Biofortification of Cereals and Pulses Using New Breeding Techniques: Current and Future Perspectives.

Cereals and pulses are consumed as a staple food in low-income countries for the fulfillment of daily dietary requirements and as a source of micronutrients. However, they are failing to offer balanced nutrition due to deficiencies of some essential compounds, macronutrients, and micronutrients, i.e., cereals are deficient in iron, zinc, some essential amino acids, and quality proteins. Meanwhile, the pulses are rich in anti-nutrient compounds that restrict the bioavailability of micronutrients. As a result, the population is suffering from malnutrition and resultantly different diseases, i.e., anemia, beriberi, pellagra, night blindness, rickets, and scurvy are common in the society. These facts highlight the need for the biofortification of cereals and pulses for the provision of balanced diets to masses and reduction of malnutrition. Biofortification of crops may be achieved through conventional approaches or new breeding techniques (NBTs). Conventional approaches for biofortification cover mineral fertilization through foliar or soil application, microbe-mediated enhanced uptake of nutrients, and conventional crossing of plants to obtain the desired combination of genes for balanced nutrient uptake and bioavailability. Whereas, NBTs rely on gene silencing, gene editing, overexpression, and gene transfer from other species for the acquisition of balanced nutritional profiles in mutant plants. Thus, we have highlighted the significance of conventional and NBTs for the biofortification of cereals and pulses. Current and future perspectives and opportunities are also discussed. Further, the regulatory aspects of newly developed biofortified transgenic and/or non-transgenic crop varieties via NBTs are also presented.

Harnessing the potential of plant transcription factors in developing climate resilient crops to improve global food security: Current and future perspectives.

Crop plants should be resilient to climatic factors in order to feed ever-increasing populations. Plants have developed stress-responsive mechanisms by changing their metabolic pathways and switching the stress-responsive genes. The discovery of plant transcriptional factors (TFs), as key regulators of different biotic and abiotic stresses, has opened up new horizons for plant scientists. TFs perceive the signal and switch certain stress-responsive genes on and off by binding to different cis-regulatory elements. More than 50 families of plant TFs have been reported in nature. Among them, DREB, bZIP, MYB, NAC, Zinc-finger, HSF, Dof, WRKY, and NF-Y are important with respect to biotic and abiotic stresses, but the potential of many TFs in the improvement of crops is untapped. In this review, we summarize the role of different stress-responsive TFs with respect to biotic and abiotic stresses. Further, challenges and future opportunities linked with TFs for developing climate-resilient crops are also elaborated.

Outcomes of patients treated with noninvasive ventilation by a medical emergency team on the wards.

BACKGROUND: Initiation of noninvasive ventilation (NIV) on the wards is not universally accepted. Medical emergency teams (METs) provide acute care and monitoring to deteriorating patients on the general wards. Whether it is safe for an MET to start NIV in ward patients with respiratory distress remains unclear. METHODS: We evaluated 1,123 MET calls in 30,217 ward patients between January 2009 and June 2011 from the prospectively maintained MET database in our tertiary care hospital. We identified ward patients with acute desaturation (< 90%) and tachypnea (breathing frequency > 28 breaths/min), for whom an MET was called. Subjects transferred to the ICU at the end of an MET call were excluded. The remaining ward subjects were divided into 2 groups: patients who were not started on NIV by the MET; versus patients who were started on NIV by the MET. The primary outcome was endotracheal intubation or ICU transfer within 48 hours of MET activation. Secondary outcome measures were 28-day mortality and ICU mortality. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-eight MET subjects met the study criteria, and 109 immediate ICU transfers were excluded. Of the remaining 129 ward subjects, 54 were in the NIV group, and 75 in the no-NIV group. The NIV group subjects were sicker (mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 17.6 ± 5.1 versus 14.4 ± 5, P < .001). Subjects with pulmonary edema, COPD exacerbation, or asthma exacerbation were more likely, while those with pneumonia were less likely to be placed on NIV. The primary outcome was reached in 2/54 (3.7%) of the NIV subjects and 12/75 (16%) of the no-NIV subjects (P = .03). There was no significant difference (P > .30) between the groups in 28-day mortality (7.4% vs. 13.3%) or ICU mortality (3.7% vs 8%). CONCLUSIONS: In selected ward patients, especially those with COPD or pulmonary edema, NIV can be safely initiated by an MET.

Using spirometry to rule out restriction in patients with concomitant low forced vital capacity and obstructive pattern.

BACKGROUND: Different formulas have been proposed to exclude restriction based on spirometry, however none of them have specifically tested the patients whose spirometry show both obstruction and a low forced vital capacity (FVC). STUDY OBJECTIVE: The study was designed to create an algorithm that would better predict the absence of restriction in such patients. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. METHODS: A cohort of consecutive adults that underwent complete pulmonary function testing from 2002-2004 was analyzed. The data was randomly split into two groups to allow for derivation and then validation of a predictive formula. Patients were randomly assigned into either a "derivation" or "validation" group. In the derivation group, stepwise logistic regression was used to determine a formula and optimal cut-off value for the variable with the best discriminative capacity. The formula was applied subsequently to the validation group to test the results and compared to previously published formula. RESULTS: The study group contained 766 patients. We determined that the variable with the highest association with TLC was [(FEV(1)/FVC) % predicted/FVC % predicted]. A value of ≥1.11 was found to be the maximal cutoff to predict the absence of restriction. The formula was applied to a validation group (n=397) and performed better than prior published algorithm with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 95%, 44%, 22%, and 98%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our formula performs superior to the previously published algorithms in patients with concomitant low FVC and obstruction to exclude restriction.