Internal circulating fluidized bed incineration system and design algorithm

ＩｎｔｒｏｄｕｃｔｉｏｎＴｈｅｐｒｏｃｅｓｓｏｆｍｕｎｉｃｉｐａｌｓｏｌｉｄｗａｓｔｅ(ＭＳＷ)ｉｓｏｎｅｏｆｔｈｅｍｏｓｔｓｅｒｉｏｕｓｉｓｓｕｅｓｉｎｔｅｒｍｓｏｆｅｎｖｉｒｏｎｍｅｎｔａｌｐｒｏｔｅｃｔｉｏｎ.ＰｒｏｃｅｓｓｉｎｇｏｆＭＳＷｗｉｔｈｏｕｔｆｕｒｔｈｅｒｄｉｓａｓｔｒｏｕｓｃｏｎｔａｍｉｎａｔｉｏｎｃａｎｂｅａｃｈｉｅｖｅｄｏｎｌｙｉｎｍｏｄｅｒｎｉｚｅｄｍｅａｓｕｒｅｓ,ｓｕｃｈａｓｉｎｃｉｎｅｒａｔｉｎｇａｎｄｅｎｅｒｇｙｇｅｎｅｒａｔｉｎｇｃｏｎｃｕｒｒｅｎｔｌｙ(Ｓｈｅｎ…     

Chinese life cycle impact assessment factors

ＩｎｔｒｏｄｕｃｔｉｏｎＬｉｆｅｃｙｃｌｅａｓｓｅｓｓｍｅｎｔ(ＬＣＡ)ｉｓａｎｅｎｖｉｒｏｎｍｅｎｔａｌｍａｎａｇｅｍｅｎｔｔｏｏｌｔｈａｔｉｓｕｓｅｄｔｏｅｘａｍｉｎｅａｎｄｅｖａｌｕａｔｅｔｈｅｅｎｖｉｒｏｎｍｅｎｔａｌｉｍｐａｃｔｓａｓｓｏｃｉａｔｅｄｗｉｔｈｔｈｅｅｘｉｓｔｅｎｃｅｏｆｐｒｏｄｕｃｔｓ(Ｊｅｎｓｅｎ,1998;Ｗｅｉｄｅｍａ,1997;Ｗｅｎｚｅｌ,1997).ＴｈｅｆｏｃｕｓｏｆＬＣＡｉｓｏｎｔｈｅｅｎｔｉｒｅｌｉｆｅｃｙｃｌｅｏｆｔｈｅｐｒｏｄｕｃｔ,ｉ.ｅ.ｆｒｏｍｔｈｅｅｘｔｒａｃｔｉ…     

Uncommon chromosomal mosaicism in chorionic villi

Three cases of unusual chromosomal mosaicism are reported for which the cytogenetic data show inconsistent findings between CVS and AC or fetal tissue, and which cannot be explained simply by non-disjunction. For case 1, in CVS the karyotype was 46,XY, whereas lymphocytes and fibroblasts revealed 69,XXY. DNA fingerprinting indicated one paternal and two maternal chromosome sets, the latter most probably due to omission of maternal meiosis II. For case 2, in CVS mos 46,XX/47,XX,+mar de novo was observed. Amniotic fluid cells had the karyotype 46,XX. The origin of the marker chromosome might be explained by at least two events of unknown order (a somatic chromosome/chromatid deletion and non-disjunction of the homologous chromosome). In case 3 (CVS: mos 46,XY/46,XY,19q+ de novo; amniotic fluid cells, lymphocytes, and fibroblasts: 46,XY), the surplus of chromosome material in 19q+ might be explained on the basis of a somatic translocation. The idea of a chimera is less convincing, as the mosaic finding is restricted to one tissue. Furthermore, there was no hint of a vanishing twin. Hitherto, no case of structural chromosome mosaicism in CVS has been reconfirmed in fetal tissues.     

Carrier screening for cystic fibrosis

A number of different models of CF carrier screening have now been tested in pilot trials. Apart from opportunistic and cascade testing (which are strictly speaking not true forms of screening), the major programmes have been directed either to young adults in primary care or to pregnant women in antenatal clinics. Only in the latter form of screening has sufficient data been collected to allow conclusions to be reached on the optimum mode of delivery. It seems very probable that when CF carrier screening passes into routine service, it will be the antenatal couple model that is used.