Get help from the best in academic writing.

The Biological Basis of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD) is a debilitating anxiety disorder that initiates feelings of distress to those suffering from it. Such obsessive-compulsive disorders include hoarding disorder, body dismorphic disorder, trichotillomania (hair-pulling disorder), and excoriation (skin-picking disorder) (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V), OCD is divided into two categories: obsessions and compulsions. Obsessions are disturbing, persistent thoughts that provoke unwanted feelings of anxiety and nervousness. Compulsions influence individuals to perform certain behaviors in an effort to reduce these anxious feelings. Such examples include hand washing, organizing, counting, repeating words, constant fear of germs, and et al. Consequently, obsessions and compulsions are unwarranted and excessive, as individuals constantly feel obligated to perform certain rituals in an effort to experience temporary relief (Rachman, 2017).
OCD is portrayed as one of the top ten leading causes of disability around the world (Davis, 2008). Patients suffering from OCD display a variety of cognitive and behavioral characteristics, including perfectionism and an overwhelming need for control. Such individuals tend to create negative scenarios, in addition to anticipating the worst. Foreshadowing negative situations only increases the likelihood of such situations from occurring, which increases obsessive-compulsive behavior. Negative thoughts do not make the situation less intimidating, but rather makes the situation worse. Thus, it is important to understand that OCD is an unbearable impairment.
Given that OCD demands a multitude of timely explanations, it is essential to recognize the plethora of factors that contribute to obsessive-compulsive behavior. Such factors include psychological, social, environmental, and cultural influences. However, recent studies have explored the possible biological basis of OCD, in addition to identifying the possible pathophysiological and neuroanatomy of this disorder. Likewise, helpful medications and treatment methods have been designed in order to alleviate the uncomfortable symptoms of OCD. Thus, the biological basis of OCD is influenced by the interactions between nature and nurture. By identifying the biological basis of OCD, in addition to determining several treatment approaches, individuals can remove the stigma that is often associated with obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Environmental Factors
With respect to nurture, OCD can arise from various environmental influences including cultural factors, familial backgrounds, traumatic life events, and social relationships. In particular, stressful life events (SLEs) are considered one of the major contributors to obsessive-compulsive behaviors. Research studies involving the relationship between SLEs and OCD initiated significant results. Rosso et al. (2012) was interested in diagnosing individuals who suffered from OCD with and without SLEs preceding obsessive-compulsive behavior. The researchers were further concerned with identifying the specific types of SLEs that may trigger obsessive-compulsive behavior among the participants. The results demonstrated that 200 participants experienced OCD symptoms when a stressful life event was presented initially. Additional data signified that females were more likely to experience obsessions and compulsions, as opposed to their male counterparts. The researchers insinuated the notion that (1) “hospitalization of a family member,” (2) “major personal physical illness,” and (3) “loss of a personally valuable object” were significant SLEs that contributed to the onset of obsessive-compulsive behaviors. Therefore, the researchers hypothesize that minimizing a connection to stressful life events may reduce OCD, given that SLEs are detrimental to one’s psychological and physiological well-being.
Biological Basis, Pathophysiology, and Neuroanatomy
With regards to nature, twin and family studies have demonstrated possible genetic factors underlying OCD. Such studies revealed that obsessive-compulsive behaviors were significantly higher among individuals who were related to one another. Family members connected to adults with OCD tended to experience the symptoms of OCD twice as often as the control population. Likewise, family members connected to children and adolescents with OCD symptoms were ten times more likely to exhibit such obsessions and compulsions (Grootheest et al., 2012). Nevertheless, it is obvious that future research studies should be conducted in order to clarify these results. Additionally, the significance of family genetics as a possible contributor to OCD should not be overlooked.
Research concerning the possible genetic influences of OCD continued with Mattheisen et al. (2015). Mattheisen and his team of researchers conducted a genome-wide study with respect to obsessive-compulsive disorder. They stressed the significance of identifying a particular genetic component of OCD in an effort to create effective treatment methods to alleviate such symptoms. The researchers rigorously analyzed 5,601 human genomes in total, which included: (1) 1,406 individuals suffering from OCD, (2) 1,000 family members with OCD, and (3) 2,655 individuals from the general population. The results indicated a significant relationship between patients with OCD and a protein tyrosine phosphokinase gene (PTPRD). PTPRD branches from the protein tyrosine phosphatase (PTP) family; PTP is designed to maintain cell growth and axon guidance. The researchers accentuated the fact that this association is groundbreaking for a variety of reasons. Primarily, they found that PTPRD might be linked to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This is important because ADHD shares similar etiological influences comorbid with OCD. Likewise, they established that PTPRD is linked to knowledge and memory retention in animals. Such areas involving learning and memory are associated with OCD in humans as well. In addition, the researchers discovered that PTPRD works in conjunction with the SLITRK1 family gene, which regulates synaptic transmission. SLITRK1 binds with PTP, initiating the early release of excitatory messages and allowing over-excited signals to travel through neural pathways. SLITRK is further associated with OCD in animals, highlighting the notion that animals can be used to model OCD in humans. Consequently, the researchers stressed the importance of exploring the possible genetic variables of OCD found in animals. Such discoveries will create an understanding for recognizing the neural pathways of this disorder in humans.
Along with the possible genetic influences, the pathophysiology and neuroanatomy of OCD has yet to be determined. Nevertheless, research studies have declared that abnormalities in the brain may contribute to the biological basis of OCD. Functional neuroimaging of patients suffering from OCD have reported high activity levels in the frontal lobe, which is responsible for motor control, problem solving, and reasoning. In particular, the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), and the caudate nucleus are areas located within the frontal lobe that are associated with obsessive-compulsive symptoms (Maia, Cooney,

