Crop Updates 2005 - Farming Systems

This session covers forty four papers from different authors: PLENARY 1. 2005 Outlook, David Stephens and Nicola Telcik, Department of Agriculture FERTILITY AND NUTRITION 2. The effect of higher nitrogen fertiliser prices on rotation and fertiliser strategies in cropping systems, Ross Kingwell, Department of Agriculture and University of Western Australia 3. Stubble management: The short and long term implications for crop nutrition and soil fertility, Wayne Pluske, Nutrient Management Systems and Bill Bowden, Department of Agriculture 4. Stubble management: The pros and cons of different methods, Bill Bowden, Department of Agriculture, Western Australia and Mike Collins, WANTFA 5. Effect of stubble burning and seasonality on microbial processes and nutrient recycling, Frances Hoyle, The University of Western Australia 6. Soil biology and crop production in Western Australian farming systems, D.V. Murphy, N. Milton, M. Osman, F.C. Hoyle, L.K Abbott, W.R. Cookson and S. Darmawanto, The University of Western Australia 7. Urea is as effective as CAN when no rain for 10 days, Bill Crabtree, Crabtree Agricultural Consulting 8. Fertiliser (N,P,S,K) and lime requirements for wheat production in the Merredin district, Geoff Anderson, Department of Agriculture and Darren Kidson, Summit Fertilizers 9. Trace element applications: Up-front verses foliar? Bill Bowden and Ross Brennan, Department of Agriculture 10. Fertcare®, Environmental Product Stewardship and Advisor Standards for thee Fertiliser Industry, Nick Drew, Fertilizer Industry Federation of Australia (FIFA) SOIL AND LAND MANAGEMENT 11. Species response to row spacing, density and nutrition, Bill Bowden, Craig Scanlan, Lisa Sherriff, Bob French and Reg Lunt, Department of Agriculture 12. Investigation into the influence of row orientation in lupin crops, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture and Angie Roe, Farm Focus Consultants 13. Deriving variable rate management zones for crops, Ian Maling, Silverfox Solutions and Matthew Adams, DLI 14. In a world of Precision Agriculture, weigh trailers are not passé, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture 15. Cover crop management to combat ryegrass resistance and improve yields, Jeff Russell, Department of Agriculture and Angie Roe, Farm Focus Consultants 16. ARGT home page, the place to find information on annual ryegrass toxicity on the web, Dr George Yan, BART Pty Ltd 17. Shallow leading tine (SLT) ripper significantly reduces draft force, improves soil tilth and allows even distribution of subsoil ameliorants, Mohammad Hamza, Glen Riethmuller and Wal Anderson, Department of Agriculture PASTURE ANS SUMMER CROP SYSTEMS 18. New annual pasture legumes for Mediteranean farming systems, Angelo Loi, Phil Nichols, Clinton Revell and David Ferris, Department of Agriculture 19. How sustainable are phase rotations with Lucerne? Phil Ward, CSIRO Plant Industry 20. Management practicalities of summer cropping, Andrea Hills and Sally-Anne Penny, Department of Agriculture 21. Rainfall zone determines the effect of summer crops on winter yields, Andrea Hills, Sally-Anne Penny and David Hall, Department of Agriculture 22. Summer crops and water use, Andrea Hills, Sally-Anne Penny and David Hall, Department of Agriculture, and Michael Robertson and Don Gaydon, CSIRO Brisbane 23. Risk analysis of sorgum cropping, Andrea Hills and Sally-Anne Penny, Department of Agriculture, and Dr Michael Robertson and Don Gaydon, CSIRO Brisbane FARMER DECISION SUPPORT AND ADOPTION 24. Variety release and End Point Royalties – a new system? Tress Walmsley, Department of Agriculture 25. Farming system analaysis using the STEP Tool, Caroline Peek and Megan Abrahams, Department of Agriculture 26. The Leakage Calculator: A simple tool for groundwater recharge assessment, Paul Raper, Department of Agriculture 27. The cost of Salinity Calculator – your tool to assessing the profitability of salinity management options, Richard O’Donnell and Trevor Lacey, Department of Agriculture 28. Climate decision support tools, Meredith Fairbanks and David Tennant, Department of Agriculture 29. Horses for courses – using the best tools to manage climate risk, Cameron Weeks, Mingenew-Irwin Group/Planfarm and Richard Quinlan, Planfarm Agronomy 30. Use of seasonal outlook for making N decisions in Merredin, Meredith Fairbanks and Alexandra Edward, Department of Agriculture 31. Forecasts and profits, Benefits or bulldust? Chris Carter and Doug Hamilton, Department of Agriculture 32. A tool to estimate fixed and variable header and tractor depreciation costs, Peter Tozer, Department of Agriculture 33. Partners in grain: ‘Putting new faces in new places’, Renaye Horne, Department of Agriculture 34. Results from the Grower group Alliance, Tracey Gianatti, Grower Group Alliance 35. Local Farmer Group Network – farming systems research opportunities through local groups, Paul Carmody, Local Farmer Group Network GREENHOUSE GAS AND CLIMATE CHANGE 36. Changing rainfall patterns in the grainbelt, Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture 37. Vulnerability of broadscale agriculture to the impacts of climate change, Michele John, CSIRO (formerly Department of Agriculture) and Ross George, Department of Agriculture 38. Impacts of climate change on wheat yield at Merredin, Imma Farré and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture 39. Climate change, land use suitability and water security, Ian Kininmonth, Dennis van Gool and Neil Coles, Department of Agriculture 40. Nitrous oxide emissions from cropping systems, Bill Porter, Department of Agriculture, Louise Barton, University of Western Australia 41. The potential of greenhouse sinks to underwrite improved land management in Western Australia, Richard Harper and Peter Ritson, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting and Forest Products Commission, Tony Beck, Tony Beck Consulting Services, Chris Mitchell and Michael Hill, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting 42. Removing uncertainty from greenhouse emissions, Fiona Barker-Reid, Will Gates, Ken Wilson and Rob Baigent, Department of Primary Industries - Victoria and CRC for Greenhouse Accounting (CRCGA), and Ian Galbally, Mick Meyer and Ian Weeks, CSIRO Atmospheric Research and CRCGA 43. Greenhouse in Agriculture Program (GIA), Traci Griffin, CRC for Greenhouse Accounting 44. Grains Greenhouse Accounting framework, D. Rodriguez, M. Probust, M. Meyers, D. Chen, A. Bennett, W. Strong, R. Nussey, I. Galbally and M. Howden CONTACT DETAILS FOR PRINCIPAL AUTHOR

