The taxonomic and conservation status of Agrostis eriantha var. planifolia

Agrostis eriantha Hack. (1904) is a tufted, rhizomatous perennial that grows in wetlands of Swaziland, Lesotho, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Gauteng, Free State, KwaZulu-Natal, and Eastern Cape. This relatively rare grass appears to be sensitive to disturbance and is mainly found in pristine habitats. In 1945, Goossen & Paperndorf described a form of the species collected by Pole-Evans on the farm Doornkloof, Irene, as A. eriantha Hack.var. planifolia Gooss. & Paperndorf. The main diagnostic character used to distinguish the two varieties was the length of the callus hairs as shown in Figures 1 and 2. In Agrostis eriantha var. eriantha, the callus hairs are up to one third the lemma length while in var. planifolia, the callus hairs are up to half the lemma length. Another suggested difference was in the leaf blades, which are said to be folded in var. eriantha and fl at in var. planifolia. Other possible differences are discussed in the results section.The Botanical Education Trust is gratefully acknowledged for the fi nancial award that was granted to the Taxonomic Problems in Plants of Conservation Importance Project. We would like to thank Mrs Lorraine Mills of the Department of Nature Conservation, Gauteng, for fi eldwork assistance, and Mrs Lyn Fish of SANBI for assistance and advice throughout this project.http://www.sanbi.org/products/publications/bothalia.htmam201

A method for establishing taxonomic research priorities in a megadiverse country

A coordinated strategy for biosystematics research that addresses the needs of end-users can improve the relevance and impact of research products. The basic types of information that taxonomists provide, common to all organisms, are the names, descriptions, and a mechanism for identifying components of biodiversity, and associated data such as distribution information. This information is provided through taxonomic research. A biosystematics research strategy has been developed in South Africa to focus on the main gaps in taxonomic knowledge. A prioritisation process has been developed and applied to plants, but can potentially be used for all organisms. The methodology for development of the taxonomic priorities to formulate a research strategy is described. Determining priorities for taxonomic research and development of the strategy will facilitate bridging the gaps among compilers, users and implementers of taxonomic information, and streamline the taxonomy-conservation impediment.Botanical Education Trust.http://www.mapress.com/phytotaxahb201

History and drivers of plant taxonomy in South Africa

The development of plant taxonomy in South Africa from about 1600 to 2015 is reviewed, with emphasis on the main driving factors that have influenced the research direction, techniques used, and choice of taxonomic research topic. In addition, key personalities and important historical events are highlighted. The early scientific interest in the flora of South Africa and, by implication, its taxonomy was initially driven by curiosity. Exploration of plants for economic purposes especially for medicinal use and later, agriculture, drove the scientific development of botany and formed the foundation of formal botany in the country. Establishment of botanical gardens and herbaria influenced botanical research, in particular the field of taxonomy. Technological advances lead to increased modernisation of taxonomy as new sources of information derived from other fields of botany were incorporated into taxonomic research. Funding priorities and availability of financial resources influence the taxonomic research that is conducted, and international initiatives that impact on priorities in biodiversity science have further impact on taxonomy. At present the predominant culture of taxonomy is directed towards electronic dissemination of taxonomic information, leading to increased accessibility and connectivity. Strategic planning of plant taxonomy in South Africa has become more formal as relevance and impact of research products increasingly need to be justified with respect to the financial costs of conducting taxonomic research.The University of Pretoria is thanked for financial support.http://www.mapress.com/j/pt/am2016Plant Scienc

Plant taxonomic capacity in South Africa

South Africa’s exceptionally rich and diverse flora faces challenges in terms of utilisation, management and conservation; these actions are underpinned by taxonomic research. The principal purpose of this review is to determine whether South Africa has the human capacity and resources to conduct taxonomic research that is required to support end-users of plant taxonomic information, and to identify shortages of capacity or resources that might prove to be an obstacle for plant taxonomic research. From an analysis of the existing gaps in taxonomic information, current research trends, and resources, it is apparent that there is a critical shortage of human capacity in South Africa to conduct plant taxonomic research for the benefit of biodiversity and society. Training institutions need to ensure the supply of suitably trained graduates including concentrating on those who meet Employment Equity targets. The need for more taxonomists is clearly justified, but may not be a priority in a country that already has such shortages of capacity in education and social services. Aside from lobbying for more jobs to be created, there is an urgent need to utilise available resources (human and other) effectively, and to implement a strategy for taxonomic research to ensure that priority activities are conducted.http://www.mapress.com/phytotaxaam201

Creating an online world flora by 2020 : a perspective from South Africa

At the 10th Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD), which was held in Nagoya, Japan, in October 2010, an updated Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC) was adopted as part of the plan of work of the CBD. Target 1 of the GSPC aims to produce an online Flora for all the plants of the world by 2020. Governments that have ratified the CBD will have to report over the next several years on progress towards achieving this challenging target. Floras are still widely regarded as a means of providing descriptive information and identification tools for the plants that occur in a specified region. Historically, Floras have included identification keys; scientific names with authorship for all taxa known to occur in the area; synonymy; descriptions; distributions within the region in question; specimen citations; habitat; literature references; and illustrations. Of these, nomenclature, descriptions, identification tools, illustrations and distributions are critical components. The approach being taken by South Africa, a biodiversity-rich country, in working towards achieving Target 1 of the GSPC by 2020 is presented and discussed, outlining a methodology that may be of practical use to other countries. We hope this will urge other countries to consider how they might meet this challenging conservation target.http://link.springer.com/journal/10531hb201

Global legume diversity assessment : concepts, key indicators, and strategies

While many plant species are considered threatened under anthropogenic pressure, it remains uncertain how rapidly we are losing plant species diversity. To fill this gap, we propose a Global Legume Diversity Assessment (GLDA) as the first step of a global plant diversity assessment. Here we describe the concept of GLDA and its feasibility by reviewing relevant approaches and data availability. We conclude that Fabaceae is a good proxy for overall angiosperm diversity in many habitats and that much relevant data for GLDA are available. As indicators of states, we propose comparison of species richness with phylogenetic and functional diversity to obtain an integrated picture of diversity. As indicators of trends, species loss rate and extinction risks should be assessed. Specimen records and plot data provide key resources for assessing legume diversity at a global scale, and distribution modeling based on these records provide key methods for assessing states and trends of legume diversity. GLDA has started in Asia, and we call for a truly global legume diversity assessment by wider geographic collaborations among various scientists.This paper is an outcome of the workshop on the global legume diversity assessment held from 19 to 22 August 2011 in Kyushu University, Japan.The Environment Research and Technology Development Fund (S9) of the Ministry of the Environment, Japan and the JSPS fund for Global Center of Excellence Program “Asian Conservation Ecology”.http://www.botanik.univie.ac.at/iapt/s_taxon.phpam201

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Robust estimation of bacterial cell count from optical density

Optical density (OD) is widely used to estimate the density of cells in liquid culture, but cannot be compared between instruments without a standardized calibration protocol and is challenging to relate to actual cell count. We address this with an interlaboratory study comparing three simple, low-cost, and highly accessible OD calibration protocols across 244 laboratories, applied to eight strains of constitutive GFP-expressing E. coli. Based on our results, we recommend calibrating OD to estimated cell count using serial dilution of silica microspheres, which produces highly precise calibration (95.5% of residuals <1.2-fold), is easily assessed for quality control, also assesses instrument effective linear range, and can be combined with fluorescence calibration to obtain units of Molecules of Equivalent Fluorescein (MEFL) per cell, allowing direct comparison and data fusion with flow cytometry measurements: in our study, fluorescence per cell measurements showed only a 1.07-fold mean difference between plate reader and flow cytometry data

Effect of remote ischaemic conditioning on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI): a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Remote ischaemic conditioning with transient ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). We investigated whether remote ischaemic conditioning could reduce the incidence of cardiac death and hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. METHODS: We did an international investigator-initiated, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI) at 33 centres across the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Serbia. Patients (age >18 years) with suspected STEMI and who were eligible for PPCI were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre with a permuted block method) to receive standard treatment (including a sham simulated remote ischaemic conditioning intervention at UK sites only) or remote ischaemic conditioning treatment (intermittent ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm through four cycles of 5-min inflation and 5-min deflation of an automated cuff device) before PPCI. Investigators responsible for data collection and outcome assessment were masked to treatment allocation. The primary combined endpoint was cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02342522) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Nov 6, 2013, and March 31, 2018, 5401 patients were randomly allocated to either the control group (n=2701) or the remote ischaemic conditioning group (n=2700). After exclusion of patients upon hospital arrival or loss to follow-up, 2569 patients in the control group and 2546 in the intervention group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months post-PPCI, the Kaplan-Meier-estimated frequencies of cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure (the primary endpoint) were 220 (8·6%) patients in the control group and 239 (9·4%) in the remote ischaemic conditioning group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·91-1·32], p=0·32 for intervention versus control). No important unexpected adverse events or side effects of remote ischaemic conditioning were observed. INTERPRETATION: Remote ischaemic conditioning does not improve clinical outcomes (cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure) at 12 months in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation, University College London Hospitals/University College London Biomedical Research Centre, Danish Innovation Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, TrygFonden

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570