Response of Zinc and Sulphur on Growth and Yield of Onion

ABSTRACT
The present investigation was conducted during winter season of 2011-2012 at research farm Department of Horticulture Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture Technology and Sciences, Allahabad (U.P.) the experiment was conducted in randomized block design with ten treatments and three replications. The response on onion (Allium cepa) on growth and yield to different levels of Zinc (Chelated) and Sulphur (Bentenite), Where Zinc levels under trail were 0, 10, 20 and 30 kg per hectare, while Sulphur levels were 0, 15, 30 and 45 kg per hectare. The statistical analysis using F test revealed that both zinc and Sulphur significantly affected all the growth parameters studied. Maximum leaf length (66.39 cm) was recorded in (1.5 m2) plots fertilized with 45 kg Sulphur and 30 kg zinc per hectare, whereas maximum plant heights (79.33 cm), bulb weight (297.87 g), yield (70.36 t ha-1) and benefit: cost ratio (2.73).
Keywords: Allium cepa, Onion, Yield, Zinc, Sulphur

INTRODUCTION
Onion (Allium cepa) belongs to the family Amaryllidaceous and is one of the most important monocotyledonous, cross-pollinated and cool season vegetable crops. Onion has its own distinctive flavor and is used in soups, meat dishes, salads, and Sandwiches, and is cooked alone as a vegetable. Its pungency is due to the presence of a volatile oil (allyl propyl disulphide) (Malik 1994). A pound of onion contain Protein 6 g, Fats 0.9g, Carbohydrate 44 g, Calcium 137 mg, Phosphorous 188 mg, Iron 2.1 mg, Thiamine 0.15mg, Riboflavin 0.1 mg, Niacin 0.6mg and Ascorbic acid 38 mg. (Thomson and Kelly 1982). Onion (Allium cepa L) is one of vegetables widely consumed due to its flavouring and health-promoting properties. It hasbeen reported that onion extract can be potent cardiovascular and anticancer agents with hypocholesterolemic,thrombolitic and antioxidant effects (Block, 1985). There is evidence that micronutrients such as Zn increasedthe dry yield of onion plants (Sliman et al., 1999).Also, Bybordi and Malakouti (1998) found that some micronutrients such as Zn and Sulphur gave higher yield of onion. Singh and Tiwari (1995) found that plantheight and bulb fresh weight, bulb diameters were highest with application of Zn and Sulphur. Sindhu and Tiwar (1993)studied the effects of micronutrients such as Zn and Sulphur on the yield and quality of onion plants and foundpositive effects of the micronutrients on the yield. On the other hand, Khalid (1996)reported that trace elements such as Zn and Sulphur increased the vegetative growth characters and yield. However, further investigation isneeded to explore the effects on onion plants grown under new-reclaimed lands. The present study wasdesigned to investigate the impact of micronutrients such as Zn and Sulphur on onion plants grown under sandy loamsoil conditions considering their growth and yield. Therefore, keeping in mind the above mentioned facts, the present experiment was carried out to find out the most suitable dose of zinc and sulphur fertilizers for onion cultivars, in order to obtain better and higher yield and growth under the agro-climatic conditions of the Allahabad.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The field trial was conducted in a RBD with three replications and plot size of 1.5 m2 (spacing 10 cm x 20 cm) on onion cv. Pusa Red at Research Farm Department of Horticulture of Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences,(Formerly Allahabad Agricultural Institute) Allahabad, during rabi season of 2011-12. Zinc and Sulphur was applied as basal dose @ 0, 10, 20 and 30 and 0, 15, 30 and 45 kg ha-1 respectively. The obtain higher plant height, more number of leaves per plant, length of leaves, fresh weight of bulb, neck diameter, polar diameter of bulb, equatorial diameter of bulb, and yield tonne ha-1 with application of T9 (Zn 30 kg S 45 kg ha-1). Ten plants were randomly selected from each treatment. The data recorded on these factors were subjected to statistical analysis as described by Fisher and Yates (1949).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Plant height (cm)