Transcriptional profile of breast muscle in heat stressed layers is similar to that of broiler chickens at control temperature

Abstract Background In recent years, the commercial importance of changes in muscle function of broiler chickens and of the corresponding effects on meat quality has increased. Furthermore, broilers are more sensitive to heat stress during transport and at high ambient temperatures than smaller egg-laying chickens. We hypothesised that heat stress would amplify muscle damage and expression of genes that are involved in such changes and, thus, lead to the identification of pathways and networks associated with broiler muscle and meat quality traits. Broiler and layer chickens were exposed to control or high ambient temperatures to characterise differences in gene expression between the two genotypes and the two environments. Results Whole-genome expression studies in breast muscles of broiler and layer chickens were conducted before and after heat stress; 2213 differentially-expressed genes were detected based on a significant (P < 0.05) genotype × treatment interaction. This gene set was analysed with the BioLayout Express3D and Ingenuity Pathway Analysis software and relevant biological pathways and networks were identified. Genes involved in functions related to inflammatory reactions, cell death, oxidative stress and tissue damage were upregulated in control broilers compared with control and heat-stressed layers. Expression of these genes was further increased in heat-stressed broilers. Conclusions Differences in gene expression between broiler and layer chickens under control and heat stress conditions suggest that damage of breast muscles in broilers at normal ambient temperatures is similar to that in heat-stressed layers and is amplified when broilers are exposed to heat stress. The patterns of gene expression of the two genotypes under heat stress were almost the polar opposite of each other, which is consistent with the conclusion that broiler chickens were not able to cope with heat stress by dissipating their body heat. The differentially expressed gene networks and pathways were consistent with the pathological changes that are observed in the breast muscle of heat-stressed broilers

