Observation of Parity Nonconservation in Møller Scattering

We report a measurement of the parity-violating asymmetry in fixed target electron-electron (Møller) scattering: A_(PV) = [-175 ± 30(stat)± 20(syst)] X 10^(-9). This first direct observation of parity nonconservation in Møller scattering leads to a measurement of the electron’s weak charge at low energy Q^e_W = -0:053 ± 0:011. This is consistent with the standard model expectation at the current level of precision: sin^2θ_W = (M_Z)_(MS) = 0:2293 ± 0:0024(stat) ± 0:0016(syst) ± 0:0006(theory)

Observation of Parity Nonconservation in Moller Scattering

We report a measurement of the parity-violating asymmetry in fixed target electron-electron (Moller) scattering: A_PV = -175 +/- 30 (stat.) +/- 20 (syst.) parts per billion. This first direct observation of parity nonconservation in Moller scattering leads to a measurement of the electron's weak charge at low energy Q^e_W = -0.053 +/- 0.011. This is consistent with the Standard Model expectation at the current level of precision: sin^2\theta_W(M_Z)_MSbar = 0.2293 +/- 0.0024 (stat.) +/- 0.0016 (syst.) +/- 0.0006 (theory).Comment: Version 3 is the same as version 2. These versions contain minor text changes from referee comments and a change in the extracted value of Q^e_W and sin^2\theta_W due to a change in the theoretical calculation of the bremsstrahulung correction (ref. 16

Precision Measurement of the Weak Mixing Angle in Moller Scattering

We report on a precision measurement of the parity-violating asymmetry in fixed target electron-electron (Moller) scattering: A_PV = -131 +/- 14 (stat.) +/- 10 (syst.) parts per billion, leading to the determination of the weak mixing angle \sin^2\theta_W^eff = 0.2397 +/- 0.0010 (stat.) +/- 0.0008 (syst.), evaluated at Q^2 = 0.026 GeV^2. Combining this result with the measurements of \sin^2\theta_W^eff at the Z^0 pole, the running of the weak mixing angle is observed with over 6 sigma significance. The measurement sets constraints on new physics effects at the TeV scale.Comment: 4 pages, 2 postscript figues, submitted to Physical Review Letter

Differential Allocation of Constitutive and Induced Chemical Defenses in Pine Tree Juveniles: A Test of the Optimal Defense Theory

Optimal defense theory (ODT) predicts that the within-plant quantitative allocation of defenses is not random, but driven by the potential relative contribution of particular plant tissues to overall fitness. These predictions have been poorly tested on long-lived woody plants. We explored the allocation of constitutive and methyl-jasmonate (MJ) inducible chemical defenses in six half-sib families of Pinus radiata juveniles. Specifically, we studied the quantitative allocation of resin and polyphenolics (the two major secondary chemicals in pine trees) to tissues with contrasting fitness value (stem phloem, stem xylem and needles) across three parts of the plants (basal, middle and apical upper part), using nitrogen concentration as a proxy of tissue value. Concentration of nitrogen in the phloem, xylem and needles was found to be greater higher up the plant. As predicted by the ODT, the same pattern was found for the concentration of non-volatile resin in the stem. However, in leaf tissues the concentrations of both resin and total phenolics were greater towards the base of the plant. Two weeks after MJ application, the concentrations of nitrogen in the phloem, resin in the stem and total phenolics in the needles increased by roughly 25% compared with the control plants, inducibility was similar across all plant parts, and families differed in the inducibility of resin compounds in the stem. In contrast, no significant changes were observed either for phenolics in the stems, or for resin in the needles after MJ application. Concentration of resin in the phloem was double that in the xylem and MJ-inducible, with inducibility being greater towards the base of the stem. In contrast, resin in the xylem was not MJ-inducible and increased in concentration higher up the plant. The pattern of inducibility by MJ-signaling in juvenile P. radiata is tissue, chemical-defense and plant-part specific, and is genetically variable

Safety and Tolerability of SRX246, a Vasopressin 1a Antagonist, in Irritable Huntington\u27s Disease Patients-A Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial.

SRX246 is a vasopressin (AVP) 1a receptor antagonist that crosses the blood-brain barrier. It reduced impulsive aggression, fear, depression and anxiety in animal models, blocked the actions of intranasal AVP on aggression/fear circuits in an experimental medicine fMRI study and demonstrated excellent safety in Phase 1 multiple-ascending dose clinical trials. The present study was a 3-arm, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 12-week, dose escalation study of SRX246 in early symptomatic Huntington\u27s disease (HD) patients with irritability. Our goal was to determine whether SRX246 was safe and well tolerated in these HD patients given its potential use for the treatment of problematic neuropsychiatric symptoms. Participants were randomized to receive placebo or to escalate to 120 mg twice daily or 160 mg twice daily doses of SRX246. Assessments included standard safety tests, the Unified Huntington\u27s Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS), and exploratory measures of problem behaviors. The groups had comparable demographics, features of HD and baseline irritability. Eighty-two out of 106 subjects randomized completed the trial on their assigned dose of drug. One-sided exact-method confidence interval tests were used to reject the null hypothesis of inferior tolerability or safety for each dose group vs. placebo. Apathy and suicidality were not affected by SRX246. Most adverse events in the active arms were considered unlikely to be related to SRX246. The compound was safe and well tolerated in HD patients and can be moved forward as a candidate to treat irritability and aggression

Phacidium and Ceuthospora (Phacidiaceae) are congeneric: taxonomic and nomenclatural implications

The morphologically diverse genus Ceuthospora has traditionally been linked to Phacidium sexual morphs via association, though molecular or cultural data to confirm this relationship have been lacking. The aim of this study was thus to resolve the relationship of these two genera by generating nucleotide sequence data for three loci, ITS, LSU and RPB2. Based on these results, Ceuthospora is reduced to synonymy under the older generic name Phacidium. Phacidiaceae (currently Helotiales) is suggested to constitute a separate order, Phacidiales (Leotiomycetes), as sister to Helotiales, which is clearly paraphyletic. Phacidiaceae includes Bulgaria, and consequently the family Bulgariaceae becomes a synonym of Phacidiaceae. Several new combinations are introduced in Phacidium, along with two new species, P. pseudophacidioides, which occurs on Ilex and Chamaespartium in Europe, and Phacidium trichophori, which occurs on Trichophorum cespitosum subsp. germanicum in The Netherlands. The generic name Allantophomopsiella is introduced to accommodate A. pseudotsugae, a pathogen of conifers, while Gremmenia is resurrected to accommodate the snow-blight pathogens of conifers, G. abietis, G. infestans, and G. pini-cembrae

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: Many patients with COVID-19 have been treated with plasma containing anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of convalescent plasma therapy in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]) is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 177 NHS hospitals from across the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either usual care alone (usual care group) or usual care plus high-titre convalescent plasma (convalescent plasma group). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, analysed on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings: Between May 28, 2020, and Jan 15, 2021, 11558 (71%) of 16287 patients enrolled in RECOVERY were eligible to receive convalescent plasma and were assigned to either the convalescent plasma group or the usual care group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between the two groups: 1399 (24%) of 5795 patients in the convalescent plasma group and 1408 (24%) of 5763 patients in the usual care group died within 28 days (rate ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·93–1·07; p=0·95). The 28-day mortality rate ratio was similar in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including in those patients without detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at randomisation. Allocation to convalescent plasma had no significant effect on the proportion of patients discharged from hospital within 28 days (3832 [66%] patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 3822 [66%] patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·94–1·03; p=0·57). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at randomisation, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients meeting the composite endpoint of progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death (1568 [29%] of 5493 patients in the convalescent plasma group vs 1568 [29%] of 5448 patients in the usual care group; rate ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·93–1·05; p=0·79). Interpretation: In patients hospitalised with COVID-19, high-titre convalescent plasma did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research

Tocilizumab in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of tocilizumab in adult patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 with both hypoxia and systemic inflammation. Methods: This randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing several possible treatments in patients hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK. Those trial participants with hypoxia (oxygen saturation <92% on air or requiring oxygen therapy) and evidence of systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein ≥75 mg/L) were eligible for random assignment in a 1:1 ratio to usual standard of care alone versus usual standard of care plus tocilizumab at a dose of 400 mg–800 mg (depending on weight) given intravenously. A second dose could be given 12–24 h later if the patient's condition had not improved. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN (50189673) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04381936). Findings: Between April 23, 2020, and Jan 24, 2021, 4116 adults of 21 550 patients enrolled into the RECOVERY trial were included in the assessment of tocilizumab, including 3385 (82%) patients receiving systemic corticosteroids. Overall, 621 (31%) of the 2022 patients allocated tocilizumab and 729 (35%) of the 2094 patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·85; 95% CI 0·76–0·94; p=0·0028). Consistent results were seen in all prespecified subgroups of patients, including those receiving systemic corticosteroids. Patients allocated to tocilizumab were more likely to be discharged from hospital within 28 days (57% vs 50%; rate ratio 1·22; 1·12–1·33; p<0·0001). Among those not receiving invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, patients allocated tocilizumab were less likely to reach the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (35% vs 42%; risk ratio 0·84; 95% CI 0·77–0·92; p<0·0001). Interpretation: In hospitalised COVID-19 patients with hypoxia and systemic inflammation, tocilizumab improved survival and other clinical outcomes. These benefits were seen regardless of the amount of respiratory support and were additional to the benefits of systemic corticosteroids. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research