Characterisation of the mitochondrial genome and phylogenetic analysis of Toxocara apodemi (Nematoda: Ascarididae)

We first sequenced and characterised the complete mitochondrial genome of Toxocara apodeme, then studied the evolutionary relationship of the species within Toxocaridae. The complete mitochondrial genome was amplified using PCR with 14 specific primers. The mitogenome length was 14303 bp in size, including 12 PCGs (encoding 3,423 amino acids), 22 tRNAs, 2 rRNAs, and 2 NCRs, with 68.38% A+T contents. The mt genomes of T. apodemi had relatively compact structures with 11 intergenic spacers and 5 overlaps. Comparative analyses of the nucleotide sequences of complete mt genomes showed that T. apodemi had higher identities with T. canis than other congeners. A sliding window analysis of 12 PCGs among 5 Toxocara species indicated that nad4 had the highest sequence divergence, and cox1 was the least variable gene. Relative synonymous codon usage showed that UUG, ACU, CCU, CGU, and UCU most frequently occurred in the complete genomes of T. apodemi. The Ka/Ks ratio showed that all Toxocara mt genes were subject to purification selection. The largest genetic distance between T. apodemi and the other 4 congeneric species was found in nad2, and the smallest was found in cox2. Phylogenetic analyses based on the concatenated amino acid sequences of 12 PCGs demonstrated that T. apodemi formed a distinct branch and was always a sister taxon to other congeneric species. The present study determined the complete mt genome sequences of T. apodemi, which provide novel genetic markers for further studies of the taxonomy, population genetics, and systematics of the Toxocaridae nematodes.

Study of the f_{0}(980) and f_{0}(500) Scalar Mesons through the Decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}

Using e^{+}e^{-} collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 7.33  fb^{-1} recorded by the BESIII detector at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV, we present an analysis of the decay D_{s}^{+}→π^{+}π^{-}e^{+}ν_{e}, where the D_{s}^{+} is produced via the process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*±}D_{s}^{∓}. We observe the f_{0}(980) in the π^{+}π^{-} system and the branching fraction of the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} with f_{0}(980)→π^{+}π^{-} measured to be (1.72±0.13_{stat}±0.10_{syst})×10^{-3}, where the uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The dynamics of the D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(980)e^{+}ν_{e} decay are studied with the simple pole parametrization of the hadronic form factor and the Flatté formula describing the f_{0}(980) in the differential decay rate, and the product of the form factor f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| is determined for the first time to be f_{+}^{f_{0}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.017_{stat}±0.035_{syst}. Furthermore, the decay D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e} is searched for the first time but no signal is found. The upper limit on the branching fraction of D_{s}^{+}→f_{0}(500)e^{+}ν_{e}, f_{0}(500)→π^{+}π^{-} decay is set to be 3.3×10^{-4} at 90% confidence level.

Observation of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} in the Amplitude Analysis of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η

We perform for the first time an amplitude analysis of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η and report the observation of the decay D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} using 2.93  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken at a center-of-mass energy of 3.773 GeV with the BESIII detector. As the only W-annihilation-free decay among D to a_{0}(980) pseudoscalar, D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} is the ideal decay in extracting the contributions of the W-emission amplitudes involving a_{0}(980) and to study the final-state interactions. The absolute branching fraction of D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}π^{+}η is measured to be (1.27±0.04_{stat}±0.03_{syst})%. The branching fractions of intermediate processes D^{+}→K_{S}^{0}a_{0}(980)^{+} with a_{0}(980)^{+}→π^{+}η and D^{+}→π^{+}K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0} with K[over ¯]_{0}^{*}(1430)^{0}→K_{S}^{0}η are measured to be (1.33±0.05_{stat}±0.04_{syst})% and (0.14±0.03_{stat}±0.01_{syst})%, respectively.

Observation of Significant Flavor-SU(3) Breaking in the Kaon Wave Function at 12<Q^{2}<25 GeV^{2} and Discovery of the Charmless Decay ψ(3770)→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0}

We present cross sections for the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→K_{S}^{0}K_{L}^{0} at center-of-mass energies ranging from 3.51 to 4.95 GeV using data samples collected in the BESIII experiment, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 26.5  fb^{-1}. The ratio of neutral-to-charged kaon form factors at large momentum transfers (12 Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

M Ablikim Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M N Achasov Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
P Adlarson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X C Ai Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
R Aliberti Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Amoroso University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M R An Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Q An State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Bai Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
O Bakina Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
I Balossino INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
Y Ban Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
H-R Bao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
V Batozskaya Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
K Begzsuren Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
N Berger Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Berlowski National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
M Bertani INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
D Bettoni INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
F Bianchi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
E Bianco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
A Bortone University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Boyko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
R A Briere Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA
A Brueggemann University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
H Cai Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X Cai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Calcaterra INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
G F Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Cao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S A Cetin Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
J F Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T T Chang Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang 464000, People's Republic of China
W L Chang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Che Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Chelkov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
C Chen Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Chao Chen Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
G Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H S Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M L Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Chen Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S L Chen North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
S M Chen Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X R Chen Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y B Chen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Q Chen Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z J Chen Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
S K Choi Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
X Chu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Cibinetto INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
S C Coen Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
F Cossio INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
J J Cui Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
H L Dai Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J P Dai Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
A Dbeyssi Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
R E de Boer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
D Dedovich Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Z Y Deng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
A Denig Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I Denysenko Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
M Destefanis University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F De Mori University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
B Ding Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X X Ding Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Y Ding Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
J Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Y Dong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Dong Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
M C Du Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S X Du Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Z H Duan Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Egorov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y H Fan North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
J Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S S Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W X Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Q Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
R Farinelli INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
L Fava University of Eastern Piedmont, I-15121 Alessandria, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Feldbauer Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Felici INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
C Q Feng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J H Feng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
K Fischer University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Fritsch Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C D Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Fu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y W Fu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Gao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y N Gao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Yang Gao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Garbolino INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
I Garzia INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
P T Ge Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
Z W Ge Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
C Geng Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
E M Gersabeck University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
A Gilman University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
K Goetzen GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
L Gong Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
W X Gong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W Gradl Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S Gramigna INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
M Greco University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M H Gu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y T Gu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Y Guan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Guan Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
A Q Guo Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L B Guo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M J Guo Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
R P Guo Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, People's Republic of China
Y P Guo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
A Guskov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
J Gutierrez Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
T T Han Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W Y Han Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X Q Hao Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
F A Harris University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822, USA
K K He Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
K L He Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H H Heinsius Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C H Heinz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y K Heng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C Herold Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
T Holtmann Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
P C Hong Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
G Y Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y R Hou University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Hou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Y Hu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H M Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Hu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
T Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Hu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G S Huang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
K X Huang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
L Q Huang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X T Huang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Huang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Hussain University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
N Hüsken Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
N In der Wiesche University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
M Irshad State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Jackson Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
S Jaeger Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
S Janchiv Institute of Physics and Technology, Peace Avenue 54B, Ulaanbaatar 13330, Mongolia
J H Jeong Chung-Ang University, Seoul, 06974, Republic of Korea
Q Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q P Ji Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
X B Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X L Ji Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Ji Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X Q Jia Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z K Jia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H J Jiang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
P C Jiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S S Jiang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T J Jiang Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
X S Jiang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Jiang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J B Jiao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z Jiao Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
S Jin Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Y Jin University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
M Q Jing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X M Jing University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Johansson Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
X Kui Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Kabana Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
N Kalantar-Nayestanaki University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
X L Kang China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
X S Kang Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
M Kavatsyuk University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
B C Ke Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
V Khachatryan Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
A Khoukaz University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
R Kiuchi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Kliemt GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
O B Kolcu Turkish Accelerator Center Particle Factory Group, Istinye University, 34010 Istanbul, Turkey
B Kopf Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
M Kuessner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
A Kupsc National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W Kühn Justus-Liebig-Universitaet Giessen, II. Physikalisches Institut, Heinrich-Buff-Ring 16, D-35392 Giessen, Germany
J J Lane University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, United Kingdom
P Larin Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
A Lavania Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
L Lavezzi University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
T T Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H Leithoff Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Lellmann Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
T Lenz Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
C Li Qufu Normal University, Qufu 273165, People's Republic of China
C Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
C H Li Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Cheng Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
D M Li Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
F Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H B Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Li Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H N Li South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
Hui Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
J R Li Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
J S Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J W Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Ke Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L K Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Lei Li Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, People's Republic of China
M H Li Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
P R Li Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Q X Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S X Li Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
W D Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W G Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X H Li State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Li Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Xiaoyu Li Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y G Li Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z J Li Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Z X Li Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
C Liang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
H Liang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Liang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y F Liang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
Y T Liang Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G R Liao Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
L Z Liao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y P Liao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Libby Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036, India
A Limphirat Suranaree University of Technology, University Avenue 111, Nakhon Ratchasima 30000, Thailand
D X Lin Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Lin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B J Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Liu Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
C Liu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
C X Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F H Liu Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, People's Republic of China
Fang Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Feng Liu Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
G M Liu South China Normal University, Guangzhou 510006, People's Republic of China
H Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
H B Liu Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, People's Republic of China
H M Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huanhuan Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Huihui Liu Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, People's Republic of China
J B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Y Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K Y Liu Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
Ke Liu Henan University of Technology, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
L Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L C Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Lu Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
M H Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
P L Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Liu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S B Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Liu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W K Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W M Liu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Y Liu Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Liu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z A Liu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Q Liu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
X C Lou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F X Lu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H J Lu Huangshan College, Huangshan 245000, People's Republic of China
J G Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X L Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Lu Central South University, Changsha 410083, People's Republic of China
Y P Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z H Lu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C L Luo Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
M X Luo Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, People's Republic of China
T Luo Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X L Luo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X R Lyu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y F Lyu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
F C Ma Liaoning University, Shenyang 110036, People's Republic of China
H Ma Yunnan University, Kunming 650500, People's Republic of China
H L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J L Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L L Ma Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q M Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
R Q Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Ma Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Ma Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y M Ma Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
F E Maas Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
M Maggiora University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Malde University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Q A Malik University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
A Mangoni INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
Y J Mao Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Z P Mao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Marcello University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
Z X Meng University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
J G Messchendorp GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany University of Groningen, NL-9747 AA Groningen, The Netherlands
G Mezzadri INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
H Miao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T J Min Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
R E Mitchell Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
X H Mo Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Moses Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA
N Yu Muchnoi Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
J Muskalla Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y Nefedov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
F Nerling Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
I B Nikolaev Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS (BINP), Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
Z Ning Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
S Nisar COMSATS University Islamabad, Lahore Campus, Defence Road, Off Raiwind Road, 54000 Lahore, Pakistan
Q L Niu Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
W D Niu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Niu Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S L Olsen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Ouyang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Pacetti INFN Sezione di Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy University of Perugia, I-06100 Perugia, Italy
X Pan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y Pan Southeast University, Nanjing 211100, People's Republic of China
A Pathak Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
P Patteri INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
Y P Pei State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M Pelizaeus Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
H P Peng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Y Peng Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
K Peters GSI Helmholtzcentre for Heavy Ion Research GmbH, D-64291 Darmstadt, Germany
J L Ping Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
R G Ping Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Plura Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
V Prasad Instituto de Alta Investigación, Universidad de Tarapacá, Casilla 7D, Arica 1000000, Chile
F Z Qi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Qi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H R Qi Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
M Qi Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T Y Qi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Qian Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W B Qian University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Qiao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J J Qin University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
L Q Qin Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
X S Qin Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Z H Qin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Qiu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Q Qu Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
C F Redmer Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K J Ren Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A Rivetti INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
M Rolo INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
G Rong Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ch Rosner Helmholtz Institute Mainz, Staudinger Weg 18, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
S N Ruan Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
N Salone National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw 02-093, Poland
A Sarantsev Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
Y Schelhaas Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
K Schoenning Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
M Scodeggio INFN Sezione di Ferrara, INFN Sezione di Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy University of Ferrara, I-44122 Ferrara, Italy
K Y Shan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W Shan Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410081, People's Republic of China
X Y Shan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J F Shangguan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
L G Shao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Shao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C P Shen Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
H F Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W H Shen University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Shen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B A Shi University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H C Shi State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J L Shi Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Y Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Q Shi Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
R S Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Shi Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J J Song Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
T Z Song Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W M Song Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y J Song Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y X Song Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
S Sosio University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
S Spataro University of Turin and INFN, University of Turin, I-10125 Turin, Italy INFN, I-10125, Turin, Italy
F Stieler Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz, Johann-Joachim-Becher-Weg 45, D-55099 Mainz, Germany
Y J Su University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
G B Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G X Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Sun University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H K Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J F Sun Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
K Sun Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Sun Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
S S Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
T Sun Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
W Y Sun Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Sun China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, People's Republic of China
Y J Sun State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y Z Sun Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z T Sun Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y X Tan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C J Tang Sichuan University, Chengdu 610064, People's Republic of China
G Y Tang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Tang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y A Tang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
L Y Tao University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Q T Tao Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
M Tat University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
J X Teng State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
V Thoren Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
W H Tian Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
W H Tian Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Y Tian Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z F Tian Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
I Uman Near East University, Nicosia, North Cyprus, 99138, Mersin 10, Turkey
Y Wan Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
S J Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
B Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Bo Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
C W Wang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
D Y Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
F Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
H J Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J P Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
K Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L L Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M Wang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Meng Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
N Y Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
S Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
T Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
T J Wang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
W Wang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
W Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
W P Wang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Wang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
X F Wang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
X J Wang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
X L Wang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Y D Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y F Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Wang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
Y N Wang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
Y Q Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yaqian Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China Hebei University, Baoding 071002, People's Republic of China
Yi Wang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
Z Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z L Wang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Z Y Wang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Ziyi Wang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D Wei University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
D H Wei Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, People's Republic of China
F Weidner University of Muenster, Wilhelm-Klemm-Strasse 9, 48149 Muenster, Germany
S P Wen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C W Wenzel Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
U Wiedner Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
G Wilkinson University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
M Wolke Uppsala University, Box 516, SE-75120 Uppsala, Sweden
L Wollenberg Bochum Ruhr-University, D-44780 Bochum, Germany
C Wu Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
J F Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
L H Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L J Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Wu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
X H Wu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y Wu University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Wu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y J Wu Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z Wu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
L Xia State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X M Xian Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
T Xiang Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
D Xiao Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
G Y Xiao Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
S Y Xiao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y L Xiao Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Z J Xiao Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
C Xie Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
X H Xie Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
Y Xie Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y G Xie Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y H Xie Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
Z P Xie State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
T Y Xing Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C J Xu Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
G F Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
Q J Xu Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 310036, People's Republic of China
Q N Xu Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot 010021, People's Republic of China
W Xu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
W L Xu University of Jinan, Jinan 250022, People's Republic of China
X P Xu Soochow University, Suzhou 215006, People's Republic of China
Y C Xu Yantai University, Yantai 264005, People's Republic of China
Z P Xu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
Z S Xu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
F Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
L Yan Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W B Yan State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W C Yan Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
X Q Yan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H J Yang Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, People's Republic of China
H L Yang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Tao Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yang Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y F Yang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Y X Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Yifan Yang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z W Yang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
Z P Yao Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
M Ye Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
M H Ye China Center of Advanced Science and Technology, Beijing 100190, People's Republic of China
J H Yin Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y You Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
B X Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
C X Yu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Yu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J S Yu Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
T Yu University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X D Yu Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China
C Z Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Yuan Beihang University, Beijing 100191, People's Republic of China
S C Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z Y Yuan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
C X Yue Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
A A Zafar University of the Punjab, Lahore-54590, Pakistan
F R Zeng Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
S H Zeng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
X Zeng Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y Zeng Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
Y J Zeng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhai Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhai Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhan Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
A Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B L Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B X Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
D H Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
G Y Zhang Henan Normal University, Xinxiang 453007, People's Republic of China
H Zhang University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
H C Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H H Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
H Q Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
H Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
J Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
J J Zhang Shanxi Normal University, Linfen 041004, People's Republic of China
J L Zhang Henan University, Kaifeng 475004, People's Republic of China
J Q Zhang Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
J W Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J X Zhang Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Jianyu Zhang University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L M Zhang Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, People's Republic of China
L Q Zhang Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhang Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
P Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Q Y Zhang Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Shuihan Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Shulei Zhang Hunan University, Changsha 410082, People's Republic of China
X D Zhang North China Electric Power University, Beijing 102206, People's Republic of China
X M Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhang Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
Y Zhang University of Oxford, Keble Road, Oxford OX13RH, United Kingdom
Y T Zhang Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yan Zhang State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Yao Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z D Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z H Zhang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z L Zhang Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
Z Y Zhang Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
G Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Y Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Z Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Lei Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Ling Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
M G Zhao Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
R P Zhao University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S J Zhao Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001, People's Republic of China
Y B Zhao Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Y X Zhao Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou 730000, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Z G Zhao State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
A Zhemchugov Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Moscow region, Russia
B Zheng University of South China, Hengyang 421001, People's Republic of China
J P Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
W J Zheng Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
Y H Zheng University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
B Zhong Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing 210023, People's Republic of China
X Zhong Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510275, People's Republic of China
H Zhou Shandong University, Jinan 250100, People's Republic of China
L P Zhou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
X Zhou Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, People's Republic of China
X K Zhou Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, People's Republic of China
X R Zhou State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
X Y Zhou Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, People's Republic of China
Y Z Zhou Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
J Zhu Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, People's Republic of China
K Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
K J Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
L Zhu Jilin University, Changchun 130012, People's Republic of China
L X Zhu University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
S H Zhu University of Science and Technology Liaoning, Anshan 114051, People's Republic of China
S Q Zhu Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, People's Republic of China
T J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
W J Zhu Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, People's Republic of China
Y C Zhu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China
Z A Zhu Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J H Zou Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing 100049, People's Republic of China
J Zu State Key Laboratory of Particle Detection and Electronics, Beijing 100049, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, People's Republic of China

