Pollination and serological studies on Egyptian grapes

White Roumi grape (Vitis vinifera L.) produces low yield when planted alone. Both pollination and serological tests indicated that this problem appears to be due to the presence of partial self-incompa·tibility in its flowers. Cross-pollination is necessary in White Roumi vineyards in order to obtain abundant yields and to improve berry quality.Different degrees of cross-compatibility were found between White Roumi flowers and four grape pollina.tors. Evaluating these pollinators indicated that Red Roumi and Thompson Seedless pollen gave the highest berry set and fruiting. BezEl-N akah resulted in early ripening berries possessing the largest weight and size. Ghariby proved to be an unsuitable pollinator of White Roumi flowers. It decreased  berry-set percentage and fruiting and increased percentage qf preharvest berry drop. Moreover, the berries were of poor quality.Bestäubungsversuche und serologische Untersuchungen an ägyptischen RebenDie Rebsorte White Roumi (Vitis vinifera L.) bringt allein gepflanzt nur niedrige Traubenerträge. Sowohl Bestäubungsexperimente als auch die serologische Prüfung zeigten, daß es sich hierbei um eine partielle Selbstinkompatibilität handeln dürfte. In Rebanlagen mit White Roumi ist Fremdbestäubung erforderlich, um reichliche Ernten zu erzielen und die Beerenqualität zu verbessern.Zwischen den Blüten von White Roumi und vier Pollenspendern wurden unterschiedliche Grade der Fremdverträglichkeit festgestellt. Bei Bestäubung mit Pollen von Red Roumi und Thompson Seedless waren der Beerenansatz und Fruchtertrag am höchsten. Pollen von Bez-El-Nakah hatte eine frühe Beerenreife zur Folge; die Beeren dieser Kreuzung waren am schwersten und größten. Die Sorte Ghariby erwies sich als ungeeigneter Pollenspender für die White-Roumi-Blüten; der Beerenansatz und Traubenertrag waren vermindert und der Anteil der vor der Ernte abgefallenen Beeren erhöht. Überdies waren die Beeren von geringer Qualität

Refeeding syndrome in adults receiving total parenteral nutrition: An audit of practice at a tertiary UK centre

Background & aims: The key to preventing refeeding syndrome (RS) is identifying and appropriately managing patients at risk. We evaluated our clinical management of RS risk in patients starting total parenteral nutrition (TPN). / Methods: Patients commencing TPN at University College London Hospital between January and July 2015 were prospectively followed-up for 7-days. Eighty patients were risk assessed for RS and categorized into risk groups. High and low risk RS groups were compared focussing on the onset of biochemical features of RS (hypophosphatemia, hypokalaemia and hypomagnesemia) and initial clinical assessment. Statistical analysis was conducted using t-tests and Mann–Whitney U tests. / Results: Sixty patients (75%) were identified as high-risk for RS and received lower initial calories (12.8 kcal/kg/day, p < 0.05). All high-risk patients received a high potency vitamin preparation compared to 35% in the low risk group (p < 0.05). Daily phosphate, magnesium and potassium plasma levels were monitored for seven days in 25%, 30% and 53.8% of patients, respectively. Hypophosphatemia developed in 30% and hypomagnesaemia and hypokalaemia in 27.5% of all patients. Approximately 84% of patients had one or more electrolyte abnormalities, which occurred more frequently in high-risk RS patients (p < 0.05). Low risk patients developed mild hypophosphatemia at a much lower percentage than high-risk RS (20% vs 33.3%, respectively). / Conclusion: A significant proportion of patients commencing TPN developed biochemical features of RS (but no more serious complications) despite nutritional assessment, treatment, and follow up in accordance with national recommendations. High vs low risk RS patients were more likely to have electrolyte abnormalities after receiving TPN regardless of preventative measures. Additional research is required to further optimise the initial nutritional approach to prevent RS in high-risk patients

Short Circuit Current Contribution for Different Wind Turbine Generator Types: Preprint

This paper presents simulation results for short-circuit current contribution for different types of WTGs obtained through transient analysis using generic WTG models

Leucurogin, a new recombinant disintegrin cloned from Bothrops leucurus (white-tailed-jararaca) with potent activity upon platelet aggregation and tumor growth

