24 research outputs found
EVALUATION OF INTRODUCED STRAWBERRY VARIETIES FOR BREEDING AND PRACTICAL USE
The results of years of researching 85 strawberry varieties in the North-West of Russia are presented. Evaluation of introduced varieties was made as compared with the local commercial cultivars, and the sources of major biological and agronomic traits interesting for breeding and and practice were identified
Development of a teaching aid on the discipline "professional foreign language" for students of universities of technical directions
Π¦Π΅Π»ΡΡ Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΈΡΡΠ»Π΅Π΄ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΡΠ²Π»ΡΠ΅ΡΡΡ ΡΠ°Π·ΡΠ°Π±ΠΎΡΠΊΠ° ΡΡΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π°Π»Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠΌΠ° Π½Π°ΠΏΠΈΡΠ°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΏΠ»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ° ΡΡΠ΅Π±Π½ΡΡ
ΠΌΠ°ΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΠΎΠ² ΠΏΠΎ Π΄ΠΈΡΡΠΈΠΏΠ»ΠΈΠ½Π΅ "ΠΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠΉ ΠΈΠ½ΠΎΡΡΡΠ°Π½Π½ΡΠΉ ΡΠ·ΡΠΊ" Π΄Π»Ρ ΡΡΡΠ΄Π΅Π½ΡΠΎΠ² ΡΠ΅Ρ
Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΡ
Π½Π°ΠΏΡΠ°Π²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ, ΠΏΡΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΈΠΌΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π² ΠΈΡΠΏΠΎΠ»ΡΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΡΠ΅ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Π°Π²Π°ΡΠ΅Π»ΡΠΌΠΈ Π°Π½Π³Π»ΠΈΠΉΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠ·ΡΠΊΠ°, Π½Π΅ ΠΈΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΠΌΠΈ ΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π½ΡΡ
Π·Π½Π°Π½ΠΈΠΉ Π² ΡΠ΅Ρ
Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ Π½Π°ΠΏΡΠ°Π²Π»Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Π³ΠΎΡΠΎΠ²ΠΊΠΈ ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ
ΡΡ.The purpose of this study is to develop an effective algorithm for writing a set of training materials for the discipline βProfessional foreign languageβ for students of technical field, applicable to ESP teachers who do not have specialized knowledge in the technical sphere
ΠΡΠΎΡΠΈΠ»Π°ΠΊΡΠΈΠΊΠ° ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ ΠΊΠΎΠ»ΠΏΡΠΎΠΊΡΡΠΊΡΠΎΠΌΠΈΠΈ Ρ ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΊΠΎΠΊΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ J-ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π·Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΡΠ²ΡΠ°ΡΠ°
On the basis of the literature the article analyzes the methodological aspects of preoperative planning and surgical techniques for the prevention intra- and postoperative complications for colproctectomy with J-pouch reservoir. Knowledge of these features can reduce the number of complications and improve the functional results of surgical treatment.Π ΡΡΠ°ΡΡΠ΅ Π½Π° ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΡΡ
Π»ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡΡΡ ΠΏΡΠΎΠ°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Ρ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ Π°ΡΠΏΠ΅ΠΊΡΡ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΠ»Π°Π½ΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΈ ΡΠ΅Ρ
Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ Ρ
ΠΈΡΡΡΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΈΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΈΠ΅ΠΌΡ Π΄Π»Ρ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΠΏΡΠ΅ΠΆΠ΄Π΅Π½ΠΈΡ ΠΈΠ½ΡΡΠ°- ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ»Π΅ΠΎΠΏΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π½ΡΡ
ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ ΠΏΡΠΈ Π²ΡΠΏΠΎΠ»Π½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΠ»ΠΏΡΠΎΠΊΡΡΠΊΡΠΎΠΌΠΈΠΈ Ρ ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠΈΡΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ΠΌ ΡΠ°Π·ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΊΠΎΠΊΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π·Π΅ΡΠ²ΡΠ°ΡΠ°. ΠΠ½Π°Π½ΠΈΠ΅ Π΄Π°Π½Π½ΡΡ
ΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Π΅Π½Π½ΠΎΡΡΠ΅ΠΉ ΠΏΠΎΠ·Π²ΠΎΠ»ΡΠ΅Ρ ΡΠΌΠ΅Π½ΡΡΠΈΡΡ ΠΊΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ²ΠΎ ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎΠΆΠ½Π΅Π½ΠΈΠΉ ΠΈ ΡΠ»ΡΡΡΠΈΡΡ ΡΡΠ½ΠΊΡΠΈΠΎΠ½Π°Π»ΡΠ½ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ΅Π·ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°ΡΡ Ρ
ΠΈΡΡΡΠ³ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ΠΎ Π»Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡ
Complete mesocolic excision for colonic cancer : Society for Translational Medicine expert consensus statement
Total mesorectal excision (TME), a revolutionary change and a milestone in the history of surgical treatment for rectal cancer, has been widely recognized as the gold standard and is now a routine procedure. The concept of complete mesocolic excision (CME) was proposed based on the similar philosophy as TME, aimed to achieve better surgical quality and improve the oncological outcomes of colon cancer. In recent years, many surgeons have increasingly adopted the principle and conducted clinical trials to verify the effect of CME; however, whether CME should be used as the standard surgical technique is still controversial. In this article, we reviewed and updated the literature. Experts in this field from nine countries were invited to complete a questionnaire concerning CME, with the aim to illustrate the embryological and anatomical basis and reach a consensus of the current situation and future of CME
Alonopsis elongata Sars 1861
<i>Alonopsis elongata (</i> Sars, 1861) <p> Leydig, 1860: 219–221, Pl. 9: figs 66–67 (<i>Lynceus macrourus</i>); Sars, 1861: 161 (<i>Alona</i>); Schoedler, 1863: 33 (<i>Acroperus intermedius</i>); Müller, 1867: 170–171, Pl. 4: fig. 28 (<i>elongata</i>); Lilljeborg, 1901: 434–440, Pl. 65: figs 5–20; Smirnov, 1966: 114–134, figs 1–10 (<i>Acroperus</i>); 1971: 413–415, figs 500–510 (<i>Acroperus</i>); Flössner, 1972: 335–339, fig. 124 (<i>Acroperus</i>); Negrea, 1983: 304–306, fig. 124; Flössner, 2000: 335–339, fig. 124.</p> <p> <b>Type locality.</b> Lake Sognsvand (now Songsvann), the vicinity of Oslo, Norway.</p> <p> <b>Possible type material.</b> Tube GOS F12424; slide GOS F9045 (locality is not specified, both labelled just as “ Norway ”, which is typical for material studied by Sars at this time), Zoological Museum of Oslo University, Norway.</p> <p> <b>Material studied:</b> several specimens from the type locality, 0 9.2003, coll. A.Y. Sinev; over 100 parthenogenetic females, numerous ephippial females and males from Russia, Murmansk Area, Khibiny Mountains, Lake Malyi Vud'yavr, 11.08.2000, coll. A.Y. Sinev; over 50 parthenogenetic females from Russia, Karelia Republic, vicinity of Moscow State University White Sea Biological Station, lake Krugloe, 16.07.2008, coll. A.Y. Sinev; over 50 parthenogenetic females from Russia, Yaroslavl Area, Uglich Reservoir, 23.07.1962, coll. N. N. Smirnov, personal collection of A.A. Kotov (Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Moscow, Russia), AAK-1999-090; 12 females from Russia, Tomsk Area, Lake Bol'shoe Purul'do, near locality Kharsk, coll. A. A. Kotov, personal collection of A.A. Kotov (Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution, Moscow, Russia), AAK 2005-279.</p> <p> <b>Description. Parthenogenetic female.</b> Body (Fig. 1 A–D, 2A, C) height-length ratio 0.61–0.65. Valves (Fig. 1 E, 2D), as for genus. Head typical of the genus, head shield (Fig. 3 C) with broadly rounded anterior margin, with no defined rostrum. Head pores as for genus (Fig. 2 B, 3C), IP/PP ratio about 1.3–2.0 in adult. Labrum (Fig. 4 A), thorax, abdomen and postabdomen (Fig. 3 A–B, E–G) as for genus.</p> <p>Antennule (Fig. 4 B), antenna (Fig. 4 C) and limb I (Fig. 4 E–G) as for genus. Limb II (Fig. 4 H–I) as for genus, with scraper 7 significantly larger than scraper 8, armed with 7–9 very robust, massive denticles. Limbs III (Fig. 4 J–K), VI (Fig. 4 L–N), and V (Fig. 4 O) as for genus; incursion between lobes of exopodite V as a right angle. Limb VI (Fig. 4 P) as for genus.</p> <p> <b>Ephippial female</b> (Fig. 1 F) with body slightly higher than in parthenogenetic female, ephippium dark yellowbrown, without prominent sculpture.</p> <p> <b>Male</b>. <i>General shape</i> of juvenile males of instar I (Fig. 1 G) and II (Fig. 1 H) similar to that of juvenile females of same instar; instar II males smaller than females of same instar. General shape of adult males (Fig. 1 I, 2J) similar to that of instar II juvenile females, body height/body length = 0.63–0.65. Ocellus and eye of same size as in female.</p> <p> <i>Postabdomen</i>. In juvenile instar I males, similar to that in juvenile females (Fig. 3 H), with sperm duct openings located before the middle of ventral margin. In instar II juvenile males (Fig 3 I), shorter than that in female. Gonopores located close to the end of postabdomen. Armament of postabdomen and postabdominal claw same as in female in both juvenile instars. In adult male, postabdomen (Fig. 2 K, 3J) narrower than in female, narrowing distally and not curved. Postanal angle not defined, preanal angle obtuse. Distal part of postabdomen 4 times longer than preanal. Sperm duct openings at the end of postabdomen above the base of postabdominal claws. Clusters of short setules in place of marginal denticles, lateral fascicles of setules same as in female. Postabdominal claw two times shorter than that of female, curved, without basal spine, with pecten of about 10 long spines, exceeding the distalmost the width of claw base.</p> <p> <i>Antennule</i>. In instar I male, same as in female. In instar II male antennule (Fig. 5 B) broader than in female, with an anlage of male seta, aesthetascs same as in female. In adult male antennule shorter than in female (Fig. 5 D), with 10 terminal and 2 lateral aesthetascs. Male seta arising at 1/4 length from tip, reaching to the end of antennule.</p> <p> <i>Thoracic limb I</i>. In instar I male with a short anlage of copulatory hook, IDL same as in female (Fig. 5 A). In instar II male, copulatory hook curved (Fig. 5 C). Ventral face of limb with anlage of copulatory brush seta and a row of about 8 short setules below it. IDL with anlage of male seta, and other setae same as in female. In adult male, limb I stouter than that of female (Fig. 5 E–F), with V-shaped copulatory hook. Copulatory brush present; about 30 irregularly spaced long setules on ventral face of limb below them, following by 20 much shorter setules in regular row. IDL seta 1 present, setae 2 and 3 subequal in length, much thinner than in female; male seta thick, about half as long as seta 3.</p> <p> <b>Size.</b> In studied material, length of females of juvenile instar I— 0.43–0.47 mm; juvenile instar II— 0.49–0.57 mm; adult female— 0.59–0.91 mm (according to literature—up to 1.1 mm). Length of male of juvenile instar I— 0.44–0.46 mm; instar II— 0.47–0.51 mm; adult male— 0.54–0.57 mm (according to literature, up to 0.6 mm).</p>Published as part of <i>Sinev, Artem Y. & Atroschenko, Margarita M., 2011, Revision of the genus Alonopsis Sars, 1862 and its position within Aloninae (Cladocera: Anomopoda: Chydoridae), pp. 1-17 in Zootaxa 2800</i> on pages 12-13, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/203597">10.5281/zenodo.203597</a>