Presence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Antibodies Among Vietnamese Healthcare Workers by Dosing Interval for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Before the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant arrived in Vietnam, case rates suggested seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was low. Beginning in March 2021, we assessed different dosing schedules and adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) for ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine among healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study to estimate the prevalence of IgG antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 before and after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination. We conducted antibody testing among HCWs in February 2021 (baseline), before the second dose (June-July 2021), and 1 and 3 months after the second dose. We detected antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 using Tetracore® FlexImmArray™, and surrogate neutralizing antibodies using GenScript cPass™. Neither assay can distinguish natural from vaccine-induced antibodies. We assessed AEFIs through interview post-dose 1 and 1 month post-dose 2. RESULTS: Before vaccination, 1/617 participants (0.16%) had antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Of these 617, 405 were vaccinated with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 with 4-8- (60%), 9-12- (27%), or ≥13-week (13%) intervals between the 2 doses. Three months following series completion, 99% and 97% of vaccinated participants had ≥1 sample with detectable antibodies and surrogate neutralizing antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, respectively. We observed no significant differences among those with different dosing intervals at last follow-up. All participants reported PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the study; 2 (0.5%) were laboratory-confirmed. AEFIs were more frequent post-dose 1 (81%) vs post-dose 2 (21%). CONCLUSIONS: In this population, regardless of dosing interval, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 induced antibodies within 3 months of the second dose. These findings may offer flexibility to policymakers when balancing programmatic considerations with vaccine effectiveness.

Continental-scale suppression of an invasive pest by a host-specific parasitoid underlines both environmental and economic benefits of arthropod biological control.

Biological control, a globally-important ecosystem service, can provide long-term and broad-scale suppression of invasive pests, weeds and pathogens in natural, urban and agricultural environments. Following (few) historic cases that led to sizeable environmental up-sets, the discipline of arthropod biological control has-over the past decades-evolved and matured. Now, by deliberately taking into account the ecological risks associated with the planned introduction of insect natural enemies, immense environmental and societal benefits can be gained. In this study, we document and analyze a successful case of biological control against the cassava mealybug, Phenacoccus manihoti (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) which invaded Southeast Asia in 2008, where it caused substantial crop losses and triggered two- to three-fold surges in agricultural commodity prices. In 2009, the host-specific parasitoid Anagyrus lopezi (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae) was released in Thailand and subsequently introduced into neighboring Asian countries. Drawing upon continental-scale insect surveys, multi-year population studies and (field-level) experimental assays, we show how A. lopezi attained intermediate to high parasitism rates across diverse agro-ecological contexts. Driving mealybug populations below non-damaging levels over a broad geographical area, A. lopezi allowed yield recoveries up to 10.0 t/ha and provided biological control services worth several hundred dollars per ha (at local farm-gate prices) in Asia's four-million ha cassava crop. Our work provides lessons to invasion science and crop protection worldwide. Furthermore, it accentuates the importance of scientifically-guided biological control for insect pest management, and highlights its potentially large socio-economic benefits to agricultural sustainability in the face of a debilitating invasive pest. In times of unrelenting insect invasions, surging pesticide use and accelerating biodiversity loss across the globe, this study demonstrates how biological control-as a pure public good endeavor-constitutes a powerful, cost-effective and environmentally-responsible solution for invasive species mitigation.