The Influence of the Type of Lime on the Hygric Behaviour and Bio-Receptivity of Hemp Lime Composites Used for Rendering Applications in Sustainable New Construction and Repair Works

The benefits of using sustainable building materials are linked not only to the adoption of manufacturing processes that entail reduced pollution, CO2 emissions and energy consumption, but also to the onset of improved performance in the building. In particular, hemp-lime composite shows low shrinkage and high thermal and acoustic insulating properties. However, this material also shows a great ability to absorb water, an aspect that can turn out to be negative for the long-term durability of the building. For this reason, the hygric properties of hemp-based composites need to be studied to ensure the correct use of this material in construction and repair works. The water absorption, drying and transpirability of hemp composites made with aerial (in the form of dry powder and putty) and hydraulic limes were investigated here and related to the microbial growth induced by the water movements within the material. Results show that hemp-natural hydraulic lime mixes exhibit the highest transpirability and drying rate, the lowest water absorption by immersion and capillary uptake and the least intense microbial attack and chromatic change. A microscopical study of the hemp shives also related their great ability to absorb water to the near-irreversible swelling of their structure under dry-wet conditions.The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement n° 326983 (NaturALiMe), and the Spanish project MAT-2012-34473 of the Ministerio de Ciencia y Competitividad. Author MB, owner of the CANNABRIC company, had some role in the design and preparation of mortar samples and in the preparation of this manuscript, but did not have any additional role in data collection and analysis

Healthcare workers' attitudes towards working during pandemic influenza: A multi method study

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) will be key players in any response to pandemic influenza, and will be in the front line of exposure to infection. Responding effectively to a pandemic relies on the majority of medical, nursing, laboratory and hotel services staff continuing to work normally. Planning assumes that during a pandemic normal healthcare service levels will be provided, although it anticipates that as caseloads increase only essential care will be provided. The ability of the NHS to provide expected service levels is entirely dependent upon HCWs continuing to work as normal. Methods/design: This study is designed as a two-phase multi-method study, incorporating focus groups and a questionnaire survey. In phase one, qualitative methods will be used to collect the views of a purposive sample of HCWs, to determine the range of factors associated with their responses to the prospect of working through pandemic influenza. In phase two, the findings from the focus groups, combined with the available literature, will be used to inform the design of a survey to determine the generalisability of these factors, enabling the estimation of the likely proportion of HCWs affected by each factor, and how likely it is that they would be willing and/or able to continue to work during an influenza pandemic. Discussion: There are potentially greater than normal health risks for some healthcare workers working during a pandemic, and these workers may be concerned about infecting family members/ friends. HCWs will be as liable as other workers to care for sick family members and friends. It is vital to have information about how motivated HCWs will be to continue to work during such a crisis, and what factors might influence their decision to work/not to work. Through the identification and subsequent management of these factors it may be possible to implement strategies that will alleviate the concerns and fears of HCWs and remove potential barriers to working

Early protein intake predicts functional connectivity and neurocognition in preterm born children

© 2021, The Author(s). Nutritional intake can promote early neonatal brain development in very preterm born neonates (\u3c 32 weeks’ gestation). In a group of 7-year-old very preterm born children followed since birth, we examined whether early nutrient intake in the first weeks of life would be associated with long-term brain function and neurocognitive skills at school age. Children underwent resting-state functional MRI (fMRI), intelligence testing (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, 5th Ed) and visual-motor processing (Beery-Buktenica, 5th Ed) at 7 years. Relationships were assessed between neonatal macronutrient intakes, functional connectivity strength between thalamic and default mode networks (DMN), and neuro-cognitive function using multivariable regression. Greater functional connectivity strength between thalamic networks and DMN was associated with greater intake of protein in the first week (β = 0.17; 95% CI 0.11, 0.23, p \u3c 0.001) but lower intakes of fat (β = − 0.06; 95% CI − 0.09, − 0.02, p = 0.001) and carbohydrates (β = − 0.03; 95% CI − 0.04, − 0.01, p = 0.003). Connectivity strength was also associated with protein intake during the first month (β = 0.22; 95% CI 0.06, 0.37, p = 0.006). Importantly, greater thalamic-DMN connectivity strength was associated with higher processing speed indices (β = 26.9; 95% CI 4.21, 49.49, p = 0.02) and visual processing scores (β = 9.03; 95% CI 2.27, 15.79, p = 0.009). Optimizing early protein intake may contribute to promoting long-term brain health in preterm-born children

Crop Updates 2007 - Lupins, Pulses and Oilseeds

This session covers forty eight papers from different authors: 2006 REGIONAL ROUNDUP 1. South east agricultural region, Mark Seymour1 and Jacinta Falconer2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Cooperative Bulk Handling Group 2. Central agricultural region, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture and Food 3. Great Southern and Lakes region, Rodger Beermier, Department of Agriculture and Food 4. Northern agricultural region, Wayne Parker and Martin Harries, Department of Agriculture and Food LUPINS 5. Development of anthracnose resistant and early flowering albus lupins (Lupinus albus L) in Western Australia, Kedar Adhikari and Geoff Thomas, Department of Agriculture and Food 6. New lupins adapted to the south coast, Peter White, Bevan Buirchell and Mike Baker, Department of Agriculture and Food 7. Lupin species and row spacing interactions by environment, Martin Harries, Peter White, Bob French, Jo Walker, Mike Baker and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture and Food 8. The interaction of lupin species row spacing and soil type, Martin Harries, Bob French, Laurie Maiolo and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture and Food 9. The effects of row spacing and crop density on competitiveness of lupins with wild radish, Bob French and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture and Food 10. The effect of time of sowing and radish weed density on lupin yield, Martin Harries and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture and Food 11. Interaction of time of sowing and weed management in lupins, Martin Harries and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture and Food 12. Delayed sowing as a strategy to manage annual ryegrass, Bob French and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture and Food 13. Is delayed sowing a good strategy for weed management in lupins? Bob French, Department of Agriculture and Food 14. Lupins aren’t lupins when it comes to simazine, Peter White and Leigh Smith, Department of Agriculture and Food 15. Seed yield and anthracnose resistance of Tanjil mutants tolerant to metribuzin, Ping Si1, Bevan Buirchell1,2 and Mark Sweetingham1,2, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, Australia; 2Department of Agriculture and Food 16. The effect of herbicides on nodulation in lupins, Lorne Mills1, Harmohinder Dhammu2 and Beng Tan1, 1Curtin University of Technology and 2Department of Agriculture and Food 17. Effect of fertiliser placements and watering regimes on lupin growth and seed yield in the central grain belt of Western Australia, Qifu Ma1, Zed Rengel1, Bill Bowden2, Ross Brennan2, Reg Lunt2 and Tim Hilder2, 1Soil Science & Plant Nutrition UWA, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 18. Development of a forecasting model for Bean Yellow Mosaic Virus in lupins, T. Maling1,2, A. Diggle1, D. Thackray1,2, R.A.C. Jones2, and K.H.M. Siddique1, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, The University of Western Australia; 2Department of Agriculture and Food 19. Manufacturing of lupin tempe,Vijay Jayasena1,4, Leonardus Kardono2,4, Ken Quail3,4 and Ranil Coorey1,4, 1Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia, 2Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), Indonesia, 3BRI Australia Ltd, Sydney, Australia, 4Grain Foods CRC, Sydney, Australia 20. The impact of lupin based ingredients in ice-cream, Hannah Williams, Lee Sheer Yap and Vijay Jayasena, Curtin University of Technology, Perth WA 21. The acceptability of muffins substituted with varying concentrations of lupin flour, Anthony James, Don Elani Jayawardena and Vijay Jayasena, Curtin University of Technology, PerthWA PULSES 22. Chickpea variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1, Rod Hunter1, Tanveer Khan1,2and Jenny Garlinge1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 23. Advanced breeding trials of desi chickpea, Khan, T.N.1, Siddique, K.H.M.3, Clarke, H.2, Turner, N.C.2, MacLeod, W.1, Morgan, S.1, and Harris, A.1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, 3TheUniversity of Western Australia 24. Ascochyta resistance in chickpea lines in Crop Variety Testing (CVT) of 2006, Tanveer Khan1 2, Bill MacLeod1, Alan Harris1, Stuart Morgan1and Kerry