A Scholarly Review of Supply Chain Integration within the New Zealand Blueberry Industry

Ethics and credence attributes are the humanistic basis for establishing sustainable supply chain development. It determines brand reputation, ecology and customer experience. Furthermore, good ethics and credence Attributes promote the progress of industry leadership and increase the possibility of win-win strategies, especially in terms of negotiation. Negotiation is the premise of supply chain collaboration. The purpose of collaboration is to establish a synchronized supply chain to improve the ability of industry coordination. This is also the key to creating value, and the importance of risk management cannot be ignored. It is not only a guarantee for the smooth operation of the supply chain, but also an important measure to improve the flexibility of the supply chain. Finally, the results of supply chain integration need to rely on performance metrics and benchmarking to control and improve the overall performance of the supply chain. This publication evaluates modern theories in all these areas and contextualise it to the New Zealand blueberry industry. It is important that the reader appreciates the scholarly origin of this publication

A comparison of simvastatin and atorvastatin up to maximal recommended doses in a large multicenter randomized clinical trial.

Item does not contain fulltextOBJECTIVE: At higher doses, simvastatin has been shown to produce significantly greater increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and apolipoprotein (apo) A-I than atorvastatin. To extend and confirm these findings, a 36-week, randomized, double-blind, dose-titration study was performed in 826 hypercholesterolemic patients to compare the effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on HDL cholesterol, apo A-I, and clinical and laboratory safety. PRIMARY HYPOTHESIS: Simvastatin, across a range of doses, will be more effective than atorvastatin at raising HDL cholesterol and apo A-I levels. METHODS: A total of 826 hypercholesterolemic patients were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized, parallel, 36-week, dose-escalation study. Patients randomized to simvastatin received 40 mg/day for the first 6 weeks, 80 mg/day for the next 6 weeks, and remained on 80 mg/day for the final 24 weeks. Patients randomized to atorvastatin received 20 mg/day for the first 6 weeks, 40 mg/day for the next 6 weeks, and 80 mg/day for the remaining 24 weeks. RESULTS: During the first 12 weeks of the study, simvastatin increased HDL cholesterol and apo A-I more than the comparative doses of atorvastatin, while producing slightly lower reductions in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglycerides. At the maximal dose comparison, simvastatin 80 mg and atorvastatin 80 mg, the HDL cholesterol and apo A-I differences favoring simvastatin were larger than at the lower doses. In addition, at the maximal dose comparison, the incidence of drug-related clinical adverse experiences was approximately two-fold higher with atorvastatin 80 mg than with simvastatin 80 mg (23 versus 12%, p < 0.001), due predominantly to a greater incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms with atorvastatin (10 versus 3%, p < 0.001). The incidence of clinically significant alanine aminotransferase elevations was also higher with atorvastatin 80 mg than with simvastatin 80 mg (3.8 versus 0.5%, p < 0.010), especially in women (6.0 versus 0.6%). CONCLUSIONS: At the doses compared in this study, simvastatin led to greater increases in HDL cholesterol and apo A-I levels than atorvastatin. At the maximum dose comparison, there were fewer drug-related gastrointestinal symptoms and clinically significant aminotransferase elevations with simvastatin

A comparison of simvastatin and atorvastatin up to maximal recommended doses in a large multicenter randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: At higher doses, simvastatin has been shown to produce significantly greater increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and apolipoprotein (apo) A-I than atorvastatin. To extend and confirm these findings, a 36-week, randomized, double-blind, dose-titration study was performed in 826 hypercholesterolemic patients to compare the effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on HDL cholesterol, apo A-I, and clinical and laboratory safety. PRIMARY HYPOTHESIS: Simvastatin, across a range of doses, will be more effective than atorvastatin at raising HDL cholesterol and apo A-I levels. METHODS: A total of 826 hypercholesterolemic patients were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized, parallel, 36-week, dose-escalation study. Patients randomized to simvastatin received 40 mg/day for the first 6 weeks, 80 mg/day for the next 6 weeks, and remained on 80 mg/day for the final 24 weeks. Patients randomized to atorvastatin received 20 mg/day for the first 6 weeks, 40 mg/day for the next 6 weeks, and 80 mg/day for the remaining 24 weeks. RESULTS: During the first 12 weeks of the study, simvastatin increased HDL cholesterol and apo A-I more than the comparative doses of atorvastatin, while producing slightly lower reductions in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and triglycerides. At the maximal dose comparison, simvastatin 80 mg and atorvastatin 80 mg, the HDL cholesterol and apo A-I differences favoring simvastatin were larger than at the lower doses. In addition, at the maximal dose comparison, the incidence of drug-related clinical adverse experiences was approximately two-fold higher with atorvastatin 80 mg than with simvastatin 80 mg (23 versus 12%, p < 0.001), due predominantly to a greater incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms with atorvastatin (10 versus 3%, p < 0.001). The incidence of clinically significant alanine aminotransferase elevations was also higher with atorvastatin 80 mg than with simvastatin 80 mg (3.8 versus 0.5%, p < 0.010), especially in women (6.0 versus 0.6%). CONCLUSIONS: At the doses compared in this study, simvastatin led to greater increases in HDL cholesterol and apo A-I levels than atorvastatin. At the maximum dose comparison, there were fewer drug-related gastrointestinal symptoms and clinically significant aminotransferase elevations with simvastatin

Proteomic approach: Identification of Medicago truncatula proteins induced in roots after infection with the pathogenic oomycete Aphanomyces euteiches

Colditz F, Nyamsuren O, Niehaus K, Eubel H, Braun HP, Krajinski F. Proteomic approach: Identification of Medicago truncatula proteins induced in roots after infection with the pathogenic oomycete Aphanomyces euteiches. Plant Molecular Biology. 2004;55(1):109-120.The legume root rot disease caused by the oomycete pathogen Aphanomyces euteiches is one major yield reducing factor in legume crop production. A comparative proteomic approach was carried out in order to identify proteins of the model legume Medicago truncatula which are regulated after an infection with A. euteiches. Several proteins were identified by two dimensional gel electrophoresis to be differentially expressed after pathogen challenge. Densitometric evaluation of expression values showed different regulation during the time-course analysed. Proteins regulated during the infection were identified by matrix assisted laser desorption/ionization-time of flight-mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS). Among the differentially expressed proteins, two encoded putative cell wall proteins and two were designated as small heat shock proteins. Furthermore, an isoform of the chalcone-O-methyltransferase was found to be increased in infected roots. The majority of induced proteins belonged to the family of class 10 of pathogenesis related proteins (PR10). Previously, various PR10-like proteins have been shown to be regulated by general stress or abscisic acid (ABA). Therefore, these proteins were further investigated concerning their regulation in response to drought stress and exogenous ABA-application. Complex regulation patterns were identified: three of the A. euteiches-induced PR10-like proteins were also induced by exogenous ABA-but none of them is induced after drought stress. In contrast, three of these proteins are down-regulated by drought stress. Hence, the strong expression of different PR10-family members and their regulation profiles indicates that this set of proteins plays a major role during root adaptations to various stress conditions