Collapse

[Application value of laparoscopic double stapler firings and double stapling technique combined with rectal eversion and total extra-abdominal resection in the sphincter-preserving resection of low rectal cancer]

Objectives: To investigate the application value of laparoscopic double stapler firings and double stapling technique combined with rectal eversion and total extra-abdominal resection (LDER) in the anal preservation treatment of low rectal cancer. Methods: Inclusion criteria: (1) age was 18-70; (2) the distance of the lower tumor edge from the anal verge was 4-5 cm; (3) primary tumor with a diameter ≤3 cm; (4) preoperative staging of T1~2N1~2M0; (5) "difficult pelvis", defined as ischial tuberosity diameter<10 cm or body mass index>25 kg/m2; (6) patients with strong intention for sphincter preservation; (7) no preoperative treatment (e.g., chemotherapy, radiotherapy, molecular targeted therapy, or immunotherapy); (8) no lateral lymph node enlargement; (9) no previous anorectal surgery; (10) patients with good basic condition who could tolerate surgery. Exclusion criteria: (1) previously suffered from malignant tumors of the digestive tract or currently suffering from malignant tumors out of the digestive tract; (2) patients with preoperative anal dysfunction (Wexner score ≥ 10), or fecal incontinence. The specific surgical steps are as follows: the distal end of the rectum was dissected to the level of the interspace between internal and external sphincters of anal canal. Five centimeters proximal to the tumor, the mesorectum was ligated, and a liner stapler was used to transect the rectum. The distal rectum with the tumor were then everted and extracted through the anus. The rectum was transected 0.5-1.0 cm distal to the tumor with a linear stapler. Full thickness suture was used to reinforce the stump of the rectum, which was then brought back into the pelvic cavity. Finally, an end-to-end anastomosis between the colon and the rectum was performed. A retrospective descriptive study was performed of the clinical and pathological data of 12 patients with T1-T2 stage low rectal cancer treated with LDER at Henan Provincial People's Hospital from January 2020 to December 2022. Results: All 12 patients successfully completed LDER with sphincter preservation, without conversion to open surgery or changes in surgical approach. The median surgical time was 272 (155-320) minutes, with a median bleeding volume of 100 (50-200) mL. No protective stoma was performed, and all patients received R0 resection. The average hospital stay was 9 (7-15) days. There were no postoperative anastomotic leakage or perioperative deaths. All 12 patients received postoperative follow-up, with a median follow-up of 12 months (6-36 months) and a Wexner score of 8 (5-14) at 6 months postoperatively. There was no tumor recurrence or metastasis during the follow-up period. Conclusions: LDER is safe and effective for the treatment of low rectal cancer.

Investigation of the ΔI=1/2 Rule and Test of CP Symmetry through the Measurement of Decay Asymmetry Parameters in Ξ^{-} Decays

Using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, numerous Ξ^{-} and Λ decay asymmetry parameters are simultaneously determined from the process J/ψ→Ξ^{-}Ξ[over ¯]^{+}→Λ(pπ^{-})π^{-}Λ[over ¯](n[over ¯]π^{0})π^{+} and its charge-conjugate channel. The precisions of α_{Λ0} for Λ→nπ^{0} and α[over ¯]_{Λ0} for Λ[over ¯]→n[over ¯]π^{0} compared to world averages are improved by factors of 4 and 1.7, respectively. The ratio of decay asymmetry parameters of Λ→nπ^{0} to that of Λ→pπ^{-}, ⟨α_{Λ0}⟩/⟨α_{Λ-}⟩, is determined to be 0.873±0.012_{-0.010}^{+0.011}, where the first and the second uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The ratio is smaller than unity more than 5σ, which signifies the existence of the ΔI=3/2 transition in Λ for the first time. Besides, we test for CP symmetry in Ξ^{-}→Λπ^{-} and in Λ→nπ^{0} with the best precision to date.

Observation of D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, Precision Test of Lepton Flavor Universality with D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}l^{+}ν_{l}, and First Measurements of D_{s}^{+}→η^{(')}μ^{+}ν_{μ} Decay Dynamics

By analyzing 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.128 and 4.226 GeV with the BESIII detector, we report the observation of the semileptonic decay D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ}, with a statistical significance larger than 10σ, and the measurements of the D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} decay dynamics for the first time. The branching fractions of D_{s}^{+}→ημ^{+}ν_{μ} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}μ^{+}ν_{μ} are determined to be (2.235±0.051_{stat}±0.052_{syst})% and (0.801±0.055_{stat}±0.028_{syst})%, respectively, with precision improved by factors of 6.0 and 6.6 compared to the previous best measurements. Combined with the results for the decays D_{s}^{+}→ηe^{+}ν_{e} and D_{s}^{+}→η^{'}e^{+}ν_{e}, the ratios of the decay widths are examined both inclusively and in several ℓ^{+}ν_{ℓ} four-momentum transfer ranges. No evidence for lepton flavor universality violation is found within the current statistics. The products of the hadronic form factors f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0) and the c→s Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element |V_{cs}| are determined. The results based on the two-parameter series expansion are f_{+,0}^{η}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.452±0.010_{stat}±0.007_{syst} and f_{+,0}^{η^{'}}(0)|V_{cs}|=0.504±0.037_{stat}±0.012_{syst}, which help to constrain present models on f_{+,0}^{η^{(')}}(0). The forward-backward asymmetries are determined to be ⟨A_{FB}^{η}⟩=-0.059±0.031_{stat}±0.005_{syst} and ⟨A_{FB}^{η^{'}}⟩=-0.064±0.079_{stat}±0.006_{syst} for the first time, which are consistent with the theoretical calculation.

