黄河首曲地区生态旅游开发适宜区识别与分类研究——结合旅游者偏好的分析（英文）

黄河首曲地区具有突出的生态功能和较高的旅游价值。为保障湿地的完整性保护及尊重当地居民的雪山崇拜,研究首先对不可开发区和可开发区进行了识别分析,认为不管是严格的生态旅游还是一般的生态旅游活动都只能在有效生态旅游区进行,生态旅游的适宜性分析与区划也主要围绕可开发区展开。研究选取距水域湿地距离、草地覆盖情况、森林覆盖情况、海拔高度、坡度和原生态性六个表征地区自然性的标准,采用GIS技术与层次分析法相结合的方法对可开发区生态旅游适宜性进行了分析,层次分析法权重源于旅游者偏好调查,并基于适宜度空间分布格局进行了区域分类。可开发区的生态旅游适宜性可划分为五级,I级地区适宜度最低,最不适合发展严格的生态旅游,V级地区适宜度最高,原生态景观价值突出,生态旅游发展潜力最大。出于协调旅游功能与生态功能的统一以实现地区生态旅游资源可持续利用的目的,黄河首曲地区被划分为五类亚区,且均具有各自特殊的主导服务功能。研究最终根据各亚区的特殊服务功能提出了相应的调控措施。研究结论有助于促进生态旅游的合理性规划及未来可持续发展

膜分离蚕豆蛋白酶解产物的理化性质及生物活性Physicochemical properties and biological activity of broad bean protein hydrolysate obtained by membrane separation technology

以新鲜蚕豆为原料，采用碱溶酸沉法提取蚕豆蛋白，采用4种不同蛋白酶对蚕豆蛋白进行单酶或双酶酶解，通过比较蚕豆蛋白水解度和多肽得率筛选出最优的两种酶复合酶解蚕豆蛋白，将复合酶解液通过膜分离技术分离得到BBPHs-Ⅰ(10 kDa)5个不同分子质量的组分，对5个组分的氨基酸组成、紫外光谱、红外光谱进行分析，同时通过测定体外抗氧化活性及α-葡萄糖苷酶抑制率表征其活性。结果表明：选用菠萝蛋白酶和木瓜蛋白酶对蚕豆蛋白进行复合酶解；与膜分离前比较，膜分离后10 kDa以下的蚕豆蛋白酶解产物总氨基酸含量增加，BBPHs-Ⅱ、BBPHs-Ⅲ、BBPHs-Ⅳ的疏水氨基酸含量较高，此外BBPHs-Ⅲ的总氨基酸、必需氨基酸、疏水氨基酸、芳香氨基酸含量均为最高，分别为65.304%、19.222%、20.762%、8.769%。不同分子质量的蚕豆蛋白酶解产物表现出一定体外抗氧化能力，当质量浓度为10 mg/mL时，BBPHs-Ⅳ的ABTS自由基清除率可达（27.89±0.01）%，BBPHs-Ⅱ的DPPH自由基清除率可高达（57.70±0.00）%；当质量浓度在2～32 mg/mL范围内，不同分子质量蚕豆蛋白酶解产物的α-葡萄糖苷酶抑制活性呈剂量依赖关系，BBPHs-Ⅱ、BBPHs-Ⅲ、BBPHs-Ⅳ表现出良好的α-葡萄糖苷酶抑制活性，质量浓度为32 mg/mL时BBPHs-Ⅲ的α-葡萄糖苷酶活性抑制率最佳，达到（86.56±1.23）%。因此，通过膜分离技术得到的小分子质量的蚕豆蛋白酶解产物具有更好的抗氧化活性和α-葡萄糖苷酶抑制活性，具有良好的开发及应用前景。 Fresh broad beans were used as raw materials, broad bean protein was extracted by alkali solution and acid precipitation. Four different proteases were used for single enzyme or double enzyme hydrolysis of broad bean protein, and the best two enzymes were selected for the complex enzymatic hydrolysis of broad bean protein by comparing the hydrolysis degree and polypeptide yield of broad bean protein. Then the broad bean protein hydrolysate (BBPHs) were fractionated by membrane separation into five fractions of BBPHs-Ⅰ(10 kDa).The amino acid composition, UV and IR spectra of the five fractions were analyzed, and their biological activities were characterized by in vitro antioxidant activity and α-glucosidase inhibition rate. The results showed that pineapple protease and papain were selected for the complex enzymatic hydrolysis of broad bean protein.The total amino acid content of broad bean protease hydrolysate below 10 kDa after membrane separation increased compared with that without membrane separation,and the hydrophobic amino acid contents of BBPHs-Ⅱ, BBPHs-Ⅲ and BBPHs-Ⅳ were higher.In addition, BBPHs-Ⅲ had the highest content of total amino acid, essential amino acid, hydrophobic amino acid and aromatic amino acid with 65.304%, 19.222%, 20.762% and 8.769% respectively.Protein hydrolysate components with different molecular weights showed certain in vitro antioxidant capacity.The ABTS free radical scavenging rate of the BBPHs-Ⅳ could reach (27.89±001)%,DPPH free radical scavenging rate of the BBPHs-Ⅱ could reach (57.70±0.00)% at 10 mg/mL mass concentration.When the mass concentration ranged from 2 mg/mL to 32 mg/mL, the α-glucosidase inhibitory activities of different molecular weight broad bean hydrolysates showed a dose-dependent relationship. BBPHs-Ⅱ, BBPHs-Ⅲ and BBPHs-Ⅳ showed good α-glucosidase inhibitory activities,and BBPHs-Ⅲ possessed the best α-glucosidase inhibition rate 〔(86.56±123)%〕 at 32 mg/mL mass concentration. Therefore, the small molecular weight broad bean protein hydrolysate obtained by membrane separation had higher antioxidant activity and α-glucosidase inhibitory activity，and had good development and application prospects

Aripiprazole versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: In most western industrialised countries, second generation (atypical) antipsychotics are recommended as first line drug treatments for people with schizophrenia. In this review we specifically examine how the efficacy and tolerability of one such agent - aripiprazole - differs from that of other comparable second generation antipsychotics. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of aripiprazole compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (November 2011), inspected references of all identified studies for further trials, and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies, drug approval agencies and authors of trials for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing aripiprazole (oral) with oral and parenteral forms of amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. Where possible, we calculated illustrative comparative risks for primary outcomes. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for each included study. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 trials involving 6389 patients. Aripiprazole was compared to olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. All trials were sponsored by an interested drug manufacturer. The overall number of participants leaving studies early was 30% to 40%, limiting validity (no differences between groups).When compared with olanzapine no differences were apparent for global state (no clinically important change: n = 703, 1 RCT, RR short-term 1.00 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22; n = 317, 1 RCT, RR medium-term 1.08 95% CI 0.95 to 1.22) but mental state tended to favour olanzapine (n = 1360, 3 RCTs, MD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) 4.68 95% CI 2.21 to 7.16). There was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 529, 2 RCTs, RR 0.99 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59) but fewer in the aripiprazole group had increased cholesterol levels (n = 223, 1 RCT, RR 0.32 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54) or weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight (n = 1095, 3 RCTs, RR 0.39 95% CI 0.28 to 0.54).When compared with risperidone, aripiprazole showed no advantage in terms of global state (n = 384, 2 RCTs, RR no important improvement 1.14 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60) or mental state (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD total PANSS 1.50 95% CI -2.96 to 5.96).One study compared aripiprazole with ziprasidone (n = 247) and both the groups reported similar change in the global state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD average change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score -0.03 95% CI -0.28 to 0.22) and mental state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD change PANSS -3.00 95% CI -7.29 to 1.29).When compared with any one of several new generation antipsychotic drugs the aripiprazole group showed improvement in global state in energy (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), mood (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.77 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92), negative symptoms (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.82 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99), somnolence (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) and weight gain (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Significantly more people given aripiprazole reported symptoms of nausea (n = 2881, 3 RCTs, RR 3.13 95% CI 2.12 to 4.61) but weight gain (7% or more of total body weight) was less common in people allocated aripiprazole (n = 330, 1 RCT, RR 0.35 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64). Aripiprazole may have value in aggression but data are limited. This will be the focus of another review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Information on all comparisons are of limited quality, are incomplete and problematic to apply clinically. Aripiprazole is an antipsychotic drug with a variant but not absent adverse effect profile. Long-term data are sparse and there is considerable scope for another update of this review as new data emerges from the many Chinese studies as well as from ongoing larger, independent pragmatic trials