BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the association between institution trust and public responses to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak.
METHODS: An Internet-based, cross-sectional survey was administered on 29 January 2020. A total of 4393 adults ≥18 y of age and residing or working in the province of Hubei, central China were included in the study.
RESULTS: The majority of the participants expressed a great degree of trust in the information and preventive instructions provided by the central government compared with the local government. Being under quarantine (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.35 [95% confidence interval {CI} 1.80 to 3.08]) and having a high institutional trust score (OR 2.23 [95% CI 1.96 to 2.53]) were both strong and significant determinants of higher preventive practices scores. The majority of study participants (n=3640 [85.7%]) reported that they would seek hospital treatment if they suspected themselves to have been infected with COVID-19. Few of the participants from Wuhan (n=475 [16.6%]) and those participants who were under quarantine (n=550 [13.8%]) expressed an unwillingness to seek hospital treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Institutional trust is an important factor influencing adequate preventive behaviour and seeking formal medical care during an outbreak.
An order, family and genus are validated, seven new genera, 35 new species, two new combinations, two epitypes, two lectotypes, and 17 interesting new host and / or geographical records are introduced in this study. Validated order, family and genus: Superstratomycetales and Superstratomycetaceae (based on Superstratomyces ). New genera: Haudseptoria (based on Haudseptoria typhae); Hogelandia (based on Hogelandia lambearum); Neoscirrhia (based on Neoscirrhia osmundae); Nothoanungitopsis (based on Nothoanungitopsis urophyllae); Nothomicrosphaeropsis (based on Nothomicrosphaeropsis welwitschiae); Populomyces (based on Populomyces zwinianus); Pseudoacrospermum (based on Pseudoacrospermum goniomae). New species: Apiospora sasae on dead culms of Sasa veitchii (Netherlands); Apiospora stipae on dead culms of Stipa gigantea (Spain); Bagadiella eucalyptorum on leaves of Eucalyptus sp. (Australia); Calonectria singaporensis from submerged leaf litter (Singapore); Castanediella neomalaysiana on leaves of Eucalyptus sp. (Malaysia); Colletotrichum pleopeltidis on leaves of Pleopeltis sp. (South Africa); Coniochaeta deborreae from soil (Netherlands); Diaporthe durionigena on branches of Durio zibethinus (Vietnam); Floricola juncicola on dead culm of Juncus sp. (France); Haudseptoria typhae on leaf sheath of Typha sp. (Germany); Hogelandia lambearum from soil (Netherlands); Lomentospora valparaisensis from soil (Chile); Neofusicoccum mystacidii on dead stems of Mystacidium capense (South Africa); Neomycosphaerella guibourtiae on leaves of Guibourtia sp. (Angola); Niesslia neoexosporioides on dead leaves of Carex paniculata (Germany); Nothoanungitopsis urophyllae on seed capsules of Eucalyptus urophylla (South Africa); Nothomicrosphaeropsis welwitschiae on dead leaves of Welwitschia mirabilis (Namibia); Paracremonium bendijkiorum from soil (Netherlands); Paraphoma ledniceana on dead wood of Buxus sempervirens (Czech Republic); Paraphoma salicis on leaves of Salix cf. alba (Ukraine); Parasarocladium wereldwijsianum from soil (Netherlands); Peziza ligni on masonry and plastering (France); Phyllosticta phoenicis on leaves of Phoenix reclinata (South Africa); Plectosphaerella slobbergiarum from soil (Netherlands); Populomyces zwinianus from soil (Netherlands); Pseudoacrospermum goniomae on leaves of Gonioma kamassi (South Africa); Pseudopyricularia festucae on leaves of Festuca californica (USA); Sarocladium sasijaorum from soil (Netherlands); Sporothrix hypoxyli in sporocarp of Hypoxylon petriniae on Fraxinus wood (Netherlands); Superstratomyces albomucosus on Pycnanthus angolensis (Netherlands); Superstratomyces atroviridis on Pinus sylvestris (Netherlands); Superstratomyces flavomucosus on leaf of Hakea multilinearis (Australia); Superstratomyces tardicrescens from human eye specimen (USA); Taeniolella platani on twig of Platanus hispanica (Germany), and Tympanis pini on twigs of Pinus sylvestris (Spain). Citation: Crous PW, Hernández-Restrepo M, Schumacher RK, Cowan DA, Maggs-Kölling G, Marais E, Wingfield MJ, Yilmaz N, Adan OCG, Akulov A, Álvarez Duarte E, Berraf-Tebbal A, Bulgakov TS, Carnegie AJ, de Beer ZW, Decock C, Dijksterhuis J, Duong TA, Eichmeier A, Hien LT, Houbraken JAMP, Khanh TN, Liem NV, Lombard L, Lutzoni FM, Miadlikowska JM, Nel WJ, Pascoe IG, Roets F, Roux J, Samson RA, Shen M, Spetik M, Thangavel R, Thanh HM, Thao LD, van Nieuwenhuijzen EJ, Zhang JQ, Zhang Y, Zhao LL, Groenewald JZ (2021). New and Interesting Fungi. 4. Fungal Systematics and Evolution 7: 255-343. doi: 10.3114/fuse.2021.07.13.
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.