Gibberellin Deficiency Confers Both Lodging and Drought Tolerance in Small Cereals

Tef [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] and finger millet [Eleusine coracana Gaertn] are staple cereal crops in Africa and Asia with several desirable agronomic and nutritional properties. Tef is becoming a life-style crop as it is gluten-free while finger millet has a low glycemic index which makes it an ideal food for diabetic patients. However, both tef and finger millet have extremely low grain yields mainly due to moisture scarcity and susceptibility of the plants to lodging. In this study, the effects of gibberellic acid (GA) inhibitors particularly paclobutrazol (PBZ) on diverse physiological and yield-related parameters were investigated and compared to GA mutants in rice (Oryza sativa L.). The application of PBZ to tef and finger millet significantly reduced the plant height and increased lodging tolerance. Remarkably, PBZ also enhanced the tolerance of both tef and finger millet to moisture deficit. Under moisture scarcity, tef plants treated with PBZ did not exhibit drought-related symptoms and their stomatal conductance was unaltered, leading to higher shoot biomass and grain yield. Semi-dwarf rice mutants altered in GA biosynthesis, were also shown to have improved tolerance to dehydration. The combination of traits (drought tolerance, lodging tolerance and increased yield) that we found in plants with altered GA pathway is of importance to breeders who would otherwise rely on extensive crossing to introgress each trait individually. The key role played by PBZ in the tolerance to both lodging and drought calls for further studies using mutants in the GA biosynthesis pathway in order to obtain candidate lines which can be incorporated into crop-breeding programs to create lodging tolerant and climate-smart crops.

Glycemic Variability Is Associated with Frequency of Blood Glucose Testing and Bolus: Post Hoc Analysis Results from the ProAct Study

ntroduction: The ProAct study has shown that a pump switch to the Accu-Chek® Combo system (Roche Diagnostics Deutschland GmbH, Mannheim, Germany) in type 1 diabetes patients results in stable glycemic control with significant improvements in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with unsatisfactory baseline HbA1c and shorter pump usage time. Patients and Methods: In this post hoc analysis of the ProAct database, we investigated the glycemic control and glycemic variability at baseline by determination of several established parameters and scores (HbA1c, hypoglycemia frequency, J-score, Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia Indexes, and Index of Glycemic Control) in participants with different daily bolus and blood glucose measurement frequencies (less than four day, four or five per day, and more than five per day, in both cases). The data were derived from up to 299 patients (172 females, 127 males; age [mean±SD], 39.4±15.2 years; pump treatment duration, 7.0±5.2 years). Results: Participants with frequent glucose readings had better glycemic control than those with few readings (more than five readings per day vs. less than four readings per day: HbA1c, 7.2±1.1% vs. 8.0±0.9%; mean daily blood glucose, 151±22 mg/dL vs. 176±30 mg/dL; percentage of readings per month >300 mg/dL, 10±4% vs. 14±5%; percentage of readings in target range [80-180 mg/dL], 59% vs. 48% [P<0.05 in all cases]) and had a lower glycemic variability (J-score, 49±13 vs. 71±25 [P<0.05]; Hyperglycemia Index, 0.9±0.5 vs. 1.9±1.2 [P<0.05]; Index of Glycemic Control, 1.9±0.8 vs. 3.1±1.6 [P<0.05]; Hypoglycemia Index, 0.9±0.8 vs. 1.2±1.3 [not significant]). Frequent self-monitoring of blood glucose was associated with a higher number of bolus applications (6.1±2.2 boluses/day vs. 4.5±2.0 boluses/day [P<0.05]). Therefore, a similar but less pronounced effect on glycemic variability in favor of more daily bolus applications was observed (more than five vs. less than four bolues per day: J-score, 57±17 vs. 63±25 [not significant]; Hypoglycemia Index, 1.0±1.0 vs. 1.5±1.4 [P<0.05]; Hyperglycemia Index, 1.3±0.6 vs. 1.6±1.1 [not significant]; Index of Glycemic Control, 2.3±1.1 vs. 3.1±1.7 [P<0.05]). Conclusions: Pump users who perform frequent daily glucose readings have a better glycemic control with lower glycemic variability.