31st Annual Meeting and Associated Programs of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC 2016) : part two

Background The immunological escape of tumors represents one of the main ob- stacles to the treatment of malignancies. The blockade of PD-1 or CTLA-4 receptors represented a milestone in the history of immunotherapy. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors seem to be effective in specific cohorts of patients. It has been proposed that their efficacy relies on the presence of an immunological response. Thus, we hypothesized that disruption of the PD-L1/PD-1 axis would synergize with our oncolytic vaccine platform PeptiCRAd. Methods We used murine B16OVA in vivo tumor models and flow cytometry analysis to investigate the immunological background. Results First, we found that high-burden B16OVA tumors were refractory to combination immunotherapy. However, with a more aggressive schedule, tumors with a lower burden were more susceptible to the combination of PeptiCRAd and PD-L1 blockade. The therapy signifi- cantly increased the median survival of mice (Fig. 7). Interestingly, the reduced growth of contralaterally injected B16F10 cells sug- gested the presence of a long lasting immunological memory also against non-targeted antigens. Concerning the functional state of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we found that all the immune therapies would enhance the percentage of activated (PD-1pos TIM- 3neg) T lymphocytes and reduce the amount of exhausted (PD-1pos TIM-3pos) cells compared to placebo. As expected, we found that PeptiCRAd monotherapy could increase the number of antigen spe- cific CD8+ T cells compared to other treatments. However, only the combination with PD-L1 blockade could significantly increase the ra- tio between activated and exhausted pentamer positive cells (p= 0.0058), suggesting that by disrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis we could decrease the amount of dysfunctional antigen specific T cells. We ob- served that the anatomical location deeply influenced the state of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In fact, TIM-3 expression was in- creased by 2 fold on TILs compared to splenic and lymphoid T cells. In the CD8+ compartment, the expression of PD-1 on the surface seemed to be restricted to the tumor micro-environment, while CD4 + T cells had a high expression of PD-1 also in lymphoid organs. Interestingly, we found that the levels of PD-1 were significantly higher on CD8+ T cells than on CD4+ T cells into the tumor micro- environment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions In conclusion, we demonstrated that the efficacy of immune check- point inhibitors might be strongly enhanced by their combination with cancer vaccines. PeptiCRAd was able to increase the number of antigen-specific T cells and PD-L1 blockade prevented their exhaus- tion, resulting in long-lasting immunological memory and increased median survival

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Catastrophic windthrow in the southern Appalachians: characteristics of pits and mounds and initial vegetation responses

www.elskvier.com/loeate/forec

VARIATION IN STREAM WATER QUALITY IN AN URBAN HEADWATER STREAM IN THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIANS

Abstract. We examined the influence of a forested landscape on the quality of water in a stream originating on an urban landscape and flowing through National Forest lands. Sample sites included an urban stream (URB), a site on the same stream but within a National Forest (FOR) and 2 km downstream from the URB site, and a small, undisturbed, forested reference tributary of the main stream (REF). We monitored stream water quality from March 2002 through June 2003. Average base flows for the three stream sites were URB = 184Ls−1, FOR = 420Ls−1, and REF = 17Ls−1. We analyzed weekly stream water samples for NO − 3,NH+ 4,PO+ 4,Cl−,K,Ca, Mg, SO4, SiO2, pH, conductivity, total suspended solids (TSS), and bacteria on a monthly basis. Most solutes were higher in concentration at the URB site, as were conductivity, TSS, and bacteria counts. Reductions in NO − 3,NH+ 4, and PO+ 4 concentrations between the URB and FOR sites were inferred from changes in nutrient:chloride ratios. Bacteria populations were greater and more responsive to stream temperature at the URB site. Water quality responses to changes in stream discharge varied among sites but were greater at the URB site. By all measures, water quality was consistently higher at the FOR site than at the URB site