@article{ChengKliemDing2018,
  author    = {Cheng, Xin and Kliem, Bernhard and Ding, Mingde},
  title     = {Unambiguous evidence of filament splitting-induced partial eruptions},
  series = {The astrophysical journal : an international review of spectroscopy and astronomical physics},
  volume    = {856},
  journal   = {The astrophysical journal : an international review of spectroscopy and astronomical physics},
  number    = {1},
  publisher = {IOP Publ. Ltd.},
  address   = {Bristol},
  issn      = {0004-637X},
  doi       = {10.3847/1538-4357/aab08d},
  pages     = {15},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Coronal mass ejections are often considered to result from the full eruption of a magnetic flux rope (MFR). However, it is recognized that, in some events, the MFR may release only part of its flux, with the details of the implied splitting not completely established due to limitations in observations. Here, we investigate two partial eruption events including a confined and a successful one. Both partial eruptions are a consequence of the vertical splitting of a filament-hosting MFR involving internal reconnection. A loss of equilibrium in the rising part of the magnetic flux is suggested by the impulsive onset of both events and by the delayed onset of reconnection in the confined event. The remaining part of the flux might be line-tied to the photosphere in a bald patch (BP) separatrix surface, and we confirm the existence of extended BP sections for the successful eruption. The internal reconnection is signified by brightenings in the body of one filament and between the rising and remaining parts of both filaments. It evolves quickly into the standard current sheet reconnection in the wake of the eruption. As a result, regardless of being confined or successful, both eruptions produce hard X-ray sources and flare loops below the erupting but above the surviving flux, as well as a pair of flare ribbons enclosing the latter.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{WangLiZhangetal.2018,
  author    = {Wang, Guang and Li, Pei-zhi and Zhang, Shi-yao and Zhong, Shan and Chu, Chang and Zeng, Shufei and Yan, Yu and Cheng, Xin and Chuai, Manli and Hocher, Berthold and Yang, Xuesong},
  title     = {Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) Induced Angiogenesis During Chicken Embryogenesis is Abolished by Combined ETA/ETB Receptor Blockade},
  series = {Cellular physiology and biochemistry : international journal of experimental cellular physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology},
  volume    = {48},
  journal   = {Cellular physiology and biochemistry : international journal of experimental cellular physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology},
  number    = {5},
  publisher = {Karger},
  address   = {Basel},
  issn      = {1015-8987},
  doi       = {10.1159/000492547},
  pages     = {2084 -- 2090},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Background/Aims: Angiogenesis plays a key role during embryonic development. The vascular endothelin (ET) system is involved in the regulation of angiogenesis. Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) could induce angiogenesis. The effects of ET blockers on baseline and LPS-stimulated angiogenesis during embryonic development remain unknown so far. Methods: The blood vessel density (BVD) of chorioallantoic membranes (CAMs), which were treated with saline (control), LPS, and/or BQ123 and the ETB blocker BQ788, were quantified and analyzed using an IPP 6.0 image analysis program. Moreover, the expressions of ET-1, ET-2, ET3, ET receptor A (ETRA), ET receptor B (ETRB) and VEGFR2 mRNA during embryogenesis were analyzed by semi-quantitative RT-PCR. Results: All components of the ET system are detectable during chicken embryogenesis. LPS increased angiogenesis substantially. This process was completely blocked by the treatment of a combination of the ETA receptor blockers-BQ123 and the ETB receptor blocker BQ788. This effect was accompanied by a decrease in ETRA, ETRB, and VEGFR2 gene expression. However, the baseline angiogenesis was not affected by combined ETA/ETB receptor blockade. Conclusion: During chicken embryogenesis, the LPS-stimulated angiogenesis, but not baseline angiogenesis, is sensitive to combined ETA/ETB receptor blockade.},
  language  = {en}
}