Abstract Aim SLE is a systemic autoimmune disease generally affecting woman in the reproductive age. It is associated with an altered level of Tregs and oxidative stress while an increase in Tregs, and different antioxidant mechanisms to combat oxidative stress are essential for successful pregnancy. Hence, this study aims to determine the level of CD4+ and CD8+ Tregs and oxidative stress in pregnant lupus patients. Methods Ten healthy and 10 pregnant lupus volunteers from the North Indian population, within the age group of 20–30 years were enrolled in the study. All the patients were non-smokers, non-alcoholics and were not associated or undergoing therapy for any other disease. They had a SLEDAI of 37.4 ± 7.32 with 5.2 ± 1.93 years of disease duration. Oxidative stress was determined by measuring the enzyme activity of anti-oxidant enzymes (catalase, superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase) and the level of reduced glutathione and lipids peroxidised, spectrophotometrically. Flowcytometry was performed for immunophenotyping to determine CD8+ and CD4+ Tregs. Results Elevated CD8+ Tregs and diminished CD4+ Tregs were observed in pregnant lupus patients. Oxidative stress was significantly increased as the activities of anti-oxidant enzymes and level of reduced glutathione was considerably diminished. There was a substantial increase in the amount of lipids peroxidised. Conclusion Pregnant lupus patients undergo considerable level of oxidative stress in comparison to healthy pregnant woman. The decreased level of CD4+ Tregs and an increase in CD8+ Tregs might be another important factor responsible for pregnancy associated complications. Hence, lupus leads to alterations in the necessary conditions for a successful pregnancy, which might eventually cause higher mortality, morbidity and associated complications.

Abstract The antagonistic potential of Trichoderma strains was assayed by studying the effect of their culture filtrate on the radial growth of Sclerotium rolfsii, the causal agent of chickpea collar rot. Trichoderma harzianum-1432 (42.2%) and Trichoderma atroviride (40.3%) were found to be strong antagonists. To enhance their antagonistic potential, mutagenesis of these two selected strains was performed. Two mutants, Th-m1 and T. atroviride m1, were found to be more effective than their parent strains. The enzymatic activities of the selected parent and mutant strains were assayed, and although both mutants were found to have enhanced enzymatic activities compared to their respective parent strains, Th-m1 possessed the maximum cellulase (5.69 U/mL) and β-1,3-glucanase activity (61.9 U/mL). Th-m1 also showed high competitive saprophytic ability (CSA) among all of the selected parent and mutant strains, and during field experiments, Th-m1 was found to successfully possess enhanced disease control (82.9%).

Este trabalho apresenta uma análise das práticas e discursos iliberais da Guerra Global Contra o Terror (GWoT, na sigla em inglês) e demonstra como os Estados Unidos da América usaram o argumento liberal como uma métrica qualitativa do seu sucesso e fracasso na GWoT. Argumento que o “estranhamento do outro” (salafistas jihadistas) – bem como o envolvimento militar no Afeganistão e Iraque foram filosoficamente enraizadas no pensamento liberal de Immanuel Kant e John Stuart Mill, que tradicionalmente têm guiado a política externa estadunidense. Mais significativamente, essas filosofias liberais da história e das relações internacionais têm dentro de si as sementes do iliberalismo ao descrever sociedades/organizações não-liberais e antidemocráticas como “bárbaras” – e, como tal, os principais candidatos para a intervenção e mudança de regime. Predicado nessa lógica, o discurso da GWoT enquadrou a Al Qaeda como uma ameaça existencial chave, não apenas para os Estados Unidos, mas também para o “mundo civilizado” em geral, exigindo então uma “guerra defensiva liberal” em resposta. Foi o sucesso da securitização da Al Qaeda que essencialmente permitiu aos Estados Unidos adotarem políticas profundamente iliberais para combater esta dita ameaça existencial utilizando-se de todos os meios à sua disposição

This paper offers an analysis of the illiberal practices and discourse of the Global War on Terror (GWoT) and demonstrates how the United States of America used the liberal argument as a qualitative metric of its success and failure in the GWoT. I argue that ‘the othering’ of Salafi Jihadists as well the full military involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq were both philosophically rooted in the liberal thinking of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill, which have traditionally guided US foreign policy. More significantly, these liberal philosophies of history and international relations hold within them the seeds of illiberalism by depicting non-liberal, undemocratic societies/organisations as ‘barbaric’ – and as such prime candidates for intervention and regime change. Predicated upon this logic, the discourse of the GWoT framed Al Qaeda as a key existential threat to not only the United States but also the ‘civilised world’ in general and one which required a ‘liberal defensive war’ in response. It was the successful securitisation of Al Qaeda that essentially enabled the United States to adopt deeply illiberal policies to counter this so-called existential threat by using any means at its disposal.