濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴濐潟閳ь剙鍊块幐濠冪珶閳哄绉€规洏鍔戝鍫曞箣閻欏懐骞㈤梻鍌欐祰椤鐣峰Ο琛℃灃婵炴垶纰嶉浠嬫煏閸繃鍟掗柡鍐ㄧ墛閺呮煡鏌涘☉鍗炲箺婵炲牊鐓″铏圭矙濞嗘儳鍓板銈嗗灥椤﹂潧顕f繝姘櫜闁告稑鍊婚崰搴ㄥ煝鎼淬劌绠氱憸搴敊閸曨垱鐓涘璺烘濞呭棛绱掔拠鑼妞ゎ偄绻橀幖鍦喆閸曨偆锛忛梻渚€娼ф灙闁稿孩鐓¢幃鐢稿閵堝棌鎷洪梺鑽ゅ枑濠㈡ê鈻撻埡鍛厵闁告垯鍊栫€氾拷
闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊炲銈嗗笂缁€渚€宕滈鐑嗘富闁靛牆妫楁慨褏绱掗悩鍐茬伌闁绘侗鍣f慨鈧柕鍫濇閸樻捇鏌℃径灞戒沪濠㈢懓妫濆畷婵嗩吋閸℃劒绨婚梺鍝勫€搁悘婵嬵敂椤愩倗纾奸弶鍫涘妽瀹曞瞼鈧娲樼敮鎺楋綖濠靛鏁勯柦妯侯槷婢规洟姊洪崨濠勭細闁稿孩濞婇幆灞解枎閹惧鍘遍梺鍝勬储閸斿矂鎮橀悩鐢电<闁绘瑢鍋撻柛銊ョ埣瀵濡搁埡鍌氫簽闂佺ǹ鏈粙鎴︻敂閿燂拷/婵犵數濮烽弫鍛婃叏閻戣棄鏋侀柛娑橈攻閸欏繘鏌i幋锝嗩棄闁哄绶氶弻鐔兼⒒鐎靛壊妲紒鎯у⒔缁垳鎹㈠☉銏犵闁哄啠鍋撻柛銈呯Ч閺屾盯濡烽鐓庘拻闂佽桨绀佸ú顓㈠蓟閺囷紕鐤€闁哄洨鍊妷锔轰簻闁挎棁顕у▍宥夋煙椤旂瓔娈滅€规洘顨嗗鍕節娴e壊妫滈梻鍌氬€风粈渚€骞夐垾瓒佹椽鏁冮崒姘憋紱婵犮垼鍩栭崝鏇㈠及閵夆晜鐓熼柟閭﹀枛閸斿鏌嶉柨瀣伌闁诡喖缍婇獮渚€骞掗幋婵愮€虫繝鐢靛仜閹冲繘宕濆▎鎾宠摕闁绘梻鍘х粈鍕煏閸繃顥滄い蹇ユ嫹/缂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁惧墽鎳撻—鍐偓锝庝簼閹癸綁鏌i鐐搭棞闁靛棙甯掗~婵嬫晲閸涱剙顥氶梻浣藉Г钃辩紒璇插€垮﹢渚€姊虹紒妯忣亜螣婵犲洤纾块煫鍥ㄧ⊕閻撴洟鏌曟繛鍨姎闁逞屽墯閹倸锕㈡笟鈧铏圭矙鐠恒劎顔囬梺鍛婅壘椤戝洨妲愰悙鍝勭闁挎梻鏅崢閬嶆⒑闂堟胆褰掑磿闁秴鐒垫い鎺嗗亾婵炲皷鈧剚鍤曞┑鐘宠壘鎯熼梺鍐叉惈閸婂憡绂嶉悙鐑樷拺缂佸瀵у﹢鎵磼鐎n偄鐏存い銏℃閺佹捇鏁撻敓锟�
闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛婵°倗濮烽崑鐐烘偋閻樻眹鈧線寮撮姀鈩冩珕闂佽姤锚椤︻喚绱旈弴銏♀拻濠电姴楠告禍婊勭箾鐠囇冾洭缂侇喗鐟╅獮瀣偐閻㈤潧绠垫繝寰锋澘鈧洟骞婃惔锝囦笉閻熸瑥瀚粻楣冩煥濠靛棝顎楀褜鍠栭埞鎴﹀灳閻愯棄浠梺鍝勬湰閻╊垱淇婇幖浣肝ㄩ柕澶堝灩娴滈箖鏌涜椤ㄥ懘鎷戦悢鍏肩厪濠电偟鍋撳▍鍡涙煕鐎n亝顥㈤柡灞剧〒娴狅箓宕滆濡插牆顪冮妶鍛寸崪闁瑰嚖鎷�: 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹瀹勬噴褰掑炊椤掑鏅悷婊冪Ч濠€渚€姊虹紒妯虹伇婵☆偄瀚板鍛婃媴缁洘鏂€闂佺粯锚閻ゅ洦绔熷Ο鑲╂/闁硅鍔﹂崵娆撴煃鐟欏嫬鐏撮柟顔规櫊瀹曪絾寰勭€n偄鈧绱撻崒娆戝妽闁告梹鐗犻妴鍐╃節閸パ嗘憰闂佽法鍠撴慨鎾倷婵犲洦鐓冮弶鐐村閸斿秹鏌h箛搴g獢婵﹤鎼悾鐑藉炊閵娿儲鐣紓鍌欑椤︿即骞愰幎钘夋槬闁绘劕鎼粻锝夋煥閺冨洦顥夊ù婊冪秺濮婃椽宕ㄦ繝鍕櫑濡炪倧缂氶崡鎶界嵁閸愩劉鏋庨煫鍥э攻閺傗偓闂備礁鐤囧Λ鍕涘Δ浣侯洸婵犻潧顑嗛悡銉╂煛閸ヮ煁顏堟倶閼碱兘鍋撳▓鍨灕妞ゆ泦鍥х叀濠㈣埖鍔曢~鍛存煟濡崵澧﹂柛鏃€鍨垮濠氬即閿涘嫮鏉告繝鐢靛Т閸婃悂鍩涙径鎰拺缂備焦岣跨粻鏍煟濡ゅ啫鈻堟鐐插暙閻o繝骞嶉崘鑼闂備礁鎲¢崝鎴﹀礉鎼淬劍鍎庨幖娣妽閳锋垿鏌i悢鍛婄凡婵炲牃鏅犻弻鐔煎礄閵堝棗顏� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亜顒㈡い鎰Г閹便劌顫滈崱妤€骞婄紓鍌氬€瑰畝鎼佸蓟閵堝棙鍙忛柟閭﹀厴閸嬫捇寮介鐔蜂壕婵﹩鍓﹂悡濂告煛瀹€瀣М鐎殿噮鍣e畷鎺戭潩椤戣法甯涚紓鍌氬€风拋鏌ュ磻閹炬剚鐔嗛柤鎼佹涧婵洨绱掗悩渚綈缂佺粯鐩弫鎰償閳ユ剚娼诲┑鐘殿暯閳ь剛鍋ㄩ崑銏ゆ煛鐏炲墽鈽夋い顐g箞椤㈡宕掑┃鐐妼铻栭柣姗€娼ф禒锕傛煟濡や焦绀夌憸棰佺椤啴濡堕崱妤€娼戦梺绋款儐閹瑰洭寮婚敐鍫㈢杸闁挎繂鎳忛悵婵嬫⒑閸濆嫯瀚扮紒澶婂濡叉劙骞掗幊宕囧枛閹筹繝濡舵惔鈶垦囨⒒閸屾瑧顦﹂柟纰卞亞閹噣顢曢敃鈧粈澶愭煙鐎涙ḿ绠ラ柛銈嗘礃閵囧嫰骞掗幋婵愪患闂佹悶鍔岄崐褰掑Φ閸曨垰绫嶉柛銉ㄥ煐缂嶅牓鏌f惔锛勪粵闁绘顨堥幑銏犫攽鐎n偄浠洪梻鍌氱墛缁嬫劙骞嬮悜鑺モ拺闂傚牊绋掗ˉ婊勩亜閹存繍妯€闁绘侗鍠涚粻娑樷槈濞嗘劖顏熼梻浣