Pathotypic diversity of Hyaloperonospora brassicae collected from Brassica oleracea

Downy mildew caused by Hyaloperonospora brassicae is an economically destructive disease of brassica crops in many growing regions throughout the world. Specialised pathogenicity of downy mildews from different Brassica species and closely related ornamental or wild relatives has been described from host range studies. Pathotypic variation amongst Hyaloperonospora brassicae isolates from Brassica oleracea has also been described; however, a standard set of B. oleracea lines that could enable reproducible classification of H. brassicae pathotypes was poorly developed. For this purpose, we examined the use of eight genetically refined host lines derived from our previous collaborative work on downy mildew resistance as a differential set to characterise pathotypes in the European population of H. brassicae. Interaction phenotypes for each combination of isolate and host line were assessed following drop inoculation of cotyledons and a spectrum of seven phenotypes was observed based on the level of sporulation on cotyledons and visible host responses. Two host lines were resistant or moderately resistant to the entire collection of isolates, and another was universally susceptible. Five lines showed differential responses to the H. brassicae isolates. A minimum of six pathotypes and five major effect resistance genes are proposed to explain all of the observed interaction phenotypes. The B. oleracea lines from this study can be useful for monitoring pathotype frequencies in H. brassicae populations in the same or other vegetable growing regions, and to assess the potential durability of disease control from different combinations of the predicted downy mildew resistance genes

Rapid in vivo analysis of synthetic promoters for plant pathogen phytosensing

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We aimed to engineer transgenic plants for the purpose of early detection of plant pathogen infection, which was accomplished by employing synthetic pathogen inducible promoters fused to reporter genes for altered phenotypes in response to the pathogen infection. Toward this end, a number of synthetic promoters consisting of inducible regulatory elements fused to a red fluorescent protein (RFP) reporter were constructed for use in phytosensing.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For rapid analysis, an <it>Agrobacterium</it>-mediated transient expression assay was evaluated, then utilized to assess the inducibility of each synthetic promoter construct <it>in vivo</it>. Tobacco (<it>Nicotiana tabacum </it>cv. Xanthi) leaves were infiltrated with <it>Agrobacterium </it>harboring the individual synthetic promoter-reporter constructs. The infiltrated tobacco leaves were re-infiltrated with biotic (bacterial pathogens) or abiotic (plant defense signal molecules salicylic acid, ethylene and methyl jasmonate) agents 24 and 48 hours after initial agroinfiltration, followed by RFP measurements at relevant time points after treatment. These analyses indicated that the synthetic promoter constructs were capable of conferring the inducibility of the RFP reporter in response to appropriate phytohormones and bacterial pathogens, accordingly.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These observations demonstrate that the <it>Agrobacterium</it>-mediated transient expression is an efficient method for <it>in vivo </it>assays of promoter constructs in less than one week. Our results provide the opportunity to gain further insights into the versatility of the expression system as a potential tool for high-throughput <it>in planta </it>expression screening prior to generating stably transgenic plants for pathogen phytosensing. This system could also be utilized for temporary phytosensing; e.g., not requiring stably transgenic plants.</p

Success and failure in narrowing the disability employment gap: comparing levels and trends across Europe 2002–2014

Background: International comparisons of the disability employment gap are an important driver of policy change. However, previous comparisons have used the European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC), despite known comparability issues. We present new results from the higher-quality European Social Survey (ESS), compare these to EU-SILC and the EU Labour Force Survey (EU-LFS), and also examine trends in the disability employment gap in Europe over the financial crisis for the first time. Methods: For cross-sectional comparisons of 25 countries, we use micro-data for ESS and EU-SILC for 2012 and compare these to published EU-LFS 2011 estimates. For trend analyses, we use seven biannual waves of ESS (2002–2014) with a total sample size of 182,195, and annual waves of EU-SILC (2004–2014) with a total sample size of 2,412,791. Results: (i) Cross-sectional: countries that have smaller disability employment gaps in one survey tend to have smaller gaps in the other surveys. Nevertheless, there are some countries that perform badly on the lower-quality surveys but better in the higher-quality ESS. (ii) Trends: the disability employment gap appears to have declined in ESS by 4.9%, while no trend is observed in EU-SILC – but this has come alongside a rise in disability in ESS. Conclusions: There is a need for investment in disability measures that are more comparable over time/space. Nevertheless, it is clear to policymakers there are some countries that do consistently well across surveys and measures (Switzerland), and others that do badly (Hungary)

Changes in total body bone mineral density following a common bone health plan with two versions of a unique bone health supplement: a comparative effectiveness research study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The US Surgeon General's Report on Bone Health suggests America's bone-health is in jeopardy and issued a "call to action" to develop bone-health plans that: (1) improve nutrition, (2) increase health literacy and, (3) increase physical activity. This study is a response to this call to action.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>After signing an informed consent, 158 adults agreed to follow an open-label bone-health plan for six months after taking a DXA test of bone density, a 43-chemistry blood test panel and a quality of life inventory (AlgaeCal 1). Two weeks after the last subject completed, a second group of 58 was enrolled and followed the identical plan, but with a different bone-health supplement (AlgaeCal 2).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline bone mineral density (BMD) or in variables related to BMD (age, sex, weight, percent body fat, fat mass, or fat-free mass). In both groups, no significant differences in BMD or related variables were found between volunteers and non-volunteers or between those who completed per protocol and those who were lost to attrition.</p> <p>Both groups experienced a significant positive mean annualized percent change (MAPC) in BMD compared to expectation [AlgaeCal 1: 1.15%, <it>p </it>= 0.001; AlgaeCal 2: 2.79%, <it>p </it>= 0.001]. Both groups experienced a positive MAPC compared to baseline, but only AlgaeCal 2 experienced a significant change [AlgaeCal 1: 0.48%, <it>p </it>= 0.14; AlgaeCal 2: 2.18%, <it>p </it>< 0.001]. The MAPC in AlgaeCal 2 was significantly greater than that in AlgaeCal 1 (<it>p </it>= 0.005). The MAPC contrast between compliant and partially compliant subjects was significant for both plans (<it>p </it>= 0.001 and <it>p </it>= 0.003 respectively). No clinically significant changes in a 43-panel blood chemistry test were found nor were there any changes in self-reported quality of life in either group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Following The Plan for six months with either version of the bone health supplement was associated with significant increases in BMD as compared to expected and, in AlgaeCal 2, the increase from baseline was significantly greater than the increase from baseline in AlgaeCal 1. Increased compliance was associated with greater increases in BMD in both groups. No adverse effects were reported in either group.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01114685">NCT01114685</a></p