Identification and comprehensive analyses of the CBL and CIPK gene families in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

The interaction analysis of wheat TaCBL and TaCIPK proteins were performed by Y2H method. (PDF 191 kb

Air-soil diffusive exchange of PAHs in an urban park of Shanghai based on polyethylene passive sampling: Vertical distribution, vegetation influence and diffusive flux

Compared with dry and wet deposition rates, air-soil exchange fluxes cannot be directly measured experimentally. Polyethylene passive sampling was applied to assess transport directions and to measure concentration gradients in order to calculate diffusive fluxes of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) across the air-soil interface in an urban park of Shanghai, China. Seven campaigns with high spatial resolution sampling at 18 heights between 0 and 200 cm above the ground were conducted in 2017–2018. Air-to-soil deposition was observed, e.g. for phenanthrene, and soil-to-air volatilization for high molecular weight compounds, such as benzo[b]fluoranthene. Significant linear correlations between gaseous PAH concentration and log-transformed height were observed. Influence of vegetation on vertical concentration gradients of gaseous PAHs was insignificant in most cases except during the growing season. Local micrometeorological conditions resulted in a directional eddy diffusion in air and then influenced vertical diffusion of gaseous PAHs. Furthermore, the vertical eddy diffusivity was estimated as a function of distance to the air-soil surface. Air-soil exchange fluxes based on the Mackay\u27s fugacity approach were calculated and confirmed by diffusive fluxes within air layer based on vertical concentration gradient of PAHs and eddy/molecular diffusion. Polyethylene passive sampling technology provides a useful tool to investigate air-soil exchange process

Severity of enterovirus A71 infection in a human SCARB2 knock-in mouse model is dependent on infectious strain and route

Enterovirus A71 (EV-A71) is a major etiological agent of human hand, foot and mouth disease, and it can cause severe neurological complications. Although several genotypes of EV-A71 strains are prevalent in different regions of the world, the genotype C4 has circulated in mainland China for more than 20 years. The pathogenicity of different EV-A71 clinical isolates varies and needs to be explored. In this study, hSCARB2 knock-in mice (N = 181) with a wide range of ages were tested for their susceptibility to two EV-A71 strains with the subgenotypes C4 and C2, and two infection routes (intracranial and venous) were compared. The clinical manifestations and pathology and their relationship to the measured viral loads in different tissues were monitored. We observed that 3 weeks is a crucial age, as mice younger than 3-week-old that were infected became extremely ill. However, mice older than 3 weeks displayed diverse clinical symptoms. Significant differences were observed in the pathogenicity of the two strains with respect to clinical signs, disease incidence, survival rate, and body weight change. We concluded that hSCARB2 knock-in mice are a sensitive model for investigating the clinical outcomes resulting from infection by different EV-A71 strains. The intracranial infection model appears to be suitable for evaluating EV-A71 neurovirulence, whereas the venous infection model is appropriate for studying the pathogenicity of EV-A71

Analysis of COVID-19 Guideline Quality and Change of Recommendations: A Systematic Review.

Background Hundreds of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and expert consensus statements have been developed and published since the outbreak of the epidemic. However, these CPGs are of widely variable quality. So, this review is aimed at systematically evaluating the methodological and reporting qualities of COVID-19 CPGs, exploring factors that may influence their quality, and analyzing the change of recommendations in CPGs with evidence published. Methods We searched five electronic databases and five websites from 1 January to 31 December 2020 to retrieve all COVID-19 CPGs. The assessment of the methodological and reporting qualities of CPGs was performed using the AGREE II instrument and RIGHT checklist. Recommendations and evidence used to make recommendations in the CPGs regarding some treatments for COVID-19 (remdesivir, glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, interferon, and lopinavir-ritonavir) were also systematically assessed. And the statistical inference was performed to identify factors associated with the quality of CPGs. Results We included a total of 92 COVID-19 CPGs developed by 19 countries. Overall, the RIGHT checklist reporting rate of COVID-19 CPGs was 33.0%, and the AGREE II domain score was 30.4%. The overall methodological and reporting qualities of COVID-19 CPGs gradually improved during the year 2020. Factors associated with high methodological and reporting qualities included the evidence-based development process, management of conflicts of interest, and use of established rating systems to assess the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. The recommendations of only seven (7.6%) CPGs were informed by a systematic review of evidence, and these seven CPGs have relatively high methodological and reporting qualities, in which six of them fully meet the Institute of Medicine (IOM) criteria of guidelines. Besides, a rapid advice CPG developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) of the seven CPGs got the highest overall scores in methodological (72.8%) and reporting qualities (83.8%). Many CPGs covered the same clinical questions (it refers to the clinical questions on the effectiveness of treatments of remdesivir, glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, interferon, and lopinavir-ritonavir in COVID-19 patients) and were published by different countries or organizations. Although randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews on the effectiveness of treatments of remdesivir, glucocorticoids, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, interferon, and lopinavir-ritonavir for patients with COVID-19 have been published, the recommendations on those treatments still varied greatly across COVID-19 CPGs published in different countries or regions, which may suggest that the CPGs do not make sufficient use of the latest evidence. Conclusions Both the methodological and reporting qualities of COVID-19 CPGs increased over time, but there is still room for further improvement. The lack of effective use of available evidence and management of conflicts of interest were the main reasons for the low quality of the CPGs. The use of formal rating systems for the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations may help to improve the quality of CPGs in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, we suggest developing a living guideline of which recommendations are supported by a systematic review for it can facilitate the timely translation of the latest research findings to clinical practice. We also suggest that CPG developers should register the guidelines in a registration platform at the beginning for it can reduce duplication development of guidelines on the same clinical question, increase the transparency of the development process, and promote cooperation among guideline developers all over the world. Since the International Practice Guideline Registry Platform has been created, developers could register guidelines prospectively and internationally on this platform