Weedy plants pose a major threat to food security, biodiversity, ecosystem services and consequently to human health and wellbeing. However, many currently used weed management approaches are increasingly unsustainable. To address this knowledge and practice gap, in June 2014, 35 weed and invasion ecologists, weed scientists, evolutionary biologists and social scientists convened a workshop to explore current and future perspectives and approaches in weed ecology and management. A horizon scanning exercise ranked a list of 124 pre-submitted questions to identify a priority list of 30 questions. These questions are discussed under seven themed headings that represent areas for renewed and emerging focus for the disciplines of weed research and practice. The themed areas considered the need for transdisciplinarity, increased adoption of integrated weed management and agroecological approaches, better understanding of weed evolution, climate change, weed invasiveness and finally, disciplinary challenges for weed science. Almost all the challenges identified rested on the need for continued efforts to diversify and integrate agroecological, socio-economic and technological approaches in weed management. These challenges are not newly conceived, though their continued prominence as research priorities highlights an ongoing intransigence that must be addressed through a more system-oriented and transdisciplinary research agenda that seeks an embedded integration of public and private research approaches. This horizon scanning exercise thus set out the building blocks needed for future weed management research and practice; however, the challenge ahead is to identify effective ways in which sufficient research and implementation efforts can be directed towards these needs.

Objective

A pilot study suggested that combination therapy with low-dose anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) and pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) preserves C-peptide in established type 1 diabetes (T1D) (duration 4 months to 2 years). We hypothesized that 1) low-dose ATG/GCSF or 2) low-dose ATG alone would slow the decline of β-cell function in patients with new-onset T1D (duration <100 days).

Research design and methods

A three-arm, randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial was performed by the Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet Study Group in 89 subjects: 29 subjects randomized to ATG (2.5 mg/kg intravenously) followed by pegylated GCSF (6 mg subcutaneously every 2 weeks for 6 doses), 29 to ATG alone (2.5 mg/kg), and 31 to placebo. The primary end point was mean area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide during a 2-h mixed-meal tolerance test 1 year after initiation of therapy. Significance was defined as one-sided P value < 0.025.

Results

The 1-year mean AUC C-peptide was significantly higher in subjects treated with ATG (0.646 nmol/L) versus placebo (0.406 nmol/L) (P = 0.0003) but not in those treated with ATG/GCSF (0.528 nmol/L) versus placebo (P = 0.031). HbA_1c was significantly reduced at 1 year in subjects treated with ATG and ATG/GCSF, P = 0.002 and 0.011, respectively.

Conclusions

Low-dose ATG slowed decline of C-peptide and reduced HbA_1c in new-onset T1D. Addition of GCSF did not enhance C-peptide preservation afforded by low-dose ATG. Future studies should be considered to determine whether low-dose ATG alone or in combination with other agents may prevent or delay the onset of the disease.