Introduction White spot lesions are a common sequela of orthodontic therapy. In this parallel-group randomized trial, we assessed the effectiveness of 2 agents commonly used to ameliorate white spot lesions compared with a normal home-care regimen. Methods Patients aged 12 to 20 years were recruited from the offices of orthodontists and dentists who belonged to the Practice-based Research Collaborative in Evidence-based Dentistry network. The patients had their orthodontic appliances removed within the past 2 months and had at least 1 white spot lesion affecting their maxillary incisors. The subjects were randomized to 1 of 3 arms: (1) an 8-week regimen of MI Paste Plus (GC America, Alsip, Ill), (2) a single application of PreviDent fluoride varnish (Colgate Oral Pharmaceuticals, New York, NY), and (3) usual home care (control). Photographs were taken at enrollment and 8 weeks later. Two panels consisting of 5 dental professionals and 5 laypersons assessed the before-and-after pairs of photographs in a blinded fashion. Objective assessments and self-assessments were also performed. Results One hundred fifteen subjects completed the study; 34 were assigned to the MI Paste Plus group, 40 to the fluoride varnish group, and 41 to the control group. The mean improvements assessed by the professional panel were 21%, 29%, and 27% in the MI Paste Plus, fluoride varnish, and control groups, respectively. The results from the lay panel were 29%, 31%, and 25%, respectively. Objective improvements in the surface affected were 16%, 25%, and 17%, respectively; self-assessments of improvement were 37% in all 3 groups. No assessments indicated significant differences between subjects in the active arms compared with the control arm. Conclusions MI Paste Plus and PreviDent fluoride varnish do not appear to be more effective than normal home care for improving the appearance of white spot lesions over an 8-week period.

The adoption of production systems that leave greater than 30% residue coverage on the soil surface, that is, conservation tillage, is limited in the mid‐southern United States due to the development of a hardpan and subsequent yield reductions. This research was conducted to determine if the inclusion of subsoiling in conservation tillage systems can maintain yield and profitability relative to that of conventional tillage. The effects of surface and subsurface tillage on soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] grain yield, net returns above specified costs, and water use efficiency (WUE) were investigated near Stoneville, MS on a Dubbs silt loam (Fine‐silty, mixed, active, thermic Typic Hapludalfs). Conservation tillage with subsoiling maintained or improved soybean grain yield, net returns above specified costs, and WUE up to 68% in three of four years. Conversely, conservation tillage alone either had no effect or decreased soybean grain yield up to 14%, decreased net returns above specified costs up to 20%, and decreased WUE up to 14%. Our data indicate that inclusion of subsoiling minimizes yield and net return declines commonly associated with conservation tillage systems and should be a component of the early soybean production system on medium‐ to coarse‐textured soils.

 Flood management in rice affects water use and profitability.  Alternate wetting and drying can decrease total water applied in rice production.  Alternate wetting and drying maintained or improved rice grain yield and net returns.  Benefits of alternate wetting and drying increase with well depth and diesel price.  Water level declines in the Mississippi River Valley Alluvial Aquifer (MRVAA) are attributed largely to withdrawals for rice (Oryza sativa L.) irrigation. This study was performed to determine if alternative irrigation strategies for rice could reduce withdrawal from the MRVAA without having an adverse effect on yield and profitability. Research was conducted at 19 on-farm locations across the Delta region of Mississippi from 2014 through 2016 to determine the effects of irrigation water management practice, i.e., conventional flood via cascade (CONV), multiple side inlet (MSI), and MSI coupled with alternate wetting and drying (AWD), on aquifer withdrawal, rough rice grain yield, irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE), and net returns above irrigation costs. Compared to CONV and MSI, up to 39% less water was applied to AWD (P ˂ 0.