Avaliação agronômica e identificação de quimiotipos de erva cidreira no Distrito Federal Agronomic evaluation and identification of Lippia alba chemotypes from Distrito Federal, Brazil

Com o objetivo de avaliar o comportamento agronômico, o potencial de rendimento de óleo essencial e identificar os quimiotipos de 16 acessos de Lippa alba (erva cidreira) da coleção da Universidade de Brasília foi conduzido um experimento de campo em Latossolo Vermelho, sob irrigação por gotejamento na região do Cerrado do Distrito Federal. Foram avaliados a época de florescimento, hábito de crescimento, área foliar, comprimento da haste, massa fresca de folhas e hastes, massa foliar seca, teor e rendimento de óleo essencial e perfil aromático. O óleo essencial foi extraído por hidrodestilação em aparelho de Clevenger modificado e os constituintes identificados e quantificados através de cromatografia em fase gasosa acoplada a espectrometria de massas. O delineamento experimental utilizado foi de blocos ao acaso, com três repetições, contendo três plantas úteis por parcela. Foram identificados os quimiotipos citral-limoneno, citral-mirceno, limoneno-carvona, citral, linalol, mirceno e linalol-limoneno. Os acessos apresentaram teores máximos de linalol de 89,8% (L.16); mirceno de 47,6% (L.37); limoneno de 36,0%, carvona de 46,9% (L.27) e citral de 56,7% (L.17). Os genótipos com maiores áreas foliares e maiores comprimentos de hastes tenderam a apresentar maiores teores de óleo e maior concentração de linalol. A concentração de óleo foi inversamente proporcional à produção de massa foliar seca. Os acessos que apresentaram os maiores rendimentos dos compostos majoritários do óleo essencial foram: L.16 (0,77 g pl-1), como fonte potencial para a produção de linalol; L.17 (0,17 g pl-1), como fonte de mirceno; L. 27 (0,17 g pl-1), como fonte de limoneno e de carvona (0,21 g pl-1) e L.38 (0,24 g pl-1), como fonte de citral.<br>The main objective of this work was to describe the essential oil profile of 16 genotypes of Lippia alba from the germplasm collection of the Universidade de Brasília and to analyze its potential of production. A field assay was carried out in the rural area of Distrito Federal and the following parameters were analyzed: flowering period, growing habit, foliar area, length of the main branch, fresh and dry weight of the biomass (leaves and branches), essential oil content and profile of the constituent volatile oils. Essential oil was extracted using a modified Clevenger apparatus and the constituent volatile oils were analyzed by gas chromatography and GC/MS. The experimental design was randomized blocks with three plants per plot. The following chemotypes were reported: citral-limonene, citral-myrcene, limonene-carvone, citral, linalool, myrcene and linalool-limonene. Higher levels of linalool were found in genotype L.16 (89.8%); myrcene in L.37 (47.6%); limonene in L.27 (36.0%); carvone in L.27 (46.9%) and citral in L.17 (56.7%). The genotypes with the highest leaf area and leaf length of the main branch seem to be correlated with the best yield of essential oil and the higher level of linalool. The yield of essential oil was inversely proportional to the dry weight of biomass. The accessions which presented the highest average yield of the major essential constituent oils were: L.16 (0.77 g pl-1) as a source of raw material for linalool production; L.17 (0.17 g pl-1) as source of myrcene; L. 27 as source of limonene (0.17 g pl-1) and carvone (0.21 g pl-1); and L.38 (0.24 g pl-1) as a citral source

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health