Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS): a systematic review of anatomy and potential risk factors

Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome (PFPS), a common cause of anterior knee pain, is successfully treated in over 2/3 of patients through rehabilitation protocols designed to reduce pain and return function to the individual. Applying preventive medicine strategies, the majority of cases of PFPS may be avoided if a pre-diagnosis can be made by clinician or certified athletic trainer testing the current researched potential risk factors during a Preparticipation Screening Evaluation (PPSE). We provide a detailed and comprehensive review of the soft tissue, arterial system, and innervation to the patellofemoral joint in order to supply the clinician with the knowledge required to assess the anatomy and make recommendations to patients identified as potentially at risk. The purpose of this article is to review knee anatomy and the literature regarding potential risk factors associated with patellofemoral pain syndrome and prehabilitation strategies. A comprehensive review of knee anatomy will present the relationships of arterial collateralization, innervations, and soft tissue alignment to the possible multifactoral mechanism involved in PFPS, while attempting to advocate future use of different treatments aimed at non-soft tissue causes of PFPS

From Sea to Sea: Canada's Three Oceans of Biodiversity

Evaluating and understanding biodiversity in marine ecosystems are both necessary and challenging for conservation. This paper compiles and summarizes current knowledge of the diversity of marine taxa in Canada's three oceans while recognizing that this compilation is incomplete and will change in the future. That Canada has the longest coastline in the world and incorporates distinctly different biogeographic provinces and ecoregions (e.g., temperate through ice-covered areas) constrains this analysis. The taxonomic groups presented here include microbes, phytoplankton, macroalgae, zooplankton, benthic infauna, fishes, and marine mammals. The minimum number of species or taxa compiled here is 15,988 for the three Canadian oceans. However, this number clearly underestimates in several ways the total number of taxa present. First, there are significant gaps in the published literature. Second, the diversity of many habitats has not been compiled for all taxonomic groups (e.g., intertidal rocky shores, deep sea), and data compilations are based on short-term, directed research programs or longer-term monitoring activities with limited spatial resolution. Third, the biodiversity of large organisms is well known, but this is not true of smaller organisms. Finally, the greatest constraint on this summary is the willingness and capacity of those who collected the data to make it available to those interested in biodiversity meta-analyses. Confirmation of identities and intercomparison of studies are also constrained by the disturbing rate of decline in the number of taxonomists and systematists specializing on marine taxa in Canada. This decline is mostly the result of retirements of current specialists and to a lack of training and employment opportunities for new ones. Considering the difficulties encountered in compiling an overview of biogeographic data and the diversity of species or taxa in Canada's three oceans, this synthesis is intended to serve as a biodiversity baseline for a new program on marine biodiversity, the Canadian Healthy Ocean Network. A major effort needs to be undertaken to establish a complete baseline of Canadian marine biodiversity of all taxonomic groups, especially if we are to understand and conserve this part of Canada's natural heritage

Publisher Correction: On the issue of transparency and reproducibility in nanomedicine

© 2019, Springer Nature Limited. In the version of this Correspondence originally published, Christine Dufès was incorrectly written as Christine Dufés. This has been corrected in the online versions of the Correspondence

Soft bottom species richness and diversity as a function of depth and iceberg scour in Arctic glacial Kongsfjorden (Svalbard)

Macrozoobenthic soft-sediment communities inhabiting six depth zones of central Arctic Kongsfjorden were analysed comparatively using SCUBA-diving. 63 taxa were found, 30 of which had not been reported for Kongsfjorden and seven for Svalbard. Suspensivorous or surface and sub-surface detritivorous polychaetes and deposit-feeding amphipods were dominant. Only eleven taxa of 45 species and additional 18 families identified inhabited the complete depth range. Biomass ranged from 3.5 to 25.0 g ash free dry mass m-2 and mean Shannon diversity (Log e) was 2.06. Similarity clustering from abun-dance and biomass data showed a significant difference between the shal-low station (5m) and the rest. The latter formed two subgroups (10-20m, 25-30m). These differences together with information on ice-scouring support the intermediate disturbance hypothesis indicating that habitats impacted by moderate iceberg scouring enable higher diversity. In contrast, biotopes frequently affected only host pioneer communities, while mature, less diverse assemblages dominate depths of low impact

Macroarthrus victoriae Hendrycks & Conlan 2003, sp. nov.

<i>Macroarthrus victoriae</i> sp. nov. <p>(figures 15, 16)</p> <p> <i>Type material</i></p> <p> H : <i>X</i>, 15.7 mm, (appendages on two slides), CMNC 2002-0013, Sta. 439, Cup# 4, 34°50.97∞N, 122°59.79∞W, 4050 m, 27 July 1990.</p> <p> <i>Description</i></p> <p>H , female, CMNC 2002-0013.</p> <p> <i>Head:</i> slightly longer than peraeonites 1 and 2 combined, midcephalic margin with a bulge at the mid-point; eye absent; rostrum short, acute; lateral cephalic lobe rounded. <i>Antenna 1:</i> very long, about 1.5×body, peduncular articles 1:2: 3 in ratio of 14:21:2, article 1 equal to head length, distally with a small tooth, article 2 long with lateral and medial setae and a small, distomedial tooth, article 3 very short with a small, distolateral, scale-like lobe; accessory flagellum very long, length about 0.3×primary flagellum, 18-articulate; primary flagellum about 92-articulate, articles with fine setae anterodistally, calceoli absent. <i>Antenna 2:</i> about 0.3×length of antenna 1, peduncular article 3 long, reaching end of peduncular article 1 of antenna 1, peduncular articles 4–5 with brush setae, peduncular article 4 long, length 1.2×peduncular article 5; flagellum short, about 0.3×peduncle length, 12-articulate, articles with distal setae, calceoli absent.</p> <p> <i>Peraeon:</i> smooth. <i>Pleon.</i> smooth, segments elongate, longer than peraeon, pleonite 1>2>3. <i>Coxae:</i> shallow; coxae 1–4 about equal in depth, 0.5×as deep as wide, posterior margin of coxa 4 weakly excavate; coxae 5–6 subequal, about 0.4×as deep as wide; coxa 7 very shallow, 0.25×as deep as wide, ventral margin straight. <i>Urosomite 1:</i> with a small posterodorsal, bidentate tooth. U <i>rosomite 2:</i> with a small, posterodorsal tooth and subapical setule.</p> <p> <i>Upper lip:</i> ventral margin shallowly incised, lobes symmetric. <i>Lower lip:</i> outer lobes broad, setulose, mandibular lobes narrow; inner lobes absent. <i>Mandible:</i> incisors slightly asymmetric, margins broad, straight, anterodorsal corner with a rounded tooth, anteroventral corner with a sharper tooth, right incisor with a tooth proximal to the anterodorsal corner; left lacinia mobilis broad, about 0.7×incisor, four- to five-cusped; right lacinia absent; accessory spine row with two to three stout spines and a proximal tuft of setae; molar absent; palp three-articulate, long, length 1.6×mandible, article 1 very short, wider than long, article 2 long, length 1.5×article 3, strongly setose posterolaterally, article 3 with 14 posterolateral and two apical setae. <i>Maxilla 1:</i> inner plate ovate, with four apical plumose setae; outer plate rectangular with eight smooth spine-teeth; palp two-articulate, longer than outer plate, medial margin strongly sloping with 11 apical spines and 13 marginal setae. <i>Maxilla 2:</i> inner plate triangular, broader than outer plate, with long plumose setae medially and apically; outer plate narrow, truncate apically with three long plumose setae. <i>Maxilliped:</i> inner plate nearly reaching base of palp, conical, with one apical spine; outer plate rounded, nearly reaching base of article 2 of palp, with 10 strong, apical and medial spines and three medial setae; palp four-articulate, long and raptorial, article 2 very long, length 3.4×article 1 and 1.4×article 3, both articles medially setose, article 3 with long, slender spines medially, dactylus long, slender, length 0.6×article 3.</p> <p> <i>Gnathopods:</i> dissimilar in size and form. <i>Gnathopod 1:</i> basis with setose anterodistal margin, with medial setae; ischium and merus short, ventral margin of merus setose, distomedially with six spines; carpus about equal to propodus, not lobate, ventral margin lined with long setae, with medial setae; propodus stout, tapering distally, weakly subchelate, palm margin long, length 2.8×remaining ventral margin, palm lined with long setae and clusters of short pecinate, comb-like setae; dactylus long, sickle-like, as long as ventral margin. <i>Gnathopod 2:</i> basis with cluster of setae anterodistally; ischium as above; carpus long, length 1.6×propodus, with long setae on ventral margin that increase in length distally, with medial and distal setae, carpus not lobate; propodus stout, short, length 0.6×carpus, strongly subchelate, palm oblique, with long setae and clusters of short, pectinate, comb-like setae, ventral margin equal to palm and lined with clusters of setae; dactylus slightly longer than palm and straighter than dactylus of gnathopod 1.</p> <p> <i>Peraeopods 3–4:</i> very slender, basis long, length 13×width, anterior margin with fine setae; ischium extremely elongated, almost as long as basis, length 25×width; merus, carpus, propodus and dactylus in ratio of 20:16:19:8. <i>Peraeopod 5:</i> basis deep, rectangular, 3.8×width, posterior margin with setae; merus, carpus and propodus in ratio of 31:24:16, anterior margins with pairs of long stout setae; dactylus strong, about 0.8×propodus. <i>Peraeopod 6:</i> subequal to peraeopod 5; basis deep, rectangular, 3.4×width, posterior margin with submarginal setae; merus, carpus and propodus in ratio of 34:22:15, anterior margins with pairs of long, stout setae; dactylus as above. <i>Peraeopod 7:</i> elongate, slender, about as long as body and about 1.5×as long as peraeopod 6; basis subovate, deep, 2.1×width, posterior margin with long, submarginal setae; merus, carpus and propodus in ratio of 45:41:46, margins with fine setae; dactylus straight, about 0.3×propodus.</p> <p> <i>Gills:</i> on peraeopods 2–7. <i>Brood plates:</i> long, narrow, lacking brood setae, on peraeopods 2–5. <i>Pleopods:</i> powerful, peduncles and rami long. <i>Epimeron 2–3:</i> with a small, posteroventral tooth, tooth on 3 the larger.</p> <p> <i>Uropod 1:</i> very long, length 2.5×urosome length, peduncle long, length 2.8×inner ramus, dorsolateral and dorsomedial margins strongly spinose, ventral margin with short setae; outer ramus 0.8×inner, inner and outer ramus with both margins strongly spinose. <i>Uropod 2:</i> as above except, peduncle very long, length 3.3×outer ramus; inner ramus missing. <i>Uropod 3:</i> peduncle very short, length 0.2×outer ramus; rami subequal, very long, length 5.2×peduncle; outer ramus twoarticulate, medial margin of article 1 with long plumose setae; article 2 minute, length less than 0.1×article 1, medial margin of inner ramus with long plumose setae. <i>Telson:</i> short, length 1.2×width, dorsolateral margins with one spine, margins parallel, cleft 55%, lobes widely divergent, acute distally. Male unknown.</p> <p> <i>Etymology</i> The species is named in honour of the first author’s daughter, Victoria.</p> <p> <i>Condition</i></p> <p>All appendages present. The left antenna 1 was dissected off instead of the right. The right antenna 1 has some of the distal articles of the flagellum broken off. The left uropod 2 is broken along the peduncle and the right is missing the inner ramus. The left uropod 3 has both rami broken off distally. The non-setose brood plates indicate that this female is not fully sexually mature.</p> <p> <i>Remarks</i></p> <p> The extreme elongation of the ischium of peraeopods 3 and 4 is a remarkable and unique character, an autapomorphy never before reported in the Amphipoda. At a casual glance, <i>Macroarthrus</i> appears to resemble many of the bathyal/abyssal eusirids, especially in the elongated peraeopod 7 and overall habitus. Most likely, this species is an epibenthic or demersal predator, living on and above soft sediments. Some morphological adaptations for this life style consist of the very long first antenna, strong, raptorial gnathopods, the very powerful maxilliped palp and the elongated peraeopods. Prey organisms may be detected, caught rapidly and thrust towards the mandibles and maxillae, in a manner similar to that shown for <i>Eusirus perdentatus</i> by Klages and Gutt (1990). The extremely elongated peraeopods 3 and 4 and peraeopod 7 may be spread widely and employed as stilts, to prevent <i>M. victoriae</i> from sinking into soft sediments, in a similar manner to deep-water eusirids (Bousfield and Hendrycks, 1995). The strongly developed pleon, powerful pleopods and uropod tail fan are indicators of rapid swimming. Peraeopods 5 and 6 are strongly spinose anteriorly and they could be employed as a collecting basket, when feeding in the water column, trapping prey items in a similar manner to that of a dragonfly capturing mosquitoes (Bousfield and Hendrycks, 1995).</p> <p> <i>Distribution</i> North-east Pacific off Point Conception, California in 4050 m depth.</p>Published as part of <i>Hendrycks, EA & Conlan, KE, 2003, New and unusual abyssal gammaridean Amphipoda from the north-east Pacific, pp. 2303-2368 in Journal of Natural History 37</i> on pages 2339-234

Rhachotropis distincta

Rhachotropis distincta (Holmes, 1908) Gracilipes distincta Holmes, 1908: 529–531, figure 35; Thorsteinson, 1941: 85 (key). Rhachotropis distincta: Shoemaker, 1930: 316–323, figures 41–44; Stephensen, 1944: 18; Birstein and Vinogradov, 1955: 276; Birstein and Vinogradov, 1958: 248; Barnard and Karaman, 1991: 338; Bousfield and Hendrycks, 1995: 43–45, figures 29, 30. Material examined Juvenile W, 6.7 mm, (appendages on one slide), CMNC 2002-0036, Sta. 1014, Cup # 9, 34°53.22∞N, 123°02.13∞W, 4050 m, 13 January 1992. Remarks This small male shows some variation from that figured by Shoemaker (1930) from the Cabot Strait (378 m) and Bousfield and Hendrycks (1995) from the Queen Charlotte Islands (0–1227 m). These differences include a shorter rostrum, longer carpus on peraeopods 3 and 4, weaker spination on the posterior margin of the basis of peraeopod 4 and shorter uropod 3 rami. Otherwise the specimen agrees with the descriptions and figures of the above authors. Distribution North Pacific and north Atlantic in net tows from depths of 0–7000 m. This confirmed record of 4050 m is a new depth record as previous collections came from trawls where the capture depth was not verified.Published as part of Hendrycks, EA & Conlan, KE, 2003, New and unusual abyssal gammaridean Amphipoda from the north-east Pacific, pp. 2303-2368 in Journal of Natural History 37 on pages 2350-235

Triquetramana Hendrycks & Conlan 2003, gen. nov.

Triquetramana gen. nov. Diagnosis Eye absent; rostrum short, rounded; antenna 1 slightly shorter than antenna 2, accessory flagellum one-articulate; mandibular palp feeble, shorter than mandible body, article 3 length 0.5×article 2; maxilla 2, inner plate wide, almost twice the width of outer plate; maxilliped palp, medial margin of dactylus spinose; coxa 1, not produced anteriorly; coxa 3 larger than 4, with a bluntly rounded, posteroventral lobe, posterior margin excavate; gnathopods 1–2, propodus triangular, equal in size, carpus elongated and non-lobate; peraeopods 5–6, basis expanded, rounded, subequal, merus expanded proximally; uropods spinose, rami broadened; telson elongate, cleft deeply. Type species Triquetramana brevipalpa sp. nov. by monotypy. Etymology The genus name is from the Latin triquetrus (three cornered, triangular) plus manus (hand), referring to the peculiar shape of the propodus of gnathopods 1 and 2. Remarks Within the genera of Eusiridae that have eusirid-like gnathopods, Triquetramana is unique in the following combination of characters: equal sized, triangular gnathopods, with the carpus of gnathopods 1 and 2 lacking a ventral lobe; the very short, mandibular palp and the proximally expanded merus of peraeopods 5 and 6. It can be differentiated easily from other similar, eusirid genera as seen in table 3. Additionally, it differs from Eusiropsis in the smooth, posterior margins of the basis of peraeopods 5–7 (vs serrate) and in the non-calceolate antennae (vs calceolate). Furthermore, from Pareusirogenes it differs in the inner plate of maxilla 1, which has only one small, subapical setule (vs three long, apical setae).Published as part of Hendrycks, EA & Conlan, KE, 2003, New and unusual abyssal gammaridean Amphipoda from the north-east Pacific, pp. 2303-2368 in Journal of Natural History 37 on pages 2352-235

Anisocallisoma Hendrycks & Conlan 2003, gen. nov.

Anisocallisoma gen. nov. Diagnosis Head much deeper than long; lateral cephalic lobe small, rounded, situated near ventral margin of head; eye absent; antenna 1, peduncle 1 short and deep, accessory flagellum one-articulate, conical, lacking distal brush setae; mandibular molar, broadly triangular, non-triturative; maxilla 1, palp one-articulate, inner plate with one subapical seta; maxilla 2, plates subequal, ovate, inner plate with few medial setae; maxilliped, outer plate, medial margin crenate with four to six small spines; gnathopod 1, coxa small, tapering distally, basis swollen, propodus simple, dactylus minute; gnathopod 2, propodus palm weakly oblique; coxae 1–4 shallow, much less than corresponding peraeonite; coxa 4, ventral margin slightly tapering, rounded, posteroventral lobe weakly developed, posterior margin shallowly excavate; peraeopods 3–4, propodus slightly expanded, weakly prehensile; peraeopods 5–7, dissimilar, peraeopod 5 much shorter than peraeopods 6–7; urosomites 1 and 3 with a dorsal concavity; pleopods 1–3, anterior margin of inner ramus with fan-shaped clusters of setae on the distal segments; uropods 1–2, rami lacking spines; epimeron 2, ventral margin shallowly concave, with fringe of setae; telson broadest at mid-point, cleft 52%. Type species Anisocallisoma armigera sp. nov. by monotypy. Etymology The genus name is a combination of the Greek anisos (unequal) referring to the difference in lengths between peraeopods 5 and 7 and callisoma, which refers to the close relationship to Eucallisoma. Remarks Anisocallisoma is distinguished from all other scopelocheirids by the extreme reduction in the number of setae of the maxilla 1 inner plate, having only one subapical seta, and in the palp of maxilla 1, which is one-articulate. The new genus appears closely related to Eucallisoma J. L. Barnard, 1961 with which it shares the expanded, glandular basis of gnathopod 1 and the peculiar, reduced dactylus. However, it can be differentiated easily from Eucallisoma by the shallow coxal plates, dissimilar peraeopods 5–7, maxilla 1 inner plate with only one subapical seta (vs>10+medial setae) and other characters in table 1.Published as part of Hendrycks, EA & Conlan, KE, 2003, New and unusual abyssal gammaridean Amphipoda from the north-east Pacific, pp. 2303-2368 in Journal of Natural History 37 on pages 2313-231