Substratos alternativos no cultivo de Sesbania virgata: uma revisão bibliográfica / Alternative substrates in the cultivation of Sesbania virgata: a literature review

A produção de mudas de qualidade está associada ao meio de cultivo que lhe forneça todos os nutrientes, e lhe sirva de suporte mecânico. Neste sentido o objetivo deste referencial teórico é expor estudos que estão sendo realizados para identificar quais os tipos de compostos orgânicos são utilizados para compor substratos para cultivo de Sesbania virgata e ampliar o campo de conhecimento sobre uso de substratos alternativos (compostos orgânicos) no cultivo dessa espécie. Utilizou-se as base de dados virtuais online SciELO; Portal periódicos CAPES para a pesquisa em periódicos nacionais e internacionais no período de setembro a outubro de 2020, foram pesquisados 20 artigos dos quais foram selecionados 11 para a confecção da pesquisa. Foi possível verificar similaridade nos resultados encontrados pelos autores em relação ao uso de substratos alternativos como meio de cultivo para a Sesbania virgata, os parâmetro usados para desenvolvimentos dos trabalhos e avaliação das mudas são: doses de compostos orgânicos; índices biométricos; meios de produção das mudas. Assim verificou-se que houve uma diferença nas quantidades de publicações de artigos relacionados durante os anos de 2003 a 2020, com destaque para o ano de 2015 que teve quatro artigos publicados. Nestes artigos foi possível verificar que a utilização de resíduos orgânicos para compor substratos tem contribuído para produção de mudas de qualidade de Sesbania virgata. Diante da pesquisa bibliográfica realizada verificou-se que existem na literatura informações sobre doses, tipos de resíduos orgânicos para compor substratos alternativos para cultivo dessa espécie, sendo interessante que haja novas pesquisas para estudos de novos resíduos orgânicos que possam ser usados em sua produção

Meta-analysis: hydroxychloroquine therapy approach with or without azithromycin against covid-19

Objective: identify and analyse the evidences about the use of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin in covid-19. Methods: This is a systematic review with meta-analysis using posted articles in December 2019 until May 2020. The research was formulated by a question structured using PICO strategy, in these data bases: BVS, PUBMED, MEDLINE, LILACS, BDENF e SCIELO. Results and discussion: Resulted in 9 articles founded by the PRISMA, approaching 4182 patients. PICO strategy selected and analysed 5 articles projected in Forest plots. Resulting in tree clinical trials (RR: 1.15; IC95%, 0.76 a 1.73), which did not found big differences in the outcome in the groups of patients who used HCQ with or without AZT, comparing with the control group. Two studies analysed the number of deaths/intubations in comparative group, experimental group and control (RR:1.86; IC: 95%, 1.54 a 2.26) resulting in more chance of death /intubation in patients who used HCQ. Conclusion: It was found that is not possible to prove the efficacy of these drugs, due to the limited number of randomized and controlled clinical trials. Therefore, the encourage of scientific production about the HCQ and AZT against Covid-19 is more than necessary

Absence of Anti-RBD Antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 Infected or Naive Individuals Prior to Vaccination with CoronaVac Leads to Short Protection of Only Four Months Duration

The COVID-19 pandemic is the biggest public health threat facing the world today. Multiple vaccines have been approved; however, the emergence of viral variants such as the recent Omicron raises the possibility of booster doses to achieve adequate protection. In Brazil, the CoronaVac (Sinovac, Beijing, China) vaccine was used; however, it is important to assess the immune response to this vaccine over time. This study aimed to monitor the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibody responses in those immunized with CoronaVac and SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals. Samples were collected between August 2020 and August 2021. Within the vaccinated cohort, some individuals had a history of infection by SARS-CoV-2 prior to immunization, while others did not. We analyzed RBD-specific and neutralizing-antibodies. Anti-RBD antibodies were detected in both cohorts, with a peak between 45–90 days post infection or vaccination, followed by a steady decline over time. In those with a previous history of COVID-19, a higher, longer, more persistent response was observed. This trend was mirrored in the neutralization assays, where infection, followed by immunization, resulted in higher, longer lasting responses which were conditioned on the presence of levels of RBD antibodies right before the vaccination. This supports the necessity of booster doses of CoronaVac in due course to prevent serious disease