Disintegrins and disintegrins-like proteins are able to inhibit platelet aggregation and integrin-mediated cell adhesion. the aim of this study was to produce one disintegrin-like cloned from Bothrops leucurus venom gland and to characterize it regarding biological activity. the recombinant protein was purified by one step procedure involving anion-exchange chromatography (DEAE-cellulose) and presented a molecular mass of 10.4 kDa. the purified protein was able to inhibit platelet aggregation induced by collagen (IC(50) = 0.65 mu M) and to inhibit growth of Ehrlich tumor implanted in mice by more than 50% after 7 days administration of 10 mu g/day. No effects were observed upon adenosine 5'diphosphate (ADP)-and arachidonic acid (AA)-induced platelet aggregation. the recombinant protein was recognized by an antibody specific for jararhagin one metalloproteinase isolated from Bothrops jararaca venom, and therefore it was named leucurogin. Anti-angiogenesis effect of leucurogin was evaluated by the sponge implant model. After 7 days administration leucurogin inhibited, in a dose dependent way, the vascularization process in the sponge. Leucurogin represents a new biotechnological tool to understand biological processes where disintegrins-like are involved and may help to characterize integrins that can be involved in development and progression of malignant cells. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.FAEPFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG)Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Univ Fed Minas Gerais, Inst Ciencias Biol, BR-31270901 Belo Horizonte, MG, BrazilUniv Mogi das Cruzes, Ctr Civ, BR-08780911 São Paulo, BrazilProteobras Desenvolvimento Biotecnol Ltda, BR-13069310 São Paulo, BrazilFundacao Ezequiel Dias, BR-30510010 Belo Horizonte, MG, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Biofis, BR-04023062 São Paulo, BrazilUniversidade Federal de São Paulo, Dept Biofis, BR-04023062 São Paulo, BrazilWeb of Scienc

Reporting interventions in trials evaluating cognitive rehabilitation in people with Multiple Sclerosis: a systematic review

Objective: To determine the quantity and quality of description of cognitive rehabilitation for cognitive deficits in people with Multiple Sclerosis, using a variety of published checklists, and suggest ways of improving the reporting of these interventions. Data sources: Ten electronic databases were searched, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO, from inception to May 2017. Grey literature databases, trials registers, reference lists and author citations were also searched. Review methods: Papers were included if participants were people with multiple sclerosis aged 18 years and over, and if the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation in improving functional ability for memory, attention or executive dysfunction, with or without a control group, was being evaluated. Results: Fifty-four studies were included in this review. The reporting of a number of key aspects of cognitive rehabilitation was poor. This was particularly in relation to content of interventions (reported completely in 26 of the 54 studies), intervention procedures (reported completely in 16 of the 54 studies), delivery mode (reported completely in 24 of the 54 studies) and intervention mechanism of action (reported completely in 21 of the 54 studies). Conclusion: The quality of reporting of cognitive rehabilitation for memory, attention and executive function for multiple sclerosis, across a range of study designs, is poor. Existing reporting checklists do not adequately cover aspects relevant to cognitive rehabilitation, such as the approaches used to address cognitive deficits. Future checklists could consider these aspects we have identified in this review

Methylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase Gene Variant (MTHFR C677T) and Migraine: A Case Control Study and Meta-analysis

Extent: 9p.Background: Migraine is a common disorder that often coexists with depression. While a functional polymorphism in methyleneterahydrofolate reductase gene (MTHFR C677T) has been implicated in depression; the evidence to support an association of MTHFR with migraine has been inconclusive. We aim to investigate the effect of this variant on propensity for migraine and to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies of MTHFR and migraine to date. Methods: Individuals with migraine (n = 447) were selected from the Depression Case Control (DeCC) study to investigate the association between migraine and MTHFR C677T single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs1801133 using an additive model compared to non-migraineurs adjusting for depression status. A meta-analysis was performed and included 15 studies of MTHFR and migraine. Results: MTHFR C677T polymorphism was associated with migraine with aura (MA) (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.01-1.70, p = 0.039) that remained significant after adjusting for age, sex and depression status. A meta-analysis of 15 case-control studies showed that T allele homozygosity is significantly associated with MA (OR = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.10-1.82) and total migraine (OR = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07-1.76), but not migraine without aura (OR = 1.16; 95% CI, 0.36-3.76). In studies of non-Caucasian population, the TT genotype was associated with total migraine (OR= 3.46; 95% CI, 1.22-9.82), whereas in studies of Caucasians this variant was associated with MA only (OR = 1.28; 95% CI, 1.002-1.63). Conclusions: MTHFR C677T is associated with MA in individuals selected for depression study. A meta-analysis of 15 studies supports this association and demonstrated effects across ethnic groups.Zainab Samaan, Daria Gaysina, Sarah Cohen-Woods, Nick Craddock, Lisa Jones, Ania Korszun, Mike Owen, Andrew Mente, Peter McGuffin and Anne Farme

Behavioural activation therapy for depression in adults (Review)

