Soil health changes induced by prairie reconstruction (cultivated fields to tallgrass prairie) were assessed in Central Missouri within sites representing a chronosequence of 0, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13-yr postreconstruction. In addition, a nearby remnant native prairie, two long-term reconstructed prairies (-25 and -57-yr post-reconstruction), and a biofuel prairie 9-yr post-reconstruction were evaluated for comparative purposes. From 0 to 8-yr, prairie reconstruction increased soil aggregation, total soil organic carbon (SOC), total nitrogen (TN), active C and N (permanganate oxidizable C and total protein), and mineralizable C and N (soil respiration and potentially mineralizable nitrogen), becoming more similar to levels in the remnant prairie. Further, four enzymes involved in the cycling of C (13-glucosidase), N (13-glucosaminidase), P (acid phosphatase), and S (arylsulfatase) demonstrated amplified activities within samples collected to a depth of 15-cm. Over time, the ratios of active C to SOC and active N to TN declined, reflecting the conversion of active C/N pools into more stable C/N pools due to continued organic inputs and increased microbial activity. In contrast, from 8- to 13-yr post-reconstruction, the number of these same soil health indicators declined, which may be attributed to historical land use, the improvement of prairie reconstruction and management strategies, and ecological processes related to succession. Overall, prairie reconstruction holds great potential for soil health restoration in degraded agricultural landscapes, and further study is needed to understand how historical land use and prairie reconstruction practices affect soil health and ecological resilience. ; Missouri EPSCoR program - National Science Foundation [IIA1355406, IIA1430427] ; Published version ; Support for this research came from the Missouri EPSCoR program, funded by the National Science Foundation under Award #IIA1355406 and #IIA1430427. We would like to thank the Missouri Department of Conservation, Prairie Fork Conservation Area (PCFA) , and University of Missouri Biological Sciences Department (Tucker Prairie) staff, and specifically Jeff Demand and Melody Kroll, for permission to soil sample. We thank Jill Souliere Staples of the USDAARS, Seth Roberts of the University of Missouri, and student workers for laboratory assistance. ; Public domain authored by a U.S. government employee
Spirulina platensis is interesting for the food industry due to its overall composition and high content in C-phycocyanin. However, the sensitivity of C-phycocyanin makes its extraction a delicate process. The present study focuses on assessing the use of ohmic heating (OH) in the recovery of C-phycocyanin and other relevant compounds as an alternative method to freeze-thawing or conventional heating. Different ohmic and conventional heating treatments were applied both to purified C-phycocyanin and Spirulina powder. Evaluation of fluorescence and circular dichroism showed that moderated electric fields increased C-phycocyanin stability. This was confirmed in the extraction trials which revealed that OH assisted extraction at higher temperatures (44°C), and shorter times (30min) allowed significant higher extraction yield of C-phycocyanin (45 mg/gdw Spirulina), in comparison with conventional heating and freeze-thawing. OH allowed also up to 80% higher yields in phenolic compounds and carbohydrates. ; This study was supported by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) under the scope of the strategic funding of UIDB/04469/2020 unit and BioTecNorte operation (NORTE-01-0145-FEDER000004) funded by the European Regional Development Fund under the scope of Norte2020 - Programa Operacional Regional do Norte. The study was also supported by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant (MSCA-RISE; FODIAC; 778388) and project OH2O – POCI-01-0145-FEDER-029145 (FCT and COMPETE2020). Pedro Santos is recipient of a fellowship supported by a doctoral advanced training (call NORTE-69-2015-15), funded by the European Social Fund under the scope of Norte2020 - Programa Operacional Regional do Norte (NORTE-08-5369-FSE-000036). ...
Peruvian households have experienced one of the most prevalent economic shocks due to COVID-19, significantly increasing their vulnerability to food insecurity (FI). To understand the vulnerability characteristics of these households among the Peruvian young population, including the role of the government's response through emergency cash transfer, we analysed longitudinal data from the Young Lives study (n = 2026), a study that follows the livelihoods of two birth cohorts currently aged 18 to 27 years old. FI was assessed using the Food Insecurity Experience Scale. Household characteristics were collected before and during the COVID-19 outbreak in Peru to characterise participants' vulnerability to FI. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between government support and participants' vulnerability characteristics to FI. During the period under study (March to December 2020), 24% (95% CI: 22.1–25.9%) of the participants experienced FI. Families in the top wealth tercile were 49% less likely to experience FI. Larger families (>5 members) and those with increased household expenses and decreased income due to COVID-19 were more likely to experience FI (by 35%, 39% and 42%, respectively). There was no significant association between government support and FI (p = 0.768). We conclude that pre-pandemic socioeconomic status, family size, and the economic disruption during COVID-19 contribute to the risk of FI among the Peruvian young population, while government support insufficiently curtailed the risk to these households.
Background: Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods: This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings: Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16-30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77-0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50-0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80-0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54-0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation: Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.