The data pertaining to the plant height of onion under different treatments recorded at 30, 60 and 90 days after transplanting (DAT) is show in Table 1. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum plant height (79.73 cm) followed by 77.73 cm with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (60.67 cm) was recorded with T0 (Control). Similar trend was observed at subsequent growth stages also. On increasing the dose of Zn and S from 10 kg ha-1 15 kg ha-1 to 30 kg ha-1 45 kg ha-1 increase in plant height was recorded. On decreasing the dose of Zn and S from 30 kg ha-1 45 kg ha-1 to 10 kg ha-1 15 kg ha-1 decreasing the plant height slightly was recorded. Hariyappa (2003).
Number of leaves per plant
Number of leaves per plant under different treatments counted and recorded at 30, 60 and 90 days after transplanting (DAT) is shown in Table 1. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum number of leaves per plant (9.00) followed by 8.40 with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (6.13) was recorded with T0 (Control). Similar trend was observed at subsequent growth stages also. On decreasing the dose of Zn and S from 30 kg ha-1 45 kg ha-1 to 10 kg ha-1 15 kg ha-1 decreasing the number of leaves per plant slightly was recorded. Number of leaves per plant increased with the increase in doses of Zinc and Sulphur, at all the stages of growth. Combination of 30 kg ha-1 45 kg ha-1 recorded maximum number of leaves per plant. Better photosynthetic activity might have result higher number of leaves per plant. Alam et al. (1999).
Length of leaves (cm)
Length of leaves under different treatments counted and recorded at 30, 60 and 90 days after transplanting (DAT) is shown in Table 1. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum length of leaves (66.39 cm) followed by 64.6. cm with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (48.45 cm) was recorded with T0 (Control). Similar trend was observed at subsequent growth stages also. Better photosynthetic activity might have result higher length of leaves. Summan et al. (2002).
Size of bulb in polar diameter (cm)
Size of bulb in polar diameterunder different treatments recorded at is presented in Table 2. The table indicates that the effect of size of bulb in polar diameter at different treatments significant effect was observed. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum polar diameter(8.26 cm) followed by 7.57 cm with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (3.76 cm) was recorded with T0 (Control). Abbey et al. (2000).
Size of bulb in equatorial diameter (cm)
Size of bulb in equatorial diameterunder different treatments recorded at is presented in Table 2. The table indicates that the effect of size of bulb in equatorial diameterat different treatments significant effect was observed. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum equatorial diameter (7.77 cm) followed by 7.18 cm with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (3.36 cm) was recorded with T0 (Control). Abbey et al. (2000).
Neck diameter (cm)
Neck diameter under different treatments recorded at is presented in Table 2. is presented in Table 4.6 and Fig. 4.6. The analysis of variance has been given in appendix (6). The table indicates that the effect of neck diameter at different treatments significant effect was observed. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum neck diameter (2.30 cm) followed by 2.21 cm with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (1.53 cm) was recorded with T0 (Control). Similar trend was observed at subsequent growth stages also. Neck diameter increased with the increase in doses of Zinc and Sulphur, at all the stages of growth. Combination of 30 kg ha-1 45 kg ha-1 recorded maximum neck diameter. Better photosynthetic activity might have result higher neck diameter. Ansary et al. (2006).
Fresh weight of bulb (g)
Fresh weight under different treatments recorded at is presented in Table 2. The table indicates that the effect of fresh weight at different treatments significant effect was observed. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum fresh weight of bulb(297.87 g) followed by 242.07 g with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (47.00 g) was recorded with T0 (Control). Similar trend was observed at subsequent growth stages also. Fresh weight of bulb increased with the increase in doses of Zinc and Sulphur, at all the stages of growth. Combination of 30 kg ha-1 45 kg ha-1 recorded maximum fresh weight. Better photosynthetic activity might have result higher fresh weight. Ansary et al. (2006).
Yield per hectare (t ha-1)
Yield per hectareunder different treatments recorded at is presented in Table 2. The table indicates that the effect of yield per hectare at different treatments significant effect was observed. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) recorded maximum yield per hectare (70.36 t) followed by 57.18 tonne with T8 (20 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) and the minimum (11.10 t) was recorded with T0 (Control). Yield per hectare Fresh weight of bulb increased with the increase in doses of Zinc and Sulphur, at all the stages of growth. Combination of 30 kg ha-1 45 kg ha-1 recorded maximum yield per hectare. Treatment T9 (30 kg Zn ha-1 45 kg S ha-1) proved to be the appropriate combination of Zinc and Sulphur, which emerged as superior over all other treatments for yield of onion. Summan et al. (2002).
References
Abbey, L.; Joyce, D.C.; Aked, J.; Smith, B. (2002). Genotype, Sulphur Nutrition and Soil Type Effects on Growth and Dry-Matter Production of Spring Onion. Journal of Horticulture Science and Biotechnology. 77 (3): pp. 340-345.
Alam, M.D., Rahim, M.A. and Sultan, M.S. (1999). Effects of paclobutrazol and sulphur fertilizer on the growth and yield of garlic. Bangladesh J. T raining and Development. 12 (3): 404-407.
Ansary, S.H., Choudhary, J. and Sarkar, S. (2006). Post-harvest studies of onion (Allium cepa L.) grown under different moisture regimes and fertilizer levels. Crop Res., Hissar. 31 (3): 404-407.
Block, E., (1985). The chemistry of garlic and onions. Scientific American, 252: 94-99. Processing and Export of Spices. P 67.
Bybordi, A. and M.J. Malakouti, (1998). A study on the effects of different nitrogen source and its interaction with sulfur on onion yield and nitrate accumulation. Soil and Water Journal, 12(6): 42-48. Clevenger, J.F., 1928. Apparatus for determination of essential Oil. J.Amr. Pharm. Assoc., 17: 346-349.
Fisher, R.A. and Yates, R. (1949). Statistical analysis for Biological and Agricultural Research, Oliver and Boyed Edenberg, 5th Edition. pp 136-141.
Hariyappa, N., (2003). Effect of potassium and sulphur on growth, yield and quality parameters of onion (Allium cepa L.). M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Oliver and Boyed Edenberg, 5th Edition. pp 136-141.
Khalid, Kh. A., (1996). Effect of fertilization on the growth, yield and chemical composition of some medicinal umbelleferous Plant. M. Sc. Thesis, Fac. Agric., Al-Azhar Univ. Cairo. Egypt.
Malik, M.N. (1994). Bulb crops, Onion. In Horticulture. .National Book Foundation Islamabad Pakistan. pp. 500-501.
Sindhu, S.S. and R.S. Tiwari, (1993). Effect of micronutrients on yield and quality of onion (Allium cepa L.) cv. Pusa Red. Progressive Horticulture, 25(3-4): 176-180.
Singh, D.P. and R.S. Tiwari, (1995). Effect of micronutrients on growth and yield of onion (Allium cepa L.) Variety Pusa Red. Recent-Horticulture, 2(2): 70-77.
Sliman, Z.T., M.A. Abdelhakim and A.A. Omran, (1999). Response of onion to foliar application of some micronutrients. Egyptian Journal of Agricultural Research, 77(3): 983-993. Snedecor, G.W. and W.G. Cochran, 1967. Statistical methods (6th Ed.) Iowa State Univ. Press, Ames, Iowa, USA.
Suman Smriti; Rajesh Kumar and Singh, S.K. (2002). Effect of Sulphur and Boron Nutrition on Growth, yield and quality of Onion (Allium cepa L.). Journal of Applied Biology. 12 (1/2): pp. 40-46.
Thomson, H.C. and W.C Kelly, (1982). Bulb crops vegetable crops. Ta Ta McGrew-Hill publishing company Limited, New York. Reprinted at Pakistan printing Works, Lahore. pp.611.

Table 1 Effect of different combinations of zinc and sulphure on plant height (cm), number of leaves per plant and length of leaves (cm) of onion (Allium cepa L.) at different intervals
Treatment
No.
Treatments

Plant height (cm)
Number of leaves per plant
Length of leaves (cm)
30 DAT
60 DAT
90 DAT
30 DAT
60 DAT
90 DAT
30 DAT
60 DAT
90 DAT
T0
Control
24.93
48.25
60.67
3.80
4.87
6.13
20.10
40.99
48.45
T1
Sulphur 15 kg ha-1 Zinc 10 kg ha-1
33.41
62.59
70.75
4.80
5.67
7.20
27.57
54.49
59.55
T2
Sulphur 15 kg ha-1 Zinc 20 kg ha-1
38.60
64.57
73.86
4.80
5.93
7.93
30.77
55.07
60.71
T3
Sulphur 15 kg ha-1 Zinc 30 kg ha-1
39.90
65.07
74.94
5.00
6.00
7.93
31.19
56.81
61.79
T4
Sulphur 30 kg ha-1 Zinc 10 kg ha-1
40.57
65.07
75.30
5.00
6.13
8.20
32.13
57.57
63.51
T5
Sulphur 30 kg ha-1 Zinc 20 kg ha-1
41.90
66.87
75.97
5.00
6.20
8.20
32.43
57.61
63.85
T6
Sulphur 30 kg ha-1 Zinc 30 kg ha-1
42.02
68.88
76.53
5.13
6.27
8.33
32.97
57.66
64.07
T7
Sulphur 45 kg ha-1 Zinc 10 kg ha-1
42.37
69.04
76.73
5.13
6.33
8.33
33.37
59.12
64.49
T8
Sulphur 45 kg ha-1 Zinc 20 kg ha-1
42.37
69.92
77.73
5.27
6.40
8.40
33.77
59.59
64.60
T9
Sulphur 45 kg ha-1 Zinc 30 kg ha-1
42.90
71.29
79.33
5.33
6.40
9.00
36.27
60.02
66.39
C.D. (P = 0.05)

0.47
0.36

0.10
0.13

0.28
0.22

Table 2 Effect of different combinations of zinc and sulphure on polar diameter of bulb (cm), equatorial diameter of bulb (cm), neck diameter of bulb (cm), fresh weight of bulb (g) and bulb yield (t ha-1) of onion (Allium cepa L.) at different intervals
Treatment
No.
Treatments
Polar
diameter of
bulb (cm)
Equatorial diameter of bulb
(cm)
Neck diameter
of bulb (cm)
Bulb fresh
weight (g)
Bulb yield
(t ha-1)
T0
Control
3.76
3.36
1.53
47.00
11.10
T1
Sulphur 15 kg ha-1 Zinc 10 kg ha-1
4.72
4.41
1.65
97.65
23.07
T2
Sulphur 15 kg ha-1 Zinc 20 kg ha-1
4.95
5.23
1.80
99.53
23.51
T3
Sulphur 15 kg ha-1 Zinc 30 kg ha-1
5.35
5.26
1.85
100.87
23.83
T4
Sulphur 30 kg ha-1 Zinc 10 kg ha-1
5.46
5.34
1.86
152.73
36.08
T5
Sulphur 30 kg ha-1 Zinc 20 kg ha-1
6.02
6.00
1.86
155.47
36.72
T6
Sulphur 30 kg ha-1 Zinc 30 kg ha-1
6.14
6.52
1.94
159.07
37.57
T7
Sulphur 45 kg ha-1 Zinc 10 kg ha-1
6.21
6.55
2.07
215.87
50.99
T8
Sulphur 45 kg ha-1 Zinc 20 kg ha-1
7.57
7.18
2.21
242.07
57.18
T9
Sulphur 45 kg ha-1 Zinc 30 kg ha-1
8.26
7.77
2.30
297.87
70.36
C. D. (P = 0.05)
0.29
0.06
0.04
4.12
0.97

[casanovaaggrev]