Regan1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 25. Yield evaluation of ascochyta blight resistant Kabuli chickpeas, Kerry Regan1and Kadambot Siddique2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia 26. Pulse WA Chickpea Industry Survey 2006, Mark Seymour1, Ian Pritchard1, Wayne Parker1and Alan Meldrum2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Pulse Australia 27. Genes from the wild as a valuable genetic resource for chickpea improvement, Heather Clarke1, Helen Bowers1and Kadambot Siddique2, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, 2Institute of Agriculture, The University of Western Australia 28. International screening of chickpea for resistance to Botrytis grey mould, B. MacLeod1, Dr T. Khan1, Prof. K.H.M. Siddique2and Dr A. Bakr3, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2The University of Western Australia, 3Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute 29. Balance® in chickpea is safest applied post sowing to a level seed bed, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture and Food, 30. Demonstrations of Genesis 510 chickpea, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture and Food 31. Field pea 2006, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture and Food 32. Field pea variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1, Rod Hunter1, Tanveer Khan1,2 and Jenny Garlinge1, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 33. Breeding highlights of the Australian Field Pea Improvement Program (AFPIP),Kerry Regan1, Tanveer Khan1,2, Phillip Chambers1, Chris Veitch1, Stuart Morgan1 , Alan Harris1and Tony Leonforte3, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 34. Field pea germplasm enhancement for black spot resistance, Tanveer Khan, Kerry Regan, Stuart Morgan, Alan Harris and Phillip Chambers, Department of Agriculture and Food 35. Validation of Blackspot spore release model and testing moderately resistant field pea line, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Rodger Beermier, Pam Burgess and Leanne Young, Department of Agriculture and Food 36. Yield losses from sowing field pea seed infected with Pea Seed-borne Mosaic Virus, Brenda Coutts, Donna O’Keefe, Rhonda Pearce, Monica Kehoe and Roger Jones, Department of Agriculture and Food 37. Faba bean in 2006, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture and Food 38. Germplasm evaluation – faba bean, Mark Seymour1, Terri Jasper1, Ian Pritchard1, Mike Baker1 and Tim Pope1,2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, , 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 39. Breeding highlights of the Coordinated Improvement Program for Australian Lentils (CIPAL), Kerry Regan1, Chris Veitch1, Phillip Chambers1 and Michael Materne2, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 40. Screening pulse lentil germplasm for tolerance to alternate herbicides, Ping Si1, Mike Walsh2 and Mark Sweetingham1,3, 1Centre for Legumes in Mediterranean Agriculture, 2West Australian Herbicide Resistance Initiative, 3Department of Agriculture and Food 41. Genomic synteny in legumes: Application to crop breeding, Phan, H.T.T.1, Ellwood, S.R.1, Hane, J.1, Williams, A.1, Ford, R.2, Thomas, S.3 and Oliver R1, 1Australian Centre of Necrotrophic Plant Pathogens, Murdoch University, 2BioMarka, University of Melbourne, 3NSW Department of Primary Industries 42. Tolerance of lupins, chickpeas and canola to Balanceâ(Isoxaflutole) and Galleryâ (Isoxaben), Leigh Smith and Peter White, Department of Agriculture and Food CANOLA AND OILSEEDS 43. The performance of TT Canola varieties in the National Variety Test (NVT),WA,2006,Katie Robinson, Research Agronomist, Agritech Crop Research 44. Evaluation of Brassica crops for biodiesel in Western Australia, Mohammad Amjad, Graham Walton, Pat Fels and Andy Sutherland, Department of Agriculture and Food 45. Production risk of canola in different rainfall zones in Western Australia, Imma Farré1, Michael Robertson2 and Senthold Asseng3, 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, 3CSIRO Plant Industry 46. Future directions of blackleg management – dynamics of blackleg susceptibility in canola varieties, Ravjit Khangura, Moin Salam and Bill MacLeod, Department of Agriculture and Food 47. Appendix 1: Contributors 48. Appendix 2: List of common acronym

