不同牧鸡密度对沙草地土壤养分状况的影响

为研究草原牧鸡在不同密度和距鸡舍不同距离对沙草地养分的影响,以中国科学院植物研究所浑善达克沙地生态研究站草原牧鸡试验平台为依托,测试样地的土壤容重、pH值、铵态氮、硝态氮、全氮、有机质及速效磷等7项理化指标。测定的数据经过Excel处理后,采用SPSS 18.0软件中的单因素方差分析(One-Way ANOVA)方法对土壤7项理化指标的显著性进行分析。结果表明:放牧密度和距鸡舍不同距离土壤容重低于对照,放牧密度的处理间土壤容重差异不显著,但距离对土壤容重有显著影响;pH值始终在9.0~9.5之间,放牧密度和距离对pH值没有显著影响;草原牧鸡显著增加了土壤铵态氮、硝态氮、全氮、有机质及速效磷的含量,且距鸡舍2m处的含量高于其他距离,但综合分析放牧密度和距离各指标间差异不显著。草原牧鸡改善了沙草地土壤的理化性质,增加了土壤的养分含量

非晶/微晶过渡区域硅薄膜的微区喇曼散射研究

通过改变氢气对硅烷气体的稀释程度，并保持其他的沉积参量不变，用等离子体增强化学气相沉积（PECVD）方法成功地制备出非晶/微晶相变过渡区域的硅薄膜样品。测量了样品的室温光电导和暗电导，样品的光电性能优越，在50 mW·cm~（-2）的白光照射下，光电导和暗电导的比值达到10~6。在室温下用微区喇曼谱研究了薄膜的微结构特性，用高斯函数对喇曼谱进行了拟合分析。结果表明，在我们的样品制备条件下，当H_2和SiH_4的流量比R较小时，样品表现出典型的非晶硅薄膜 的结构特性；随流量比R的增大，薄膜表现出两相结构，其中的微晶成分随氢稀释比的增大逐渐增多；用量子尺寸效应估算了两个高氢稀释样品（R > 50）中微晶粒子的平均尺寸大小为2.4 nm左右；样品的中程有序度随氢稀释程度的增加而增大

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