Evolutionary divergence of the plant elicitor peptides (Peps) and their receptors: interfamily incompatibility of perception but compatibility of downstream signalling

Plant elicitor peptides (Peps) co-evolved with their receptors, resulting in interfamily incompatibility of Pep recognition. In contrast, operation of defence pathways by Pep receptors is conserved within the flowering plant

The Arabidopsis protein phosphatase PP2C38 negatively regulates the central immune kinase BIK1

Plants recognize pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) via cell surface-localized pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), leading to PRR-triggered immunity (PTI). The Arabidopsis cytoplasmic kinase BIK1 is a downstream substrate of several PRR complexes. How plant PTI is negatively regulated is not fully understood. Here, we identify the protein phosphatase PP2C38 as a negative regulator of BIK1 activity and BIK1-mediated immunity. PP2C38 dynamically associates with BIK1, as well as with the PRRs FLS2 and EFR, but not with the co-receptor BAK1. PP2C38 regulates PAMP-induced BIK1 phosphorylation and impairs the phosphorylation of the NADPH oxidase RBOHD by BIK1, leading to reduced oxidative burst and stomatal immunity. Upon PAMP perception, PP2C38 is phosphorylated on serine 77 and dissociates from the FLS2/EFR-BIK1 complexes, enabling full BIK1 activation. Together with our recent work on the control of BIK1 turnover, this study reveals another important regulatory mechanism of this central immune component

Quality and comparison of antenatal care in public and private providers in the United Republic of Tanzania

OBJECTIVE: To compare the quality of public and private first-tier antenatal care services in Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania, using defined criteria. METHODS: Structural attributes of quality were assessed through a checklist, and process attributes, including interpersonal and technical aspects, through observation and exit interviews. A total of 16 health care providers, and 166 women in the public and 188 in the private sector, were selected by systematic random sampling for inclusion in the study. Quality was measured against national standards, and an overall score calculated for the different aspects to permit comparison. FINDINGS: The results showed that both public and private providers were reasonably good with regard to the structural and interpersonal aspects of quality of care. However, both were poor when it came to technical aspects of quality. For example, guidelines for dispensing prophylactic drugs against anaemia or malaria were not respected, and diagnostic examinations for the assessment of gestation, anaemia, malaria or urine infection were frequently not performed. In all aspects, private providers were significantly better than public ones. CONCLUSION: Approaches to improving quality of care should emerge progressively as a result of regular quality assessments. Changes should be introduced using an incremental approach addressing few improvements at a time, while ensuring participation in, and ownership of, every aspect of the strategy by health personnel, health planners and managers and also the community