This is the final version. Available from Cochrane Collaboration via the DOI in this record. BACKGROUND: Behavioural activation is a brief psychotherapeutic approach that seeks to change the way a person interacts with their environment. Behavioural activation is increasingly receiving attention as a potentially cost-effective intervention for depression, which may require less resources and may be easier to deliver and implement than other types of psychotherapy. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of behavioural activation compared with other psychological therapies for depression in adults. To examine the effects of behavioural activation compared with medication for depression in adults. To examine the effects of behavioural activation compared with treatment as usual/waiting list/placebo no treatment for depression in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CCMD-CTR (all available years), CENTRAL (current issue), Ovid MEDLINE (1946 onwards), Ovid EMBASE (1980 onwards), and Ovid PsycINFO (1806 onwards) on the 17 January 2020 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of 'behavioural activation', or the main elements of behavioural activation for depression in participants with clinically diagnosed depression or subthreshold depression. We did not apply any restrictions on date, language or publication status to the searches. We searched international trials registries via the World Health Organization's trials portal (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify unpublished or ongoing trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of behavioural activation for the treatment of depression or symptoms of depression in adults aged 18 or over. We excluded RCTs conducted in inpatient settings and with trial participants selected because of a physical comorbidity. Studies were included regardless of reported outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened all titles/abstracts and full-text manuscripts for inclusion. Data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments were also performed by two review authors in duplicate. Where necessary, we contacted study authors for more information. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-three studies with 5495 participants were included; 51 parallel group RCTs and two cluster-RCTs. We found moderate-certainty evidence that behavioural activation had greater short-term efficacy than treatment as usual (risk ratio (RR) 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10 to 1.78; 7 RCTs, 1533 participants), although this difference was no longer evident in sensitivity analyses using a worst-case or intention-to-treat scenario. Compared with waiting list, behavioural activation may be more effective, but there were fewer data in this comparison and evidence was of low certainty (RR 2.14, 95% CI 0.90 to 5.09; 1 RCT, 26 participants). No evidence on treatment efficacy was available for behavioural activation versus placebo and behavioural activation versus no treatment. We found moderate-certainty evidence suggesting no evidence of a difference in short-term treatment efficacy between behavioural activation and CBT (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.07; 5 RCTs, 601 participants). Fewer data were available for other comparators. No evidence of a difference in short term-efficacy was found between behavioural activation and third-wave CBT (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.33; 2 RCTs, 98 participants; low certainty), and psychodynamic therapy (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.99; 1 RCT,60 participants; very low certainty). Behavioural activation was more effective than humanistic therapy (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.95; 2 RCTs, 46 participants; low certainty) and medication (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.76; 1 RCT; 141 participants; moderate certainty), but both of these results were based on a small number of trials and participants. No evidence on treatment efficacy was available for comparisons between behavioural activation versus interpersonal, cognitive analytic, and integrative therapies. There was moderate-certainty evidence that behavioural activation might have lower treatment acceptability (based on dropout rate) than treatment as usual in the short term, although the data did not confirm a difference and results lacked precision (RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.31; 14 RCTs, 2518 participants). Moderate-certainty evidence did not suggest any difference in short-term acceptability between behavioural activation and waiting list (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.93; 8 RCTs. 359 participants), no treatment (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.09; 3 RCTs, 187 participants), medication (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.16; 2 RCTs, 243 participants), or placebo (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.67; 1 RCT; 96 participants; low-certainty evidence). No evidence on treatment acceptability was available comparing behavioural activation versus psychodynamic therapy. Low-certainty evidence did not show a difference in short-term treatment acceptability (dropout rate) between behavioural activation and CBT (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.25; 12 RCTs, 1195 participants), third-wave CBT (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.10; 3 RCTs, 147 participants); humanistic therapy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.20 to 5.55; 2 RCTs, 96 participants) (very low certainty), and interpersonal, cognitive analytic, and integrative therapy (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.20; 4 RCTs, 123 participants). Results from medium- and long-term primary outcomes, secondary outcomes, subgroup analyses, and sensitivity analyses are summarised in the text. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that behavioural activation may be more effective than humanistic therapy, medication, and treatment as usual, and that it may be no less effective than CBT, psychodynamic therapy, or being placed on a waiting list. However, our confidence in these findings is limited due to concerns about the certainty of the evidence. We found no evidence of a difference in short-term treatment acceptability (based on dropouts) between behavioural activation and most comparison groups (CBT, humanistic therapy, waiting list, placebo, medication, no treatment or treatment as usual). Again, our confidence in all these findings is limited due to concerns about the certainty of the evidence. No data were available about the efficacy of behaioural activation compared with placebo, or about treatment acceptability comparing behavioural activation and psychodynamic therapy, interpersonal, cognitive analytic and integrative therapies. The evidence could be strengthened by better reporting and better quality RCTs of behavioural activation and by assessing working mechanisms of behavioural activation.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR