Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the only effective pharmacological treatments for obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). Nonetheless, their generally limited efficacy, side-effects, and delayed onset of action require improved medications for this highly prevalent disorder. Preclinical and clinical findings have suggested serotonin2C (5-HT2C) receptors as a potential drug target. Data in rats and mice are presented here on the effects of a novel 5-HT2C receptor agonist ((3S)-3-Methyl-1-[4-(trifluoromethyl)-7-benzofuranyl]-piperazine) (CPD 1) with high potency and full efficacy at 5-HT2C receptors and less potency and partial agonism at 5-HT2A and 5-HT2B receptors. Effects of CPD 1 on consummatory (schedule-induced polydipsia in rats) and non-consummatory behaviors (marble-burying and nestlet-shredding in mice) that are repetitive and non-habituating were studied. We also evaluated the effects of CPD 1 in rats with isoproterenol- and deprivation-induced drinking in rats to compare with the polydipsia studies. The SSRIs, fluoxetine, and chlomipramine decreased the high rates of drinking in rats engendered by a schedule of intermittent food delivery (schedule-induced polydipsia). The effects of fluoxetine, but not of d-amphetamine, were prevented by the selective 5-HT2C receptor antagonist SB242084. The 5-HT2C receptor agonists Ro 60-0175 and CPD 1 also decreased drinking, but unlike the SSRIs and Ro 60-0175, CPD 1 dose-dependently decreased excessive drinking without affecting lever press responses that produced food. The effects of CPD 1 were prevented by SB242084. CPD 1 also suppressed drinking induced by isoproterenol and by water deprivation without affecting normative drinking behavior. CPD 1, like fluoxetine, also suppressed marble-burying and nestlet-shredding in mice at doses that did not affect rotarod performance or locomotor activity. The behavioral specificity of effects of CPD 1 against repetitive and excessive behaviors suggests a potential therapeutic application in OCD.

Este trabajo surge a partir de la investigación general de las técnicas hidropónicas teniendo en cuenta sus ventajas y desventajas para de esta forma poder encontrar aquel factor determinante a través de una comparación de técnicas hidropónicas que permitan clasificarlas y escoger la mejor opción que genere menos impacto ambiental negativo y demuestre ser más productivo en los entornos urbanos. Adicionalmente, un factor determinante en las ciudades es su espacio limitado por lo que la mejor opción también deberá incluir un óptimo manejo del espacio que permita a casi cualquier individuo poder aplicarlos desde su entorno sin recurrir a excesivas modificaciones. Como principal resultado se escogió a la Hidroponía recirculante como método predominante por los excelentes resultados que se obtienen con relación a los demás, adicionalmente, este puede ser fácilmente aplicado en los ambientes urbanos por su versatilidad y buen manejo de recursos. Palabras Clave: Hidroponia, ambiente, urbano, comparativa, técnicas, cultivo. Referencias [1]J. López, «La producción hidropónica de cultivos,» IDESIA (Chile), vol. 36, nº 2, pp. 139-141, 2018. [2]J. Lee, A. Rahman, J. Behrens, C. Brennan, B. Ham, H. Seok Kim, C. Won, S. Yun, H. Azam y M. Kwon, «Nutrient removal from hydroponic wastewater by a microbial consortium,» New Biotechnology, vol. 41, pp. 15-24, 2018. [3]H. Ku, C. Tiong, A. Suresh y B. Ong, «“Active” hydroponic greenhouse system to kick-start and augment reforestation program through carbon sequestration e an experimental and theoretical feasibility study,» Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 129, pp. 637-646, 2016. [4]J. Beltrano y D. Gimenez, Cultivo en hidroponía, Buenos Aires: Universidad de la Plata, 2015. [5]L. Ramírez, M. Pérez, P. Jiménez, H. Giraldo y E. Gómez, «Evaluación preliminar de sistemas acuapónicos e hidropónicos en cama flotante para el cultivo de orégano (Origanum vulgare: LAMIACEAE),» Revista Facultad de Ciencias Básicas, vol. 7, nº 2, pp. 242-259, 2011. [6]S. Hosseinzadeh, D. Testai, M. BKheet y J. De Graeve, «Degradation of root exudates in closed hydroponic systems using UV/H2O2: Kinetic investigation, reaction pathways and cost analysis,» Science of the Total Environment, vol. 1, pp. 1-9, 2019. [7]N. Camarena, A. Rojas y M. Santos, «Fluoride bioaccumulation by hydroponic cultures of camellia,» Chemosphere, vol. 136, pp. 56-62, 2015. [8]W. Wang, Y. Ma, L. Fu, Y. Cui y M. Yaqoob, «Physical an mechanical properties of hydroponic lettuce for automatic harvesting,» Informatión processing in agriculture, vol. 1, pp. 2214-3173, 2020. [9]M. Zárate, Manual de Hidroponia, Coyoacán: Universidad Autónoma de Mexico, 2014. [10]S. Magwaza, L. Magwaza, A. Odindo y C. Buckley, «Partially treated domestic wastewater as a nutrient source for tomatoes(Lycopersicum solanum) grown in a hydroponic system: effect on nutrientabsorption and yield,» Heliyon, vol. 6, nº 12, pp. 2405-8440, 2020. [11]C. ARANO, «Hidroponía: Algunas paginas de historia,» Tecnología de Producción , nº 58 , pp. 24-32, 2007. [12]G. Guzmán, Hidroponia en Casa: Una actividad familiar, Costa Rica: Ministerio de Agricultura y ganaderia, 2004. [13]J. Gilsanz, HIDROPONIA, Montevideo : Unidad de Comunicación y Transferencia de Tecnología , 2007. [14]C. Miller, «El debate de hidroponia orgánica: Perspectivas norteamericanas sobre si la producción hidropónica merece ser certificada como orgánica.,» Productores de Hortalizas, nº 6, pp. 36-38, 2017. [15]A. Herrera, «Manejo de la solución nutritiva en la producción de tomate en hidroponía,» Terra Latinoamericana, vol. 17, nº 3, pp. 221-229, 1999. [16]C. Espinal y D. Matulić, «Recirculating Aquaculture Technologies,» Biomedical and Life Sciences, pp. 35-76, 2020. [17]H. Resh, «Técnicas de cultivo con flujo laminar de nutrientes,» de Cultivos Hidroponicos, España, Mundi-Prensa, 2001, pp. 35-37. [18]P. Blanca y L. Teresa, «Sistemas recirculantes y su interés en el cutlivo de ornamentales,» Tecnología de producción, nº 35, pp. 34-36, 2006. [19]C. Magán, «Recirculación de las soluciones nutritivas, Manejo y Control Microbiologico,» InfoAgro , nº 2, pp. 1-2, 2016. [20]S. Goddek, A. Joyce, B. Kotzen y M. Dos-Santos, «Aquaponics and Global Food Challenges,» Aquaponics Food Production Systems. Springer, vol. 1, nº 1, pp. 3-17, 2019. [21]S. G. Verdoliva, D. Gwyn Jones, A. Detheridge y P. Robson, «Controlled comparisons between soil and hydroponic systems reveal increased water use efficiency and higher lycopene and β-carotene contents in hydroponically grown tomatoes,» Scientia Horticulturae, pp. 3002-4238, 2020. [22]A. Chaudhry y V. Mishra, «A Comparative Analysis of Vertical Agriculture Systems in Residential Apartments, » de 2019 Advances in Science and Engineering Technology International Conferences (ASET), Dubai, United Arab Emirates, United Arab Emirates, 2019. [23]T. Mazhar, G. Jianmin, L. Imran, S. Kashif, Q. Waqar, S. Sher y C. Jiedong, «Modern plant cultivation technologies in agriculture under controlled nvironment: a review on aeroponics,» Journal of Plant Interactions, vol. 13, nº 1, pp. 338-352, 2012. [24]K. Janiak, A. Jurga, J. Kuźma, W. Breś y M. Muszyński, «Surfactants effect on aeroponics and important mass balances of regenerative life support system – Lettuce case study,» Science of the Total Environment, vol. 718, nº137324, pp. 1-12, 2020. [25]F. Rahman, I. Jahan, R. Biplob, N. Farhin y J. Uddin, «Automated Aeroponics System for Indoor Farming using Arduino,» de 2018 Joint 7th International Conference on Informatics, Electronics & Vision (ICIEV) and 2018 2nd International Conference on Imaging, Vision & Pattern Recognition (icIVPR), Kitakyushu, Japan, 2018. [26]M. Caldeyro Stajano, «La Hidroponía Simplificada como Tecnología apropiada, para implementar la Seguridad Alimentaria en la Agricultura Urbana.,» Cuadernos del CEAgro, nº 8, pp. 71-76, 2006.

No abstract

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggesstions for reducing this burden, to Washington

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Computer forensics has become its own area of scientific expertise, with accompanying coursework and certification. For someone who would like to get started practicing computer forensics it might be a little overwhelming. There are many different tools, and techniques. Each tool will provide different capabilities and will affect the suspect system differently. Some tools can be very expensive, but there are many tools available which are free and fairly ABSTRACTComputer forensics has become its own area of scientific expertise, with accompanying coursework and certification.For someone who would like to get started practicing computer forensics it might be a little overwhelming. There are many different tools, and techniques. Each tool will provide different capabilities and will affect the suspect system differently. Some tools can be very expensive, but there are many tools available which are free and fairly complete. The Helix tool is very robust and free of charge. Helix can be run as an operating system, it can be run from command line and it also has a windows GUI. Helix allows for the analysis of a live system. Many corporate systems use Windows and the Windows GUI is a perfect way to get started in practicing forensics. In this document you will find simple laboratories to follow so that you may familiarize yourself with the Helix tool using the Windows GUI and get started in the practice of computer forensics These laboratories were run on an XP-virtual machine. Helix is available as a free downloadable ISO image from