Radiance Research AcademyInternational Journal of Current Research and Review2231-21960975-52411712EnglishN2025June28Healthcare Bacteriological Study of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia (VAP) in a Medical Critical Care Unit     English0104Jeetendra ChavanEnglish Chhaya ChandeEnglish Pallavi BoraseEnglish Kavita BhilkarEnglish Jyoti BadeEnglish Introduction: Ventilator associated pneumoniae is one of the most common hospital-acquired infections and is a major device-associated complication encountered in critical patients receiving intensive care. Knowledge of VAP rates the common etiological agents in the critical areas of health care institutions and can help to plan empirical antimicrobial treatment. Aim: To study the etiology and antimicrobial resistance of bacteria responsible for VAP. Objectives: (1) To estimate VAP rate / 1000 ventilator days. (2) To study the bacteriology of Ventilator Associated Pneumonia (VAP). (3) To identify bacterial isolates up to species level. (4) To study anti-microbial susceptibility in the bacterial isolates. Methods: The study was conducted in the Department of Microbiology of an urban tertiary care teaching hospital in Western India. The patients were admitted to the MICU during the study period who received mechanical ventilation (MV) for >48 hours and developed pneumonia, diagnosed on clinical and radiological findings were the study population to calculate the VAP rate and find out the etiological agents. Antimicrobial Susceptibilities were performed on the bacterial isolates recovered from VAP cases. Results: A total of 125 patients developed clinical VAP proven by radiological and clinical findings out of 271 patients on mechanical ventilation studied. The VAP rate was calculated as 35.7 in 1000 ventilator days. The incidence rate of VAP was 46.12%. Late on-set VAP accounted for 66% of cases. All the clinically suspected 125 VAP cases were culture positive with 77% positive predictive value for culture-positive samples and 100% negative predictive value for culture-negative samples. The majority of the isolates of VAP comprised multi drug resistant gram-negative organisms like K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii, and P. aeruginosa. Conclusion: VAP is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients admitted to the critical care unit. Multidrug-resistant bacteria are frequently involved in the causation of VAP. Hence, microbiological information could be used for planning antibiotic therapy and should not be limited only to making a diagnosis. EnglishVentilator Associated Pneumonia, Bacteriological analysis, Medical critical care unit, Multidrug resistant, Microbiological Information, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosahttp://ijcrr.com/abstract.php?article_id=4861http://ijcrr.com/article_html.php?did=4861 1. American Thoracic Society, Infectious Diseases Society of America. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital- acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171:388–416. 2. Procop GW, Church DL, Hall GS, Janda WM, Koneman EW, Shreckenberger PC, et al. Koneman’s Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology. 7th ed. Chapter 2. 2017. 3. Rit K, Chakraborty B, Saha R, Majumder U. Ventilator associated pneumonia in a tertiary care hospital in India: Incidence, etiology, risk factors, role of multidrug-resistant pathogens. Int J Med Public Health. 2014;4(1). 4. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria: Informational supplement. CLSI; 2018. 5. Patil HV, Patil VC. Incidence, bacteriology, and clinical outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia at tertiary care hospital. J Nat Sci Biol Med. 2017;8(1):46. 6. Bonell A, Azarrafiy R, Huong VT, Viet TL, Phu VD, Dat VQ, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of ventilatorassociated pneumonia in adults in Asia: an analysis of national income level on incidence and etiology. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;68(3):511–8. 7. Sarkar M, Raj HJ, Ghosh TK. Ventilator Associated Pneumonia: a challenge in intensive care unit acquired infection. Bangladesh J Med Sci. 2016;15(4):588–95. 8. Solanke V, Pai C, Urhekar AD. Comparative bacteriological study of community-acquired pneumonia. Bombay Hosp J. 2011;53:159–65. 9. John J, Thomas SM, Mathai AS, Rajkumar A. A prospective study on incidence and microbiological profile of ventilator associated pneumonia in the intensive care unit of a tertiary care centre. Int J Contemp Med Res. 2017;4(9):1840–3. 10. Joseph NM, Sistla S, Dutta TK, Badhe AS, Parija SC. Ventilatorassociated pneumonia in a tertiary care hospital in India: incidence and risk factors. J Infect Dev Ctries. 2009;3(10):771–7. 11. Combes A, Luyt CE, Fagon JY, Wolff M, Trouillet JL, Chastre J; PNEUMA Trial Group. Early predictors for infection recurrence and death in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(1):146–54. 12. Leonard KL, Borst GM, Davies SW, Coogan M, Waibel BH, Poulin NR, et al. Ventilator-associated pneumonia in trauma patients: different criteria, different rates. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2016;17(3):363–8. 13. Liang YJ, Li ZL, Wang L, Liu BY, Ding RY, Ma XC. Comparison of risk factors and pathogens in patients with early- and lateonset ventilator-associated pneumonia in intensive care unit. Zhonghua Nei Ke Za Zhi. 2017;56(10):743–6. 14. Chastre J, Fagon JY. Ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;165(7):867–903. 15. Wu D, Wu C, Zhang S, Zhong Y. Risk factors of ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients. Front Pharmacol. 2019; 10:482. doi:10.3389/fphar.2019.00482. PMID: 31143118; PMCID: PMC6521332. 16. Pawar M, Mehta Y, Khurana P, Chaudhary A, Kulkarni V, Trehan N. Ventilator-associated pneumonia: Incidence, risk factors, outcome, and microbiology. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2003;17:22–8. 17. Baker AM, Meredith JW, Haponik EF. Pneumonia in intubated trauma patients: microbiology and outcomes. Am J Crit Care. 1996;5(3):343–9.

Radiance Research AcademyInternational Journal of Current Research and Review2231-21960975-52411712EnglishN2025June28Healthcare Genomic Approaches for Biodiversity Conservation – A Review     English0511S. Murhali MoanEnglish D.S.R.S. PrakashEnglish Pola SudhakarEnglish B. Preethi ChandrakalaEnglish A. Matta ReddyEnglish The integration of genomics with biodiversity is promising and reveal valuable information about genome organization and genome evolution. Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technology generated vast genomic resources like short sequence repeats (SSRs), Single Nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), Insertions and deletions (InDels), Copy Number Variations (CNVs), Diversity Array Technology (DArT) markers etc. The use of these genomic resources can accelerate biodiversity assessment, conservation, and restoration efforts by enabling scientists to make well-informed decisions. Bioinformatic analyses will further help finding genes, gene products and their function. The genomic technology helps estimating genetic diversity, identification of adaptive alleles, complex diseases and traits, and also enable species identification by DNA barcoding approaches. The use of genomics with classical genetic rescue programs will enable conservation biologists to protect, preserve and mange ecosystems efficiently. EnglishBiodiversity conservation, Genome sequence, Genomic resources, Adaptive alleles, Comparative mapping, DNA barcodinghttp://ijcrr.com/abstract.php?article_id=4862http://ijcrr.com/article_html.php?did=4862 1. Bay RA, Palumbi SR. Multilocus adaptation associated with heat resistance in reef-building corals. Curr Biol. 2014; 24: 2952–6. 2. Baerwald MR, Goodbla AM, Nagarajan RP, Gootenberg JS, Abudayyeh OO, Zhang F. Rapid and accurate species identification for ecological studies and monitoring using CRISPR-based SHERLOCK. Mol Ecol Resour. 2020; 20: 961-970. 3. Brandies P, Peel E, Hogg CJ, Belov K. The value of reference genomes in the conservation of threatened species. Genes. 2019;10: 846. 4. Bouteiller XP, Verdu CF, Aikio E, Bloese P, Dainou K, Delcamp A, et al. A few north Appalachian populations are the source of European black locust. Ecology Evol. 2019;9:2398–2414. 5. Ceballos G, Ehrlich PR, Barnosky AD, Garcia A, Pringle RM, Palmer TM. Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. Sci Adv, 2015.1: e1400253. 6. Coghlan SA, Shafer ABA, Freeland JR. Development of an environmental DNA metabarcoding assay for aquatic vascular plant communities. Environ DNA. 2021;3:372–387. 7. Chen F, Smith J, Lee H, Wang X, Kumar S, Patel R, et al. The sequenced angiosperm genomes and genome databases. Front. Plant Sci. 2018;9:418. 8. Chen F, Song Y, Li X, Chen J, Mo L, Zhang X. Genome sequences of horticultural plants: past, present, and future. Hortic. Res. 2019;6:112. 9. de Vere N, Rich TCG, Trinder SA, Long C. DNA Barcoding for Plants. In: Batley J, editor. Plant Genotyping: Methods and Protocols. Methods Mol Biol. 2015;1245. doi: 10.1007/978-1- 4939-1966-6_8. 10. Di Marco M, Harwood TD, Hoskins AJ, Ware C, Hill SLL, Ferrier S. Projecting impacts of global climate and land-use scenarios on plant biodiversity using compositional-turnover modelling. Glob. Change Biol. 2019;25: 2763–2778. 11. Diana JS. Aquaculture production and biodiversity conservation. Bioscience. 2009;59: 27-38. 12. Gaston KJ, Spicer JI Biodiversity an introduction. Second Edition. Blackwell Publishing p.3. 2004. ISBN: 978-1-118-68491- 7. 