Contribution to the bryophyte flora of India

The bryophyte flora of the Silent Valley National Park is catalogued. The catalogue consists of 148 taxa (109 mosses, 36 liverworts, 3 hornworts), of which nine species viz., Chrysocladium flammeum (Mitt.) M.Fleisch., Gymnostomum calcareum Nees & Hornsch., Glossadelphus bilobatus (Dix.) Broth., Hypnum flaccens Besch., Notoscyphus paroicus Schiffn., Macromitrium turgidum Dix., Calyptothecium pinnatum Nog., Brotherella amblystegia (Mitt.) Broth. and Wijkia deflexifolia (Ren. & Card.) Crum. are newly reported for Peninsular India. Another four species viz., Lejeunea cavifolia (Ehrh.) Lindb., Radula obscura Mitt., Radula meyeri Steph. and Barbella turgida Nog. are new record of occurrence for Kerala State. Trichostelium stigmosum (Manju et al., 2012) and Aerobryopsis wallichii (Brid.) Fleisch. (Prajitha et al., in press), has been reported as new records for India from Silent Valley

Water quality management in aquaculture

In aquaculture, water quality is one of the prime factors that determines the success of that particular culture. Primarily the water quality parameters are divided into three major categories, physical, chemical and biological. But a slight change in some of the parameters especially pH,temperature,DO will lead to stress in the organism and it may be of physiological or behavioral. Deteriorated or changed water quality will affect growth,reproductive capacity. Susceptibility to diseases is also more in such environment. Water qualitymanagement measures aim at improving water quality. Aquaculture entrepreneurs should know the basics of water quality management measures in aquaculture to reduce the problems related with water quality so as to utilize the of water body with viable profit as well as environmental sustainabilit

Musashi regulates the temporal order of mRNA translation during Xenopus oocyte maturation

A strict temporal order of maternal mRNA translation is essential for meiotic cell cycle progression in oocytes of the frog Xenopus laevis. The molecular mechanisms controlling the ordered pattern of mRNA translational activation have not been elucidated. We report a novel role for the neural stem cell regulatory protein, Musashi, in controlling the translational activation of the mRNA encoding the Mos proto-oncogene during meiotic cell cycle progression. We demonstrate that Musashi interacts specifically with the polyadenylation response element in the 3′ untranslated region of the Mos mRNA and that this interaction is necessary for early Mos mRNA translational activation. A dominant inhibitory form of Musashi blocks maternal mRNA cytoplasmic polyadenylation and meiotic cell cycle progression. Our data suggest that Musashi is a target of the initiating progesterone signaling pathway and reveal that late cytoplasmic polyadenylation element-directed mRNA translation requires early, Musashi-dependent mRNA translation. These findings indicate that Musashi function is necessary to establish the temporal order of maternal mRNA translation during Xenopus meiotic cell cycle progression

Immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines BBV152 (COVAXIN®) and ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (COVISHIELD™) in seronegative and seropositive individuals in India: a multicentre, nonrandomised observational studyResearch in context

Summary: Background: There are limited global data on head-to-head comparisons of vaccine platforms assessing both humoral and cellular immune responses, stratified by pre-vaccination serostatus. The COVID-19 vaccination drive for the Indian population in the age group 18–45 years began in April 2021 when seropositivity rates in the general population were rising due to the delta wave of COVID-19 pandemic during April–May 2021. Methods: Between June 30, 2021, and Jan 28, 2022, we enrolled 691 participants in the age group 18–45 years across four clinical sites in India. In this non-randomised and laboratory blinded study, participants received either two doses of Covaxin® (4 weeks apart) or two doses of Covishield™ (12 weeks apart) as per the national vaccination policy. The primary outcome was the seroconversion rate and the geometric mean titre (GMT) of antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid proteins post two doses. The secondary outcome was the frequency of cellular immune responses pre- and post-vaccination. Findings: When compared to pre-vaccination baseline, both vaccines elicited statistically significant seroconversion and binding antibody levels in both seronegative and seropositive individuals. In the per-protocol cohort, Covishield™ elicited higher antibody responses than Covaxin® as measured by seroconversion rate (98.3% vs 74.4%, p < 0.0001 in seronegative individuals; 91.7% vs 66.9%, p < 0.0001 in seropositive individuals) as well as by anti-spike antibody levels against the ancestral strain (GMT 1272.1 vs 75.4 binding antibody units/ml [BAU/ml], p < 0.0001 in seronegative individuals; 2089.07 vs 585.7 BAU/ml, p < 0.0001 in seropositive individuals). As participants at all clinical sites were not recruited at the same time, site-specific immunogenicity was impacted by the timing of vaccination relative to the delta and omicron waves. Surrogate neutralising antibody responses against variants-of-concern including delta and omicron was higher in Covishield™ recipients than in Covaxin® recipients; and in seropositive than in seronegative individuals after both vaccination and asymptomatic infection (omicron variant). T cell responses are reported from only one of the four site cohorts where the vaccination schedule preceded the omicron wave. In seronegative individuals, Covishield™ elicited both CD4+ and CD8+ spike-specific cytokine-producing T cells whereas Covaxin® elicited mainly CD4+ spike-specific T cells. Neither vaccine showed significant post-vaccination expansion of spike-specific T cells in seropositive individuals. Interpretation: Covishield™ elicited immune responses of higher magnitude and breadth than Covaxin® in both seronegative individuals and seropositive individuals, across cohorts representing the pre-vaccination immune history of most of the vaccinated Indian population. Funding: Corporate social responsibility (CSR) funding from Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) and Unilever India Pvt. Ltd. (UIPL)