[Quality control of lymph node dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer]

Numerous studies have confirmed that D2 lymphadenectomy is the standard surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer. Standardized lymph node dissection plays a crucial role in ensuring surgical quality and efficacy. It is recommended to perform D2 lymph node dissection according to the 6th edition of the Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines. For lymph nodes beyond the scope of D2 lymph node dissection, such as No.10, 13, 14v, 16 and mediastinal lymph nodes, selective D2+ lymph node dissection can be performed, which may be advantageous for some patients. Currently, omentectomy is the standard surgical procedure for locally advanced gastric cancer. However, the clinical significance of gastrectomy with preservation of the greater omentum requires further validation through large-scale clinical trials. Standardized ex vivo lymph node dissection is important for accurate postoperative staging, and it is recommended to harvest more than 30 lymph nodes to avoid staging deviation.

[The influence of Ras-associated binding protein 23 knockdown on the migration and invasion of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cells and its mechanism]

Objective: To investigate the role and the mechanism of Ras-associated binding protein23 (RAB23) in the migration and invasion of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) cells. Methods: RAB23 mRNA levels were measured in 16 pairs of ESCC and adjacent normal tissues via real-time polymerase chain reactions. RAB23 mRNA levels in the ESCC and adjacent normal tissues of dataset GSE20347 deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database were also analyzed. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) was used to detect the RAB23 protein expressions in 106 pairs of ESCC and adjacent normal tissues, as well as in the lymph glands and primary tumor tissues of 33 patients with positive lymph nodes and 10 patients with negative lymph nodes. Endogenous RAB23 expression was transiently depleted using siRNAs (si-NC, si-RAB23-1, and si-RAB23-9) or stably reduced using shRNAs (sh-NC and sh-RAB23) in ESCC KYSE30 and KYSE150 cells, and the knockdown efficiency was tested using Western blot assays. Cell counting kit-8 assays and mouse xenograft models were used to test the proliferation of ESCC cells. Transwell assays and tail vein-pulmonary metastasis models in immunocompromised mice were used to examine the migration and invasion of ESCC cells. Cell adhesion assays were used to test the adhesion of ESCC cells. RNA-seq assays were used to analyze how RAB23 knockdown influenced the expression profile of ESCC cells and the implicated signal pathways were confirmed using Western blot assays. Results: The RAB23 mRNA expression in 16 cases of ESCC tissues was 0.009 7±0.008 9, which was markedly higher than that in adjacent normal tissues (0.003 2±0.003 7, P=0.006). GEO analysis on RAB23 expressions in ESCC and adjacent normal tissues showed that the RAB23 mRNA level in ESCC tissues (4.30±0.25) was remarkably increased compared with their normal counterparts (4.10±0.17, P=0.037). Among the 106 pairs of ESCC and tumor-adjacent normal tissues, 51 cases exhibited low expression of RAB23 and 55 cases showed high expression of RAB23, whereas in the paired tumor-adjacent normal tissues 82 cases were stained weakly and 24 strongly for RAB23 protein. These results indicated that RAB23 expression was markedly increased in ESCC tissues (P<0.001). Additionally, only 1 out of 33 primary ESCC tissues with positive lymph nodes showed low RAB23 protein expression. On the other hand, 7 samples of primary ESCC tissues with negative lymph nodes were stained strongly for RAB23 while its level in the other 3 samples was weak. These results showed that RAB23 expression was remarkably increased in primary ESCC tissues with positive lymph nodes compared with those with negative lymph nodes (P=0.024). Further tests showed that 32 out of 33 positive lymph nodes were stained strongly for RAB23, whereas no negative lymph nodes (n=10) exhibited high expression of RAB23 (P<0.001). Both transient and stable knockdown of endogenous RAB23 expression failed to cause detectable changes in the proliferation of KYSE30 cells in vitro and in vivo, but attenuated the migration and invasion of KYSE30 cells as well as the invasion of KYSE150 cells. RAB23 knockdown was found to significantly decrease the number of adhesive KYSE30 cells in the sh-RAB23 group (313.75±89.34) compared with control cells in the sh-NC group (1 030.75±134.29, P<0.001). RAB23 knockdown was also found to significantly decrease the number of adhesive KYSE150 cells in the sh-RAB23 group (710.5±31.74) compared with the number of control cells in the sh-NC group (1 005.75±61.09, P<0.001). RNA-seq assays demonstrated that RAB23 knockdown using two siRNAs targeting RAB23 mRNA markedly impaired focal adhesion-related signal pathways, and decreased the levels of phosphorylated FAK (p-FAK) and phosphorylated paxillin (p-paxillin) in KYSE30 and KYSE150 cells. Conclusions: Significantly increased RAB23 in ESCC tissues positively correlates with lymph node metastasis. Depleted RAB23 expression attenuates focal adhesion-related signal pathways, thus impairing the invasion, metastasis, and adhesion of ESCC cells.

Determination of the Σ^{+} Timelike Electromagnetic Form Factors

Based on data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the process e^{+}e^{-}→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} is studied at center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=2.3960, 2.6454, and 2.9000 GeV. Using a fully differential angular description of the final state particles, both the relative magnitude and phase information of the Σ^{+} electromagnetic form factors in the timelike region are extracted. The relative phase between the electric and magnetic form factors is determined to be sinΔΦ=-0.67±0.29(stat)±0.18(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.3960  GeV, ΔΦ=55°±19°(stat)±14°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.6454  GeV, and 78°±22°(stat)±9°(syst) at sqrt[s]=2.9000  GeV. For the first time, the phase of the hyperon electromagnetic form factors is explored in a wide range of four-momentum transfer. The evolution of the phase along with four-momentum transfer is an important input for understanding its asymptotic behavior and the dynamics of baryons.

[Clinical implications of Naples prognostic scores in patients with resectable Siewert type II-III adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction]

Objective: To evaluate the clinical value of preoperative Naples prognostic scores (NPS) in patients with resectable Siewert type II-III esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma (AEG). Methods: In this retrospective observational study we collected and analyzed relevant data of patients with Siewert Type II-III AEG treated in the Department of Gastric Cancer, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from January 2014 to December 2018. NPS were calculated using preoperative albumin concentration, total cholesterol concentration, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, and lymphocyte/monocyte ratio and used to allocate patients into three groups: NTS-0 (0 points), NTS-1 (1-2 points) and NTS-2 (3-4 points). Kaplan-Meier was used to calculate disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in each NPS group and the log-rank test to compare these groups. Univariate and multivariate survival analyes were performed using the Cox regression model. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves were constructed to compare the relationships between four commonly used tools for evaluating inflammatory responses and nutritional status:NPS, systemic inflammatory response scores, nutrient control status (CONUT), and prognostic nutrition index (PNI). Results: The study cohort comprised 221 patients with AEG of median age 63.0 (36.0-87.0) years. There were 190 men (86.0%) and 31 women (14.0%). As to pTNM stage, 47 patients (21.3%) had Stage I disease, 68 (30.8%) Stage II, and 106 (48.0%) Stage III. One hundred and forty-seven patients (66.5%) had Siewert Type II disease and 74 (33.5%) Siewert type III. There were 45 patients (20.4%) in the NPS-0, 142 (64.2%) in the NPS-1 and 34 (15.4%) in the NPS-2 groups. Higher NPS scores were significantly associated with older patients (χ²=5.056, P=0.027) and higher TNM stages (H=5.204,P<0.001). The median follow-up was 39 (6-105) months; 16 patients (7.2%) were lost to follow-up. The median OS in the NPS-0, NPS-1, and NPS-2 groups were 78.4, 63.1, and 37.0 months, respectively; these differences are statistically significant (P=0.021). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis identified the following as independently and significantly associated with OS in patients with Siewert Type II-III: TNM stage (Stage II: HR=2.182, 95%CI: 1.227-3.878, P=0.008; Stage III: HR=3.534, 95%CI: 1.380-6.654, P<0.001), tumor differentiation (G3: HR=1.995, 95%CI: 1.141-3.488, P=0.015), vascular invasion (HR=2.172, 95%CI: 1.403-3.363, P<0.001), adjuvant chemotherapy (HR=0.326, 95%CI: 0.200-0.531, P<0.001), NPS (NPS-1: HR=2.331, 95%CI: 1.371-3.964, P=0.002; NPS-2: HR=2.494, 95%CI: 1.165-5.341, P=0.019), SIS group (NPS-1: HR=2.170, 95%CI: 1.244-3.784, P=0.006; NPS-2: HR=2.291, 95%CI: 1.052-4.986, P=0.037), and CONUT (HR=1.597, 95% CI: 1.187-2.149, P=0.038). The median DFS in the NPS-0, NPS-1, and NPS-2 groups was 68.6, 52.5, and 28.3 months, respectively; these differences are statistically significant (P=0.009). Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis identified the following as independently and significantly associated with DFS in patients with Siewert Type II-III AEG: TNM stage (StageⅡ: HR=2.789, 95%CI:1.210-6.428, P=0.016; Stage III: HR=10.721, 95%CI:4.709-24.411, P<0.001), adjuvant chemotherapy (HR=0.640, 95% CI: 0.432-0.946, P=0.025), and NPS (NPS-1: HR=1.703, 95%CI: 1.043-2.782, P=0.033; NPS-2: HR=3.124, 95%CI:1.722-5.666, P<0.001). Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves showed that NPS was more accurate in predicting OS and DFS in patients with Siewert Type II-III AEG than were systemic inflammatory response scores, CONUT, or PNI scores. Conclusion: NPS is associated with age and TNM stage, is an independent prognostic factor in patients who have undergone resection of Siewert type II-III AEG, and is better than SIS, CONUT, or PNI in predicting survival.