Crop Updates 2006 - Lupins and Pulses

This session covers sixty six papers from different authors: 2005 LUPIN AND PULSE INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS 1. Lupin Peter White, Department of Agriculture 2. Pulses Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 3. Monthly rainfall at experimental sites in 2005 4. Acknowledgements Amelia McLarty EDITOR 5. Contributors 6. Background Peter White, Department of Agriculture 2005 REGIONAL ROUNDUP 7. Northern agricultural region Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 8. Central agricultural region Ian Pritchard and Bob French, Department of Agriculture 9. Great southern and lakes Rodger Beermier, Department of Agriculture 10. South east region Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture LUPIN AND PULSE PRODUCTION AGRONOMY AND GENETIC IMPROVEMENT 11. Lupin Peter White, Department of Agriculture 12. Narrow-leafed lupin breeding Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 13. Progress in the development of pearl lupin (Lupinus mutabilis) for Australian agriculture, Mark Sweetingham1,2, Jon Clements1, Geoff Thomas2, Roger Jones1, Sofia Sipsas1, John Quealy2, Leigh Smith1 and Gordon Francis1 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 14. Molecular genetic markers and lupin breeding, Huaan Yang, Jeffrey Boersma, Bevan Buirchell, Department of Agriculture 15. Construction of a genetic linkage map using MFLP, and identification of molecular markers linked to domestication genes in narrow-leafed lupin (Lupinus augustiflolius L) Jeffrey Boersma1,2, Margaret Pallotta3, Bevan Buirchell1, Chengdao Li1, Krishnapillai Sivasithamparam2 and Huaan Yang1 1Department of Agriculture, 2The University of Western Australia, 3Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics, South Australia 16. The first gene-based map of narrow-leafed lupin – location of domestication genes and conserved synteny with Medicago truncatula, M. Nelson1, H. Phan2, S. Ellwood2, P. Moolhuijzen3, M. Bellgard3, J. Hane2, A. Williams2, J. Fos‑Nyarko4, B. Wolko5, M. Książkiewicz5, M. Cakir4, M. Jones4, M. Scobie4, C. O’Lone1, S.J. Barker1, R. Oliver2, and W. Cowling1 1School of Plant Biology, The University of Western Australia, 2Australian Centre for Necrotrophic Fungal Pathogens, Murdoch University, 3Centre for Bioinformatics and Biological Computing, Murdoch University, 4School of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, SABC, Murdoch University,5Institute of Plant Genetics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poznań, Poland 17. How does lupin optimum density change row spacing? Bob French and Laurie Maiolo, Department of Agriculture 18. Wide row spacing and seeding rate of lupins with conventional and precision seeding machines Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 19. Influence of row spacing and plant density on lupin competition with annual ryegrass, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 20. Effect of timing and speed of inter-row cultivation on lupins, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Steve Cosh, Department of Agriculture 21. The interaction of atrazine herbicide rate and row spacing on lupin seedling survival, Martin Harries and Jo Walker Department of Agriculture 22. The banding of herbicides on lupin row crops, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Murray Blyth, Department of Agriculture 23. Large plot testing of herbicide tolerance of new lupin lines, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 24. Effect of seed source and simazine rate of seedling emergence and growth, Peter White and Greg Shea, Department of Agriculture 25. The effect of lupin row spacing and seeding rate on a following wheat crop, Martin Harries, Jo Walker and Dirranie Kirby, Department of Agriculture 26. Response of crop lupin species to row spacing, Leigh Smith1, Kedar Adhikari1, Jon Clements2 and Patrizia Guantini3, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3University of Florence, Italy 27. Response of Lupinus mutabilis to lime application and over watering, Peter White, Leigh Smith and Mark Sweetingham, Department of Agriculture 28. Impact of anthracnose on yield of Andromeda lupins, Geoff Thomas, Kedar Adhikari and Katie Bell, Department of Agriculture 29. Survey of lupin root health (in major production areas), Geoff Thomas, Ken Adcock, Katie Bell, Ciara Beard and Anne Smith, Department of Agriculture 30. Development of a generic forecasting and decision support system for diseases in the Western Australian wheatbelt, Tim Maling1, Art Diggle1,2, Debbie Thackray1, Kadambot Siddique1 and Roger Jones1,2 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agriculture 31.Tanjil mutants highly tolerant to metribuzin, Ping Si1, Mark Sweetingham1,2, Bevan Buirchell1,2 and Huaan Yang l,2 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 2Department of Agriculture 32. Precipitation pH vs. yield and functional properties of lupin protein isolate, Vijay Jayasena1, Hui Jun Chih1 and Ken Dods2 1Curtin University of Technology, 2Chemistry Centre 33. Lupin protein isolation with the use of salts, Vijay Jayasena1, Florence Kartawinata1,Ranil Coorey1 and Ken Dods2 1Curtin University of Technology, 2Chemistry Centre 34. Field pea, Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 35. Breeding highlights Kerry Regan1,2, Tanveer Khan1,2, Stuart Morgan1 and Phillip Chambers1 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 36. Variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tanveer Khan1,2, Jenny Garlinge1 and Rod Hunter1 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 37. Days to flowering of field pea varieties throughout WA Mark Seymour1, Ian Pritchard1, Rodger Beermier1, Pam Burgess1 and Dr Eric Armstrong2 Department of Agriculture, 2NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga 38. Semi-leafless field peas yield more, with less ryegrass seed set, in narrow rows, Glen Riethmuller, Department of Agriculture 39. Swathing, stripping and other innovative ways to harvest field peas, Mark Seymour, Ian Pritchard, Rodger Beermier and Pam Burgess, Department of Agriculture 40. Pulse demonstrations, Ian Pritchard, Wayne Parker, Greg Shea, Department of Agriculture 41. Field pea extension – focus on field peas 2005, Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture 42. Field pea blackspot disease in 2005: Prediction versus reality, Moin Salam, Jean Galloway, Pip Payne, Bill MacLeod and Art Diggle, Department of Agriculture 43. Pea seed-borne mosaic virus in pulses: Screening for seed quality defects and virus resistance, Rohan Prince, Brenda Coutts and Roger Jones, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 44. Yield losses from sowing field peas infected with pea seed-borne mosaic virus, Rohan Prince, Brenda Coutts and Roger Jones, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 45. Desi chickpea, Wayne Parker, Department of Agriculture 46. Breeding highlights, Tanveer Khan 1,2, Pooran Gaur3, Kadambot Siddique2, Heather Clarke2, Stuart Morgan1and Alan Harris1, 1Department of Agriculture2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3International Crop Research Institute for Semi Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), India 47. National chickpea improvement program, Kerry Regan1, Ted Knights2 and Kristy Hobson3,1Department of Agriculture, 2Agriculture New South Wales 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria 48. Chickpea breeding lines in CVT exhibit excellent ascochyta blight resistance, Tanveer Khan1,2, Alan Harris1, Stuart Morgan1 and Kerry Regan1,2, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 49. Variety evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tanveer Khan1,2, Jenny Garlinge2 and Rod Hunter2, 1CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 2Department of Agriculture 50. Desi chickpeas for the wheatbelt, Wayne Parker and Ian Pritchard, Department of Agriculture 51. Large scale demonstration of new chickpea varieties, Wayne Parker, MurrayBlyth, Steve Cosh, Dirranie Kirby and Chris Matthews, Department of Agriculture 52. Ascochyta management with new chickpeas, Martin Harries, Bill MacLeod, Murray Blyth and Jo Walker, Department of Agriculture 53. Management of ascochyta blight in improved chickpea varieties, Bill MacLeod1, Colin Hanbury2, Pip Payne1, Martin Harries1, Murray Blyth1, Tanveer Khan1,2, Kadambot Siddique2, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 54. Botrytis grey mould of chickpea, Bill MacLeod, Department of Agriculture 55. Kabuli chickpea, Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 56. New ascochyta blight resistant, high quality kabuli chickpea varieties, Kerry Regan1,2, Kadambot Siddique2, Tim Pope2 and Mike Baker1, 1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 57. Crop production and disease management of Almaz and Nafice, Kerry Regan and Bill MacLeod, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 58. Faba bean,Mark Seymour, Department of Agriculture 59. Germplasm evaluation – faba bean, Mark Seymour1, Tim Pope2, Peter White1, Martin Harries1, Murray Blyth1, Rodger Beermier1, Pam Burgess1 and Leanne Young1,1Department of Agriculture, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 60. Factors affecting seed coat colour of faba bean during storage, Syed Muhammad Nasar-Abbas1, Julie Plummer1, Kadambot Siddique2, Peter White 3, D. Harris4 and Ken Dods4.1The University of Western Australia, 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3Department of Agriculture, 4Chemistry Centre 61. Lentil,Kerry Regan, Department of Agriculture, and CLIMA, The University of Western Australia 62. Variety and germplasm evaluation, Kerry Regan1,2, Tim Pope2, Leanne Young1, Phill Chambers1, Alan Harris1, Wayne Parker1 and Michael Materne3, 1Department of Agriculture 2CLIMA, The University of Western Australia, 3Department of Primary Industries, Victoria Pulse species 63. Land suitability for production of different crop species in Western Australia, Peter White, Dennis van Gool, and Mike Baker, Department of Agriculture 64. Genomic synteny in legumes: Application to crop breeding, Huyen Phan1, Simon Ellwood1, J. Hane1, Angela Williams1, R. Ford2, S. Thomas3 and Richard Oliver1,1Australian Centre of Necrotrophic Plant Pathogens, Murdoch University 2BioMarka, School of Agriculture and Food Systems, ILFR, University of Melbourne 3NSW Department of Primary Industries 65. ALOSCA – Development of a dry flow legume seed inoculant, Rory Coffey and Chris Poole, ALOSCA Technologies Pty Ltd 66. Genetic dissection of resistance to fungal necrotrophs in Medicago truncatula, Simon Ellwood1, Theo Pfaff1, Judith Lichtenzveig12, Lars Kamphuis1, Nola D\u27Souza1, Angela Williams1, Emma Groves1, Karam Singh2 and Richard Oliver1 1Australian Centre of Necrotrophic Plant Pathogens, Murdoch University, 2CSIRO Plant Industry APPENDIX I: LIST OF COMMON ACRONYM

Increasing vegetable intakes: rationale and systematic review of published interventions

Purpose While the health benefits of a high fruit and vegetable consumption are well known and considerable work has attempted to improve intakes, increasing evidence also recognises a distinction between fruit and vegetables, both in their impacts on health and in consumption patterns. Increasing work suggests health benefits from a high consumption specifically of vegetables, yet intakes remain low, and barriers to increasing intakes are prevalent making intervention difficult. A systematic review was undertaken to identify from the published literature all studies reporting an intervention to increase intakes of vegetables as a distinct food group. Methods Databases—PubMed, PsychInfo and Medline—were searched over all years of records until April 2015 using pre-specified terms. Results Our searches identified 77 studies, detailing 140 interventions, of which 133 (81 %) interventions were conducted in children. Interventions aimed to use or change hedonic factors, such as taste, liking and familiarity (n = 72), use or change environmental factors (n = 39), use or change cognitive factors (n = 19), or a combination of strategies (n = 10). Increased vegetable acceptance, selection and/or consumption were reported to some degree in 116 (83 %) interventions, but the majority of effects seem small and inconsistent. Conclusions Greater percent success is currently found from environmental, educational and multi-component interventions, but publication bias is likely, and long-term effects and cost-effectiveness are rarely considered. A focus on long-term benefits and sustained behaviour change is required. Certain population groups are also noticeably absent from the current list of tried interventions

