Na-O layer provides Na ⁺ diffusion pathway and storage site, whereas benzene layer provides e−conduction pathway and redox center.

There is a growing recognition of the links between the increasing prevalence of noncommunicable diseases, environmental concerns including biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation, and socioecological issues such as ecological (in)justice. This has encouraged a number of recent calls for the development of integrative approaches aimed at addressing these issues—also known as nature-based solutions. An example of an emerging nature-based solution is a ‘green prescription’, broadly defined as a nature-based health intervention. Green prescriptions are typically designed for patients with a defined need and they have the potential to supplement orthodox medical treatments, particularly those aimed at addressing noncommunicable diseases. It is also thought that green prescriptions could bring about significant environmental, economic, and social co-benefits. However, researchers have recently expressed concerns over taking the ‘dose of nature’ approach, in that it may be too reductionistic for the complex social settings in which it is provided. Here we frame a holistic philosophical perspective and discuss green prescribing logic, types, mechanisms and fundamental remaining questions and challenges. We place a significant emphasis on the potential co-benefits of green prescriptions, and the importance of taking a planetary health approach. More research is needed to determine how this potential can be realised, and to further understand the complexities of the nature–human health relationship. However, with additional research and support, there is huge potential for green prescriptions to contribute to both reactive (health care) and proactive (health promoting) public health solutions whilst enhancing the natural environment.

The United Nations heralded 2021–2030 as the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. A socioecological approach to restoration has been proposed that honors the diversity in ecological landscapes and their respective cultures and peoples with the goal of repairing degraded ecosystems. Indigenous peoples are intimately interconnected with landscapes, which are under mounting pressure from anthropogenic global environmental change. Article 31 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states the rights of Indigenous peoples to maintain, protect, and control their culture and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK); however, these rights have not always been acknowledged. We are concerned that large global restoration goals will continue to promote TEK extraction that further perpetuates inequities and discrimination of Indigenous peoples. If the restoration sector wishes to partner with Indigenous communities leading TEK efforts, it needs to understand established international agreements and proactively protect intellectual property and data sovereignty rights. To illustrate a theme of ethical engagement, we present risks to TEK integrity while highlighting engagement that has successfully promoted Indigenous leadership and self‐determination. We propose that a decade of responsible and respectful restoration will be achieved only with shared principles and an ethical code of conduct for TEK partnerships. We argue that deep listening with Indigenous peoples and engagement with humility and respect needs to be the starting point. Finally, we propose an Indigenous‐led workshop to re‐imagine and re‐develop equitable ways forward for TEK partnerships in restoration, with explicit considerations for the rights, livelihoods, and leadership of Indigenous peoples.

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about unprecedented changes to human lifestyles across the world. The virus and associated social restriction measures have been linked to an increase in mental health conditions. A considerable body of evidence shows that spending time in and engaging with nature can improve human health and wellbeing. Our study explores nature’s role in supporting health during the COVID-19 pandemic. We created web-based questionnaires with validated health instruments and conducted spatial analyses in a geographic information system (GIS). We collected data (n = 1184) on people’s patterns of nature exposure, associated health and wellbeing responses, and potential socioecological drivers such as relative deprivation, access to greenspaces, and land-cover greenness. The majority of responses came from England, UK (n = 993). We applied a range of statistical analyses including bootstrap-resampled correlations and binomial regression models, adjusting for several potential confounding factors. We found that respondents significantly changed their patterns of visiting nature as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. People spent more time in nature and visited nature more often during the pandemic. People generally visited nature for a health and wellbeing benefit and felt that nature helped them cope during the pandemic. Greater land-cover greenness within a 250 m radius around a respondent’s postcode was important in predicting higher levels of mental wellbeing. There were significantly more food-growing allotments within 100 and 250 m around respondents with high mental wellbeing scores. The need for a mutually-advantageous relationship between humans and the wider biotic community has never been more important. We must conserve, restore and design nature-centric environments to maintain resilient societies and promote planetary health.

In the absence of effective and scalable human intervention, up to 95% of the world's ecosystems will be affected by anthropogenic degradation by 2050. Therefore, immediate and large‐scale ecological restoration is imperative to stem biodiversity loss and ecosystem decline. Ecologists must draw upon the most effective and efficient tools available to achieve successful restoration goals. Drones (i.e., unmanned aerial vehicles) are a valuable set of tools in the environmental, forestry, and agriculture sectors; however, there has been limited uptake in restoration ecology. Here, we aim to highlight the existing and emerging uses of drones in restoration science and practice. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these applications and provide a roadmap for increasing the utilisation of drones to refine and enhance restoration objectives. Our article is presented with the restoration continuum in mind, including sections for restoration planning, implementation and monitoring. We also take a novel approach by describing how drones relate to a globally recognised restoration tool published by the Society for Ecological Restoration. Drones are used in several restoration scenarios from mapping habitats and managing wildfires, to monitoring the effectiveness of restoration interventions. Many applications in other disciplines can also be transferred to restoration scenarios. However, the use of drones will be context‐dependent, and several technical and practical constraints need to be addressed. Drones have considerable potential to improve the science and practice of restoration at all stages of a restoration project, which is vital to realising the goals of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration.

The rise of microbiomics and metagenomics has been driven by advances in genomic sequencing technology, improved microbial sampling methods, and fast-evolving approaches in bioinformatics. Humans are a host to diverse microbial communities in and on their bodies, which continuously interact with and alter the surrounding environments. Since information relating to these interactions can be extracted by analyzing human and environmental microbial profiles, they have the potential to be relevant to forensics. In this review, we analyzed over 100 papers describing forensic microbiome applications with emphasis on geolocation, personal identification, trace evidence, manner and cause of death, and inference of the postmortem interval (PMI). We found that although the field is in its infancy, utilizing microbiome and metagenome signatures has the potential to enhance the forensic toolkit. However, many of the studies suffer from limited sample sizes and model accuracies, and unrealistic environmental settings, leaving the full potential of microbiomics to forensics unexplored. It is unlikely that the information that can currently be elucidated from microbiomics can be used by law enforcement. Nonetheless, the research to overcome these challenges is ongoing, and it is foreseeable that microbiome-based evidence could contribute to forensic investigations in the future.