[Swyer syndrome with gonadal non-dysgerminoma malignant germ cell tumors: a report of 15 cases in a national medical center]

Objective: To evaluate the incidence, treatment, and survival outcomes of Swyer syndrome with gonadal non-dysgerminoma malignant germ cell tumor (MGCT-NDG). Methods: A retrospective study was performed on Swyer syndrome patients with MGCT-NDG between January 2011 and December 2022 in Peking Union Medical College Hospital to investigate their characteristics and outcomes. Results: A total of 15 patients (4.9%, 15/307) with Swyer syndrome were identified in 307 MGCT-NDG patients. The average age at diagnosis of MGCT-NDG and Swyer syndrome were (16.8±6.7) and (16.7±6.6) years, respectively. Six cases were preoperatively diagnosed as Swyer syndrome, of which 4 cases received bilateral gonadectomy with or without hysterectomy, while the other 2 cases underwent removal of gonadal tumor and unilateral gonadectomy with hysterectomy, respectively. Of the 9 patients postoperatively diagnosed as Swyer syndrome, unilateral gonadectomy, removal of gonadal tumor, and unilateral gonadectomy with hysterectomy were performed in 6 patients, 2 patients, and 1 patient, respectively. Mixed malignant germ cell tumor (MGCT;10 cases), yolk sac tumor (4 cases), and immature teratoma (1 case) were the pathological subtypes, in the descending order. There were International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage Ⅰ in 6 cases, stage Ⅱ in 3 cases, stage Ⅲ in 5 cases, and stage Ⅳ in 1 case, respectively. Eleven patients received reoperation for residual gonadectomy after a average delay of (7.9±6.2) months, including 8 MGCT-NDG patients and 1 gonadoblastoma patient, no tumor involved was seen in the remaining gonads in the other 2 cases. Ten patients experienced at least one recurrence, with a median event free survival of 9 months (5, 30 months), of which 2 patients received surgery only at the time of initial treatment. All patients with recurrence received surgery and combined with postoperative chemotherapy. After a median follow-up of 25 months (15, 42 months), 10 patients were disease-free, 3 patients died of the tumor, 1 died of side effects of leukemia chemotherapy, and 1 survived with disease. Conclusion: The incidence rate of Swyer syndrome in patients with MGCT-NDG is about 4.9%; timely diagnosis and bilateral gonadectomy should be emphasized to reduce the risk of reoperation and second carcinogenesis in this population.

First Measurement of the Decay Asymmetry in the Pure W-Boson-Exchange Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+}

Based on 4.4  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data collected at the center-of-mass energies between 4.60 and 4.70 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, the pure W-boson-exchange decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Ξ^{0}K^{+} is studied with a full angular analysis. The corresponding decay asymmetry is measured for the first time to be α_{Ξ^{0}K^{+}}=0.01±0.16(stat)±0.03(syst). This result reflects the noninterference effect between the S- and P-wave amplitudes. The phase shift between S- and P-wave amplitudes has two solutions, which are δ_{p}-δ_{s}=-1.55±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad or 1.59±0.25(stat)±0.05(syst)  rad.

[A study of the clinical curative effect of nucleos(t)ide analogues treated to pegylated interferon-α add-on therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B]

Objective: To investigate the hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) clearance condition and its predictive factors after treatment with nucleos(t)ide analogues to pegylated interferon-α add-on therapy in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Methods: Patients with chronic hepatitis B who visited the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from 2018~2019 were prospectively enrolled. HBsAg≤ 1500 IU/mL, hepatitis B e antigen-negative, HBV DNA undetectable, received antiviral treatment with nucleos(t)ide analogues for at least one year, and pegylated interferon-α add-on therapy for 48 weeks were included. The primary endpoint of study was to determine the proportion of HBsAg clearance at 72 weeks. Concurrently, the predictive factors for HBsAg clearance were analyzed. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed using a t-test or non-parametric test and a Fisher's exact test. Results: A total of 38 cases were included in this study, of which 13 cases obtained HBsAg clearance at 48 weeks of therapy and another six cases obtained HBsAg clearance throughout the extended treatment period of 72 weeks, accounting for 50.00% of all enrolled patients. There was a significant difference in HBsAg dynamics between the HBsAg clearance group and the non-clearance group (P < 0.05). Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that patients' age, baseline, 12-and 24-week HBsAg levels, and early HBsAg reduction were predictive factors for HBsAg clearance at 72 weeks of treatment. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that age (OR = 1.311; P = 0.016; 95% confidence interval: 1.051~1.635) and HBsAg levels at 24 weeks of treatment (OR = 4.481; P = 0.004; 95% confidence interval: 1.634~12.290) were independent predictors for HBsAg clearance. Conclusion: Hepatitis B e antigen-negative, nucleos(t)ide analogue treated, HBsAg ≤ 1500 IU/mL, and HBV DNA undetectable, peg-IFNα add-on treatment for 48 weeks could promote HBsAg clearance in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Six of the sixteen cases (37.50%) who did not obtain HBsAg clearance at week 48 did so with the course of therapy extended to week 72. Hence, the optimal individualized treatment strategy should be customized according to the predictors rather than the fixed 48-week course. Age (≤ 38), baseline HBsAg level (≤2.86 log(10)IU/ml), HBsAg level at 24 weeks (≤ 0.92 log(10)IU/ml), and 12-week HBsAg decrease from baseline (≥ 0.67 log(10)IU/ml) indicate that patients are highly likely to obtain HBsAg clearance at the 72 weeks of combination therapy, in which the combined indicator based on HBsAg level ≤0.92 log(10)IU/ml at 24 weeks will identify 85.0% to 100.0% of patients with HBsAg clearance.

Environmental factors influencing potential distribution of Schisandra sphenanthera and its accumulation of medicinal components

Schisandrae Sphenantherae Fructus (SSF), the dry ripe fruit of Schisandra sphenanthera Rehd. et Wils., is a traditional Chinese medicine with wide application potential. The quality of SSF indicated by the composition and contents of secondary metabolites is closely related to environmental factors, such as regional climate and soil conditions. The aims of this study were to predict the distribution patterns of potentially suitable areas for S. sphenanthera in China and pinpoint the major environmental factors influencing its accumulation of medicinal components. An optimized maximum entropy model was developed and applied under current and future climate scenarios (SSP1-RCP2.6, SSP3-RCP7, and SSP5-RCP8.5). Results show that the total suitable areas for S. sphenanthera (179.58×104 km2) cover 18.71% of China's territory under the current climatic conditions (1981-2010). Poorly, moderately, and highly suitable areas are 119.00×104 km2, 49.61×104 km2, and 10.98×104 km2, respectively. The potentially suitable areas for S. sphenanthera are predicted to shrink and shift westward under the future climatic conditions (2041-2070 and 2071-2100). The areas of low climate impact are located in southern Shaanxi, northwestern Guizhou, southeastern Chongqing, and western Hubei Provinces (or Municipality), which exhibit stable and high suitability under different climate scenarios. The contents of volatile oils, lignans, and polysaccharides in SSF are correlated with various environmental factors. The accumulation of major secondary metabolites is primarily influenced by temperature variation, seasonal precipitation, and annual precipitation. This study depicts the potential distribution of S. sphenanthera in China and its spatial change in the future. Our findings decipher the influence of habitat environment on the geographical distribution and medicinal quality of S. sphenanthera, which could have great implications for natural resource conservation and artificial cultivation.

[Comparison of 1-year outcomes between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y duodenojejunal bypass in the patients of obesity with type 2 diabetes mellitus]

Objective: To compare the 1-year effects of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y duodenal bypass (SG+RYDJB) on weight loss, remission of diabetes, and postoperative complications in patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes. Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from January 2020 to December 2020. Sixty-four patients with type 2 diabetes and body mass index (BMI) of 27.5-40.0 kg/m2 were included in this study and divided into the RYGB group (n=34) and the SG+RYDJB group (n=30). In both procedures, the biliopancreatic branch was measured 100 cm distal to the Treitz ligament, and the food branch was measured 100 cm distal to the gastric or duodenojejunal anastomosis. Patients were followed up by telephone or WeChat, a free messaging and calling app at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively to determine their weight loss and remission of diabetes. The primary outcomes were the weight loss and reduction in blood glucose concentrations at 1 year after surgery and postoperative complications. Other postoperative changes, including body weight, BMI, percentage of total weight loss (%TWL), percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and fasting blood glucose at 1 year after surgery were also assessed. Results: There were no significant differences in baseline data between the two groups (all P>0.05). No conversion to open surgery or death occurred in either group. Operation time was longer in the SG+RYDJB than the RYGB group (137.8±22.1 minutes vs. 80.0±24.9 minutes, t=9.779, P<0.001) and the incidence of perioperative complications was higher in the SG+RYDJB than the RYGB group (20% [6/30] vs. 2.9% [1/34], χ2=4.761, P=0.029). However, the postoperative hospital stay was similar between the two groups [3.0 (3.0, 4.3) days vs. 3.0 (4.0, 6.0) days, U=641.500, P=0.071]. Perioperative complications comprised small gastric pouch anastomotic leakage in one patient in the RYGB group and leakage (three patients) and bleeding (two patients with gastrointestinal bleeding and one with trocar site bleeding) in the SG+RYDJB group. Long-term complications were as follows. The incidence of anemia was significantly higher in the RYGB than the SG+RYDJB group (26.5% [9/34] vs. 3.3% [1/30], χ2=6.472, P=0.011). However, there were no significant differences in incidences of postoperative reflux, dumping syndrome, alopecia, diarrhea, constipation or foul-smelling flatus between the two groups (all P>0.05). Compared with 1 year before surgery, the body weights and fasting plasma glucose concentrations of patients in the SG+RYDJB and RYGB group (72.4±10.6 kg vs. 98.5±14.2 kg, respectively; 68.2±10.0 kg vs. 91.9±14.8 kg, respectively), BMI (25.2±2.9 kg/m2 vs. 34.3±4.2 kg/m2, respectively; 24.3±2.4 kg/m2 vs. 32.7±3.7 kg/m2, respectively) (5.5±1.6 vs. 10.6±3.3, respectively; 5.8±2.1 vs. 9.0±3.4, respectively); HbA1c (5.7±0.8 vs. 9.7±1.2, respectively; 9.1±1.9 vs. 5.9±0.9, respectively) were significantly lower at 1 year after surgery (all P<0.05). However, the % TWL (26.5%±6.0% vs. 25.6%±4.4%, t=0.663, P=0.510) and % EWL (109.1%±38.2% vs. 109.4%±40.3%, t=-0.026, P=0.026), rate of complete remission of diabetes at 1 year (80.0% [24/30] vs. 82.4% [28/34], χ2=0.058, P=0.810] did not differ significantly between the two groups (all P>0.05). Conclusions: Although SG+RYDJB surgery compared with RYGB is more difficult to perform, it can achieve similar weight loss and remission of diabetes and is associated with a lower incidence of anemia because of the preservation of the pylorus.

Test of CP Symmetry in Hyperon to Neutron Decays

The quantum entangled J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-} pairs from (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events taken by the BESIII detector are used to study the nonleptonic two-body weak decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-}. The CP-odd weak decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→nπ^{+} (α_{+}) and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→n[over ¯]π^{-} (α[over ¯]_{-}) are determined to be 0.0481±0.0031_{stat}±0.0019_{syst} and -0.0565±0.0047_{stat}±0.0022_{syst}, respectively. The decay parameter α[over ¯]_{-} is measured for the first time, and the accuracy of α_{+} is improved by a factor of 4 compared to the previous results. The simultaneously determined decay parameters allow the first precision CP symmetry test for any hyperon decay with a neutron in the final state with the measurement of A_{CP}=(α_{+}+α[over ¯]_{-})/(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})=-0.080±0.052_{stat}±0.028_{syst}. Assuming CP conservation, the average decay parameter is determined as ⟨α_{+}⟩=(α_{+}-α[over ¯]_{-})/2=-0.0506±0.0026_{stat}±0.0019_{syst}, while the ratios α_{+}/α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{-}/α[over ¯]_{0} are -0.0490±0.0032_{stat}±0.0021_{syst} and -0.0571±0.0053_{stat}±0.0032_{syst}, where α_{0} and α[over ¯]_{0} are the decay parameters of the decays Σ^{+}→pπ^{0} and Σ[over ¯]^{-}→p[over ¯]π^{0}, respectively.

