Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Years
2019 2020 2021 2024
Previous Archive
31 March 2020 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
UFS Covid-19 vaccine research team
Prof Robert Bragg and members of the Veterinary Biotechnology research group believe that finding a vaccine for COVID-19 will not be a ‘quick fix’. From the left are: Prof Bragg, Samantha McCarlie, Liese Kilian, and Dr Charlotte Boucher-van Jaarsveld. The photo was taken during the World Veterinary Poultry Association congress in Thailand in 2019.

On 31 March 2020, there were 804 061 coronavirus cases and 39 064 deaths globally due to the outbreak. According to media reports, there is still no licensed vaccine for COVID-2019 – the cause of our current global health emergency.  

Prof Robert Bragg, researcher at the University of the Free State (UFS), says this is without a doubt the most pressing research need in the world today. 

The Veterinary Biotechnology research group in the Department of Microbial, Biochemical, and Food Biotechnology at the UFS recently submitted an article for publication on the design of a possible COVID-19 vaccine, based on work they have done on infectious bronchitis virus (also a coronavirus). The article, authored by the group of which Prof Bragg is a member, is titled: A sub-unit vaccine produced in 'Yarrowia lipolytica' against COVID-19: Lessons learnt from infectious bronchitis virus. 

The research group, consisting of researchers and postgraduate students, is mostly looking at strategies for improved disease control, mainly in avian species, through vaccine development, treatment, and biosecurity.

Prof Bragg says their main aim with this study was to get the research out there so that the bigger pharmaceutical companies could take up the design of a possible COVID-19 vaccine and assist with the development of a vaccine. 

He says the research group’s role in this lengthy process would be to express the protein, which could be used in the development of a possible vaccine. “Thereafter, it will have to be taken up by a vaccine manufacturer to get the vaccine made and to the market.”

Developing a vaccine
Liese Kilian, a member of the research group, finished writing up her MSc thesis in Microbiology in the UFS Department of Microbial, Biochemical, and Food Biotechnology in December 2019 – the same time that COVID-19 originated in China. She has been working on the development of an edible sub-unit vaccine against the infectious bronchitis virus (IBV), which is a widespread avian coronavirus. This virus is specific to poultry and is different from COVID-19. 

Kilian’s project was conducted under the supervision of Prof Bragg and Dr Charlotte Boucher-van Jaarsveld. Dr Boucher-van Jaarsveld is a research fellow in the university’s Department of Microbial, Biochemical and Food Biotechnology.

Kilian, with the assistance of Samantha Mc Carlie, currently a master’s student in the research group, substituted the genetic code of the IBV with the genetic code of the COVID-19 virus, which were already published at that stage. Thus, a gene for the development of a possible sub-unit vaccine against the S1 spike protein of COVID-19 was developed for expression in the same yeast strain used to express the spike protein of IBV. A sub-unit vaccine can be described as part of a pathogen, triggering an immune response against the pathogen from which it is derived.

After Killian successfully developed the gene for this study, she expressed the S1 spike protein of the IBV in a yeast-based expression system developed by the research group. Dr Boucher-van Jaarsveld says this simply means that the yeast takes up the foreign genetic material (viral gene) into its own genetic make-up and makes more of this protein as if it is part of the yeast’s normal material. 

“The images of COVID-19 are being shown constantly in the media and the ‘spikes’ can be seen on all of these images. These spikes are very typical for all coronaviruses and there is some level of similarity between the structure of these spikes in many of the coronaviruses,” Prof Bragg adds.

According to the World Health Organisation, the spike protein is a promising candidate for a sub-unit vaccine due to its immunogenicity and safety, as well as manufacturing and stability considerations during large-scale development.

Prof Bragg says there are many different expression systems that are widely used. Producing the sub-unit vaccine in a yeast species is beneficial for the work they are doing. A yeast expression system is favourable as large-scale production, is less expensive compared to mammalian cell lines, and can be applied as an edible vaccine.

“The technology to grow massive volumes of yeast are also very well established. This, after all, is how beer is made!” Prof Bragg says. Dr Boucher-van Jaarsveld adds: “The expression of an antigen is not necessarily just geared towards vaccines but can also be used in the development of diagnostic tests to screen populations for infections.”

Working with other researchers
“Now that the situation is all but out of control, we maybe need to investigate the possibilities of working with other key researchers at the UFS as well as other universities in South Africa to develop the vaccine or diagnostic reagents locally. Discussions on this aspect are already underway.”

Several other universities in South Africa are also working to find a cure for the virus. Government availed funding for more research on the matter. According to Higher Education, Science and Technology Minister, Blade Nzimande, the University of Cape Town, the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, as well as the Vaccines Institute of Southern Africa are working on the development of a vaccine.

Prof Bragg expressed the hope of obtaining funding for this work. “Because without funding, we will not be able to do anything with this data,” he says. They are currently investigating different funding options. 

“The sooner we start on the development of a vaccine, the sooner there will be one, but it will not be a ‘quick fix’. It must be stressed that, even if vaccine development is fast-tracked through the regulatory bodies, it will take many months (if not years) to move from the laboratory to the first human experimentation. It will take even longer before any human vaccine can be rolled out,” says Prof Bragg.



News Archive

Media: Sunday Times
2006-05-20

Sunday Times, 4 June 2006

True leadership may mean admitting disunity
 

In this edited extract from the inaugural King Moshoeshoe Memorial Lecture at the University of the Free State, Professor Njabulo S Ndebele explores the leadership challenges facing South Africa

RECENT events have created a sense that we are undergoing a serious crisis of leadership in our new democracy. An increasing number of highly intelligent, sensitive and committed South Africans, across class, racial and cultural spectrums, confess to feeling uncertain and vulnerable as never before since 1994.

When indomitable optimists confess to having a sense of things unhinging, the misery of anxiety spreads. We have the sense that events are spiralling out of control and that no one among the leadership of the country seems to have a definitive handle on things.

There can be nothing more debilitating than a generalised and undefined sense of anxiety in the body politic. It breeds conspiracies and fear.

There is an impression that a very complex society has developed, in the last few years, a rather simple, centralised governance mechanism in the hope that delivery can be better and more quickly driven. The complexity of governance then gets located within a single structure of authority rather than in the devolved structures envisaged in the Constitution, which should interact with one another continuously, and in response to their specific settings, to achieve defined goals. Collapse in a single structure of authority, because there is no robust backup, can be catastrophic.

The autonomy of devolved structures presents itself as an impediment only when visionary cohesion collapses. Where such cohesion is strong, the impediment is only illusory, particularly when it encourages healthy competition, for example, among the provinces, or where a province develops a character that is not necessarily autonomous politically but rather distinctive and a special source of regional pride. Such competition brings vibrancy to the country. It does not necessarily challenge the centre.

Devolved autonomy is vital in the interests of sustainable governance. The failure of various structures to actualise their constitutionally defined roles should not be attributed to the failure of the prescribed governance mechanism. It is too early to say that what we have has not worked. The only viable corrective will be in our ability to be robust in identifying the problems and dealing with them concertedly.

We have never had social cohesion in South Africa — certainly not since the Natives’ Land Act of 1913. What we definitely have had over the decades is a mobilising vision. Could it be that the mobilising vision, mistaken for social cohesion, is cracking under the weight of the reality and extent of social reconstruction, and that the legitimate framework for debating these problems is collapsing? If that is so, are we witnessing a cumulative failure of leadership?

I am making a descriptive rather than an evaluative inquiry. I do not believe that there is any single entity to be blamed. It is simply that we may be a country in search of another line of approach. What will it be?

I would like to suggest two avenues of approach — an inclusive model and a counter-intuitive model of leadership.

In an inclusive approach, leadership is exercised not only by those who have been put in some position of power to steer an organisation or institution. Leadership is what all of us do when we express, sincerely, our deepest feelings and thoughts; when we do our work, whatever it is, with passion and integrity.

Counter-intuitive leadership lies in the ability of leaders to read a problematic situation, assess probable outcomes and then recognise that those outcomes will only compound the problem. Genuine leadership, in this sense, requires going against probability in seeking unexpected outcomes. That’s what happened when we avoided a civil war and ended up with an “unexpected” democracy.

Right now, we may very well hear desperate calls for unity, when the counter-intuitive imperative would be to acknowledge disunity. A declaration of unity where it manifestly does not appear to exist will fail to reassure.

Many within the “broad alliance” might have the view that the mobilising vision of old may have transformed into a strategy of executive steering with a disposition towards an expectation of compliance. No matter how compelling the reasons for that tendency, it may be seen as part of a cumulative process in which popular notions of democratic governance are apparently undermined and devalued; and where public uncertainty in the midst of seeming crisis induces fear which could freeze public thinking at a time when more voices ought to be heard.

Could it be that part of the problem is that we are unable to deal with the notion of opposition? We are horrified that any of us could be seen to have become “the opposition”. The word has been demonised. In reality, it is time we began to anticipate the arrival of a moment when there is no longer a single, overwhelmingly dominant political force as is currently the case. Such is the course of history. The measure of the maturity of the current political environment will be in how it can create conditions that anticipate that moment rather than seek to prevent it. We see here once more the essential creativity of the counter-intuitive imperative.

This is the formidable challenge of a popular post-apartheid political movement. Can it conceptually anticipate a future when it is no longer overwhelmingly in control, in the form in which it is currently, and resist, counter-intuitively, the temptation to prevent such an eventuality? Successfully resisting such an option would enable its current vision and its ultimate legacy to our country to manifest in different articulations, which then contend for social influence. In this way, the vision never really dies; it simply evolves into higher, more complex forms of itself. Consider the metaphor of flying ants replicating the ant community by establishing new ones.

We may certainly experience the meaning of comradeship differently, where we will now have “comrades on the other side”.

Any political movement that imagines itself as a perpetual entity should look at the compelling evidence of history. Few movements have survived those defining moments when they should have been more elastic, and that because they were not, did not live to see the next day.

I believe we may have reached a moment not fundamentally different from the sobering, yet uplifting and vision-making, nation-building realities that led to Kempton Park in the early ’90s. The difference between then and now is that the black majority is not facing white compatriots across the negotiating table. Rather, it is facing itself: perhaps really for the first time since 1994. Could we apply to ourselves the same degree of inventiveness and rigorous negotiation we displayed leading up to the adoption or our Constitution?

This is not a time for repeating old platitudes. It is the time, once more, for vision.

In the total scheme of things, the outcome could be as disastrous as it could be formative and uplifting, setting in place the conditions for a true renaissance that could be sustained for generations to come.

Ndebele is Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cape Town and author of the novel The Cry of Winnie Mandela

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept