ランキング (合計) - Ceek.jp Altmetrics

Materisls used for this experiment were two Nelumbo nucifera fruits, preserved for 800 years, which had been layered in the coffin of a mummified head of the Foruth Fujiwara reign. The plants were observed from seeding to flowering. Also observed were the morphology of the fruit, flower, leaf, and pollen grain of the lotus. The causes of longevity in lotus fruit and Tyuusonji-lotus fruit were investigated. 1. Development from seeding to flowring. a. On the seeding of the two lotus fruits were used, one weighing 720 milligrams, and the other weighing 860 milligrams. The seeding was started on May 20,1993. They were cut at the base of the fruit, and then water was poured into the glass. Germination of the fruit weighing 860 milligrams started four days after beginning the seeding ; but the fruit weighing 720 milligrams withered and died. The first leaf emerged six days after seeding, and small roots appeared. 21 days after seeding, the first and second leaves had opened, and the third and fourth leaves had emerged. When the first through the fifth leaves were opened, the lotus plantlet was transplanted, using upland soil in a small round pot, 96 days after seeding, the lotus plantlet was transplanted, using a mixture of a little Maguanp K fertilizer in upland soil. It was cultured a round pot placed in a field. After that, seven leaves opened, but it had no standing leaf. b. The first year seeding, 1994,the plant formed three rhizomes, which were transplanted into a round pot and rectangular plastic contianer : The upland soil was fertilized with a mix of 100 grams of Maguanp K 500 grams of manure per square meter. The lotus plants grew and developed well, but did not exhibit flowering. c. The second year after seeding, 1995,the plant formed eight rhizomes. These rhizomes were transplanted into three rectangular plastic containers, with the upland soil fertilized with a mix of 100 grams Maguanp K, 100 grams of compound fertilizer, and a little bone manure per sequare meter. The lotus plants grew and development well, but did not flowering. d. The third years after seeding, 1996,the plant formed twelve rhizomes. The fertilizer used in this year the same as that used in the previus years. The containers used were round pots and rectangular plastic containers. The lotus plants grew and developed well, but did not flowering. e. The fouth years after seeding, 1997,the plant formed sixteen rhizomes. The culture contianer, fertilizer, and culture methods of this year were the same as those used in the previous year. The lotus plants did not exhibit flowering this year either. One reason for this was that the culture containers placed in the field received in-sufficient hours of sunshine. f. The fifth years after seeding, 1998,the plant formed twenty rhizomes. The culture contianer, and fertilizer and culture methods were the same as in the previous year. The lotus plant had its first flowering during this year. The first flower bloomed on July 29,1998. The flower was 23 centimeters in diameter, and was a beautiful bright pink. Five days later, blooming finished, early in the morning of August 2nd. The flower resembled a ""Waren"" the Japanese wild lotus of midium sized, with bright pink and slender petals. 2. The morphology of lotus included the formation of a stylar end, the protuberance, a cap-shaped portion, and the fruit body and dent portion. In its longitudinal section were found the formation stylar end, pericarp, seed coat, cotyledon, plumula, cavity and dent portion. The pericarp was very hard in sclerenchymatous cells of the palisade layer, and under it was a sclerenchymatous layer in a dense arrangement. There was a hyaline zone near the center of the palisade layer, and under the stoma was a stomatal canal. The hardness of the pericarp in the lotus fruit was a development of mechanical tissue for the palisade layer and sclerenchymatous cell. 3. The lotus flower was a formation of calyx, receptacle, petal, stamen, and pistil.

2022-07-29 21:44:40
4 + 4 Twitter

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110000483265

4 0 0 0 IR 明治の名所 : 『国学和歌改良論』から鉄幹まで

著者: 堀下翔
出版者: 筑波大学日本文学会近代部会
雑誌: 稿本近代文学
巻号頁・発行日: no.44, pp.1-18, 2021-03-31

2022-07-27 17:00:01
4 + 4 Twitter

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/120007116907

4 0 0 0 IR 今日における政治と宗教 (天皇制の現段階と元号・靖国<特集>)

著者: 中島三千男 Nakajima Michio
出版者: 歴史科学協議会
雑誌: 歴史評論 (ISSN:03868907)
巻号頁・発行日: no.358, pp.p33-58,68, 1980-02

特集・天皇制の現段階と元号・靖国〔追記〕の指示に従い末頁にp.68の一部を収録

2022-07-25 14:32:31
1 + 0 Twitter
3 + 3 Wikipedia

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/120002693068

4 0 0 0 外国人の公務就任権に関する予備的考察 : 外国人の人権享有主体性についての一試論

著者: 高乗智之
出版者: 高岡法科大学
雑誌: 高岡法学 (ISSN:09159339)
巻号頁・発行日: no.31, pp.67-88, 2013-03-31

2022-07-25 12:36:11
4 + 1 Twitter

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110009564081

4 0 0 0 IR 「明治百年」に見る歴史意識 : 桑原武夫と竹内好を題材に

著者: 鈴木洋仁
出版者: 京都大學人文科學研究所
雑誌: 人文学報 (ISSN:04490274)
巻号頁・発行日: no.105, pp.117-139, 2014

本論文は、「戦後」において「明治」を見直す動きを、桑原武夫と竹内好の言説を対象に議論している。桑原と竹内が、「もはや戦後ではない」昭和31年 = 1956年を境に行われた「明治の再評価」をめぐる議論の意味を指摘する。「明治の再評価」を最初に唱えた一人・桑原にとっての「元号」は、西暦とは異なる、日本固有の時間の積み重ねだった。それは同時に、昭和20年 = 1945年に始まる「戦後」という時間軸よりも、「昭和」や「明治」という時間の蓄積に親しみを抱く世間の空気でもあった。そして、桑原もまた、「元号」と同様に、世の中の雰囲気を鋭敏に察知するアイコンでもあった。対する竹内は、「昭和」という「元号」を称揚する復古的な動きに嫌悪感をあらわにし、「明治」を否定的に回顧しようとしつつも苦悩する。「明治維新百年祭」を提唱した理由は、その百年の歴史が、自分たちが生きる今の基盤になっていると考えたからこそ、苦悩し、ジャーナリズムでさかんに発言する。このように本研究では、「明治百年」についての複数の言説の中で、日本近代に対峙した代表的な2人の論客が「元号」に依拠して明らかにした歴史意識を対象として、当時の知識人と社会、学問とジャーナリズムの関係性もまた見通している。This paper is discussing about the movement of revival the "Meiji" in post-war era, focusing on attitude of two intellectual elites ; Takeo Kuwabara and Yoshimi Takeuchi. Kuwabara who is totally forgotten today, by contrast, Takeuchi still remains as an influential figure in Japanese academic society. What determined the destiny of these two? The pivotal point is found in the famous sentence "there is not a post-war anymore now" appeared in the economic white paper of 1956. For Kuwabara who would like to advocate a "re-evaluation of the Meiji", "Gen-go" (Japanese name of era) is a symbol of unique history of Japan which is very different from that of the West described by A. D. This is because periodization by "Gengo" (ex. "Showa" and "Meiji") is more familiar for ordinary Japanese at that time than by "pre-war" or "post-war", and he keenly felt it. Therefore Kuwabara is remembered by people today only as a good observer of the time. On the other hand, Takeuchi tried desperately to express his loathing for "Showa" and the revival boom, examining "Meiji" era in a negative way. Despite being a proposer of "Centennial Meiji Restoration", he himself confused by the magnitude of that event. Because he knew it is the history accumulated after "Meiji Restoration" which defined his identity. Both two intellectuals facing the Japanese "modern" had shown their historical consciousness in a series of discourse about "Centennial of Meiji" and "Gen-go". These are the very typical figures suffering in the Japanese "modern".