Sampling and PCR method for detecting pathogenic Fusarium oxysporum strains in onion harvest

Fusarium basal rot is a worldwide disease problem in onions, and causes substantial losses in onion production, both during the growing season and in the storage. To minimize the post-harvest losses, a protocol for screening of latent infections with pathogenic Fusarium oxysporum strains from harvested onions was developed. This protocol is based on a dual PCR test with primers specific for the fungal species and new SIX3 primers specific for the onion-pathogenic F. oxysporum strains. A pooled sample containing pieces from 50 harvested symptomless onions was prepared for the dual PCR using microwave disruption of the filamentous Fusarium fungi and Whatman FTA(TM) filter paper matrix technology, or as a reference protocol, by extracting DNA with a commercial kit. The two sample preparation protocols gave consistent results with the tested onion samples. Detection limit of the dual PCR protocol was 100 pg of F. oxysporum DNA, in a mixture with onion DNA, when the FTA card was applied. The new protocol reported here is simple and sensitive enough for routine testing, enabling the detection of latent infections in harvest lots even at the infection levels under 10%. Significance and Impact of the Study Fusarium basal rot causes serious problems in onion production. To minimize post-harvest losses, a simple protocol based on FTA(TM) technology and a dual PCR test with Fusarium oxysporum species-specific and pathogenicity-specific primers was developed. By testing pooled onion samples using this method, latent infections with F. oxysporum can be screened from a representative sample of the harvest. This screening method could be a useful tool to manage the post-harvest losses caused by latent infections with F. oxysporum and, with modification of the PCR protocol, with other Fusarium species pathogenic to onion.Peer reviewe

Esiopetuksen pedagogiset oppimisympäristöt päiväkodeissa ja kouluissa

Tiivistelmä. Tutkimme ja vertailimme esiopetuksen pedagogisia oppimisympäristöjä päiväkoti- ja koulukonteksteissa. Tutkimuskysymyksenä on millaisia ovat esiopetuksen pedagogiset oppimisympäristöt päiväkodeissa ja kouluissa. Aikaisempien havaintojemme perusteella olimme epävarmoja tasa-arvoisen esiopetuksen toteutumisesta eri konteksteissa, jonka vuoksi koimme aiheen tärkeäksi. Tutkimus on kvalitatiivinen ja aineiston keräsimme teemahaastatteluilla. Haastatteluihin osallistui kuusi esiopetuksen opettajaa. Teoriaosuudessa avaamme oppimisympäristön käsitettä ja tarkastelemme esiopetusta pedagogisen oppimisympäristön näkökulmasta. Pedagogisessa oppimisympäristössä keskityimme tarkastelemaan erityisesti ulkoisia vaikuttavia tekijöitä, toimintaa ja vuorovaikutusta. Ulkoisia tekijöitä ovat päiväjärjestys, ryhmäkoko sekä fyysiset tilat ja käytettävissä olevat välineet. Toimintaan liittyen käsittelemme suunnittelua, toteutusta ja arviointia. Tutkimme vuorovaikutusta esiopetuksessa ja yhteistyötä vanhempien kanssa sekä koulun ja päiväkodin välillä. Opettaja luo pedagogista oppimisympäristöä. Suunnittelun pohjana toimivat kaikki edellä mainitut pedagogiseen oppimisympäristöön vaikuttavat tekijät. Suunnittelu ohjaa millaista opetusta lapset saavat ja miten opettaja toimii. Ryhmäkoko vaikuttaa siihen, kuinka opettaja pystyy huomioimaan jokaisen lapsen kehityksen yksilöllisesti. Esiopetuksessa yhteisten tavoitteiden lisäksi jokaisella lapsella on yksilölliset tavoitteet, jotka laaditaan yhdessä vanhempien kanssa. Arviointi tulee toteuttaa peilaten asetettuihin tavoitteisiin. Esiopetuskontekstien välillä oli eroja, mutta laadullisesti esiopetus on tasa-arvoista kummassakin kontekstissa. Esiopetuksen toteutumiseen vaikuttavia tekijöitä on monia, sillä niin konteksti, esiopetuksen opettaja kuin ryhmä vaikuttavat siihen millaista esiopetus on. Esiopetuksen yhdenvertaisuutta lisää esiopetussuunnitelma, jonka mukaan esiopetuksen opettaja suunnittelee toimintaa. Tasavertainen esiopetus on jokaisen lapsen oikeus

Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROS) are widely accepted measures for evaluating outcomes of surgical interventions. As patient-reported information is stored in electronic health records, it is essential that there are valid electronic PRO (ePRO) instruments available for clinicians and researchers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of electronic versions of five widely used foot and ankle specific PRO instruments. Methods: Altogether 111 consecutive elective foot/ankle surgery patients were invited face-to-face to participate in this study. Patients completed electronic versions of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), the modified Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS), the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), and the Visual Analogue Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) on the day of elective foot and/or ankle surgery. Construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the scales were assessed. Results: Based on general and predefined thresholds, construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA were acceptable. Major issues arose with score distribution and convergent validity of the modified LEFS instrument. Conclusions: The ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ and the VAS-FA provide valid scores for foot and ankle patients. However, our findings do not support the use of the modified LEFS as an electronic outcome measure for patients with orthopedic foot and/or ankle pathologies. (C) 2020 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

Structural validity of the Finnish Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) using the Rasch model

Background: The 16-item patient-reported Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) with subscales of pain, social interactions, and walking/standing has been claimed for strongest scientific evidence in measuring foot and ankle complaints. This study tests the validity of the Finnish MOXFQ for orthopaedic foot and ankle population using the Rasch analysis. Methods: We translated the MOXFQ into Finnish and used that translation in our study. MOXFQ scores were obtained from 183 patients. Response category distribution, item fit, coverage, targeting, item dependency, ability to measure latent trait (unidimensionality), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and person separation index (PSI) were analyzed. Results: Fifteen of the items had ordered response categories and/or sufficient fit statistics. The subscales provided coverage and targeting. Some residual correlation was noted. Removing one item in the pain subscale led to a unidimensional structure. Alphas and PSIs ranged between 0.68-0.90 and 0.67-0.92, respectively. Conclusions: Despite some infractions of the Rasch model, the instrument functioned well. The subscales of the MOXFQ are meaningful for assessing patient-reported complaints and outcomes in orthopaedic foot and ankle population. (C) 2020 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Peer reviewe

What do stakeholders want in relation to the control of production diseases?

201