Post-Operative Functional Outcomes in Early Age Onset Rectal Cancer

Background: Impairment of bowel, urogenital and fertility-related function in patients treated for rectal cancer is common. While the rate of rectal cancer in the young (<50 years) is rising, there is little data on functional outcomes in this group. Methods: The REACCT international collaborative database was reviewed and data on eligible patients analysed. Inclusion criteria comprised patients with a histologically confirmed rectal cancer, <50 years of age at time of diagnosis and with documented follow-up including functional outcomes. Results: A total of 1428 (n=1428) patients met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. Metastatic disease was present at diagnosis in 13%. Of these, 40% received neoadjuvant therapy and 50% adjuvant chemotherapy. The incidence of post-operative major morbidity was 10%. A defunctioning stoma was placed for 621 patients (43%); 534 of these proceeded to elective restoration of bowel continuity. The median follow-up time was 42 months. Of this cohort, a total of 415 (29%) reported persistent impairment of functional outcomes, the most frequent of which was bowel dysfunction (16%), followed by bladder dysfunction (7%), sexual dysfunction (4.5%) and infertility (1%). Conclusion: A substantial proportion of patients with early-onset rectal cancer who undergo surgery report persistent impairment of functional status. Patients should be involved in the discussion regarding their treatment options and potential impact on quality of life. Functional outcomes should be routinely recorded as part of follow up alongside oncological parameters

The genetics of blood pressure regulation and its target organs from association studies in 342,415 individuals

To dissect the genetic architecture of blood pressure and assess effects on target-organ damage, we analyzed 128,272 SNPs from targeted and genome-wide arrays in 201,529 individuals of European ancestry and genotypes from an additional 140,886 individuals were used for validation. We identified 66 blood pressure loci, of which 17 were novel and 15 harbored multiple distinct association signals. The 66 index SNPs were enriched for cis-regulatory elements, particularly in vascular endothelial cells, consistent with a primary role in blood pressure control through modulation of vascular tone across multiple tissues. The 66 index SNPs combined in a risk score showed comparable effects in 64,421 individuals of non-European descent. The 66-SNP blood pressure risk score was significantly associated with target-organ damage in multiple tissues, with minor effects in the kidney. Our findings expand current knowledge of blood pressure pathways and highlight tissues beyond the classic renal system in blood pressure regulation

Causal effect of plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 on coronary heart disease

Background--Plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (PAI-1) plays an essential role in the fibrinolysis system and thrombosis. Population studies have reported that blood PAI-1 levels are associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). However, it is unclear whether the association reflects a causal influence of PAI-1 on CHD risk. Methods and Results--To evaluate the association between PAI-1 and CHD, we applied a 3-step strategy. First, we investigated the observational association between PAI-1 and CHD incidence using a systematic review based on a literature search for PAI-1 and CHD studies. Second, we explored the causal association between PAI-1 and CHD using a Mendelian randomization approach using summary statistics from large genome-wide association studies. Finally, we explored the causal effect of PAI-1 on cardiovascular risk factors including metabolic and subclinical atherosclerosis measures. In the systematic meta-analysis, the highest quantile of blood PAI-1 level was associated with higher CHD risk comparing with the lowest quantile (odds ratio=2.17; 95% CI: 1.53, 3.07) in an age- and sex-adjusted model. The effect size was reduced in studies using a multivariable-adjusted model (odds ratio=1.46; 95% CI: 1.13, 1.88). The Mendelian randomization analyses suggested a causal effect of increased PAI-1 level on CHD risk (odds ratio=1.22 per unit increase of log-transformed PAI-1; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.47). In addition, we also detected a causal effect of PAI-1 on elevating blood glucose and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Conclusions--Our study indicates a causal effect of elevated PAI-1 level on CHD risk, which may be mediated by glucose dysfunction

Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study

Introduction: The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures. Methods: In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025. Findings: Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2–6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5–5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4–10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32–4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23–11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation. Interpretation: After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification