaccination movement have improved health (or are alive today) because their parents and pediatricians had the foresight to administer vaccines to them when they were young. The same health benefits are being denied to their children for reasons that are indefensible from a public health perspective. The anti-vaccination movement endangers the health of an entire generation of children. Its potential to negatively influence national economies is evident, and it threatens a 150-year old public health success story. The signing of Senate Bill No. 277 (Public Health: Vaccinations) by Governor Brown in California strikes the state's personal exemption for immunizations that was being used by some to allow their children to attend school without being vaccinated [28]. This represents a powerful new reaffirmation that vaccinations save lives.

    It is possible that the anti-vaccination movement has arisen among younger generations, in part, because they cannot bear witness to the tragedy of disfigurement, morbidity, and death caused by viral and bacterial diseases. However, as the 2015 outbreak of measles in California reminds us, the diseases our ancestors feared so much have not gone away—they lay dormant in many parts of the world where they resurface on occasion as a constant reminder of their existence. They will return if we lower our guard and allow herd immunity to drop below threshold levels. So as a potent reminder of their devastating impact, we provide images of what poliomyelitis, measles, and smallpox (three examples among many) does to human bodies. The anti-vaccination movement is a wake-up call to reinforce defenses against the diseases that plagued humanity from the beginning.

    Figure 1. Measles
    Figure 2. Poliomyelitis
    Figure 3. Smallpox

    Acknowledgments

    Support for Dr. Olshansky was provided, in part, by the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on an Aging Society.


    Conflict of Interest

    All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.


    [1] Convention on Biological Diversity, United Nations. 1992. Available from: https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf
    [2] Fahrig L, Baudry J, Brotons L, et al. (2011) Functional landscape heterogeneity and animal biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. Ecol Lett 14: 101-112. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01559.x
    [3] Odum EP (1969) The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262-270 doi: 10.1126/science.164.3877.262
    [4] Holling CS (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4: 1-23. doi: 10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245
    [5] Beintema AJ (1986) Man-made Polders in the Netherlands: a Traditional Habitat for shorebirds. Colon Waterbirds 9: 196-202 doi: 10.2307/1521213
    [6] EEA (2015) European ecosystem assessment — concept, data, and implementation. Contribution to Target 2 Action 5 Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. EEA Technical Report no.6/2015, EEA, Copenhagen, Denmark.
    [7] Henckel L, Borger L, Meiss H, et al. (2015) Organic fields sustain weed metacommunity dynamics in farmland landscapes. Proc R Soc B 282: 20150002. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2015.0002
    [8] Wereld Natuur Fonds (2015) Living Planet Report. Natuur in Nederland. WNF, Zeist, The Netherlands.
    [9] Buckwell A, Uhre AN, Williams A, et al. (2012) Sustainable Intensification of European Agriculture A review sponsored by the RISE Foundation. www.risefoundation.eu
    [10] Geiger F, Bengtsson J, Berendse F, et al. (2010) Persistent negative effects of pesticides and biological control potential on European farmland. Basic Appl Ecol 11: 97-105. doi: 10.1016/j.baae.2009.12.001
    [11] Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, et al. (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309: 570-574. doi: 10.1126/science.1111772
    [12] Lechenet M, Bretagnolle V, Bockstaller C, et al. (2014) Reconciling pesticide reduction with economic and environmental sustainability in arable farming. PLoS ONE 9: e97922. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097922
    [13] FAO, WFP and IFAD (2012) The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2012. Economic growth is necessary but not sufficient to accelerate reduction of hunger and malnutrition. Rome, FAO.
    [14] Tittonell P (2013) Farming Systems Ecology. Towards ecological intensification of world agriculture. Inaugural lecture upon taking up the position of Chair in Farming Systems Ecology at Wageningen University on 16 May 2013. http://www.wageningenur.nl/en/show/Feeding-the-world-population-sustainably-and- efficiently-with-ecologically-intensive-agriculture.htm.
    [15] Tomich TP, Brodt S, Ferris H, et al. (2011) Agroecology: A Review from a Global-Change Perspective. Annu Rev Environ Resour 36: 193-222. doi: 10.1146/annurev-environ-012110-121302
    [16] Davis AS, Hill JD, Chase CA, et al. (2012) Increasing Cropping System Diversity Balances Productivity, Profitability and Environmental Health. PLoS ONE 7: e47149. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0047149
    [17] Tilman D, Wedin D, Knops J (1996) Productivity and sustainability influenced by biodiversity in grassland ecosystems. Nature 379: 718-720. doi: 10.1038/379718a0
    [18] Tilman D, Reich P, Isbell F (2012) Biodiversity impacts ecosystem productivity as much as resources, disturbance or herbivory. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109: 10394-10397.
    [19] FAO (2010) Sustainable Diets and Biodiversity. Directions and Solutions for Policy, Research and Action. Proceedings of the International Scientific Symposium ‘Biodiversity and Sustainable Diets United Against Hunger’ on 3-5 November 2010 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
    [20] Cardinale BJ, Duffy JE, Gonzalez A, et al. (2012) Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486: 59-67. doi: 10.1038/nature11148
    [21] Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Manning AD (2006) Biodiversity, ecosystem function, and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Front Ecol Environ 4: 80-86.
    [22] Huyghe C, Litrico I, Surault F (2012) Agronomic value and provisioning services of multi-species swards. Grassl Sci Eur 17: 35-46.
    [23] Schmid B (2002) The species richness-productivity controversy. Trends Ecol Evol 17: 113-114.
    [24] Zuppinger-Dingley D, Schmid B, Petermann JS, et al. (2014) Selection for niche differentiation in plant communities increases biodiversity effects. Nature 515: 108-111. doi: 10.1038/nature13869
    [25] Vandermeer J, van Noordwijk M, Anderson J, et al. (1998) Global change and multi-species agroecosystems: Concepts and issues. Agric Ecosyst Environ 67: 1-22. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(97)00150-3
    [26] Walker B (1995) Conserving biological diversity through ecosystem resilience. Conserv Biol 9: 747-752. doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1995.09040747.x
    [27] Jacobsen SE, Sørensen M, Pedersen S, et al. (2013) Feeding the world: genetically modified crops versus agricultural biodiversity. Agron Sustain Dev 33: 651-662.
    [28] Altieri MA (2009) Agroecology, small farms and food sovereignty. Mon Rev 61: 102.
    [29] Mundt CC (2002) Use of multiline cultivars and cultivar mixtures for disease management. Annu Rev Phytopathol 40: 381-410. doi: 10.1146/annurev.phyto.40.011402.113723
    [30] Wolfe MS (2000) Crop strength through diversity. Nature 406: 681-682. doi: 10.1038/35021152
    [31] Jareño D, Viñuela J, Luque-Larena JJ, et al. (2015) Factors associated with the colonization of agricultural areas by common voles Microtus arvalis in NW Spain. Biol Invasions 17: 2315-2327.
    [32] Evans KL (2004) The potential for interactions between predation and habitat change to cause population declines of farmland birds. Ibis 146: 1-13.
    [33] Kentie R, Both C, Hooijmeijer JCE, et al. (2015) Management of modern agricultural landscapes increases nest predation rates in Black-tailed Godwits Limosa limosa. Ibis 157: 614-625. doi: 10.1111/ibi.12273
    [34] Bretagnolle V, Gauffre B, Meiss H, et al. (2011) The Role of Grassland Areas within Arable Cropping Systems for the Conservation of Biodiversity at the Regional Level. In: Grassland Productivity and Ecosystem Services, ed. Lemaire, G. et al. 251-60. USA: CABI
    [35] Pywell RF, Heard MS, Woodcock BA, et al. (2015) Wildlife friendly farming increases crop yield: evidence for ecological intensification. Proc R Soc B 282: 20151740. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2015.1740
    [36] Compendium, 2015. Available from: https://www.Compendiumvoordeleefomgeving.nl
    [37] Donald PF, Sanderson FJ, Burfield IJ, et al. (2006) Further evidence of continent-wide impacts of agricultural intensification on European farmland birds, 1990-2000. Agric Ecosyst Environ 116: 189-196. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.02.007
    [38] Ministry of Economic Affairs (2014) Convention on Biological Diversity. Fifth National Report of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Den Haag, The Netherlands.
    [39] PBL (2014) Balans van de Leefomgeving 2014. De toekomst is nú, Den Haag: Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving. The Netherlands.
    [40] Dise NB, Ashmore M, Belyazid S, et al. (2011) Nitrogen as a threat to European terrestrial biodiversity. In: The European Nitrogen Assessment, ed. Sutton MA, Howard CM, Erisman JW, et al. Cambridge University Press.
    [41] Erisman JW, Galloway JN, Dise NB, et al. (2015) Nitrogen: Too much of a vital resource. WWF Netherlands, Zeist, the Netherlands. 27.
    [42] Van den Noort PC (1987) Land consolidation in the Netherlands. Land Use Policy 4: 11-13. doi: 10.1016/0264-8377(87)90004-4
    [43] Napel J, Bianchi F, Bestman MWP (2006) Utilising intrinsic robustness in agricultural production systems. TransForum Working Papers. 32-53. (available at www.louisbolk.org)
    [44] Erisman JW, Brasseur G, Ciais P, et al. (2015) Global change: Put people at the centre of global risk management. Nature 519: 151-153. doi: 10.1038/519151a
    [45] Altieri MA (1999) The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 74: 19-31.
    [46] Rodale Institute (2011) The farming systems trial. Celebrating 30 years. The Rodale Institute, USA. Available from: http://rodaleinstitute.org/assets/FSTbooklet.pdf
    [47] De Schutter O (2010) Report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food, Olivier De Schutter. United Nations, General Assembly. Human Rights Council, Sixteenth session, Agenda item 3: Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development. Available from: www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/food/docs/A-HRC-16-49. pdf). August 17, 2011.
    [48] Deru J, Schilder H, Van der Schoot JR, et al. (2014) Genetic differences in root mass of Lolium perenne varieties under eld conditions. Euphytica 199: 223-232.
    [49] Gewin V (2010) An underground revolution. Nature 466: 552-553. doi: 10.1038/466552a
    [50] Van Grinsven HJM, Holland M, Jacobsen BH, et al. (2013) Costs and Benefits of Nitrogen for Europe and Implications for Mitigation. Environ Sci Technol 47: 3571-3579. doi: 10.1021/es303804g
    [51] Lin BB (2011) Resilience in Agriculture through Crop Diversification: Adaptive Management for Environmental Change. BioScience 61: 183-193.
    [52] De Ponti T, Rijk B, Van Ittersum MK (2012) The crop yield gap between organic and conventional agriculture. Agric Syst 108: 1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2011.12.004
    [53] Seufert V, Ramankutty N, Foley JA (2012) Comparing the yields of organic and conventional agriculture. Nature 485: 229-232 doi: 10.1038/nature11069
    [54] Ponisio LC, M’Gonigle LK, Mace KC, et al. (2015) Diversification practices reduce organic to conventional yield gap. Proc R Soc B 282: 20141396.
    [55] Altieri MA, Nicholls CI, Henao A, et al. (2015) Agroecology and the design of climate change-resilient farming systems. Agron Sustain Dev 35: 869-890 doi: 10.1007/s13593-015-0285-2
    [56] Isbell F, Craven D, Connolly J, et al. (2015) Biodiversity increases the resistance of ecosystem productivity to climate extremes. Nature 526: 574-577. doi: 10.1038/nature15374
    [57] Nemes N (2009) Comparative analysis of organic and non-organic farming systems: a critical assessment of farm profitability. FAO, Rome, Italy.
    [58] Gonthier DJ, Ennis KJ, Farinas S, et al. (2014) Biodiversity conservation in agriculture requires a multi-scale approach. Proc R Soc B 281: 20141358. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2014.1358
    [59] Smith HG, Dänhardt J, Lindström A, et al. (2010) Consequences of organic farming and landscape heterogeneity for species richness and abundance of farmland birds. Oecologia 162: 1071-1079 doi: 10.1007/s00442-010-1588-2
    [60] Smits MJW, van Alebeek FAN (2007) Biodiversiteit en kleine landschapselementen in de biologische landbouw; Een literatuurstudie. Wageningen, Wettelijke Onderzoekstaken Natuur & Milieu, WOT-rapport 39. 84.
    [61] Schneider MK, Lüscher G, Jeanneret P, et al. (2014) Gains to species diversity in organically farmed fields are not propagated at the farm level. Nat Commun 5: 1-9.
    [62] Kretschmer H, Pfeffer H, Hoffmann J, et al. (1995) Strukturelemente in Agrarlandschaften Ostdeutschlands - Bedeutung für den Biotop- und Artenschutz. ZALF-Bericht 19, Selbstverlag ZALF, Müncheberg: 164 S.
    [63] Hoffmann J, Kretschmer H, Pfeffer H (1999) Effects of Current Landscape Patterns on Biodiversity. -In: Tenhunen, J.D., R. Lenz und R.E. Hantschel (Hrsg.): Ecosystem properties and landscape function in Central Europe. Ecological Studies. Springer.
    [64] Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD (2003) Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends Ecol Evol 18: 182-188. doi: 10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00011-9
    [65] Allan E, Bossdorf O, Dormann CF, et al. (2014) Interannual variation in land-use intensity enhances grassland multidiversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111: 308-313. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1312213111
    [66] Payne RJ, Thompson AM, Standen V, et al. (2012) Impact of simulated nitrogen pollution on heathland microfauna, mesofauna and plants. Eur J Soil Biol 49: 73-79.
    [67] Wymenga E, Latour J, Beemster N, et al. (2015) Terugkerende muizenplagen in Nederland. Inventarisatie, sturende factoren en beheersing. A&W-rapport 2123. Altenburg & Wymenga bv, Alterra Wageningen UR, Livestock Research Wageningen, Wetterskip Fryslân, Stichting Werkgroep Grauwe Kiekendief. Feanwâlden.
    [68] Van Eekeren N, Heeres E, Smeding F (2003) Leven onder de graszode - Discussiestuk over het beoordelen en beïnvloeden van bodemleven in de biologische melkveehouderij. Louis Bolk publikatie LV 52. Louis Bolk Instituut Driebergen, The Netherlands.
    [69] Van Groenigen JW, Lubbers IM, Vos HMJ, et al. (2014) Earthworms increase plant production: a meta-analysis. Sci Reports 4: 6365. doi: 10.1038/srep06365
    [70] Geiger F (2011) Agricultural intensification and farmland birds. Thesis Wageningen University, The Netherlands.
    [71] Brink C, van Grinsven H, Jacobsen BH, et al. (2011) Costs and benefits of nitrogen in the environment. In: Sutton MA, Howard CM, Erisman JW, et al. (Eds). The European Nitrogen Assessment. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press, Chapter 19, pp. 434-462.
    [72] Compton JE, Harrison JA, Dennis RL, et al. (2011) Ecosystem services altered by human changes in the nitrogen cycle: a new perspective for US decision making. Ecol Lett 14: 804-815. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01631.x
    [73] Frison EA, Cherfas J, Hodgkin T (2011) Agricultural biodiversity is essential for a sustainable improvement in food and nutrition security. Sustainability 3: 238-253. doi: 10.3390/su3010238
    [74] Lemaire G, Franzluebbers A, Carvalho PCF, et al. (2014) Integrated crop-livestock systems: Strategies to achieve synergy between agricultural production and environmental quality. Agric Ecosyst Environ 190: 4-8. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2013.08.009
    [75] Grace JB, Anderson TM, Seabloom EW, et al. (2016) Integrative modelling reveals mechanisms linking productivity and plant species richness. Nature 529: 390-393. doi: 10.1038/nature16524
    [76] Van Eekeren N, Verhoeven F, Erisman JW (2015) Verkenning Kritische Prestatie Indicatoren voor stimulering van een biodiverse melkveehouderij. Louis Bolk, Driebergen, The Netherlands.
    [77] Groot JCJ, Rossing WAH, Jellema A, et al. (2007) Exploring multi-scale trade-offs between nature conservation, agricultural profits and landscape quality - a methodology to support discussions on land-use perspectives. Agric Ecosyst Environ 120: 58-69. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.03.037
    [78] De Snoo GR, Herzon I, Staats H, et al. (2012) Toward effective nature conservation on farmland: making farmers matter. Conserv Lett 6: 66-72.
    [79] Duru M, Therond O, Martin G (2015) How to implement biodiversity-based agriculture to enhance ecosystem services: A review. Agron Sustain Dev 35: 1259-1281.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Rana Nikzad, Laura S. Angelo, Kevin Aviles-Padilla, Duy T. Le, Vipul K. Singh, Lynn Bimler, Milica Vukmanovic-Stejic, Elena Vendrame, Thanmayi Ranganath, Laura Simpson, Nancy L. Haigwood, Catherine A. Blish, Arne N. Akbar, Silke Paust, Human natural killer cells mediate adaptive immunity to viral antigens, 2019, 4, 2470-9468, eaat8116, 10.1126/sciimmunol.aat8116
    2. Alexis Laurent, Nathalie Hirt-Burri, Corinne Scaletta, Murielle Michetti, Anthony S. de Buys Roessingh, Wassim Raffoul, Lee Ann Applegate, Holistic Approach of Swiss Fetal Progenitor Cell Banking: Optimizing Safe and Sustainable Substrates for Regenerative Medicine and Biotechnology, 2020, 8, 2296-4185, 10.3389/fbioe.2020.557758
    3. Hung Wei Lai, Ryuta Sasaki, Shiro Usuki, Motowo Nakajima, Tohru Tanaka, Shun-ichiro Ogura, Novel strategy to increase specificity of ALA-Induced PpIX accumulation through inhibition of transporters involved in ALA uptake, 2019, 27, 15721000, 327, 10.1016/j.pdpdt.2019.06.017
    4. Clementina Sansone, Christian Galasso, Marco Lo Martire, Tomás Vega Fernández, Luigi Musco, Antonio Dell’Anno, Antonino Bruno, Douglas M. Noonan, Adriana Albini, Christophe Brunet, In Vitro Evaluation of Antioxidant Potential of the Invasive Seagrass Halophila stipulacea, 2021, 19, 1660-3397, 37, 10.3390/md19010037
    5. George F Winter, Vaccines and the fetus, 2018, 26, 0969-4900, 480, 10.12968/bjom.2018.26.7.480
    6. Alexis Laurent, Poyin Lin, Corinne Scaletta, Nathalie Hirt-Burri, Murielle Michetti, Anthony S. de Buys Roessingh, Wassim Raffoul, Bin-Ru She, Lee Ann Applegate, Bringing Safe and Standardized Cell Therapies to Industrialized Processing for Burns and Wounds, 2020, 8, 2296-4185, 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00581
    7. Anthony R. Mawson, Ashley M. Croft, Multiple Vaccinations and the Enigma of Vaccine Injury, 2020, 8, 2076-393X, 676, 10.3390/vaccines8040676
    8. Leonard Hayflick, Subject of The Vaccine Race offers perspective on errors, 2018, 392, 01406736, 633, 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31648-9
    9. Steve Campbell, Elaine Crisp, Commentary: Vaccine-hesitant parents’ reasons for choosing alternate protection methods in Turkey, 2020, 1744-9871, 174498712097129, 10.1177/1744987120971292
    10. llya Soifer, Nicole L Fong, Nelda Yi, Andrea T Ireland, Irene Lam, Matthew Sooknah, Jonathan S Paw, Paul Peluso, Gregory T Concepcion, David Rank, Alex R Hastie, Vladimir Jojic, J Graham Ruby, David Botstein, Margaret A Roy, Fully Phased Sequence of a Diploid Human Genome Determined de Novo from the DNA of a Single Individual, 2020, 10, 2160-1836, 2911, 10.1534/g3.119.400995
    11. George Winter, Vaccines and anti-vaccination, 2020, 2, 2631-8385, 378, 10.12968/jprp.2020.2.7.378
    12. Alexis Laurent, Corinne Scaletta, Philippe Abdel-Sayed, Murielle Michetti, Anthony de Buys Roessingh, Wassim Raffoul, Nathalie Hirt-Burri, Lee Ann Applegate, Biotechnology and Cytotherapeutics: The Swiss Progenitor-Cell Transplantation Program, 2022, 2, 2673-8392, 336, 10.3390/encyclopedia2010021
    13. Amanda M. Bifani, Hwee Cheng Tan, Milly M. Choy, Eng Eong Ooi, Susana López, Cell Strain-Derived Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells as an Isogenic Approach To Investigate Age-Related Host Response to Flaviviral Infection, 2022, 96, 0022-538X, 10.1128/jvi.01737-21
    14. Alexis Laurent, Philippe Abdel-Sayed, Corinne Scaletta, Philippe Laurent, Elénie Laurent, Murielle Michetti, Anthony de Buys Roessingh, Wassim Raffoul, Nathalie Hirt-Burri, Lee Ann Applegate, Back to the Cradle of Cytotherapy: Integrating a Century of Clinical Research and Biotechnology-Based Manufacturing for Modern Tissue-Specific Cellular Treatments in Switzerland, 2021, 8, 2306-5354, 221, 10.3390/bioengineering8120221
    15. Yu-Hsiu Chen, Xin Zhang, Kuei-Yueh Ko, Ming-Feng Hsueh, Virginia Byers Kraus, Milena Georgieva, CBX4 Regulates Replicative Senescence of WI-38 Fibroblasts, 2022, 2022, 1942-0994, 1, 10.1155/2022/5503575
    16. Iver Petersen, Classification and Treatment of Diseases in the Age of Genome Medicine Based on Pathway Pathology, 2021, 22, 1422-0067, 9418, 10.3390/ijms22179418
    17. Patrick M. Perrigue, Agata Henschke, Bartosz F. Grześkowiak, Łucja Przysiecka, Kaja Jaskot, Angelika Mielcarek, Emerson Coy, Sergio E. Moya, Cellular uptake and retention studies of silica nanoparticles utilizing senescent fibroblasts, 2023, 13, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-022-26979-1
    18. Veysel Kayser, Iqbal Ramzan, Vaccines and vaccination: history and emerging issues, 2021, 17, 2164-5515, 5255, 10.1080/21645515.2021.1977057
    19. Alexis Laurent, Corinne Scaletta, Philippe Abdel-Sayed, Wassim Raffoul, Nathalie Hirt-Burri, Lee Ann Applegate, Primary Progenitor Tenocytes: Cytotherapeutics and Cell-Free Derivatives, 2023, 3, 2673-8392, 340, 10.3390/encyclopedia3010021
    20. Mark T. Menghini, Christoph Geisler, Ajay B. Maghodia, Hoai J. Hallam, Steven L. Denton, Jason P. Gigley, Donald L. Jarvis, Host ranges of Sf-rhabdoviruses harbored by lepidopteran insects and insect cell lines, 2023, 00426822, 10.1016/j.virol.2023.05.007
    21. Justin Brumbaugh, Brian A. Aguado, Tamra Lysaght, Lawrence S.B. Goldstein, Human fetal tissue is critical for biomedical research, 2023, 22136711, 10.1016/j.stemcr.2023.10.008
    22. Maria Knoth Humlum, Marius Opstrup Morthorst, Peter Rønø Thingholm, Sibling spillovers and the choice to get vaccinated: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design, 2023, 01676296, 102843, 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2023.102843
    23. Natalya Eshchenko, Mariia Sergeeva, Evgenii Zhuravlev, Kira Kudria, Elena Goncharova, Andrey Komissarov, Grigory Stepanov, A Knockout of the IFITM3 Gene Increases the Sensitivity of WI-38 VA13 Cells to the Influenza A Virus, 2024, 25, 1422-0067, 625, 10.3390/ijms25010625
    24. Bruno Vinicius Santos Valiate, Julia Teixeira de Castro, Tomás Gazzinelli Marçal, Luis Adan Flores Andrade, Livia Isabela de Oliveira, Gabriela Barbi Freire Maia, Lídia Paula Faustino, Natalia S. Hojo-Souza, Marconi Augusto Aguiar Dos Reis, Flávia Fonseca Bagno, Natalia Salazar, Santuza R. Teixeira, Gregório Guilherme Almeida, Ricardo Tostes Gazzinelli, Evaluation of an RBD-nucleocapsid fusion protein as a booster candidate for COVID-19 vaccine, 2024, 27, 25890042, 110177, 10.1016/j.isci.2024.110177
    25. Michael D. West, João Pedro de Magalhães, S. Jay Olshansky, Leonard Hayflick (1928–2024), 2024, 2662-8465, 10.1038/s43587-024-00720-1
    26. Manuel Serrano, Leonard Hayflick (1928-2024) – obituary, 2024, 10, 2731-6068, 10.1038/s41514-024-00174-0
    27. Mahmoud S. Elkotamy, Islam A. Elkelesh, Simone Giovannuzzi, Rania S.M. Ismail, Wessam M. El-Refaie, Abdulrahman A. Almehizia, Ahmed M. Naglah, Alessio Nocentini, Claudiu T. Supuran, Mohamed Fares, Hazem A. Ghabbour, Rofaida Salem, Wagdy M. Eldehna, Hatem A. Abdel-Aziz, Rationally Designed Pyrazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidines as Dual Inhibitors of CA IX/XII and CDK6: A Novel Approach for NSCLC Treatment, 2025, 02235234, 117752, 10.1016/j.ejmech.2025.117752
    28. Aviraj K. S, Apoorva Wasnik, Lalima Gupta, Ayushi Ranjan, Harshini Suresh, Effectiveness of interventions to improve vaccine efficacy: a systematic review and meta-analysis, 2025, 14, 2046-4053, 10.1186/s13643-025-02856-6
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2016 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(18284) PDF downloads(3233) Cited by(87)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(6)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog