中国物理海洋学研究70年：发展历程、学术成就概览

本文概略评述新中国成立70年来物理海洋学各分支研究领域的发展历程和若干学术成就。中国物理海洋学研究起步于海浪、潮汐、近海环流与水团,以及以风暴潮为主的海洋气象灾害的研究。随着国力的增强,研究领域不断拓展,涌现了大量具有广泛影响力的研究成果,其中包括:提出了被国际广泛采用的"普遍风浪谱"和"涌浪谱",发展了第三代海浪数值模式;提出了"准调和分析方法"和"潮汐潮流永久预报"等潮汐潮流的分析和预报方法;发现并命名了"棉兰老潜流",揭示了东海黑潮的多核结构及其多尺度变异机理等,系统描述了太平洋西边界流系;提出了印度尼西亚贯穿流的南海分支(或称南海贯穿流);不断完善了中国近海陆架环流系统,在南海环流、黑潮及其分支、台湾暖流、闽浙沿岸流、黄海冷水团环流、黄海暖流、渤海环流,以及陆架波方面均取得了深刻的认识;从大气桥和海洋桥两个方面对太平洋–印度洋–大西洋洋际相互作用进行了系统的总结;发展了浅海水团的研究方法,基本摸清了中国近海水团的分布和消长特征与机制,在大洋和极地水团分布及运动研究方面也做出了重要贡献;阐明了南海中尺度涡的宏观特征和生成机制,揭示了中尺度涡的三维结构,定量评估了其全球物质与能量输运能力;基本摸清了中国近海海洋锋的空间分布和季节变化特征,提出了地形、正压不稳定和斜压不稳定等锋面动力学机制;构建了"南海内波潜标观测网",实现了对内波生成–演变–消亡全过程机理的系统认识;发展了湍流的剪切不稳定理论,提出了海流"边缘不稳定"的概念,开发了海洋湍流模式,提出了湍流混合参数化的新方法等;在海洋内部混合机制和能量来源方面取得了新的认识,并阐述了混合对海洋深层环流、营养物质输运等过程的影响;研发了全球浪–潮–流耦合模式,推出一系列海洋与气候模式;发展了可同化主要海洋观测数据的海洋数据同化系统和用于ENSO预报的耦合同化系统;建立了达到国际水准的非地转(水槽/水池)和地转(旋转平台)物理模型实验平台;发展了ENSO预报的误差分析方法,建立了海洋和气候系统年代际变化的理论体系,揭示了中深层海洋对全球气候变化的响应;初步建成了中国近海海洋观测网;持续开展南北极调查研究;建立了台风、风暴潮、巨浪和海啸的业务化预报系统,为中国气象减灾提供保障;突破了国外的海洋技术封锁,研发了万米水深的深水水听器和海洋光学特性系列测量仪器;建立了溢油、危险化学品漂移扩散等预测模型,为伴随海洋资源开发所带来的风险事故的应急处理和预警预报提供科学支撑。文中引用的大量学术成果文献(每位第一作者优选不超过3篇)显示,经过70年的发展,中国物理海洋学研究培养了一支实力雄厚的科研队伍,这是最宝贵的成果。这支队伍必将成为中国物理海洋学研究攀登新高峰的主力军

麋鹿被毛微量元素、重金属含量及对环境污染的监测作用

哺乳动物被毛微量元素和重金属元素含量能够反映其生活状态和栖息地状况，是环境监测中重要的生物化学指示物。对北京南海子和浙江临安两地麋鹿（Elaphurus davidianus）种群被毛中的10种重金属和34种微量元素进行测定，以期探讨麋鹿被毛微量元素和重金属含量在栖息环境监测中的可行性。结果表明：除Re元素外，其余43种元素在麋鹿被毛中均被检出，统计分析表明Li、Be、Sc、V、Co、Ga、Rb、Ir、Mo、Cd、Cs、Ba、La、Ce、Pr、Nd、Sm、Eu、Gd、Tb、Dy、Ho、Er、Tm、Yb、Lu、Tl、Bi、Th、U、Nb、Ta、Zr和Hf 34种元素为麋鹿被毛的特征元素；与北京南海子麋鹿种群相比，浙江临安麋鹿种群被毛中的微量元素Sr、In、Sb、W、Bi、U和重金属元素Zn、Cu、Cr、Pb、Cd含量更少，其余32种元素含量均高于北京南海子麋鹿种群；独立样本t检验分析表明，麋鹿被毛微量元素和重金属元素含量存在地域差异性，仅Cr（p=0.064）、Ni（p=0.769）、Mo（p=0.129）、Tl（p=0.065）、Zr（p=0.138）和Hf（p=0.057）6种元素差异不显著，其余37种元素差异均显著；北京南海子和浙江临安麋鹿种群的栖息环境和食物均未受到Zn、Cu、Cr、Pb、Cd、V、Co、Ni、Sb和Tl 10种重金属元素污染的威胁。研究表明，麋鹿被毛可作为栖息环境重金属污染的非损伤监测指示材料

麋鹿角柄发育规律与相关内分泌及信号通路检测

鹿类角柄终生有2次发育，第1次在胚胎期，第2次在青春期，出生后角柄的激活和首次发育对于鹿角再生极为重要，角柄的青春期发育对于鹿类个性及等级序位形成、鹿角大小、争夺配偶、种间竞争和应对天敌等有重要意义。利用红外测距仪，开展麋鹿（Elaphurus davidianus）角柄生长发育的宏观测量，结合青春期骨膜组织取样、血液激素水平和信号通路表达情况检测，对麋鹿角柄发育情况进行研究。结果表明：与成年不同，幼龄雄性麋鹿在第1年秋季开始出生后的首次角柄发育，由毛旋处长出骨质突起，翌年2—3月角柄长至2.5~3.0 cm，逐渐形成初角基，5—6月首次生茸，冬至脱落，此时形成完整的角柄；随青春期发育和年龄增长，角柄逐渐变粗变短；角柄围长由2岁时的（17.17±1.00）cm增加到3岁时的（35.43±0.83）cm，差异极显著（F1，9=4.128 1，n=9，p=0.005 3）；角柄直径由2岁时的（3.66±0.59）cm增加到3岁时的（5.91±0.72）cm，差异极显著（F1，9=3.174 0，n=9，p=0.024 6）。血液激素检测表明睾酮分泌水平与角柄发育密切相关，睾酮分泌水平由1岁时的（564.27±41.16） pg/mL增加到3岁时的（737.96±66.57） pg/mL，差异极显著（F1，9=4.303 0，n=9，p=0.002 2）；分子检测结果也显示TGF-β/Smads信号通路参与了角柄发育过程。研究揭示了麋鹿角柄发育规律，探讨与之相关的内分泌因素及分子表达情况，为今后持续开展麋鹿角柄发育及茸再生机制多样化奠定了基础

地方认同视角下居民对农业文化遗产认知及保护态度——以福州茉莉花与茶文化系统为例

居民对农业文化遗产的认知态度影响其行为选择,并对农业文化遗产的保护及可持续发展具有重要意义。基于人文地理学及环境心理学领域的地方认同理论,选择历史认同、现实认同、情感认同及行为认同4个维度变量,通过问卷调查,以福州居民对全球重要农业文化遗产"福州茉莉花与茶文化系统"的认知及保护态度作为研究对象,并通过构建福州居民农业文化遗产认知及保护规律定量分析居民认知态度、保护行为与人口特征之间的关系。结果表明:(1)福州居民对茉莉花与茶文化系统的行为认同维度得分高于其他维度,且福州市民各维度得分均高于外来居民;(2)受访居民对农业文化遗产的地方认同与其年龄、受教育水平、收入水平及在福州居住时间长短的关系较为密切;(3)通过构建福州居民农业文化遗产认知及保护规律发现,福州居民对农业文化遗产的保护行为主要受其对该遗产项目认知态度的影响,与居民人口特征相关性较弱。拓展农业文化遗产领域的研究视角及方法,促进农业文化遗产地动态保护与可持续发展具有参考价值

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