1. In a recently published paper, Oliva et al. concluded that domestic grazing pressure across Patagonian rangelands approached carrying capacity due to decades of stock adjustment, but that guanaco overpopulation may have altered that balance. The authors argued that unless guanaco numbers are controlled, they will reduce forage available for domestic stock and will negatively affect rangelands. We consider that the herbivore-stock analysis presented is inaccurate and deserves revision, and that the stated conclusions lack empirical support. 2. When the spatial distribution of herbivores is accounted for in the Oliva et al. analysis, domestic stock is far above carrying capacity, indicating that domestic overgrazing continues. 3. Theoretical and empirical evidence on bottom-up regulation and competitive exclusion challenges the supposed guanaco overpopulation and the hypothetical reduction of forage available for livestock. 4. Even if guanaco numbers are reduced, grassland degradation and production losses will continue because their main drivers, domestic overstock and heterogeneous grazing, are still operating. 5. Synthesis and applications. Oversimplified models with poor ecological insight can lead to erroneous conclusions and misguide management decisions. The incorrect inference that Patagonian domestic stock is adjusted to carrying capacity could help to consolidate current domestic overgrazing by reducing incentives to improve livestock management practices. Regarding guanacos, a controversial species in an unfavourable context, control-oriented harvest without a clear justification threatens populations' viability and genuine attempts of productive diversification. Addressing relevant ecological processes, such as niche partitioning, competitive exclusion and population regulation, is essential to correctly assess joint carrying capacity in multi-herbivore systems, as well as to identify the true factors driving degradation processes and to optimize rangeland use on a sustainable basis.

Objective. A pediatric office-based intervention was implemented following a randomized, controlled design, aimed at improving child feeding practices and growth patterns and ultimately reducing risk for overweight and obesity later in life. Methods. Four clinics (232 infants) were randomized to control or intervention (I), the latter delivered by health care provider at each of 7–9 well-baby visits over 2 years, using a previously developed program (Growing Leaps and Bounds) that included verbal, visual, and text advice and information for parents. Results. The I group offered significantly less soda (p = 0.006), sweetened tea (p = 0.01), punch (p = 0.02) and/or cow's milk (p = 0.001) to infants and delayed the introduction of drink/food other than breast milk (p < 0.05). Parents in the I group had a higher perceived parental monitoring (p = 0.05) and restriction (p = 0.01) on infant feeding. While the I group exhibited at baseline more adverse socioeconomic indicators than the control group, growth trajectory or body size indices did not significantly differ between groups. Conclusions. Education provided by health care providers in addition to follow-up monthly phone calls may help modify parental behaviors related to child feeding and increase parental sense of responsibility toward child eating behaviors.

No abstract

No abstract