Search This Blog

Thursday, March 17, 2022

Environmental DNA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The longhorn beetle, Leptura quadrifasciata, is an example of a flower‐visiting insect found in a study which showed that environmental DNA (eDNA) from arthropods is deposited on wild flowers after interactions 

Environmental DNA or eDNA is DNA that is collected from a variety of environmental samples such as soil, seawater, snow or air, rather than directly sampled from an individual organism. As various organisms interact with the environment, DNA is expelled and accumulates in their surroundings from various sources.

In recent years, eDNA has been used as a tool to detect endangered wildlife that were otherwise unseen. In 2020, human health researchers began repurposing eDNA techniques to track the COVID-19 pandemic.

Example sources of eDNA include, but are not limited to, feces, mucus, gametes, shed skin, carcasses and hair. Such samples can be analyzed by high-throughput DNA sequencing methods, known as metagenomics, metabarcoding, and single-species detection, for rapid monitoring and measurement of biodiversity. In order to better differentiate between organisms within a sample, DNA metabarcoding is used in which the sample is analyzed and uses previously studied DNA libraries, such as BLAST, to determine what organisms are present.

eDNA metabarcoding is a novel method of assessing biodiversity wherein samples are taken from the environment via water, sediment or air from which DNA is extracted, and then amplified using general or universal primers in polymerase chain reaction and sequenced using next-generation sequencing to generate thousands to millions of reads. From this data, species presence can be determined, and overall biodiversity assessed. It is an interdisciplinary method that brings together traditional field-based ecology with in-depth molecular methods and advanced computational tools.

The analysis of eDNA has great potential, not only for monitoring common species, but to genetically detect and identify other extant species that could influence conservation efforts. This method allows for biomonitoring without requiring collection of the living organism, creating the ability to study organisms that are invasive, elusive, or endangered without introducing anthropogenic stress on the organism. Access to this genetic information makes a critical contribution to the understanding of population size, species distribution, and population dynamics for species not well documented. Importantly, eDNA is often more cost-effective compared to traditional sampling methods. The integrity of eDNA samples is dependent upon its preservation within the environment.

Soil, permafrost, freshwater and seawater are well-studied macro environments from which eDNA samples have been extracted, each of which include many more conditioned subenvironments. Because of its versatility, eDNA is applied in many subenvironments such as freshwater sampling, seawater sampling, terrestrial soil sampling (tundra permafrost), aquatic soil sampling (river, lake, pond, and ocean sediment), or other environments where normal sampling procedures can become problematic.

Overview

Environmental DNA or eDNA describes the genetic material present in environmental samples such as sediment, water, and air, including whole cells, extracellular DNA and potentially whole organisms. The analyse of eDNA start with capturing an environmental sample of interest. The DNA in the sample is extracted and purified. The purified DNA is then amplified for a specific gene target so it can be sequenced and categorised based on its sequence. From this information, detection and classification of species is possible.

eDNA can come from skin, mucous, saliva, sperm, secretions, eggs, feces, urine, blood, roots, leaves, fruit, pollen, and rotting bodies of larger organisms, while microorganisms may be obtained in their entirety. eDNA production is dependent on biomass, age and feeding activity of the organism as well as physiology, life history, and space use.

Despite being a relatively new method of surveying, eDNA has already proven to have enormous potential in biological monitoring. Conventional methods for surveying richness and abundance are limited by taxonomic identification, may cause disturbance or destruction of habitat, and may rely on methods in which it is difficult to detect small or elusive species, thus making estimates for entire communities impossible. eDNA can complement these methods by targeting different species, sampling greater diversity, and increasing taxonomic resolution. Additionally, eDNA is capable of detecting rare species, but not of determining population quality information such as sex ratios and body conditions, so it is ideal for supplementing traditional studies. Regardless, it has useful applications in detecting the first occurrences of invasive species, the continued presence of native species thought to be extinct or otherwise threatened, and other elusive species occurring in low densities that would be difficult to detect by traditional means.

Degradation of eDNA in the environment limits the scope of eDNA studies, as often only small segments of genetic material remain, particularly in warm, tropical regions. Additionally, the varying lengths of time to degradation based on environmental conditions and the potential of DNA to travel throughout media such as water can affect inference of fine-scale spatiotemporal trends of species and communities. Despite these drawbacks, eDNA still has the potential to determine relative or rank abundance as some studies have found it to correspond with biomass, though the variation inherent in environmental samples makes it difficult to quantify. While eDNA has numerous applications in conservation, monitoring, and ecosystem assessment, as well as others yet to be described, the highly variable concentrations of eDNA and potential heterogeneity through the water body makes it essential that the procedure is optimized, ideally with a pilot study for each new application to ensure that the sampling design is appropriate to detect the target.

Community DNA

While the definition of eDNA seems straightforward, the lines between different forms of DNA become blurred, particularly in comparison to community DNA, which is described as bulk organismal samples. A question arises regarding whole microorganisms captured in eDNA samples: do these organisms alter the classification of the sample to a community DNA sample? Additionally, the classification of genetic material from feces is problematic and often referred to as eDNA. Differentiation between the two is important as community DNA indicates organismal presence at a particular time and place, while eDNA may have come from a different location, from predator feces, or from past presence, however this differentiation is often impossible. However, eDNA can be loosely classified as including many sectors of DNA biodiversity research, including fecal analysis and bulk samples when they are applicable to biodiversity research and ecosystem analysis.

selfDNA

The concept of selfDNA stems from discoveries made by scientists from the University of Naples Federico II, which were reported during 2015 in the journal New Phytologist, about the self-inhibitory effect of extracellular DNA in plants, but also in bacteria, fungi, algae, plants, protozoa and insects. The environmental source of such extracellular DNA is proposed to be plant litter but also other sources in different ecosystems and organisms, with the size of DNA fragments experimentally shown to have an inhibitory effect upon their conspecific organisms typically ranging between 200 and 500 base pairs. The selfDNA phenomenon has been postulated to drive ecological interactions and to be mechanistically mediated by damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and to have potential for the development of biocidal applications.

eDNA metabarcoding

By 2019 methods in eDNA research had been expanded to be able to assess whole communities from a single sample. This process involves metabarcoding, which can be precisely defined as the use of general or universal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) primers on mixed DNA samples from any origin followed by high-throughput next-generation sequencing (NGS) to determine the species composition of the sample. This method has been common in microbiology for years, but is only just finding its footing in assessment of macroorganisms. Ecosystem-wide applications of eDNA metabarcoding have the potential to not only describe communities and biodiversity, but also to detect interactions and functional ecology over large spatial scales, though it may be limited by false readings due to contamination or other errors. Altogether, eDNA metabarcoding increases speed, accuracy, and identification over traditional barcoding and decreases cost, but needs to be standardized and unified, integrating taxonomy and molecular methods for full ecological study.

eDNA metabarcoding has applications to diversity monitoring across all habitats and taxonomic groups, ancient ecosystem reconstruction, plant-pollinator interactions, diet analysis, invasive species detection, pollution responses, and air quality monitoring. eDNA metabarcoding is a unique method still in development and will likely remain in flux for some time as technology advances and procedures become standardized. However, as metabarcoding is optimized and its use becomes more widespread, it is likely to become an essential tool for ecological monitoring and global conservation study.

Extracellular and relic DNA

Extracellular DNA, sometimes called relic DNA, is DNA from dead microbes. Naked extracellular DNA (eDNA), most of it released by cell death, is nearly ubiquitous in the environment. Its concentration in soil may be as high as 2 μg/L, and its concentration in natural aquatic environments may be as high at 88 μg/L. Various possible functions have been proposed for eDNA: it may be involved in horizontal gene transfer; it may provide nutrients; and it may act as a buffer to recruit or titrate ions or antibiotics. Extracellular DNA acts as a functional extracellular matrix component in the biofilms of several bacterial species. It may act as a recognition factor to regulate the attachment and dispersal of specific cell types in the biofilm; it may contribute to biofilm formation; and it may contribute to the biofilm's physical strength and resistance to biological stress.

Under the name of environmental DNA, eDNA has seen increased use in the natural sciences as a survey tool for ecology, monitoring the movements and presence of species in water, air, or on land, and assessing an area's biodiversity.

In the diagram on the right, the amount of relic DNA in a microbial environment is determined by inputs associated with the mortality of viable individuals with intact DNA and by losses associated with the degradation of relic DNA. If the diversity of sequences contained in the relic DNA pool is sufficiently different from that in the intact DNA pool, then relic DNA may bias estimates of microbial biodiversity (as indicated by different colored boxes) when sampling from the total (intact + relic) DNA pool. Standardised Data on Initiatives (STARDIT) has been proposed as one way of standardising both data about sampling and analysis methods, and taxonomic and ontological relationships.

Collection

Terrestrial sediments

The importance of eDNA analysis stemmed from the recognition of the limitations presented by culture-based studies. Organisms have adapted to thrive in the specific conditions of their natural environments. Although scientists work to mimic these environments, many microbial organisms can not be removed and cultured in a laboratory setting. The earliest version of this analysis began with ribosomal RNA (rRNA) in microbes to better understand microbes that live in hostile environments. The genetic makeup of some microbes is then only accessible through eDNA analysis. Analytical techniques of eDNA were first applied to terrestrial sediments yielding DNA from both extinct and extant mammals, birds, insects and plants. Samples extracted from these terrestrial sediments are commonly referenced as 'sedimentary ancient DNA' (sedaDNA or dirtDNA). The eDNA analysis can also be used to study current forest communities including everything from birds and mammals to fungi and worms. Samples can be obtained from soil, faeces, 'bite DNA' from where leaves have been bitten, plants and leaves where animals have been, and from the blood meals of captured mosquitos which may have eaten blood from any animals in the area. Some methods can also attempt to capture cells with hair traps and sandpaper in areas commonly transversed by target species.

Aquatic sediments

The sedaDNA was subsequently used to study ancient animal diversity and verified using known fossil records in aquatic sediments. The aquatic sediments are deprived of oxygen and are thus protect the DNA from degrading. Other than ancient studies, this approach can be used to understand current animal diversity with relatively high sensitivity. While typical water samples can have the DNA degrade relatively quickly, the aquatic sediment samples can have useful DNA two months after the species was present. One problem with aquatic sediments is that it is unknown where the organism deposited the eDNA as it could have moved in the water column.

Aquatic (water column)

Studying eDNA in the water column can indicate the community composition of a body of water. Before eDNA, the main ways to study open water diversity was to use fishing and trapping, which requires resources such as funding and skilled labour, whereas eDNA only needs samples of water. This method is effective as pH of the water does not affect the DNA as much as previously thought, and sensitivity can be increased relatively easily. Sensitivity is how likely the DNA marker will be present in the sampled water, and can be increased simply by taking more samples, having bigger samples, and increasing PCR. eDNA degrades relatively fast in the water column, which is very beneficial in short term conservation studies such as identifying what species are present.

Researchers at the Experimental Lakes Area in Ontario, Canada and McGill University have found that eDNA distribution reflects lake stratification. As seasons and water temperature change, water density also changes such that it forms distinct layers in small boreal lakes in the summer and winter. These layers mix during the spring and fall. Fish habitat use correlates to stratification (e.g. a cold-water fish like lake trout will stay in cold water) and so does eDNA distribution, as these researchers found.

Monitoring species

eDNA can be used to monitor species throughout the year and can be very useful in conservation monitoring. eDNA analysis has been successful at identifying many different taxa from aquatic plants, aquatic mammals, fishes, mussels, fungi  and even parasites. eDNA has been used to study species while minimizing any stress inducing human interaction, allowing researchers to monitor species presence at larger spatial scales more efficiently. The most prevalent use in current research is using eDNA to study the locations of species at risk, invasive species, and keystone species across all environments. eDNA is especially useful for studying species with small populations because eDNA is sensitive enough to confirm the presence of a species with relatively little effort to collect data which can often be done with a soil sample or water sample. eDNA relies on the efficiency of genomic sequencing and analysis as well as the survey methods used which continue to become more efficient and cheaper. Some studies have shown that eDNA sampled from stream and inshore environment decayed to undetectable level at within about 48 hours.

Environmental DNA can be applied as a tool to detect low abundance organisms in both active and passive forms. Active eDNA surveys target individual species or groups of taxa for detection by using highly sensitive species-specific quantitative real-time PCR or digital droplet PCR markers. CRISPR-Cas methodology has also been applied to the detection of single species from eDNA; utilising the Cas12a enzyme and allowing greater specificity when detecting sympatric taxa. Passive eDNA surveys employ massively-parallel DNA sequencing to amplify all eDNA molecules in a sample with no a priori target in mind providing blanket DNA evidence of biotic community composition.

Decline of terrestrial arthropods

Terrestrial arthropods are experiencing massive decline in Europe as well as globally, although only a fraction of the species have been assessed and the majority of insects are still undescribed to science. As one example, grassland ecosystems are home to diverse taxonomic and functional groups of terrestrial arthropods, such as pollinators, phytophagous insects, and predators, that use nectar and pollen for food sources, and stem and leaf tissue for food and development. These communities harbor endangered species, since many habitats have disappeared or are under significant threat. Therefore, extensive efforts are being conducted in order to restore European grassland ecosystems and conserve biodiversity. For instance, pollinators like bees and butterflies represent an important ecological group that has undergone severe decline in Europe, indicating a dramatic loss of grassland biodiversity. The vast majority of flowering plants are pollinated by insects and other animals both in temperate regions and the tropics. The majority of insect species are herbivores feeding on different parts of plants, and most of these are specialists, relying on one or a few plant species as their main food resource. However, given the gap in knowledge on existing insect species, and the fact that most species are still undescribed, it is clear that for the majority of plant species in the world, there is limited knowledge about the arthropod communities they harbor and interact with.

Terrestrial arthropod communities have traditionally been collected and studied using methods, such as Malaise traps and pitfall traps, which are very effective but somewhat cumbersome and potentially invasive methods. In some instances, these techniques fall short of performing efficient and standardized surveys, due to, for example, phenotypic plasticity, closely related species, and difficulties in identifying juvenile stages. Furthermore, morphological identification depends directly on taxonomic expertise, which is in decline. All such limitations of traditional biodiversity monitoring have created a demand for alternative approaches. Meanwhile, the advance in DNA sequencing technologies continuously provides new means of obtaining biological data. Hence, several new molecular approaches have recently been suggested for obtaining fast and efficient data on arthropod communities and their interactions through non‐invasive genetic techniques. This includes extracting DNA from sources such as bulk samples or insect soups, empty leaf mines, spider webs, pitcher plant fluid, environmental samples like soil and water (environmental DNA [eDNA]), host plant and predatory diet identification from insect DNA extracts, and predator scat from bats. Recently, also DNA from pollen attached to insects has been used for retrieving information on plant–pollinator interactions. Many of such recent studies rely on DNA metabarcoding—high‐throughput sequencing of PCR amplicons using generic primers.

Mammals

Snow tracks

Wildlife researchers in snowy areas also use snow samples to gather and extract genetic information about species of interest. DNA from snow track samples has been used to confirm the presence of such elusive and rare species as polar bears, arctic fox, lynx, wolverines, and fishers.

DNA from the air

In 2021, researchers demonstrated that eDNA can be collected from air and used to identify mammals.

Managing fisheries

Overfishing the Canadian northern cod fishery resulted in catastrophic collapse 
 
In this example, a fish leaves eDNA behind in a trail as it moves through the water, but the trail dissipates slowly over time (click to enlarge)

The successful management of commercial fisheries relies on standardised surveys to estimate the quantity and distribution of fish stocks. Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) is an iconic example that demonstrates how poorly constrained data and uninformed decision making can result in catastrophic stock decline and ensuing economic and social problems. Traditional stock assessments of demersal fish species have relied primarily on trawl surveys, which have provided a valuable stream of information to decision makers. However, there are some notable drawbacks of demersal trawl surveys including cost, gear selectivity/catchability, habitat destruction and restricted coverage (e.g. hard-substrate bottom environments, marine protected areas).

Environmental DNA (eDNA) has emerged as a potentially powerful alternative for studying ecosystem dynamics. The constant loss and shedding of genetic material from macroorganisms imparts a molecular footprint in environmental samples that can be analysed to determine either the presence of specific target species  or characterise biodiversity. The combination of next generation sequencing and eDNA sampling has been successfully applied in aquatic systems to document spatial and temporal patterns in the diversity of fish fauna. To further develop the utility of eDNA for fisheries management, understanding the ability of eDNA quantities to reflect fish biomass in the ocean is an important next step.

