顶空气相色谱法检测生物检材中乙醇及其相关物质

目的建立生物检材中乙醇及其相关物质的检测方法。方法生物检材加入内标异丙醇后用顶空气相色谱法进行检测（FID检测器）,以保留时间定性,内标法定量。结果该方法线性范围为0．05035-1．613mg／ml。相关系数r=0．9999,最低检测限（limit of detection,LOD）3．379μg／ml,分析方法平均回收率为98．24％～106．5％,日内精密度RSD〈2．2％,日间精密度RSD〈1．4％,总分析时间不超过18min。结论该方法可用于生物检材中乙醇及其相关物质的检测。     

固相萃取-气相色谱法检测生物检材中斑蝥素

目的建立固相萃取-气相色谱法检测生物检材中斑蝥素的方法。方法采用HLB固相萃取柱提取,气相色谱-内标法检测。结果斑蝥素在0.1～200mg/L范围内呈良好的线性关系,相关系数为0.999以上;精密度（RSD）小于5%。对于添加血样,方法检出限为0.05μg/mL,加标回收率范围为93.03%～98.29%。结论该方法操作简便、快速、灵敏,提取回收率高,提取物含杂质较少,可用于实际案件中全血和尿样中斑蝥素的检测。     

血液乙醇检测内外标法比较研究

目的通过比较内标法和外标法对血液乙醇含量检测结果,探讨外标法在法医学实践中的应用价值。方法通过收集2005年10月~2006年12月间本中心符合检测要求的血液样品263例,每例分别采用内标法和外标法进行血液样品乙醇含量检测,比较其检测结果。结果外标法检测时间短(2.5min),用量0.5ml,而内标法检测时间长(6.5min),样品量1.0ml;外标法检测血乙醇平均浓度为89.30mg/100ml,内标法检测血乙醇平均浓度为92.37mg/100ml,P=0.001。结论外标法检测时间短(2.5min),用量少,节约检材,可作为大量待测血液样本的筛选检查手段。     

液相色谱-三重四极杆质谱法同时检测生物检材中百草枯及其代谢物

目的建立生物检材中同时检测百草枯(paraquat,PQ)及其主要代谢物单季铵盐(monoquat)、百草枯-单吡啶酮(paraquat-monopyridone,MP)、百草枯-联吡啶酮(paraquat-dipyridone,DP)、4-羧基-1-甲基吡啶盐(4-Carboxy-1-methylpyridinium ion,MINA)的液相色谱-串联质谱(LC-MS/MS)检测方法。方法以百草枯氘代内标(Paraquat-d8 Dichloride,PQ-D8)作为内标,检材样品调节pH后,经乙腈沉淀蛋白,使用不同色谱柱洗脱,在多反应监测模式下检测。结果百草枯PQ、monoquat、MP、DP、MINA的线性范围分别是5~800ng/mL、0.5~80ng/mL、5~800ng/mL、2.5~400ng/mL、2~320ng/mL(r均高于0.993),日内、日间精密度(RSDs)分别在5%~14%、3%~13%、3%~15%、5%~13%、2%~15%之间,准确度(RE)分别在91%~116%、80%~100%、80%~111%、85%~114%、91%~114%之间。生物样品处理后自动进样器上室温放置72h,各物质的准确度分别在90%~119%、56%~125%、60%~110%、78%~98%、83%~117%之间。结论本测定方法前处理过程简便,分离效果好,提取效率高,可使用本方法对疑似百草枯中毒的检材进行原体及代谢物的检测,为案件提供法律依据;本实验优化了课题组前期建立的生物样品中百草枯及monoquat、MP的检测方法,参考其案例结果,检测相应检材,对比分析,该检测方法在原体含量大幅下降时,痕量代谢物仍可检出。     

LC-MS/MS分析生物检材中的呋喃酚葡萄糖醛酸结合物

目的建立生物检材中呋喃酚葡萄糖醛酸结合物的LC-MS/MS检测方法。方法血和肝等检材经乙腈沉淀蛋白,采用ZORBAX HILIC Plus(4.6mm×100mm,3.5μm)亲水性色谱柱,以水和含0.1%甲酸的乙腈为流动相,梯度洗脱,以负离子多反应检测(MRM)模式检测,扫描时间8min。结果血和肝中呋喃酚葡萄糖醛酸结合物的线性范围分别是20ng/ml～5μg/ml和50ng/g～5μg/g,线性关系良好,r~2均大于0.999,血和肝中最低检出限分别为10ng/ml和9.93ng/g,最低定量限分别为15.63ng/ml和16.56ng/g;批内及批间精密度分别在1.53%～5.02%和5.06%～6.85%;相对回收率为86.13%～92.71%和87.01%～94.06%。对一例克百威中毒死亡人体检材进行检测,克百威及呋喃酚的血浓度分别为0.77ug/g和29.65ug/g,呋喃酚葡萄糖醛酸结合物的血浓度为1.059ug/g,肝组织浓度为4.056 ug/g。结论本研究所建方法特异性强、灵敏度高,可满足法医学中对于血中呋喃酚葡萄糖醛酸结合物的检测需求。     

HS-GC内标曲线法测定血中乙醇含量的不确定度评估

目的建立自动顶空-气相色谱(HS-GC)内标曲线法测定血中乙醇含量的不确定评估方法。方法从分析测定程序着手,依据不确定度评定的指导性文件,分析不确定度来源,量化不确定度分量,计算检测结果的合成标准不确定度和扩展不确定度。结果各相对不确定度来自于检材重复性检测为3.4%,乙醇标准溶液为0.71%,检材为0.61%,叔丁醇内标溶液为0.41%,标准曲线为1.1%,气相色谱仪为1.3%,血液中乙醇的相对扩展不确定度为3.9%。结论血液中乙醇含量的不确定度主要来源于检材重复性检测、气相色谱仪、乙醇标准曲线。     

LC-MS/MS检测生物检材中雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲CSCD

目的建立生物检材中雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲的液相色谱-串联质谱（LC-MS/MS）分析方法,并进行方法学验证。方法 0.4 m L血液、尿液或0.4 g肝组织加入内标混匀后用乙酸乙酯进行提取,提取物经Allure PFP Propyl柱（100 mm×2.1 mm,5μm）分离,以甲醇-20 mmol/L乙酸铵溶液梯度洗脱,采用电喷雾正离子化（ESI＋）、多反应监测检测雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲。结果各生物检材中雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲在相应的线性范围内线性良好（r〉0.995 0）,检出限均为2 ng/m L或2 ng/g,回收率为61.08%～102.98%,日内精密度和日间精密度均小于12.58%,准确度为90.61%～105.80%。结论所建方法简便、选择性好,适用于同时分析各种生物检材中的雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲,为雷公藤中毒的法医学鉴定和临床诊治提供技术保障。     

饮料中γ-羟基丁酸的分析

目的建立饮料中γ-羟基丁酸(GHB)的分析方法。方法检材以GHB-d6为内标,加入酸性氯化铵饱和溶液调节pH值<4,用乙酸乙酯提取、离心后取有机层,水浴下吹干,经BSTFA衍生化后,用气相色谱/质谱联用仪测定。检材以GHB-d6为内标,经流动相稀释、离心后,吸取上清液用液相色谱-串联质谱仪测定。结果GC/MS测定饮料中GHB的检出限为0.2μg/mL,日内精密度和日间精密度小于8.54%;LC/MS/MS测定饮料中GHB的检出限为2μg/mL,日内精密度和日间精密度小于8.62%。结论饮料中GHB进行定性定量分析。方法灵敏、准确、快速,适用于法庭毒物分析中饮料中GHB的检测。     

LC-MS/MS检测生物检材中雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲

目的建立生物检材中雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲的液相色谱-串联质谱(LC-MS/MS)分析方法,并进行方法学验证。方法 0.4 m L血液、尿液或0.4 g肝组织加入内标混匀后用乙酸乙酯进行提取,提取物经Allure PFP Propyl柱(100 mm×2.1 mm,5μm)分离,以甲醇-20 mmol/L乙酸铵溶液梯度洗脱,采用电喷雾正离子化(ESI+)、多反应监测检测雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲。结果各生物检材中雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲在相应的线性范围内线性良好(r0.995 0),检出限均为2 ng/m L或2 ng/g,回收率为61.08%~102.98%,日内精密度和日间精密度均小于12.58%,准确度为90.61%~105.80%。结论所建方法简便、选择性好,适用于同时分析各种生物检材中的雷公藤甲素和雷公藤酯甲,为雷公藤中毒的法医学鉴定和临床诊治提供技术保障。     

GC/MS法测定人体血液和肾、肝组织中的丙泊酚

目的 采用气相色谱/质谱法检测人体血液和肾、肝组织中的丙泊酚.方法 心血和肾、肝组织中的丙泊酚经环己烷提取,采用气相色谱/质谱法,丙泊酚选择m/z 163、178,内标百里香酚选择m/z 150、135进行测定;并考察方法专属性、线性范围、定量线与检出限、回收率与精密度.结果 丙泊酚的保留时间为8.17min,与内标百里香酚分离良好;其在心血和肾、肝组织中的检测浓度线性关系良好,r值均大于0.992,最低检测质量浓度分别为0.05 μg/mL、0.10μg/g及0.05 μg/g,方法回收率90％ ～ 110％,日内、日间RSD均小于7％.结论 本文方法简便、灵敏、快速,其准确度、精密度和回收率均可满足生物检材中丙泊酚浓度的测定,可在相关研究及实践中选用.     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Immigration,intermarriage and the changing face of Europe in the post war period

In this article we compare the propensity to intermarry of various migrant groups and their children who settled in Germany, France, England, Belgium and the Netherlands in the post-war period, using a wide range of available statistical data. We try to explain different intermarriage patterns within the framework of Alba and Nee's assimilation theory and pay special attention to the role of religion, colour and colonial background. We therefore compare colonial with non colonial migrants and within these categories between groups with ‘European’ (Christian) and non-European (Islam, Hinduism) religions. First of all, religion appears to be an important variable. Migrants whose faith has no tradition in Western Europe intermarry at a much lower rate than those whose religious backgrounds correspond with those that are common in the country of settlement. The rate of ethnic endogamous marriages in Western Europe are highest in Hindu and Muslim communities, often regardless if they came as guest workers or colonial migrants. Whereas differences in religion diminish the propensity to intermarry, colour or ‘racial’ differences on the other hand seem to be less important. This is largely explained by the pre-migration socialisation. Furthermore, the paper argues that the attention to institutions, as rightly advocated by Richard Alba and Victor Nee, needs a more refined and layered elaboration. Institutions, often as barriers to intermarriage, do not only emanate from the receiving society, but also—be it less formalized—within migrant communities. Especially religions and family systems, but also organized nationalist feelings, can have a profound influence on how migrants think about endogamy. Finally, strong pressures to assimilate, often through institutionalized forms of discrimination and stigmatization, not only produce isolation and frustrate assimilation (with resulting low intermarriage rates), but can also stimulate assimilation by 'passing' mechanisms. These factors, together with a more comparative perspective, are not completely ignored in the new assimilation theory, but—as this study of Western European intermarriage patterns stresses—deserve to be included more systematically in historical and social scientist analyses.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

Illumination,Imagination, Creativity: Rājaśekhara,Kuntaka, and Jagannātha on <Emphasis Type="Italic">Pratibhā</Emphasis>

Sanskrit poeticians make the visionary faculty of pratibhā a necessary part of the professional poet’s make-up. The term has a pre-history in Bhartṛhari’s linguistic metaphysics, where it is used to explain the unitary perception of meaning. This essay examines the relation between pratibhā and possible theories of the imagination, with a focus on three unusual theoreticians—Rājaśekhara, Kuntaka, and Jagannātha Paṇḍita. Rājaśekhara offers an analysis of pratibhā that is heavily interactive, requiring the discerning presence of the bhāvaka listener or critic; he also positions pratibhā in relation to Bildung (vyutpatti) and practice. For Kuntaka, pratibhā, never an ex nihilo creation by a poet, serves as the basis for the peculiar forms of intensified insight and experience that constitute poetry; these may also involve the creative scrambling and re-articulation of the object in terms of its systemic composition. At times, Kuntaka’s pratibhā comes close to a strong notion of imaginative process. But the full-fledged thematization of the imagination, and of pratibhā as its support and mechanism, is best seen in the seventeenth-century debates preserved for us by Jagannātha. A link is suggested between the discourse of poetic imagination in Jagannātha and similar themes that turn up in Indo-Persian poets such as Bedil.     

Preventing Homelessness for System‐Involved Youth

Too many youth and young adults find themselves on the streets, couch‐surfing with friends, in emergency shelters or worse, after exiting the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. In some circumstances, youth have had court hearings until their exit from the legal system, but those hearings have not focused on long‐range plans of youth and emergencies youth may encounter. In other circumstances, there has been little or no planning prior to discharge, especially for young people who leave the juvenile justice system. Courts can and should prevent, alleviate or end youth homelessness for youth who appear before them through strategies that are enumerated in the recently‐passed NCJFCJ resolution. This article expounds on three of these strategies – coordinating transition and re‐entry plans, insisting on effective legal representation of youth, and utilizing sound judicial leadership. It also describes the concurrent efforts of the Coalition for Juvenile Justice and the American Bar Association's Homeless Youth Legal Network to remove legal barriers and improve outcomes for youth and young adults experiencing homelessness.     

Best practices for structuring a family court parenting plan evaluation under the 2022 AFCC Guidelines

Evaluation appointment orders provide enforceable scaffolding for conduct of family court parenting plan evaluations, and use of the evaluator's reports, feedback, file, and testimony. Unlike a contract, a stipulated or adjudicated appointment order is directly enforceable by the family court. It unambiguously positions the evaluator as the family court's appointee – answerable directly to the court and, in some jurisdictions, protected by quasi-judicial immunity from damages claims. A well-crafted appointment order governs the roles and expectations of the court, the evaluator, the parties, the lawyers, and the collateral witnesses. An appointment order mandates the legal duties, rights, powers, and responsibilities of the professionals, the parties, and the collateral witnesses. At minimum, an appointment order articulates the legal basis for the appointment, the purpose and scope of the evaluation, compensation of evaluator, and the duty of the parties to participate in the process. A written evaluation protocol or procedures statement discloses in advance the methods of investigation and assessment that the evaluator intends to use. Together, the appointment order and written protocol help the evaluator, lawyers, parents, and judge manage the complexity of the evaluation process.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.