Diapause termination rate and average pre-hatching period for diapausing eggs of <i>A</i>. <i>lucorum</i> exposed to different water treatments under warm long day conditions.

<p>Diapause termination rate and average pre-hatching period for diapausing eggs of <i>A</i>. <i>lucorum</i> exposed to different water treatments under warm long day conditions.</p

Flow chart showing water treatments during the diapause/post-diapause stage under warm long-day conditions, during the diapause termination (chilling) stage, and during the post-diapause stage (from transfer to WLD conditions after chilling until the hatching of nymphs).

<p>Watering once on day XX denotes watering on day 24, 35, 53, 63, 76, 84, 95, or 109 of incubation, respectively. Watering 2 or 3 ml every YY days means watering with either 2 or 3 ml water every 3 (watering with only 2 ml), 5, 10, 15, 20 and 30 days, respectively. Soaking for 1 or 3 h every ZZ days means soaking eggs for either 1 or 3 h every 5, 10 and 15 days, respectively. Watering once on day MM denotes watering once on day 0, 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 of chilling, respectively. Watering once on day NN denotes watering once on day 0, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20 or 22 after transfer to WLD conditions, respectively.</p

Effect of Water on Survival and Development of Diapausing Eggs of <i>Apolygus lucorum</i> (Hemiptera: Miridae) - Fig 5

<p><b>The relationship between post-diapause development duration (A) and watering-to-hatching period of resumed development (B) and the time to watering (<i>T</i></b>_{<b><i>2</i></b>}<b>) in post-diapause stage for <i>A</i>. <i>lucorum</i>.</b> The triangle (Δ), inverted triangle, the cross (×) and bar (┬) indicate the minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation of development duration in each treatment, respectively. NDE represents the developmental duration of non-diapause eggs. The thick solid curve indicates the relationship between post-diapause development duration (<i>Dp</i>) and time to watering (<i>T</i>_<i>2</i>) (dry days experienced) described by <i>Dp</i> = 19.12 + (31.08–19.12) / (1 + exp ((8.90—<i>T</i>_<i>2</i>) / 0.56)). The thin dashed curve indicates the relationship between development duration of the post-diapause stage for the first hatchlings (<i>D</i>_<i>p1</i>) and time to watering (<i>T</i>_<i>2</i>) described by <i>D</i>_<i>p1</i> = 8.32 + (26.91–8.32) / (1 + exp ((10.07—<i>T</i>_<i>2</i>) / 3.13)). The lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the probability level of 0.05.</p

The post-diapause development duration of <i>A</i>. <i>lucorum</i> eggs with different water treatments during chilling at 4°C.

<p>NDE represents the developmental duration of non-diapause eggs. The different lowercase letters above each box indicated significant differences at the probability level of 0.05.</p

Diapause termination rate of <i>A</i>. <i>lucorum</i> eggs being watered at different times during the post-diapause stage.

<p>The lowercase letters indicate significant differences at the probability level of 0.05.</p

Diapause termination rate of diapausing <i>A</i>. <i>lucorum</i> eggs exposed to different water treatments during chilling at 4°C.

<p>The different lowercase letters indicated significant differences at the probability level of 0.05.</p

Relationship between pre-hatching period (<i>P</i>) of diapausing eggs and time to watering (<i>T</i>_<i>1</i>) under warm long day conditions.

<p>The triangle (Δ), inverted triangle, the cross (×) and bar (┬) indicate the minimum, maximum, mean and standard deviation of the pre-hatching period in each treatment, respectively. The time to watering (<i>T</i>_<i>1</i>) was 24, 35, 53, 63, 76, 84, 95 and 109 days, respectively. The exponential curve indicates the relationship (<i>P</i> = 72.53 exp (0.0037 <i>T</i>_<i>1</i>)) between the pre-hatching period and time to watering.</p

L'Auto-vélo : automobilisme, cyclisme, athlétisme, yachting, aérostation, escrime, hippisme / dir. Henri Desgranges

09 octobre 19241924/10/09 (A25,N8699)

Diagnostic Accuracy of 2D-Shear Wave Elastography for Liver Fibrosis Severity: A Meta-Analysis

<div><p>Purpose</p><p>To evaluate the accuracy of shear wave elastography (SWE) in the quantitative diagnosis of liver fibrosis severity.</p><p>Methods</p><p>The published literatures were systematically retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of science and Scopus up to May 13^th, 2016. Included studies reported the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, as well as the diagnostic odds ratio of SWE in populations with liver fibrosis. A bivariate mixed-effects regression model was used, which was estimated by the <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> statistics. The quality of articles was evaluated by quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS).</p><p>Results</p><p>Thirteen articles including 2303 patients were qualified for the study. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of SWE for the diagnosis of liver fibrosis are as follows: <b>≥</b>F1 0.76 (<i>p</i><0.001, 95% CI, 0.71–0.81, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 75.33%), 0.92 (<i>p</i><0.001, 95% CI, 0.80–0.97, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 79.36%); <b>≥</b>F2 0.84 (<i>p</i> = 0.35, 95% CI, 0.81–0.86, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 9.55%), 0.83 (<i>p</i><0.001, 95% CI, 0.77–0.88, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 86.56%); <b>≥</b>F3 0.89 (<i>p</i> = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.86–0.92, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 0%), 0.86 (<i>p</i><0.001, 95% CI, 0.82–0.90, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 75.73%); F4 0.89 (<i>p</i> = 0.24, 95% CI, 0.84–0.92, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 20.56%), 0.88 (<i>p</i><0.001, 95% CI, 0.84–0.92, <i>I</i>^<i>2</i> = 82.75%), respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed no significant changes if any one of the studies was excluded. Publication bias was not detected in this meta-analysis.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>Our study suggests that SWE is a helpful method to appraise liver fibrosis severity. Future studies that validate these findings would be appropriate.</p></div

Additional file 3: of Sexual dysfunction and mode of delivery in Chinese primiparous women: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The results of the included studies through sensitivity analysis. Figure S1. Sensitivity analysis of 5 studies with the random effects model for sexual satisfaction within 3 months after delivery. Figure S2. Sensitivity analysis of 6 studies with the fixed effects model for sexual satisfaction within 6 months after delivery. Figure S3. Sensitivity analysis of 9 studies with the random effects model for resumed intercourse within 3 months after delivery. Figure S4. Sensitivity analysis of 8 studies with the fixed effects model for resumed intercourse within 6 months after delivery. Figure S5. Sensitivity analysis of 7 studies with the fixed effects model for sexual pain within 3 months after delivery. Figure S6. Sensitivity analysis of 7 studies with the fixed effects model for sexual pain within 6 months after delivery. (DOCX 957 kb