Positive relationships between eDNA quantities and fish biomass and abundance have been demonstrated in experimental systems. However, known variations between eDNA production and degradation rates is anticipated to complicate these relationships in natural systems. Furthermore, in oceanic systems, large habitat volumes and strong currents are likely to result in physical dispersal of DNA fragments away from target organisms. These confounding factors have been previously considered to restrict the application of quantitative eDNA monitoring in oceanic settings.

Despite these potential constraints, numerous studies in marine environments have found positive relationships between eDNA quantities and complimentary survey efforts including radio-tagging, visual surveys, echo-sounding  and trawl surveys. However, studies that quantify target eDNA concentrations of commercial fish species with standardised trawl surveys in marine environments are much scarcer. In this context, direct comparisons of eDNA concentrations with biomass and stock assessment metrics, such as catch per unit effort (CPUE), are necessary to understand the applicability of eDNA monitoring to contribute to fisheries management efforts.

Deep sea sediments

Extracellular DNA in surface deep-sea sediments is by far the largest reservoir of DNA of the world oceans. The main sources of extracellular DNA in such ecosystems are represented by in situ DNA release from dead benthic organisms, and/or other processes including cell lysis due to viral infection, cellular exudation and excretion from viable cells, virus decomposition, and allochtonous inputs from the water column. Previous studies provided evidence that an important fraction of extracellular DNA can escape degradation processes, remaining preserved in the sediments. This DNA represents, potentially, a genetic repository that records biological processes occurring over time.

Recent investigations revealed that DNA preserved in marine sediments is characterized by a large number of highly diverse gene sequences. In particular, extracellular DNA has been used to reconstruct past prokaryotic and eukaryotic diversity in benthic ecosystems characterized by low temperatures and/or permanently anoxic conditions.

The diagram on the right shows the OTU (operational taxonomic unit) network of the extracellular DNA pools from the sediments of the different continental margins. The dot size within the network is proportional to the abundance of sequences for each OTU. Dots circled in red represent extracellular core OTUs, dot circled in yellow are partially shared (among two or more pools) OTUs, dots circled in black are OTUs exclusive of each pool. The core OTUs contributing at least for 20 sequences are shown. The numbers in parentheses represent the number of connections among OTUs and samples: 1 for exclusive OTUs, 2–3 for partially shared OTUs and 4 for core OTUs.

Previous studies suggested that the preservation of DNA might be also favoured in benthic systems characterised by high organic matter inputs and sedimentation rates, such as continental margins,. These systems, which represent ca. 15% of the global seafloor, are also hotspots of benthic prokaryotic diversity, and therefore they could represent optimal sites to investigate the prokaryotic diversity preserved within extracellular DNA.

Spatial distribution of prokaryotic diversity has been intensively studied in benthic deep-sea ecosystems  through the analysis of "environmental DNA" (i.e., the genetic material obtained directly from environmental samples without any obvious signs of biological source material). However, the extent to which gene sequences contained within extracellular DNA can alter the estimates of the diversity of the present-day prokaryotic assemblages is unknown.

Sedimentary ancient DNA

Analyses of ancient DNA preserved in various archives have transformed understanding of the evolution of species and ecosystems. Whilst earlier studies have concentrated on DNA extracted from taxonomically constrained samples (such as bones or frozen tissue), advances in high-throughput sequencing and bioinformatics now allow the analysis of ancient DNA extracted from sedimentary archives, so called sedaDNA. The accumulation and preservation of sedaDNA buried in land and lake sediments have been subject to active research and interpretation. However, studying the deposition of DNA on the ocean floor and its preservation in marine sediments is more complex because the DNA has to travel through a water column for several kilometers. Unlike in the terrestrial environment, with pervasive transport of subfossil biomass from land, the largest portion of the marine sedaDNA is derived from planktonic community, which is dominated by marine microbes and marine protists. After the death of the surface plankton, its DNA is subject to a transport through the water column, during which much of the associated organic matter is known to be consumed and respired. This transport could take between 3 to 12 days depending on the size and morphology of test. However, it remains unclear how exactly the planktonic eDNA, defined as the total DNA present in the environment after, survives this transport, whether the degradation or transport are associated with sorting or lateral advection, and finally, whether the eDNA arriving at the seafloor is preserved in marine sediments without further distortion of its composition.

Despite the long exposure to degradation under oxic conditions during transport in the water column, and substantially lower concentration of organic matter on the seafloor, there is evidence that planktonic eDNA is preserved in marine sediments and contains exploitable ecological signal. Earlier studies have shown sedaDNA preservation in marine sediments deposited under anoxia with unusually high amounts of organic matter preserved, but later investigations indicate that sedaDNA can also be extracted from normal marine sediments, dominated by clastic or biogenic mineral fractions. In addition, the low temperature of deep-sea water (0–4 °C) ensures a good preservation of sedaDNA. Using planktonic foraminifera as a "Rosetta Stone", allowing benchmarking of sedaDNA signatures by co-occurring fossil tests of these organisms, Morard et al. showed in 2017 that the fingerprint of plankton eDNA arriving on the seafloor preserves the ecological signature of these organisms at a large geographic scale. This indicates that planktonic community eDNA is deposited onto the seafloor below, together with aggregates, skeletons and other sinking planktonic material. If this is true, sedaDNA should be able to record signatures of surface ocean hydrography, affecting the composition of plankton communities, with the same spatial resolution as the skeletal remains of the plankton. In addition, if the plankton eDNA is arriving on the seafloor in association with aggregates or shells, it is possible that it withstands the transport through the water column by fixation onto mineral surfaces. The same mechanism has been proposed to explain the preservation of sedaDNA in sediments, implying that the flux of planktonic eDNA encapsulated in calcite test arriving on the seafloor is conditioned for preservation upon burial.

Planktonic foraminifera sedaDNA is an ideal proxy both “horizontally” to assess the spatial resolution of reconstructing past surface ocean hydrographic features and “vertically”, to unambiguously track the burial of its signal throughout the sediment column. Indeed, the flux of planktonic foraminifera eDNA should be proportionate to the flux of dead foraminiferal shells sinking to the seafloor, allowing independent benchmarking of the eDNA signal. eDNA is powerful tool to study ecosystem because it does not require direct taxonomic knowledge thus allowing information to be gathered on every organism present in a sample, even at the cryptic level. However, assignment of the eDNA sequences to known organisms is done via comparison with reference sequences (or barcodes) made available in public repositories or curated databases. The taxonomy of planktonic foraminifera is well understood  and barcodes exist allowing almost complete mapping of eDNA amplicons on the taxonomy based on foraminiferal test morphology. Importantly, the composition of planktonic foraminifera communities is closely linked to surface hydrography and this signal is preserved by fossil tests deposited on the seafloor. Since foraminiferal eDNA accumulated in the ocean sediment can be recovered, it could be used to analyze changes in planktonic and benthic communities over time.

Participatory research and citizen science

The relative simplicity of eDNA sampling lends itself to projects which seek to involve local communities in being part of research projects, including collecting and analysing DNA samples. This can empower local communities (including Indigenous peoples) to be actively involved in monitoring the species in an environment, and help make informed decisions as part of participatory action research model. An example of such a project has been demonstrated by the charity Science for All with the 'Wild DNA' project.

Myopia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Myopia
Other namesshort-sightedness, near-sightedness
Myopia.gif
Diagram showing changes in the eye with near-sightedness

 
SpecialtyOphthalmology, optometry
SymptomsDistant objects appear blurry, close objects appear normal, headaches, eye strain
ComplicationsRetinal detachment, cataracts, glaucoma
CausesCombination of genetic and environmental factors
Risk factorsNear work, greater time spent indoors, family history
Diagnostic methodEye examination
PreventionUnknown
TreatmentEyeglasses, contact lenses, surgery
Frequency1.5 billion people (22%)

Myopia, also known as near-sightedness and short-sightedness, is an eye disorder where light focuses in front of, instead of on, the retina. This causes distant objects to appear blurry while close objects appear normal. Other symptoms may include headaches and eye strain. Severe near-sightedness is associated with an increased risk of retinal detachment, cataracts, and glaucoma.

The underlying mechanism involves the length of the eyeball growing too long or less commonly the lens being too strong. It is a type of refractive error. Diagnosis is by eye examination.

Tentative evidence indicates that the risk of near-sightedness can be decreased by having young children spend more time outside. This may be related to natural light exposure. Near-sightedness can be corrected with eyeglasses, contact lenses, or a refractive surgery. Eyeglasses are the easiest and safest method of correction. Contact lenses can provide a wider field of vision, but are associated with a risk of infection. Refractive surgery permanently changes the shape of the cornea.

Near-sightedness is the most common eye problem and is estimated to affect 1.5 billion people (22% of the population). Rates vary significantly in different areas of the world. Rates among adults are between 15% to 49%. Among children, it affects 1% of rural Nepalese, 4% of South Africans, 12% of people in the US, and 37% in some large Chinese cities. In China the proportion of girls is slightly higher than boys. Rates have increased since the 1950s. Uncorrected near-sightedness is one of the most common causes of vision impairment globally along with cataracts, macular degeneration, and vitamin A deficiency.

Signs and symptoms

Near-sighted vision (top/left), normal vision (bottom/right)

A myopic individual can see clearly out to a certain distance (the far point of the eye), but objects placed beyond this distance appear blurred. If the extent of the myopia is great enough, even standard reading distances can be affected. Upon routine examination of the eyes, the vast majority of myopic eyes appear structurally identical to nonmyopic eyes.

Onset is often in school children, with worsening between the ages of 8 and 15.

Causes

The underlying cause is believed to be a combination of genetic and environmental factors. Risk factors include doing work that involves focusing on close objects, greater time spent indoors, urbanization, and a family history of the condition. It is also associated with a high socioeconomic class and higher level of education.

A 2012 review could not find strong evidence for any single cause, although many theories have been discredited. Identical twins are more likely to be affected than non identical twins which indicates at least some genetic factors are involved. Myopia has been increasing rapidly throughout the developed world, suggesting environmental factors are involved.

A single-author literature review in 2021 contended that myopia is the result of corrective lenses interfering with emmetropization.

Genetics

A risk for myopia may be inherited from one's parents. Genetic linkage studies have identified 18 possible loci on 15 different chromosomes that are associated with myopia, but none of these loci is part of the candidate genes that cause myopia. Instead of a simple one-gene locus controlling the onset of myopia, a complex interaction of many mutated proteins acting in concert may be the cause. Instead of myopia being caused by a defect in a structural protein, defects in the control of these structural proteins might be the actual cause of myopia. A collaboration of all myopia studies worldwide identified 16 new loci for refractive error in individuals of European ancestry, of which 8 were shared with Asians. The new loci include candidate genes with functions in neurotransmission, ion transport, retinoic acid metabolism, extracellular matrix remodeling and eye development. The carriers of the high-risk genes have a tenfold increased risk of myopia. Aberrant genetic recombination and gene splicing in the OPNLW1 and OPNMW1 genes that code for two retinal cone photopigment proteins can produce high myopia by interfering with refractive development of the eye.

Human population studies suggest that contribution of genetic factors accounts for 60–90% of variance in refraction. However, the currently identified variants account for only a small fraction of myopia cases, suggesting the existence of a large number of yet unidentified low-frequency or small-effect variants, which underlie the majority of myopia cases.

Environmental factors

Environmental factors which increase the risk of nearsightedness include insufficient light exposure, low physical activity, near work, and increased year of education.

One hypothesis is that a lack of normal visual stimuli causes improper development of the eyeball. Under this hypothesis, "normal" refers to the environmental stimuli that the eyeball evolved to. Modern humans who spend most of their time indoors, in dimly or fluorescently lit buildings may be at risk of development of myopia.

People, and children especially, who spend more time doing physical exercise and outdoor play have lower rates of myopia, suggesting the increased magnitude and complexity of the visual stimuli encountered during these types of activities decrease myopic progression. There is preliminary evidence that the protective effect of outdoor activities on the development of myopia is due, at least in part, to the effect of long hours of exposure to daylight on the production and the release of retinal dopamine.

Myopia can be induced with minus spherical lenses, and overminus in prescription lenses can induce myopia progression. Overminus during refraction can be avoided through various techniques and tests, such as fogging, plus to blur, and the duochrome test.

The near work hypothesis, also referred to as the "use-abuse theory" states that spending time involved in near work strains the intraocular and extraocular muscles. Some studies support the hypothesis, while other studies do not. While an association is present, it is not clearly causal.

Nearsightedness is also more common in children with diabetes, childhood arthritis, uveitis, and systemic lupus erythematosus.

Mechanism

Because myopia is a refractive error, the physical cause of myopia is comparable to any optical system that is out of focus. Borish and Duke-Elder classified myopia by these physical causes:

  • Axial myopia is attributed to an increase in the eye's axial length 
  • Refractive myopia is attributed to the condition of the refractive elements of the eye. Borish further subclassified refractive myopia:
  • Curvature myopia is attributed to excessive, or increased, curvature of one or more of the refractive surfaces of the eye, especially the cornea. In those with Cohen syndrome, myopia appears to result from high corneal and lenticular power.
  • Index myopia is attributed to variation in the index of refraction of one or more of the ocular media.

As with any optical system experiencing a defocus aberration, the effect can be exaggerated or masked by changing the aperture size. In the case of the eye, a large pupil emphasizes refractive error and a small pupil masks it. This phenomenon can cause a condition in which an individual has a greater difficulty seeing in low-illumination areas, even though there are no symptoms in bright light, such as daylight.

Under rare conditions, edema of the ciliary body can cause an anterior displacement of the lens, inducing a myopia shift in refractive error.

Diagnosis

A diagnosis of myopia is typically made by an eye care professional, usually an optometrist or ophthalmologist. During a refraction, an autorefractor or retinoscope is used to give an initial objective assessment of the refractive status of each eye, then a phoropter is used to subjectively refine the patient's eyeglass prescription. Other types of refractive error are hyperopia, astigmatism, and presbyopia.

Types

Various forms of myopia have been described by their clinical appearance:

  • Simple myopia: Myopia in an otherwise normal eye, typically less than 4.00 to 6.00 diopters. This is the most common form of myopia.
  • Degenerative myopia, also known as malignant, pathological, or progressive myopia, is characterized by marked fundus changes, such as posterior staphyloma, and associated with a high refractive error and subnormal visual acuity after correction. This form of myopia gets progressively worse over time. Degenerative myopia has been reported as one of the main causes of visual impairment.
  • Pseudomyopia is the blurring of distance vision brought about by spasm of the accommodation system.
  • Nocturnal myopia: Without adequate stimulus for accurate accommodation, the accommodation system partially engages, pushing distance objects out of focus.
  • Nearwork-induced transient myopia (NITM): short-term myopic far point shift immediately following a sustained near visual task. Some authors argue for a link between NITM and the development of permanent myopia.
  • Instrument myopia: over-accommodation when looking into an instrument such as a microscope.
  • Induced myopia, also known as acquired myopia, results from various medications, increases in glucose levels, nuclear sclerosis, oxygen toxicity (e.g., from diving or from oxygen and hyperbaric therapy) or other anomalous conditions. Sulphonamide therapy can cause ciliary body edema, resulting in anterior displacement of the lens, pushing the eye out of focus. Elevation of blood-glucose levels can also cause edema (swelling) of the crystalline lens as a result of sorbitol accumulating in the lens. This edema often causes temporary myopia. Scleral buckles, used in the repair of retinal detachments may induce myopia by increasing the axial length of the eye.
  • Index myopia is attributed to variation in the index of refraction of one or more of the ocular media. Cataracts may lead to index myopia.
  • Form deprivation myopia occurs when the eyesight is deprived by limited illumination and vision range, or the eye is modified with artificial lenses or deprived of clear form vision. In lower vertebrates, this kind of myopia seems to be reversible within short periods of time. Myopia is often induced this way in various animal models to study the pathogenesis and mechanism of myopia development.

Degree

The degree of myopia is described in terms of the power of the ideal correction, which is measured in diopters:

  • Myopia between −0.00 and −0.50 diopters is usually classified as emmetropia.
  • Low myopia usually describes myopia between −0.50 and −3.00 diopters.
  • Moderate myopia usually describes myopia between −3.00 and −6.00 diopters. Those with moderate amounts of myopia are more likely to have pigment dispersion syndrome or pigmentary glaucoma.
  • High myopia usually describes myopia of −6.00 or more. People with high myopia are more likely to have retinal detachments and primary open angle glaucoma. They are also more likely to experience floaters, shadow-like shapes which appear in the field of vision. In addition to this, high myopia is linked to macular degeneration, cataracts, and significant visual impairment.

Age at onset

Myopia is sometimes classified by the age at onset:

  • Congenital myopia, also known as infantile myopia, is present at birth and persists through infancy.
  • Youth onset myopia occurs in early childhood or teenage, and the ocular power can keep varying until the age of 21, before which any form of corrective surgery is usually not recommended by ophthalmic specialists around the world.
  • School myopia appears during childhood, particularly the school-age years. This form of myopia is attributed to the use of the eyes for close work during the school years.
  • Adult onset myopia
  • Early adult onset myopia occurs between ages 20 and 40.
  • Late adult onset myopia occurs after age 40.

Prevention

Various methods have been employed in an attempt to decrease the progression of myopia, although studies show mixed results. Many myopia treatment studies have a number of design drawbacks: small numbers, lack of adequate control group, and failure to mask examiners from knowledge of treatments used. Among myopia specialists, mydriatic eyedrops are the most favored approach, applied by almost 75% in North America and more than 80% in Australia. A 2015 review suggested that increased outdoor time protects young children from myopia. A 2020 study of global practice patterns used by paediatric ophthalmologists to decrease the progression of myopia showed behavioral intervention (counseling to spend more time outdoors and less time with near-work) to be favored by 25% of specialists, usually in addition to medications.

Glasses and contacts

The use of reading glasses when doing close work may improve vision by reducing or eliminating the need to accommodate. Altering the use of eyeglasses between full-time, part-time, and not at all does not appear to alter myopia progression. The American Optometric Association's Clinical Practice Guidelines found evidence of effectiveness of bifocal lenses and recommends it as the method for "myopia control". In some studies, bifocal and progressive lenses have not shown differences in altering the progression of myopia compared to placebo.

In 2019 contact lenses to prevent the worsening of nearsightedness in children were approved for use in the United States. This "MiSight" type claims to work by focusing peripheral light in front of the retina.

Medication

Anti-muscarinic topical medications in children under 18 years of age may slow the worsening of myopia. These treatments include pirenzepine gel, cyclopentolate eye drops, and atropine eye drops. While these treatments were shown to be effective in slowing the progression of myopia, side effects included light sensitivity and near blur.

Other methods

Scleral reinforcement surgery is aimed to cover the thinning posterior pole with a supportive material to withstand intraocular pressure and prevent further progression of the posterior staphyloma. The strain is reduced, although damage from the pathological process cannot be reversed. By stopping the progression of the disease, vision may be maintained or improved.

Treatment

Glasses are commonly used to address near-sightedness.

The National Institutes of Health says there is no known way of preventing myopia, and the use of glasses or contact lenses does not affect its progression, unless the glasses or contact lenses are too strong of a prescription. There is no universally accepted method of preventing myopia and proposed methods need additional study to determine their effectiveness. Optical correction using glasses or contact lenses is the most common treatment; other approaches include orthokeratology, and refractive surgery. Medications (mostly atropine) and vision therapy can be effective in addressing the various forms of pseudomyopia.

Compensating for myopia using a corrective lens.

Glasses and contacts

Prismatic color distortion shown with a camera set for near-sighted focus, and using -9.5-diopter eyeglasses to correct the camera's myopia (left). Close-up of color shifting through corner of eyeglasses. The light and dark borders visible between color swatches do not exist (right).

Corrective lenses bend the light entering the eye in a way that places a focused image accurately onto the retina. The power of any lens system can be expressed in diopters, the reciprocal of its focal length in meters. Corrective lenses for myopia have negative powers because a divergent lens is required to move the far point of focus out to the distance. More severe myopia needs lens powers further from zero (more negative). However, strong eyeglass prescriptions create distortions such as prismatic movement and chromatic aberration. Strongly near-sighted wearers of contact lenses do not experience these distortions because the lens moves with the cornea, keeping the optic axis in line with the visual axis and because the vertex distance has been reduced to zero.

Surgery

Refractive surgery includes procedures which alter the corneal curvature of some structure of the eye or which add additional refractive means inside the eye.

Photorefractive keratectomy

Photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) involves ablation of corneal tissue from the corneal surface using an excimer laser. The amount of tissue ablation corresponds to the amount of myopia. While PRK is a relatively safe procedure for up to 6 dioptres of myopia, the recovery phase post-surgery is usually painful.

LASIK

In a LASIK pre-procedure, a corneal flap is cut into the cornea and lifted to allow the excimer laser beam access to the exposed corneal tissue. After that, the excimer laser ablates the tissue according to the required correction. When the flap again covers the cornea, the change in curvature generated by the laser ablation proceeds to the corneal surface. Though LASIK is usually painless and involves a short rehabilitation period post-surgery, it can potentially result in flap complications and loss of corneal stability (post-LASIK keratectasia).

Phakic intra-ocular lens

Instead of modifying the corneal surface, as in laser vision correction (LVC), this procedure involves implanting an additional lens inside the eye (i.e., in addition to the already existing natural lens). While it usually results in good control of the refractive change, it can induce potential serious long-term complications such as glaucoma, cataract and endothelial decompensation.

Orthokeratology

Orthokeratology or simply Ortho-K is a temporary corneal reshaping process using rigid gas permeable (RGP) contact lenses. Overnight wearing of specially designed contact lenses will temporarily reshape cornea, so patients may see clearly without any lenses in daytime. Orthokeratology can correct myopia up to -6D. Several studies shown that Ortho-K can reduce myopia progression also. Risk factors of using Ortho-K lenses include microbial keratitis, corneal edema, etc. Other contact lens related complications like corneal aberration, photophobia, pain, irritation, redness etc. are usually temporary conditions, which may be eliminated by proper usage of lenses.

Intrastromal corneal ring segment

The Intrastromal corneal ring segment (ICRS), commonly used in keratoconus treatment now, was originally designed to correct mild to moderate myopia. The thickness is directly related to flattening and the diameter of the ring is proportionally inverse to the flattening of cornea. So, if diameter is smaller or thickness is greater, resulting myopia correction will be greater.

Alternative medicine

A number of alternative therapies have been claimed to improve myopia, including vision therapy, "behavioural optometry", various eye exercises and relaxation techniques, and the Bates method. Scientific reviews have concluded that there was "no clear scientific evidence" that eye exercises are effective in treating near-sightedness and as such they "cannot be advocated".

Epidemiology

Global refractive errors have been estimated to affect 800 million to 2.3 billion. The incidence of myopia within sampled population often varies with age, country, sex, race, ethnicity, occupation, environment, and other factors. Variability in testing and data collection methods makes comparisons of prevalence and progression difficult.

The prevalence of myopia has been reported as high as 70–90% in some Asian countries, 30–40% in Europe and the United States, and 10–20% in Africa. Myopia is about twice as common in Jewish people than in people of non-Jewish ethnicity. Myopia is less common in African people and associated diaspora. In Americans between the ages of 12 and 54, myopia has been found to affect African Americans less than Caucasians.

Asia

Estimated myopia rate in 20-year-olds in Asia.

In some parts of Asia, myopia is very common.

  • Singapore is believed to have the highest prevalence of myopia in the world; up to 80% of people there have myopia, but the accurate figure is unknown.
  • China's myopia rate is 31%: 400 million of its 1.3 billion people are myopic. The prevalence of myopia in high school in China is 77%, and in college is more than 80%.
  • In some areas, such as China and Malaysia, up to 41% of the adult population is myopic to 1.00 dpt, and up to 80% to 0.5 dpt.
  • A study of Jordanian adults aged 17 to 40 found over half (54%) were myopic.
  • Some research suggests the prevalence of myopia in Indian children is less than 15%.

Europe

Myopia rate in Europe by birth decade (1910 to 1970).
  • In first-year undergraduate students in the United Kingdom 50% of British whites and 53% of British Asians were myopic.
  • A recent review found 27% of Western Europeans aged 40 or over have at least −1.00 diopters of myopia and 5% have at least −5.00 diopters.

North America

Myopia is common in the United States, with research suggesting this condition has increased dramatically in recent decades. In 1971–1972, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey provided the earliest nationally representative estimates for myopia prevalence in the U.S., and found the prevalence in persons aged 12–54 was 25%. Using the same method, in 1999–2004, myopia prevalence was estimated to have climbed to 42%.

A study of 2,523 children in grades 1 to 8 (age, 5–17 years) found nearly one in 10 (9%) have at least −0.75 diopters of myopia. In this study, 13% had at least +1.25 D hyperopia (farsightedness), and 28% had at least 1.00-D difference between the two principal meridians (cycloplegic autorefraction) of astigmatism. For myopia, Asians had the highest prevalence (19%), followed by Hispanics (13%). Caucasian children had the lowest prevalence of myopia (4%), which was not significantly different from African Americans (7%).

A recent review found 25% of Americans aged 40 or over have at least −1.00 diopters of myopia and 5% have at least −5.00 diopters.

Australia

In Australia, the overall prevalence of myopia (worse than −0.50 diopters) has been estimated to be 17%. In one recent study, less than one in 10 (8%) Australian children between the ages of four and 12 were found to have myopia greater than −0.50 diopters. A recent review found 16% of Australians aged 40 or over have at least −1.00 diopters of myopia and 3% have at least −5.00 diopters.

South America

In Brazil, a 2005 study estimated 6% of Brazilians between the ages of 12 and 59 had −1.00 diopter of myopia or more, compared with 3% of the indigenous people in northwestern Brazil. Another found nearly 1 in 8 (13%) of the students in the city of Natal were myopic.

History

The difference between the near-sighted and far-sighted people was noted already by Aristotle. Graeco-Roman physician Galen first used the term "myopia" for near-sightedness. The first spectacles for correcting myopia were invented by a German cardinal in the year 1451. Johannes Kepler in his Clarification of Ophthalmic Dioptrics (1604) first demonstrated that near-sightedness was due to the incident light focusing in front of the retina. Kepler also showed that near-sightedness could be corrected by concave lenses. In 1632, Vopiscus Fortunatus Plempius examined a myopic eye and confirmed that myopia was due to a lengthening of its axial diameter.

Society and culture

The terms "myopia" and "myopic" (or the common terms "short-sightedness" or "short-sighted", respectively) have been used metaphorically to refer to cognitive thinking and decision making that is narrow in scope or lacking in foresight or in concern for wider interests or for longer-term consequences. It is often used to describe a decision that may be beneficial in the present, but detrimental in the future, or a viewpoint that fails to consider anything outside a very narrow and limited range. Hyperopia, the biological opposite of myopia, may also be used metaphorically for a value system or motivation that exhibits "farsighted" or possibly visionary thinking and behavior; that is, emphasizing long-term interests at the apparent expense of near-term benefit.

Correlations

Numerous studies have found correlations between myopia, on the one hand, and intelligence and academic achievement, on the other; it is not clear whether there is a causal relationship. Myopia is also correlated with increased microsaccade amplitude, suggesting that blurred vision from myopia might cause instability in fixational eye movements.

Etymology

The term myopia is of Koine Greek origin: μυωπία myōpia (or μυωπίασις myōpiasis) "short-sight(-ness)", from Ancient Greek μύωψ myōps "short-sighted (man), (man) with eyes getting shut", from μύειν myein "to shut the eyes" and ὤψ ōps "eye, look, sight" (GEN ὠπός ōpos). The opposite of myopia in English is hyperopia (long-sightedness).

Education

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education Education is the transmissio...