13. Gerdol M, Moreira R, Cruz F, Gómez-Garrido J, Vlasova A, Rosani U. et al. Massive gene presence-absence variation shapes an open pan-genome in the Mediterranean mussel. Genome Biol. 2020; 21, 275; https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-020-02180-3 14. Hotaling S, Kelly JL, Frandsen PB. Toward a genome sequence for every animal: Where are we now? PNAS. 2021;118: 52 e2109019118 15. Keller L, Waller DM. Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends Ecol Evol. 2002;17: 230–241. 16. Kersey PJ. Plant genome sequences: past, present, future. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2019;48:1–8. 17. Loman NJ, Pallen MJ. Twenty years of bacterial genome sequencing. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2015;13:787–794. 18. Mackay IJ, Powell W. Methods for linkage disequilibrium mapping in crops. Trends Plant Sci. 2006;12:2. doi: 10.1016/j. tplants.12.001. 19. Marks RA, Hotaling S, Frandsen PB, VanBuren R. Representation and participation across 20 years of plant genome sequencing. Nat. Plants. 2021;7:1571–1578. 20. Meinke DW, Cherry JM, Dean C, Rounsley SD, Koornneef AM. Arabidopsis thaliana: A model plant for genome analysis. Science. 1998;282:662–682. 21. Mohan SM, Sudhakar P. Metagenomic Approaches for Studying Plant–Microbe Interactions. In: Bramhachari PV, editor. Understanding the Microbiome Interactions in Agriculture and the Environment. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag; 2023. p. 243–254. doi: 10.1007/978-981-19-3696-8_12. 22. Murchison EP, Schulz-Trieglaff OB, Ning Z, Alexandrov LB, Bauer MJ, Fu B, et al. Genome sequencing and analysis of the Tasmanian Devil and its transmissible cancer. Cell. 2012;148:780–791. 23. Pfenninger M, Reuss F, Kiebler A, Schönenbeck P, Caliendo C, Gerber S, et al. Genomic basis for drought resistance in European beech forests threatened by climate change. eLife. 2021;10:e65532. doi: 10.7554/eLife.65532. 24. Piertney SB, Oliver MK. The evolutionary ecology of the major histocompatibility complex. Heredity. 2006;96:7–21. 25. Maranju PA, Yadav S, Kolipakam V, Singh S, Qureshi Q, Jhala Y. Erratum to: Schrodinger’s scat: a critical review of the currently available tiger (Panthera tigris) and leopard (Panthera pardus) specific primers in India, and a novel leopard specific primer. BMC Genet. 2017;18:28. 26. Santo LND, Hoban S, Parchman TL, Wright JW, Hamilton JA. Reduced representation sequencing to understand the evolutionary history of Torrey pine (Pinus torreyana parry) with implications for rare species conservation. Mol Ecol. 2021;31(18):4622– 4639. 27. Su YC, Huang H, Liu XY, Zheng RY. Systematic relationship of several controversial Cunninghamella taxa inferred from sequence comparisons of ITS2 of rDNA. Mycol. Res.1999;103:805–810. 28. Szövényi P, Gunadi A, Li FW. Charting the genomic landscape of seed-free plants. Nat. Plants. 2021;7: 554–565. 29. Turvey ST, Crees JJ. Extinction in the anthropocene. Curr Biol. 2019; 29: 982–986. 30. Ward RD, Hanner R, Hebert PDN. The campaign to DNA barcode all fishes. J. Fish Biol. 2009; 74: 329-56. 31. Watanabe R, Matsushima R, Gomei Y. Life history of the endangered Japanese aquatic beetle Helophorus auriculatus (Coleoptera: Helophoridae) and implications for its conservation. J. Insect Conserv. 2020;24:603–611. 32. Wright B, Farquharson KA, McLennan EA, Belov K, Hogg CJ, Grueber CE. From reference genomes to population genomics: comparing three reference-aligned reduced-representation sequencing pipelines in two wildlife species. BMC Genomics. 2019; 20: 453.