Measurement of Energy-Dependent Pair-Production Cross Section and Electromagnetic Form Factors of a Charmed Baryon

We study the process e^{+}e^{-}→Λ_{c}^{+}Λ[over ¯]_{c}^{-} at twelve center-of-mass energies from 4.6119 to 4.9509 GeV using data samples collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The Born cross sections and effective form factors (|G_{eff}|) are determined with unprecedented precision after combining the single and double-tag methods based on the decay process Λ_{c}^{+}→pK^{-}π^{+}. Flat cross sections around 4.63 GeV are obtained and no indication of the resonant structure Y(4630), as reported by Belle, is found. In addition, no oscillatory behavior is discerned in the |G_{eff}| energy dependence of Λ_{c}^{+}, in contrast to what is seen for the proton and neutron cases. Analyzing the cross section together with the polar-angle distribution of the Λ_{c}^{+} baryon at each energy point, the moduli of electric and magnetic form factors (|G_{E}| and |G_{M}|) are extracted and separated. For the first time, the energy dependence of the form factor ratio |G_{E}/G_{M}| is observed, which can be well described by an oscillatory function.

Genome-Wide Identification and Characterization of the bHLH Gene Family and Its Response to Abiotic Stresses in Carthamus tinctorius

The basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription factors possess DNA-binding and dimerization domains and are involved in various biological and physiological processes, such as growth and development, the regulation of secondary metabolites, and stress response. However, the bHLH gene family in C. tinctorius has not been investigated. In this study, we performed a genome-wide identification and analysis of bHLH transcription factors in C. tinctorius. A total of 120 CtbHLH genes were identified, distributed across all 12 chromosomes, and classified into 24 subfamilies based on their phylogenetic relationships. Moreover, the 120 CtbHLH genes were subjected to comprehensive analyses, including protein sequence alignment, evolutionary assessment, motif prediction, and the analysis of promoter cis-acting elements. The promoter region analysis revealed that CtbHLH genes encompass cis-acting elements and were associated with various aspects of plant growth and development, responses to phytohormones, as well as responses to both abiotic and biotic stresses. Expression profiles, sourced from transcriptome databases, indicated distinct expression patterns among these CtbHLH genes, which appeared to be either tissue-specific or specific to certain cultivars. To further explore their functionality, we determined the expression levels of fifteen CtbHLH genes known to harbor motifs related to abiotic and hormone responses. This investigation encompassed treatments with ABA, salt, drought, and MeJA. The results demonstrated substantial variations in the expression patterns of CtbHLH genes in response to these abiotic and hormonal treatments. In summary, our study establishes a solid foundation for future inquiries into the roles and regulatory mechanisms of the CtbHLH gene family.

Determination of Spin-Parity Quantum Numbers for the Narrow Structure near the pΛ[over ¯] Threshold in e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c

A narrow structure in the pΛ[over ¯] system near the mass threshold, named as X(2085), is observed in the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] with a statistical significance greater than 20σ. Its spin and parity are determined for the first time to be J^{P}=1^{+} in an amplitude analysis, with a statistical significance greater than 5σ over other quantum numbers (0^{-},1^{-} and 2^{+}). The pole positions of X(2085) are measured to be M_{pole}=(2084_{-2}^{+4}±9)  MeV and Γ_{pole}=(58_{-3}^{+4}±25)  MeV, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The analysis is based on the study of the process e^{+}e^{-}→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯] and uses the data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the center-of-mass energies sqrt[s]=4.008, 4.178, 4.226, 4.258, 4.416, and 4.682 GeV with a total integrated luminosity of 8.35  fb^{-1}.

Precise Measurement of the e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} Cross Sections at Center-of-Mass Energies from Threshold to 4.95 GeV

The process e^{+}e^{-}→D_{s}^{*+}D_{s}^{*-} is studied with a semi-inclusive method using data samples at center-of-mass energies from threshold to 4.95 GeV collected with the BESIII detector operating at the Beijing Electron Positron Collider. The Born cross sections of the process are measured for the first time with high precision in this energy region. Two resonance structures are observed in the energy-dependent cross sections around 4.2 and 4.4 GeV. By fitting the cross sections with a coherent sum of three Breit-Wigner amplitudes and one phase-space amplitude, the two significant structures are assigned masses of (4186.8±8.7±30) and (4414.6±3.4±6.1)  MeV/c^{2}, widths of (55±15±53) and (122.5±7.5±8.1)  MeV, where the first errors are statistical and the second ones are systematic. The inclusion of a third Breit-Wigner amplitude is necessary to describe a structure around 4.79 GeV.

First Experimental Study of the Purely Leptonic Decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}

Using 7.33  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data taken with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we report the first experimental study of the purely leptonic decay D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e}. Our data contain a signal of this decay with a statistical significance of 2.9σ. The branching fraction of D_{s}^{*+}→e^{+}ν_{e} is measured to be (2.1_{-0.9_{stat}}^{+1.2}±0.2_{syst})×10^{-5}, corresponding to an upper limit of 4.0×10^{-5} at the 90% confidence level. Taking the total width of the D_{s}^{*+} [(0.070±0.028)  keV] predicted with the radiative D_{s}^{*+} decay from the lattice QCD calculation as input, the decay constant of the D_{s}^{*+} is determined to be f_{D_{s}^{*+}}=(214_{-46_{stat}}^{+61}±44_{syst})  MeV, corresponding to an upper limit of 354 MeV at the 90% confidence level.

Clinical prior Knowledge-Based One-Shot Learning for Automatic Delineation of Clinical Target Volumes in Adaptation Radiotherapy of Cervical Cancer

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

Rapid and accurate delineation of clinical target volumes (CTV) of cervical cancer is the crux to ensure the efficiency and benefits of adaptation radiotherapy (ART). However, contour propagation using deformation image registration (DIR) is difficult to ensure the accuracy of CTV contours due to the significant tumor recession in next fraction, and the tumor progress in each fraction is not considered by conventional automatic delineation methods based on deep learning (DL). Currently, one-shot learning (OSL) is feasible to learn the tumor progress from former fractions to improve the accuracy of automatically delineating CTV.

MATERIALS/METHODS

We retrospectively collected 45 patients with cervical cancer from January 2021 to May 2022 in our department. All patients consist of a pair of planning CT and daily CT in ART. A personalized automatic delineation method based on one-shot learning was developed to delineate CTV in daily CT by learning the clinical prior knowledge from the CTV contours and images of planning CT. The performance of our proposed method was evaluated by dice similarity coefficient (DSC), 95% Harsdorff distance (95HD) and average surface distance (ASD) with human experts, and its automatic delineation performance were compared with DIR and DL in daily CT.

RESULTS

Our automatic delineation method OSL performed the best results in all evaluation metrics (denoted by mean ± standard deviation) as shown in Table 1, it is superior to method DL: 0.92 & 0.90 of DSC, 2.33 mm & 2.68 mm of HD95, 0.68 mm & 0.82 mm of ASD, P < 0.05 for DSC and ASD. Specifically, our method is significantly superior to the automatic delineation results by method DIR: 0.92 & 0.84 of DSC, 2.33 mm & 4.11 mm of HD95, 0.68 mm & 1.52 mm of ASD, P < 0.05 for all. In addition, OSL can significantly overcome the delineation problems in fuzzy boundary and delineation missing and perform better generalization for some unusual images, compared with DIR and DL.

CONCLUSION

We proposed an automatic delineation method based on one-shot learning for CTV of cervical cancer in ART, the results demonstrated that the proposed method could improve the precision and generalization of automatically delineating CTV compared against current popular methods. Therefore, it is potential to improve the quality and efficiency of ART for personalized patients and have a positive impact on tumor control and patient survival.

Search for Λ[over ¯]-Λ Baryon-Number-Violating Oscillations in the Decay J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c

We report on the first search for Λ[over ¯]-Λ oscillations in the decay J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c. by analyzing 1.31×10^{9}  J/ψ events accumulated with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The J/ψ events are produced using e^{+}e^{-} collisions at a center of mass energy sqrt[s]=3.097  GeV. No evidence for hyperon oscillations is observed. The upper limit for the oscillation rate of Λ[over ¯] to Λ hyperons is determined to be P(Λ)=[B(J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ+c.c.)/B(J/ψ→pK^{-}Λ[over ¯]+c.c.)]<4.4×10^{-6} corresponding to an oscillation parameter δm_{ΛΛ[over ¯]} of less than 3.8×10^{-18}  GeV at the 90% confidence level.

Preoperative contrast-enhanced CT-based radiomics signature for predicting hypoxia-inducible factor 1α expression in retroperitoneal sarcoma

AIM

To develop and test a contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT)-based radiomics signature (RS) to preoperatively predict hypoxia-inducible factor 1α (HIF-1α) expression in retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 129 patients with RPS retrospectively who underwent CECT, including 64 male and 65 female patients (55 [2-84] years). Participants were divided into a training set comprising 85 patients and a test set comprising 44 patients. Clinical data and CECT findings of all patients were collected. RS construction was performed by the minimum redundancy maximum relevance method and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator algorithm. The clinical information was analysed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The RS and risk factors were included to build a radiomics nomogram. The predictive efficacy of different models was evaluated by accuracy, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

The RS combined signature was constructed on the basis of multi-phase CECT and had an accuracy of 0.795 and an AUC of 0.719 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.552-0.886) in the test set, which were higher than that of the radiomics nomogram (accuracy: 0.636; AUC: 0.702 [95% CI, 0.547-0.857]) and the clinical model (accuracy: 0.682; AUC: 0.486 [95% CI, 0.324-0.647]). The decision curve analysis showed that the RS combined signature provided better clinical application than the clinical model and radiomics nomogram.

CONCLUSIONS

The multi-phase CECT-based RS constructed can be used as a powerful tool for predicting HIF-1α expression in patients with RPS.

[Prognostic value of a predictive model comprising preoperative inflammatory response and nutritional indexes in patients with gastric cancer]

Objective: To investigate the prognostic value of preoperative inflammatory and nutritional condition detection in the postoperative survival, and establish a prognostic model for predicting the survival of patients with gastric cancer. Methods: The clinicopathological data of 1123 patients with gastric cancer who had undergone radical gastrectomy in Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital from January 2005 to December 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with history of other malignancy, with history of gastrectomy, who had received preoperative treatment, who died during the initial hospital stay or first postoperative month, and missing clinical and pathological information were excluded. Cox univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify independent clinicopathological factors associated with the survival of these gastric cancer patients. Cox univariate analysis was used to identify preoperative inflammatory and nutritional indexes related to the survival of patients with gastric cancer after radical gastrectomy. Moreover, the Cox proportional regression model for multivariate survival analysis (forward stepwise regression method based on maximum likelihood estimation) was used. The independent clinicopathological factors that affect survival were incorporated into the following three new prognostic models: (1) an inflammatory model: significant preoperative inflammatory indexes identified through clinical and univariate analysis; (2) a nutritional model: significant preoperative nutritional indexes identified through clinical and univariate analysis; and (3) combined inflammatory/nutritional model: significant preoperative inflammatory and nutritional indexes identified through clinical and univariate analysis. A model that comprised only pT and pN stages in tumor TNM staging was used as a control model. The integrated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (iAUC) and C-index were used to evaluate the discrimination of the model. Model fitting was evaluated by Akaike information criterion analysis. Calibration curves were used to assess agreement between the predicted probabilities and actual probabilities at 3-year or 5-year overall survival (OS). Results: The study cohort comprised 1 123 patients with gastric cancer. The mean age was 58.9±11.6 years, and 783 were males. According to univariate analysis, age, surgical procedure, extent of lymph node dissection, tumor location, maximum tumor size, number of examined lymph nodes, pT stage, pN stage, and nerve invasion were associated with 5-year OS after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer (all P<0.050). Multivariate analysis further identified age (HR: 1.18, 95%CI: 1.03-1.36, P=0.019), maximum tumor size (HR: 1.19, 95%CI: 1.03-1.38, P=0.022), number of examined lymph nodes (HR: 0.79, 95%CI: 0.68-0.92, P=0.003), pT stage (HR: 1.40, 95%CI: 1.26-1.55, P<0.001) and pN stage (HR: 1.28, 95%CI: 1.21-1.35, P<0.001) as independent prognostic factors for OS of gastric cancer patients. Additionally, according to univariate survival analysis, the preoperative inflammatory markers of neutrophil count, percentage of neutrophils, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, platelet/neutrophil ratio and preoperative nutritional indicators of serum albumin and body mass index were potential prognostic factors for gastric cancer (all P<0.05). On the basis of the above results, three models for prediction of prognosis were constructed. Variables included in the three models are as follows. (1) Inflammatory model: age, maximum tumor size, number of examined lymph nodes, pT stage, pN stage, percentage of neutrophils, and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio; (2) nutritional model: age, maximum tumor size, number of examined lymph nodes, pT stage, pN stage, and serum albumin; and (3) combined inflammatory/nutritional model: age, maximum tumor size, number of examined lymph nodes, pT stage, pN stage, percentage of neutrophils, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, and serum albumin. We found that the predictive accuracy of the combined inflammatory/nutritional model, which incorporates both inflammatory indicators and nutrition indicators (iAUC: 0.676, 95% CI: 0.650-0.719, C-index: 0.698),was superior to that of the inflammation model (iAUC: 0.662, 95% CI: 0.673-0.706;C-index: 0.675), nutritional model (iAUC: 0.666, 95% CI: 0.642-0.698, C-index: 0.672), and TNM staging control model (iAUC: 0.676, 95% CI: 0.650-0.719, C-index: 0.658). Furthermore, the combined inflammatory/nutritional model had better fitting performance (AIC: 10 762) than the inflammatory model (AIC: 10 834), nutritional model (AIC: 10 810), and TNM staging control model (AIC: 10 974). Conclusions: Preoperative percentage of neutrophils, NLR, and BMI have predictive value for the prognosis of gastric cancer patients. The inflammatory / nutritional model can be used to predict the survival and prognosis of gastric cancer patients on an individualized basis.

First Study of Reaction Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p Using Ξ^{0}-Nucleus Scattering at an Electron-Positron Collider

Using (1.0087±0.0044)×10^{10}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII storage ring, the process Ξ^{0}n→Ξ^{-}p is studied, where the Ξ^{0} baryon is produced in the process J/ψ→Ξ^{0}Ξ[over ¯]^{0} and the neutron is a component of the ^{9}Be, ^{12}C, and ^{197}Au nuclei in the beam pipe. A clear signal is observed with a statistical significance of 7.1σ. The cross section of the reaction Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be is determined to be σ(Ξ^{0}+^{9}Be→Ξ^{-}+p+^{8}Be)=(22.1±5.3_{stat}±4.5_{sys})  mb at the Ξ^{0} momentum of 0.818  GeV/c, where the first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic. No significant H-dibaryon signal is observed in the Ξ^{-}p final state. This is the first study of hyperon-nucleon interactions in electron-positron collisions and opens up a new direction for such research.

Measurements of Normalized Differential Cross Sections of Inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} Production in e^{+}e^{-} Annihilation at Energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV

Based on electron positron collision data collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage rings, the differential cross sections of inclusive π^{0} and K_{S}^{0} production as a function of hadron momentum, normalized by the total cross section of the e^{+}e^{-}→hadrons process, are measured at six center-of-mass energies from 2.2324 to 3.6710 GeV. Our results, which cover a relative hadron energy range from 0.1 to 0.9, significantly deviate from several theoretical calculations based on existing fragmentation functions.

Improved Measurement of the Evolution of the Reactor Antineutrino Flux and Spectrum at Daya Bay

Reactor neutrino experiments play a crucial role in advancing our knowledge of neutrinos. In this Letter, the evolution of the flux and spectrum as a function of the reactor isotopic content is reported in terms of the inverse-beta-decay yield at Daya Bay with 1958 days of data and improved systematic uncertainties. These measurements are compared with two signature model predictions: the Huber-Mueller model based on the conversion method and the SM2018 model based on the summation method. The measured average flux and spectrum, as well as the flux evolution with the ^{239}Pu isotopic fraction, are inconsistent with the predictions of the Huber-Mueller model. In contrast, the SM2018 model is shown to agree with the average flux and its evolution but fails to describe the energy spectrum. Altering the predicted inverse-beta-decay spectrum from ^{239}Pu fission does not improve the agreement with the measurement for either model. The models can be brought into better agreement with the measurements if either the predicted spectrum due to ^{235}U fission is changed or the predicted ^{235}U, ^{238}U, ^{239}Pu, and ^{241}Pu spectra are changed in equal measure.

Precision Measurement of the Decay Σ^{+}→pγ in the Process J/ψ→Σ^{+}Σ[over ¯]^{-}

Using (10 087±44)×10^{6} J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector, the radiative hyperon decay Σ^{+}→pγ is studied at an electron-positron collider experiment for the first time. The absolute branching fraction is measured to be (0.996±0.021_{stat}±0.018_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is lower than its world average value by 4.2 standard deviations. Its decay asymmetry parameter is determined to be -0.652±0.056_{stat}±0.020_{syst}. The branching fraction and decay asymmetry parameter are the most precise to date, and the accuracies are improved by 78% and 34%, respectively.

[Differences in clinicopathological features, gene mutations, and prognosis between primary gastric and intestinal gastrointestinal stromal tumors in 1061 patients]

Objective: To analyze the clinicopathological features and gene mutations of primary gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) of the stomach and intestine and the prognosis of intermediate- and high-risk GISTs. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. Data of patients with GISTs admitted to Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital from January 2011 to December 2019 were collected retrospectively. Patients with primary gastric or intestinal disease who had undergone endoscopic or surgical resection of the primary lesion and were confirmed pathologically as GIST were included. Patients treated with targeted therapy preoperatively were excluded. The above criteria were met by 1061 patients with primary GISTs, 794 of whom had gastric GISTs and 267 intestinal GISTs. Genetic testing had been performed in 360 of these patients since implementation of Sanger sequencing in our hospital in October 2014. Gene mutations in KIT exons 9, 11, 13, and 17 and PDGFRA exons 12 and 18 were detected by Sanger sequencing. The factors investigated in this study included: (1) clinicopathological data, such as sex, age, primary tumor location, maximum tumor diameter, histological type, mitotic index (/5 mm²), and risk classification; (2) gene mutation; (3) follow-up, survival, and postoperative treatment; and (4) prognostic factors of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for intermediate- and high-risk GIST. Results: (1) Clinicopathological features: The median ages of patients with primary gastric and intestinal GIST were 61 (8-85) years and 60 (26-80) years, respectively; The median maximum tumor diameters were 4.0 (0.3-32.0) cm and 6.0 (0.3-35.0) cm, respectively; The median mitotic indexes were 3 (0-113)/5 mm² and 3 (0-50)/5 mm², respectively; The median Ki-67 proliferation indexes were 5% (1%-80%) and 5% (1%-50%), respectively. The rates of positivity for CD117, DOG-1, and CD34 were 99.7% (792/794), 99.9% (731/732), 95.6% (753/788), and 100.0% (267/267), 100.0% (238/238), 61.5% (163/265), respectively. There were higher proportions of male patients (χ²=6.390, P=0.011), tumors of maximum diameter > 5.0 cm (χ²=33.593, P<0.001), high-risk (χ²=94.957, P<0.001), and CD34-negativity (χ²=203.138, P<0.001) among patients with intestinal GISTs than among those with gastric GISTs. (2) Gene mutations: Gene mutations were investigated in 286/360 patients (79.4%) with primary gastric GISTs and 74/360 (20.6%) with primary intestinal GISTs. Among the 286 patients with gastric primary GISTs, 79.4% (227/286), 8.4% (24/286), and 12.2% (35/286), had KIT mutations, PDGFRA mutations, and wild-type, respectively. Among the 74 patients with primary intestinal GISTs, 85.1% (63/74) had KIT mutations and 14.9% (11/74) were wild-type. The PDGFRA mutation rate was lower in patients with intestinal GISTs than in those with gastric GISTs[ 0% vs. 8.4%(24/286), χ²=6.770, P=0.034], whereas KIT exon 9 mutations occurred more often in those with intestinal GISTs [22.2% (14/63) vs. 1.8% (4/227), P<0.001]. There were no significant differences between gastric and intestinal GISTs in the rates of KIT exon 11 mutation type and KIT exon 11 deletion mutation type (both P>0.05). (3) Follow-up, survival, and postoperative treatment: After excluding 228 patients with synchronous and metachronous other malignant tumors, the remaining 833 patients were followed up for 6-124 (median 53) months with a follow-up rate of 88.6% (738/833). None of the patients with very low or low-risk gastric (n=239) or intestinal GISTs (n=56) had received targeted therapy postoperatively. Among 179 patients with moderate-risk GISTs, postoperative targeted therapy had been administered to 88/155 with gastric and 11/24 with intestinal GISTs. Among 264 patients with high-risk GISTs, postoperative targeted therapy had been administered to 106/153 with gastric and 62/111 with intestinal GISTs. The 3-, 5-, and 10-year PFS of patients with gastric or intestinal GISTs were 96.5%, 93.8%, and 87.6% and 85.7%, 80.1% and 63.3%, respectively (P<0.001). The 3-, 5-, and 10-year OS were 99.2%, 98.8%, 97.5% and 94.8%, 92.1%, 85.0%, respectively (P<0.001). (4) Analysis of predictors of intermediate- and high-risk GISTs: The 5-year PFS of patients with gastric and intestinal GISTs were 89.5% and 73.2%, respectively (P<0.001); The 5-year OS were 97.9% and 89.3%, respectively (P<0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that high risk (HR=2.918, 95%CI: 1.076-7.911, P=0.035) and Ki-67 proliferation index > 5% (HR=2.778, 95%CI: 1.389-5.558, P=0.004) were independent risk factors for PFS in patients with intermediate- and high-risk GISTs (both P<0.05). Intestinal GISTs (HR=3.485, 95%CI: 1.407-8.634, P=0.007) and high risk (HR=3.753,95%CI:1.079-13.056, P=0.038) were independent risk factors for OS in patients with intermediate- and high-risk GISTs (both P<0.05). Postoperative targeted therapy was independent protective factor for PFS and OS (HR=0.103, 95%CI: 0.049-0.213, P<0.001; HR=0.210, 95%CI:0.078-0.564,P=0.002). Conclusions: Primary intestinal GIST behaves more aggressively than gastric GISTs and more frequently progress after surgery. Moreover, CD34 negativity and KIT exon 9 mutations occur more frequently in patients with intestinal GISTs than in those with gastric GISTs.

Precision Measurement of Reactor Antineutrino Oscillation at Kilometer-Scale Baselines by Daya Bay

We present a new determination of the smallest neutrino mixing angle θ_{13} and the mass-squared difference Δm_{32}^{2} using a final sample of 5.55×10^{6} inverse beta-decay (IBD) candidates with the final-state neutron captured on gadolinium. This sample is selected from the complete dataset obtained by the Daya Bay reactor neutrino experiment in 3158 days of operation. Compared to the previous Daya Bay results, selection of IBD candidates has been optimized, energy calibration refined, and treatment of backgrounds further improved. The resulting oscillation parameters are sin^{2}2θ_{13}=0.0851±0.0024, Δm_{32}^{2}=(2.466±0.060)×10^{-3}  eV^{2} for the normal mass ordering or Δm_{32}^{2}=-(2.571±0.060)×10^{-3}  eV^{2} for the inverted mass ordering.

Measurements of the Electric and Magnetic Form Factors of the Neutron for Timelike Momentum Transfer

We present the first measurements of the electric and magnetic form factors of the neutron in the timelike (positive q^{2}) region as function of four-momentum transfer. We explored the differential cross sections of the reaction e^{+}e^{-}→n[over ¯]n with data collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII accelerator, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 354.6  pb^{-1} in total at twelve center-of-mass energies between sqrt[s]=2.0-2.95  GeV. A relative uncertainty of 18% and 12% for the electric and magnetic form factors, respectively, is achieved at sqrt[s]=2.3935  GeV. Our results are comparable in accuracy to those from electron scattering in the comparable spacelike region of four-momentum transfer. The electromagnetic form factor ratio R_{em}≡|G_{E}|/|G_{M}| is within the uncertainties close to unity. We compare our result on |G_{E}| and |G_{M}| to recent model predictions, and the measurements in the spacelike region to test the analyticity of electromagnetic form factors.

Observation of a New X(3872) Production Process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872)

Using 4.7  fb^{-1} of e^{+}e^{-} collision data at center-of-mass energies from 4.661 to 4.951 GeV collected by the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we observe the X(3872) production process e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) for the first time. The significance is 7.8σ, including both the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The e^{+}e^{-}→ωX(3872) Born cross section and the corresponding upper limit at 90% confidence level at each energy point are reported. The line shape of the cross section indicates that the ωX(3872) signals may be from the decays of some nontrivial structures.

Observation of Three Charmoniumlike States with J^{PC}=1^{--} in e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+}

The Born cross sections of the process e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} at center-of-mass energies from 4.189 to 4.951 GeV are measured for the first time. The data samples used correspond to an integrated luminosity of 17.9  fb^{-1} and were collected by the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring. Three enhancements around 4.20, 4.47, and 4.67 GeV are visible. The resonances have masses of 4209.6±4.7±5.9  MeV/c^{2}, 4469.1±26.2±3.6  MeV/c^{2}, and 4675.3±29.5±3.5  MeV/c^{2} and widths of 81.6±17.8±9.0  MeV, 246.3±36.7±9.4  MeV, and 218.3±72.9±9.3  MeV, respectively, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic. The first and third resonances are consistent with the ψ(4230) and ψ(4660) states, respectively, while the second one is compatible with the ψ(4500) observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→K^{+}K^{-}J/ψ process. These three charmoniumlike ψ states are observed in the e^{+}e^{-}→D^{*0}D^{*-}π^{+} process for the first time.

[Intravesical instillation of bacillus Calmette-Guerin for non-muscle invasive bladder cancer: outcomes of 421 patients in a single center]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the therapeutic effect and adverse effect of intravesical instillation of bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG) for treatment of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and analyze the independent predictors of patient survival.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected the clinical data from 421 patients (mean age 61.79±11.51 years) with NMIBC, who received intravesical instillation of BCG after surgery in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from September, 2015 to September, 2021. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease specific survival (DSS) of the patients were analyzed, and the adverse effects were assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 5.0. Kaplan-Meier analysis, univariate and multivariate COX regression analyses were used to identify the independent predictors of the patients' survival outcomes.

RESULTS

The median follow-up of the patients was 17 months, during which 88 (20.9%) patients experienced recurrence (median time to recurrence of 10 months, range 3-58 months); 40 (9.5%) patients showed tumor progression (median time to progression of 18 months, range 3-50 months); and 14 (3.3%) patients died (median survival time of 30 months, range 8-52 months). Adverse events of grade 1, 2, and 3 occurred in 69, 110, and 23 of the patients, respectively. Survival analysis indicated that an age below 67.5 years (P=0.013), first tumor onset (P < 0.001), solitary tumor (P= 0.010), time to recurrence over one year (P=0.042), low levels of neutrophils (P=0.005), monocytes (P=0.005) and neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR; P=0.014), and cytokeratin 19 fragment 21-1 (CyFra21-1; P=0.002) were all associated with a higher PFS rate. Multivariate COX analysis suggested that the time of tumor recurrence (P=0.007, HR=2.669, 95% CI: 1.316-5.414), monocyte counts (P=0.015, HR=0.376, 95% CI: 0.171-0.829), and serum CyFra21-1 level (P=0.002, HR=0.312, 95% CI: 0.151-0.647) were independent predictors of RFS; primary tumor or tumor relapse (P=0.003, HR=0.301, 95% CI: 0.138-0.660), neutrophil counts (P=0.028, HR=0.302, 95% CI: 0.103-0.882), and CyFra21-1 level (P=0.029, HR=0.358, 95% CI: 0.142-0.903) were independent predictors of PFS following BCG instillation.

CONCLUSION

Intravesical instillation of BCG is effective for treatment of intermediate or high-risk NMIBC, and the adverse effects are tolerable in most cases. The time of tumor recurrence, monocyte counts, and serum CyFra21-1 level are independent predictors of RFS, and primary tumor or tumor relapse, neutrophil counts, and CyFra21-1 level are independent predictors of PFS.

Review and future perspectives on the integration characteristics for equine lentivirus in the host genome

Despite over 40 years of research on the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) vaccine, we still lack a considerable progress. Equine infectious anemia virus (EIAV) is a lentivirus in the Retroviridae family, akin to HIV-1 in genome structure and antigenicity. EIA is an important infectious disease in equids, characterized by anemia, persistent infection, and repeated fevers. The EIAV attenuated vaccine in China is the only lentiviral vaccine used on a large scale. Elucidating the mechanism of waning and induction of protective immunity from this attenuated vaccine strain will provide a critical theoretical basis and reference point for vaccine research, particularly in the development of lentivirus vaccines, with far-reaching scientific value and social significance. In this paper, we summarize the information related to EIAV integration site selection, particularly for the Chinese EIAV attenuated vaccine strains on the equine genome. This may improve our mechanistic understanding of EIAV virulence reduction at the host genome level. The obtained data may help elucidate the biological characteristics of EIAV, particularly the Chinese attenuated EIAV vaccine strain, and provide valuable information regarding retroviral infections, particularly lentiviral infection and associated therapeutic vectors.

Evidence for the Cusp Effect in η' Decays into ηπ^{0}π^{0}

Using a sample of 4.3×10^{5} η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} events selected from the ten billion J/ψ event dataset collected with the BESIII detector, we study the decay η^{'}→ηπ^{0}π^{0} within the framework of nonrelativistic effective field theory. Evidence for a structure at π^{+}π^{-} mass threshold is observed in the invariant mass spectrum of π^{0}π^{0} with a statistical significance of around 3.5σ, which is consistent with the cusp effect as predicted by the nonrelativistic effective field theory. After introducing the amplitude for describing the cusp effect, the ππ scattering length combination a_{0}-a_{2} is determined to be 0.226±0.060_{stat}±0.013_{syst}, which is in good agreement with theoretical calculation of 0.2644±0.0051.

[Analysis of the efficacy and safety of coblation and pulsed radiofrequency in the treatment of cervicogenic headache]

Objective: To explore the efficacy and safety of coblation and pulsed radiofrequency on cervicogenic headache (CEH). Methods: A total of 118 patients with CEH who underwent coblation or pulsed radiofrequency in the Department of Pain Management at Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University from August 2018 to June 2020 was retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into the coblation group (n=64) and the pulsed radiofrequency group (n=54) according to different surgical methods. In the coblation group, there were 14 males and 50 females, aged 29-65 (49.8±10.2) years, while in the pulse radiofrequency group, there were 24 males and 30 females, aged 18-65 (41.7±14.8) years. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score, postoperative numbness in the affected areas and other complications were recorded and compared between the two groups at preoperative 3 d, and 1 month, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively. Results: The VAS score of the coblation group was (7.16±0.91), (3.67±1.13), (1.59±0.91), (1.66±0.84) and (1.56±0.90) before operation, and 3 days, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months after surgery. Likewise, the VAS score of the pulsed radiofrequency group was (7.01±0.78), (1.58±0.88), (1.57±0.94), (3.71±1.08) and (6.92±0.83) at the aforementioned time points. There were statistically significant differences of VAS scores between the coblation group and the pulsed radiofrequency group at 3 days, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively (all P<0.001). Intra-group comparison revealed that VAS scores in the coblation group were significantly lower than those before surgery at all time points after surgery (all P<0.001), while VAS scores in the pulsed radiofrequency group were significantly decreased at 3 days, 1 month and 3 months after surgery (P<0.001). The incidence of numbness was 72% (46/64), 61% (39/64), 6% (4/64) and 3% (2/62) in the coblation group and 7% (4/54), 7% (4/54), 2% (1/54) and 0 (0/54) in the pulsed radiofrequency group, respectively. At 3 days and 1 month after surgery, the incidence of numbness in the coblation group was higher than those in the pulsed radiofrequency group (both P<0.001). In the coblation group, one patient developed pharyngeal discomfort 3 days after surgery, which disappeared spontaneously 1 week after surgery without special treatment. One patient developed vertigo after getting up in the morning at 3 days postoperatively, and the possibility of transient cerebral ischemia was considered. In the pulsed radiofrequency group, one patient developed nausea and vomiting after operation, but spontaneous remission was observed after one hour without special treatment. Conclusions: Both coblation and pulsed radiofrequency are effective and safe in the treatment of CEH. But the VAS scores at 3 and 6 months after coblation is significantly lower than those of pulsed radiofrequency ablation group, and the efficacy is better in those undergoing coblation.

MLL1:EZH2 Ratio in Uterine Secretions and Endometrial Receptivity in Patients with Endometriosis

OBJECTIVE

To establish a novel approach for diagnosing endometriosis (EM) in patients with impaired endometrial receptivity.

METHOD

Mixed lineage leukemia 1 (MLL1) and enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) levels were analyzed. The MLL1:EZH2 ratio in identifying impaired endometrial receptivity has been established and validated.

RESULTS

In normal endometrial tissue, the MLL1:EZH2 ratio increased significantly in the midsecretory phase, compared with that in the proliferative phase. In the midsecretory phase, the MLL1:EZH2 ratio in endometrial tissues and uterine secretions accurately identifies patients with EM who have impaired endometrial receptivity. In the validation group, the sensitivity and specificity of the MLL1:EZH2 ratio in the uterine secretions of the midsecretory phase, in diagnosing patients EM who have impaired endometrial receptivity, were 100% and 96.55%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The MLL1:EZH2 ratio in uterine secretions of the midsecretory phase may serve as a marker to diagnose EM in patients with impaired endometrial receptivity.

Study of the Semileptonic Decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}

The study of the Cabibbo-favored semileptonic decay Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e} is reported using a 4.5  fb^{-1} data sample of e^{+}e^{-} annihilations collected at center-of-mass energies ranging from 4.600 GeV to 4.699 GeV with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider. The branching fraction of the decay is measured to be B(Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e})=(3.56±0.11_{stat}±0.07_{syst})%, which is the most precise measurement to date. Furthermore, we perform an investigation of the internal dynamics in Λ_{c}^{+}→Λe^{+}ν_{e}. We provide the first direct comparisons of the differential decay rate and form factors with those predicted from lattice quantum chromodynamics (LQCD) calculations. Combining the measured branching fraction with a q^{2}-integrated rate predicted by LQCD, we determine |V_{cs}|=0.936±0.017_{B}±0.024_{LQCD}±0.007_{τ_{Λ_{c}}}.

Measurement of the Absolute Branching Fraction and Decay Asymmetry of Λ→nγ

The radiative hyperon decay Λ→nγ is studied using (10087±44)×10^{6}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector operating at BEPCII. The absolute branching fraction of the decay Λ→nγ is determined to be (0.832±0.038_{stat}±0.054_{syst})×10^{-3}, which is a factor of 2.1 lower and 5.6 standard deviations different than the previous measurement. By analyzing the joint angular distribution of the decay products, the first determination of the decay asymmetry α_{γ} is reported with a value of -0.16±0.10_{stat}±0.05_{syst}.

[The surveillance analysis of the adverse events following immunization of the domestic 13-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide conjugate vaccine in Zhejiang Province]

To evaluate the safety of the domestic 13-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide conjugate vaccine-tetanus toxoid protein (PCV13-TT) after its licensure. The adverse event following immunization (AEFI) and the vaccination data of PCV13-TT in Zhejiang province from July 2020 to October 2021 were collected from national adverse event following immunization surveillance system and Zhejiang provincial immunization information system. Descriptive epidemiological method was used for this analysis. From July 2020 to October 2021, 302 317 doses of PCV13-TT were administered in children under 6 years old in Zhejiang Province and 636 AEFI case reports were received, with a reporting rate of 21.04 per 10 000 doses. Of these AEFI cases, 97.17% were mild vaccine product-related reaction (20.54 per 10 000 doses) and 95.44% occurred in the 0-1 d after vaccination (20.08 per 10 000 doses). The most common clinical diagnoses of AEFI included fever (224 cases), redness (204 cases), and induration (190 cases), while allergic rash (11 cases) was the most common diagnosis among the abnormal reactions. In conclusion,the present results bolstered that the domestic PCV13-TT was generally well tolerated in children under 6 years old in Zhejiang Province.

Observation of an Isoscalar Resonance with Exotic J^{PC}=1^{-+} Quantum Numbers in J/ψ→γηη^{'}

Using a sample of (10.09±0.04)×10^{9}  J/ψ events collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring, a partial wave analysis of the decay J/ψ→γηη^{'} is performed. The first observation of an isoscalar state with exotic quantum numbers J^{PC}=1^{-+}, denoted as η_{1}(1855), is reported in the process J/ψ→γη_{1}(1855) with η_{1}(1855)→ηη^{'}. Its mass and width are measured to be (1855±9_{-1}^{+6})  MeV/c^{2} and (188±18_{-8}^{+3})  MeV, respectively, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second are systematic, and its statistical significance is estimated to be larger than 19σ.

Observation of an a_{0}-like State with Mass of 1.817 GeV in the Study of D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0} Decays

Using e^{+}e^{-} annihilation data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 6.32  fb^{-1} collected at center-of-mass energies between 4.178 and 4.226 GeV with the BESIII detector, we perform the first amplitude analysis of the decay D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0} and determine the relative branching fractions and phases for intermediate processes. We observe an a_{0}-like state with mass of 1.817 GeV in its decay to K_{S}^{0}K^{+} for the first time. In addition, we measure the ratio {B[D_{s}^{+}→K[over ¯]^{*}(892)^{0}K^{+}]/B[D_{s}^{+}→K[over ¯]^{0}K^{*}(892)^{+}]} to be 2.35_{-0.23stat}^{+0.42}±0.10_{syst}. Finally, we provide a precision measurement of the absolute branching fraction B(D_{s}^{+}→K_{S}^{0}K^{+}π^{0})=(1.46±0.06_{stat}±0.05_{syst})%.

[Analysis of early severe postoperative complications and risk factors in 4255 patients who underwent bariatric and metabolic surgery in a single cente]

Objective: To analyze the incidence of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery and the experience of their diagnosis, treatment, and risk factors. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, the clinical data of 4255 patients who underwent bariatric and metabolic surgery between May 2010 and May 2022 in the Department of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University were retrospectively collected. Among these patients, 1125 were male and 3130 were female. The mean age and body mass index (BMI) of the patients at the time of operation were 31.3±4.5 years and 36.5±6.4 kg/m², respectively. Regarding surgical type, 2397 patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG), 489 underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 1028 underwent sleeve gastrectomy plus jejunojejunal bypass (SG+JJB), and 341 underwent single anastomosis duodenal switch (SADS). The inclusion criteria were patients (1) with a Clavien-Dindo grade of ≥III; (2) who were undergoing SG, RYGB, SG-JJB, or SADS; and (3) who had complete clinical data. The exclusion criteria were patients (1) undergoing revisional surgery and (2) other operations during the bariatric and metabolic surgery. The Clavien-Dindo classification was used to analyze the incidence of early severe postoperative complications and their prognosis. Early severe postoperative complications were defined as Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications within 30 days after surgery. Meanwhile, multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify risk factors of the complications. Results: Summary of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery: (1) of the 4255 patients, 22 (12 male and 10 female) exhibited early severe complications (0.52%). The mean age and BMI of these patients were 41.1±9.9 years and 36.9±8.2 kg/m², respectively. Preoperatively, 7 patients had hypertension, 10 had type 2 diabetes mellitus, 1 had respiratory failure, and 1 had heart failure. The severe complications included 9 patients (0.21%) with grade IIIa, 11 (0.26%) with grade IIIb, 1 (0.02%) with grade IVa, and 1 (0.02%) with grade V complications. The incidences of severe postoperative complications in the different surgical procedures were 0.17% for SG (4/2397), 0.61% for RYGB (3/489), 0.58% for SG+JJB (6/1028), and 2.64% for SADS (9/341). The common severe complications were leakage (0.28%, 12 patients), bleeding (0.14%, 6 patients), and obstruction (0.05%, 2 patients). (2) Management of complications: Grade IIIa complications (including eight patients with leakage and one with severe inflammation) were treated with antibiotics, nasogastric and nutritional tube placements, and CT-guided drainage. For grade IIIa complications, five patients with bleeding were treated with reoperation, and all the patients recovered; four patients with leakage were treated with reoperation, wherein three were converted to RYGB and one patient underwent resuturing of the leakage site; two patients with obstruction were treated with adhesiolysis. The patient with grade IVa complication (including respiratory failure complicated with acid aspiration) was treated in the ICU. For the grade V complication, bleeding in a patient with SG+JJB was treated with reoperation, which confirmed the bleeding of short gastric vessels. Unfortunately, the patient died. (3) Risk factor analysis of early severe complications: univariate analysis detected that sex, age, type 2 diabetes mellitus, operation time, and surgical type were associated with postoperative complications (P<0.05). However, multivariate analysis indicated that an age of ≥31.3 years (odds ratio [OR] = 5.423, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.004-29.278, P=0.049) and surgical type (SADS: OR = 19.758, 95%CI: 5.803-67.282, P<0.001; RYGB: OR = 9.752, 95%CI: 2.456-38.723, P=0.001; SG+JJB: OR = 5.706, 95%CI: 1.966- 16.559, P=0.001) were independent risk factors of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery. Conclusion: Bariatric and metabolic surgery is safe. Its common postoperative complications include leakage, bleeding, and obstruction, which require early detection, diagnosis, and treatment to improve treatment outcomes. Age and surgical type are independent risk factors of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery.

[Current status of sleeve gastrectomy plus jejunojejunal bypass]

At present, sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have become the major bariatric and metabolic surgical procedures, but neither of them is perfect. Adding jejunojejunal bypass (JJB) to SG can enhance weight loss and hypoglycemic effect. Present clinical results show that the short-term weight loss effect of SG-JJB is better than SG, and the weight loss and hypoglycemic effect is similar to RYGB. However, SG-JJB does not have various complications like traditional jejunal ileal bypass (JIB). The existing evidence shows that SG-JJB is a safe and effective bariatric and metabolic surgery, with relatively simple technical requirement. Meanwhile, SG-JJB has almost no dumping syndrome or ulcers, and facilitates endoscopic examination of the biliary tract, and has no blind gastric pouch. Thus, SG-JJB has some clinical application prospects, but further high-quality research with long-term follow-up is needed.

Precise Measurements of Decay Parameters and CP Asymmetry with Entangled Λ-Λ[over ¯] Pairs

Based on 10 billion J/ψ events collected at the BESIII experiment, a search for CP violation in Λ decay is performed in the difference between CP-odd decay parameters α_{-} for Λ→pπ^{-} and α_{+} for Λ[over ¯]→p[over ¯]π^{+} by using the process e^{+}e^{-}→J/ψ→ΛΛ[over ¯]. With a five-dimensional fit to the full angular distributions of the daughter baryon, the most precise values for the decay parameters are determined to be α_{-}=0.7519±0.0036±0.0024 and α_{+}=-0.7559±0.0036±0.0030, respectively. The Λ and Λ[over ¯] averaged value of the decay parameter is extracted to be α_{avg}=0.7542±0.0010±0.0024 with unprecedented accuracy. The CP asymmetry A_{CP}=(α_{-}+α_{+})/(α_{-}-α_{+}) is determined to be -0.0025±0.0046±0.0012, which is one of the most precise measurements in the baryon sector. The reported results for the decay parameter will play an important role in the studies of the polarizations and CP violations for the strange, charmed and beauty baryons.