Improvement of selected morphological, physiological, and biochemical parameters of Roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.) grown under different salinity levels using potassium silicate and Aloe saponaria extract

Two successive field trials were carried out at the experimental farm of the Agriculture Department of Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt, to investigate the sole or dual interaction effect of applying a foliar spray of Aloe saponaria extract (Ae) or potassium silicate (KSi) on reducing the stressful salinity impacts on the development, yield, and features of roselle (Hibiscus sabdariffa L.) plants. Both Ae or KSi were used at three rates: 0% (0 cm3 L−1), 0.5% (5 cm3 L−1), and 1% (10 cm3 L−1) and 0, 30, and 60 g L−1, respectively. Three rates of salinity, measured by the electrical conductivity of a saturated soil extract (ECe), were also used: normal soil (ECe < 4 dS/m) (S1); moderately-saline soil (ECe: 4–8 dS/m) (S2); and highly-saline soil (ECe: 8–16 dS/m) (S3). The lowest level of salinity yielded the highest levels of all traits except for pH, chloride, and sodium. Ae at 0.5% increased the values of total soluble sugars, total free amino acids, potassium, anthocyanin, a single-photon avalanche diode, stem diameter, fruit number, and fresh weight, whereas 1% of Ae resulted in the highest plant height, chlorophyll fluorescence (Fv/Fm), performance index, relative water content, membrane stability index, proline, total soluble sugars, and acidity. KSi either at 30 or 60 g L−1 greatly increased these abovementioned attributes. Fruit number and fruit fresh weight per plant also increased significantly with the combination of Ae at 1% and KSi at 30 g L−1 under normal soil conditions

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries