Study on quality standard of Minghuanggao gel

目的:研究明黄膏质量标准。方法:采用薄层色谱(TLC)法对明黄膏中的主要成分大黄、黄连、苦参进行定性鉴别;高效液相色谱(HPLC)法测定明黄膏中大黄酚的含量。结果:TLC色谱中均能明显地检出大黄、黄连、苦参;HPLC法测得本品中大黄酚的含量为0.267~0.308 mg·g-1;在10.02~100.16 mg·L-1的范围内,溶液的浓度与峰面积呈良好线性关系,r=0.999 9;加样平均回收率为98.48% (n=6),RSD为1.20%。结论:本品定性、定量方法简便、准确,专属性强,质量标准能够控制该制剂的内在质量。OBJECTIVE To study the quality standard of Minghuanggao gel. METHODS Radix et Rhizoma Rhei, Rhizoma Coptidis and Radix Sophorae Flavescentis in Minghuanggao gel were identified by TLC. The content of chrysophanol in this preparation was determined by HPLC. RESULTS Radix and Rhizoma Rhei, Rhizoma Coptidis and Radix Sophorae Flavescentis in Minghuang-gao gel could be detected obviously by TLC. The content of chrysophanol in this gel was 0.267 - 0.308 mg·g -1 . The linear ranges were 10.02 - 100.16 mg·L -1 with good positive correlation. The average recovery of chrysophanol was 98.48% ( n =6),RSD= 1.20% . CONCLUSION TLC is a simple, method HPLC is accurate and reliable method. The quality standard can be used for quality control of this product.甘肃省科技厅中青年科技基金资助项目(编号:YS 011 A23 015

Analysis and Prediction on Human-Environment Correlation in Wangdong Gully Watershed

通过对王东沟流域近１５年人口与耕地数量的预测，得出结论：（１）人口增加与耕地减少的矛盾将随着社会与经济发展有所缓和；（２）人地矛盾缓和的进程取决于采取措施的力度；（３）目前农村经济发展的关键在于科学指导与必要的扶持

Distribution changes and refugia of three spruce taxa since the last interglacial

基于物种现代分布信息和19个环境变量数据,利用最大熵模型(MaxEnt)模拟丽江云杉、紫果云杉和青杄在末次间冰期、末次盛冰期、全新世中期和现代的适生分布区,用云杉孢粉数据进行结果验证,探讨物种分布动态与气候变化的关系,推测其生物避难所.受试者工作特征曲线下方面积(AUC)以及孢粉数据验证结果显示,模拟结果较准确.结果表明:等温性、最暖季均温和最暖季均温分别是影响丽江云杉、紫果云杉和青杄分布的首要环境因子,相对于降水,温度对其分布的影响更重要; 3种云杉的喜寒习性和分布地的深切峡谷地貌特征导致其在末次盛冰期扩张;青杄和紫果云杉在末次间冰期可能存在生物避难所,分别位于湖北神农架地区和四川二郎山及其邻近区.本研究较为准确地模拟了3种云杉属植物末次间冰期以来几个重要地质历史时期的适生分布,推测了青杄和紫果云杉的生物避难所,为深入分析云杉属植物现代分布格局的形成、预测其在气候变化背景下的变化趋势以及3种云杉林的可持续管理和保护提供了科学依据

The suitable distribution area of Tsuga longibracteata revealed by a climate and spatial constraint model under future climate change scenarios

长苞铁杉(Tsuga longibracteata)是中国特有的珍贵树种,不仅对研究裸子植物的系统发育、古生态和古气候具有重要作用,而且该树种具有造林、用材和药用等方面的较高价值。研究长苞铁杉在气候变化下的分布格局变化是制定其保护和可持续利用的重要基础。采用最大熵模型(MaxEnt),结合不同时期(当前、2050年和2070年)和不同二氧化碳排放情境下(RCP2.6和RCP8.5)的气候因子变量,探讨气候变化与物种地理分布格局的关系,预测长苞铁杉的潜在分布区变迁。本研究考虑了空间约束对物种分布的限制作用,构建了气候因子预测模型(C)和气候+空间约束因子预测模型(C+S)分别进行潜在分布区预测,比较其结果差异。结果显示,最干月降水量和温度年较差是影响长苞铁杉地理分布的主导气候因子,空间约束因子对长苞铁杉未来的地理分布有重要影响。随时间年限增加,长苞铁杉总潜在适生区面积降低,特别是中高等级的适生区面积有不同程度地减少,分布范围总体向北移动,这些变化趋势在RCP8.5情境下更加突出。这一结果表明未来气候变化会导致长苞铁杉种群分布范围收缩和生境适宜度下降,加剧其受胁程度。加入空间约束因子后,C+S模型的预测精度更高,结果更符合长苞铁杉的迁移、扩散特性。长苞铁杉未来的核心分布区仍位于现存的湘、桂、黔结合部,表明其具有原地避难的特性,应进一步加强对现有野生资源的保护。渝、川、鄂结合部的大巴山等地区是未来气候变化下长苞铁杉的理论分布区域,可作为长苞铁杉应对未来气候变化的引种地区,应提早进行人工引种、栽培等前期研究。研究结果可为气候变化背景下长苞铁杉的保护、物种迁地保存和可持续管理提供科学依据,也可为准确预测濒危、珍稀植物的地理分布范围提供方法参考

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