芥硶閸o箓骞忛敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾圭€瑰嫭鍣磋ぐ鎺戠倞鐟滃繘寮抽敃鍌涚厱妞ゎ厽鍨垫禍婵嬫煕濞嗗繒绠抽柍褜鍓欑粻宥夊磿闁单鍥敍濠婂懐鐒奸梺鍛婂姀閺傚倹绂嶅⿰鍕╀簻闁规崘娉涢弸搴ㄦ煟韫囥儳绉柡宀嬬秮婵$兘顢欐繝姘粣婵犳鍠栭敃锔惧垝椤栫偛绠柛娑欐綑瀹告繂鈹戦悩鎻掓殭闁告挸鐏氭穱濠囨倷椤忓嫧鍋撻弽顓炲瀭闁汇垻枪绾惧綊鏌涢…鎴濇灓闁哄棴闄勭换婵囩節閸屾碍娈滈梺琛″亾濞寸姴顑嗛悡鏇熴亜閹邦喖孝闁诲浚鍣i弻锝夊箻鐎涙ê闉嶇紓浣虹帛缁诲牊鎱ㄩ埀顒勬煥濠靛棙顥犻柕鍡樺姈缁绘繈濮€閿濆棛銆愬┑鐐叉▕閸樺ジ鎮鹃悜钘夌闁挎洍鍋撶紒鐘哄吹缁辨挻鎷呴懖鈩冨灥閳诲秴饪伴崼鐔哄幍闂佸吋绁撮弲鐐舵"闂備線鈧偛鑻晶顔剧棯缂併垹寮い銏$懇楠炲鎮╅悽纰夌闯闂備胶枪閺堫剟鎮烽敃鍋瑰洦顦版惔锝囷紲闂傚⿴鍓氳ぐ鍐焵椤掍胶绠為柣娑卞枦缁犳稑鈽夊▎鎰仧闂備浇娉曢崳锕傚箯閿燂拷 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屻倝宕妷锔芥瘎婵炲濮电喊宥嗙┍婵犲洦鍊锋い蹇撳閸嬫捇寮介鐐茬€梺姹囧灮鏋柣銈庡櫍閺屸剝寰勭€n亞浠奸梺鍝勬4缁犳捇寮婚敓鐘茬倞闁靛鍎虫禒楣冩⒑缂佹ê绗╅柛瀣姍閸┾偓妞ゆ巻鍋撶紒鐘茬Ч瀹曟洟鏌嗗鍛枃闂佽澹嗘晶妤呭磻閳哄倻绠剧€瑰壊鍠曠花濂告煕婵犲倻浠涙い銊e劦閹瑩鎳犻鑳闂備礁鎲″鍦枈瀹ュ桅闁告洦鍨遍弲婊堟偣閸ヮ亜鐨哄ù鐙€鍨跺鍝勑ч崶褍濮舵繛瀛樼玻缂嶄浇妫熼悷婊呭鐢鎮″☉銏″€堕柣鎰絻閳锋棃鏌曢崱妯虹瑨闂囧鏌e▎蹇斿櫧闁伙絿鏁婚弻鐔碱敊閻e本鍣板銈冨灪椤ㄥ﹤鐣烽幒鎴旀闁告鍋為崐鐘电磽閸屾艾鈧悂宕愰幖浣哥9闁绘垼濮ら崵鍕煠閹间焦娑ч柛銊︽閺岀喓绱掗姀鐘崇亪缂備胶濯崹鍫曞蓟閵娾晜鍋嗛柛灞剧☉椤忥拷 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屾盯顢曢敐鍡欙紭闂侀€炲苯鍘搁柣鎺炲閹广垹鈹戠€n亞顦板銈嗘尵婵厼危閸楃偐鏀介柣鎰摠缂嶆垿鏌涘顒夊剰瀹€锝呯仢閳诲酣骞嬪┑鎰棥闂備胶顫嬮崟鍨暦闂佹娊鏀遍崹鍫曞Φ閸曨垰绠抽柛鈩冦仦婢规洜绱撻崒娆戭槮妞わ缚鍗抽獮鎰板礃閼碱剚娈鹃悷婊呭鐢帞澹曟總鍛婄厽闁归偊鍓﹂崵鐔兼煕濡粯鍊愭慨濠冩そ瀹曘劍绻濋崒姘兼綆闂備礁鎲¢弻銊р偓娑掓櫊瀵尙鎹勭悰鈩冾潔闂侀潧楠忕槐鏇㈠储娴犲鈷戦柛锔诲幖閸斿绻涚拠褏鐣电€规洟娼ч埢搴ㄥ箛閳衡偓缁ㄨ顪冮妶鍡樺皑闁告挻绻勫☉鐢稿醇閺囩喓鍘甸梺鑽ゅ枑濠㈡﹢顢旈銏$厵闁绘挸娴风粔铏光偓瑙勬礈閸忔﹢銆佸Ο琛℃斀闁割偁鍩勫Σ鏉库攽閻樺灚鏆╁┑顔惧厴閵嗗倿顢欓悙顒夋綗闂佸搫娲㈤崹鍦閸ф鐓欓弶鍫濆⒔閻h京绱掗悪鈧崹鍫曞蓟閵娾晜鍋嗛柛灞剧☉椤忥拷 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屾盯骞橀懠顒€濡介梺绋跨箲缁捇寮诲☉銏╂晝闁挎繂妫涢ˇ銉╂⒑濮瑰洤鈧繄绮婚弽顓炶摕闁挎繂顦粻娑欍亜閹捐泛袨闁稿鍋ゅ娲传閸曢潧鍓扮紓浣割槸缂嶅﹤顕f繝姘╅柕澶堝灪閺傗偓闂備胶纭跺褔寮插⿰鍡椻偓鎾⒒閸屾瑧绐旈柍褜鍓涢崑娑㈡嚐椤栫偛鍌ㄩ柛婵勫劤绾惧ジ鏌ら梹鎰シ濠㈣锕㈤弻锝夋晲閸パ冨箣婵犵鍓濋幃鍌炲春閳╁啯濯存繛宸簽瀹曟粓姊婚崒娆掑厡闁硅櫕鎹囬、姘额敇閻斿嘲鐏佸銈嗘尵閸婏綁鏁愰崥銈嗘そ椤㈡棃宕ㄩ鍛伖闂傚倷鑳堕崢褔锝為弴銏犵9闁哄洨鍋熼幗銉モ攽閻樺灚鏆╅柛瀣洴閹洦瀵奸弶鎴狅紮闂佸搫娴勭槐鏇熺閽樺鏀介柣妯虹仛閺嗏晛鈹戦鑺ョ稇閻撱倝鏌曢崼婵囧窛闁活厼妫楅…鍧楁嚋闂堟稑顫嶉梺缁樻尪閸庣敻寮婚敐澶婂嵆闁绘劖绁撮崑鎾诲捶椤撴稑浜炬慨妯煎亾鐎氾拷 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳顭烽弻锝夊箛椤掍焦鍎撻梺鎼炲妼閸婂潡寮诲☉銏╂晝闁挎繂妫涢ˇ銉х磽娴e搫小闁告濞婇獮鍐亹閹烘垹鍊為悷婊冪Ч瀵剟鍩€椤掑倻纾介柛灞捐壘閳ь剙婀遍崰濠傤吋閸ャ劌搴婂┑鐐村灟閸ㄥ綊鐛姀鈥茬箚妞ゆ牗绻冮鐘裁归悡搴㈠缂佺粯绻傞埢鎾诲垂椤旂晫浜跺┑鐘垫暩閸嬫盯鏁冮鍕靛殨濠电姵鑹鹃崡鎶芥煟閺冨牜妫戠紒鎰仱濮婅櫣鍖栭弴鐐测拤闁藉啴浜堕弻锝呪攽閸ャ劉鎷荤紓浣介哺閹稿骞忛崨鏉戠闁瑰搫绉撮ˉ姘舵⒑鐠囨煡顎楅柛妯荤矒瀹曟垿骞樼紒妯煎幈闂佸搫娲㈤崝灞炬櫠椤旀祹褰掓偑閳ь剟宕圭捄渚綎婵炲樊浜滅粻褰掓煟閹邦厼绲诲┑鈯欏洦鈷戦柛娑橈攻绾炬悂鏌涢弬璺ㄐч柟顔斤耿瀹曞崬鈽夊▎灞惧濠电偠鎻徊浠嬪箟閿熺姴鐤柣鎰節缁诲棙銇勯幇鍓佸埌闁诲繐鐡ㄩ〃銉╂倷閼碱剛顔掗梺杞扮劍閹瑰洭寮幘缁樻櫢闁跨噦鎷� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊炲銈嗗坊閸嬫挾鐥幆褜鐓奸柡宀€鍠栭獮宥夘敊绾拌鲸姣夐梻浣呵归鍐磹濠靛钃熼柨鐔哄Т缁€鍐煏婵炑冨枤閺嗩偊姊绘担瑙勫仩闁告柨鐭傚畷鎰板箹娴e湱鐣抽梻鍌欒兌鏋紒缁樺姍瀹曘儳鈧綆鍠栫壕鎸庝繆閵堝懏鍣洪柣鎾寸☉闇夐柨婵嗘噺閸熺偞銇勯妷锝呯伈闁哄矉绱曟禒锔炬嫚閹绘帩娼庨梻浣筋嚃閸犳捇宕愬┑鍡欐殾闁圭儤鍨熷Σ鍫熸叏濡も偓濡梻妲愰敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾圭€瑰嫭鍣磋ぐ鎺戠倞妞ゆ帒顦伴弲顏堟偡濠婂啰绠婚柛鈹惧亾濡炪倖甯婇懗鍫曞煝閹剧粯鐓涢柛娑卞灠瀛濋梺浼欑到閸㈣尪鐏掗梺鐓庮潟閸婃鎯侀崼婵冩斀妞ゆ梹鏋绘笟娑㈡煕濡粯鍊愭鐐村姍瀹曟﹢顢欑憴锝嗗闂備礁鎲$粙鎴︽晝閵夛箑绶為柛鏇ㄥ灡閻撴洟鏌熼悙顒佺稇闁告繆娅i埀顒冾潐濞测晝绱為埀顒傜磼閻樺磭鈽夐柍钘夘槸閳诲酣骞嬪┑鍡樿緢闂傚倸鍊烽懗鍓佸垝椤栨娲冀椤撶偟锛欓梺闈╁瘜閸樻悂宕戦幘鎰佹僵闁绘劦鍓欓锟� 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳顭烽弻锝夊箛椤掍焦鍎撻梺鎼炲妼閸婂潡寮诲☉銏╂晝闁挎繂妫涢ˇ銉х磽娴e搫孝缂傚秴锕璇差吋婢跺﹣绱堕梺鍛婃处閸撴瑥鈻嶉敐澶嬧拺缂佸鍎婚~锕傛煕閺冣偓閸ㄥ灝顕f繝姘櫜濠㈣泛锕﹂鎺楁倵鐟欏嫭绀€婵炲眰鍔屽嵄闊洦绋掗埛鎴︽煠婵劕鈧洟寮搁幋锔藉€垫慨姗嗗墰婢э妇鈧鍣崳锝呯暦閻撳簶鏀介柛鈩冪懅瀹曞搫鈹戦敍鍕杭闁稿﹥鐗犻獮鎰版倷椤掆偓閸ㄦ梹銇勯幘璺衡偓锝夋晲閸氥倖妞介、鏃堝川椤忓懎顏归梻鍌欒兌閸樠囷綖閺囥垹纾归柡鍥╁仧閹姐儱鈹戦悩鍨毄闁稿鐩幆鍥ㄥ閺夋垹锛欓梺鍝勬祫缁辨洘绂嶉挊澶嗘斀闁绘ê鐏氶弳鈺佲攽椤旇姤缍戦悡銈夋煏閸繃宸濋柣顓炴椤潡鎳滈棃娑橆潔闂佺粯鎸堕崕鐢稿蓟閿濆鍗抽柣鎰ゴ閸嬫捇宕烽娑樹壕婵ḿ鍋撶€氾拷 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛婵°倗濮烽崑娑⑺囬悽绋挎瀬闁瑰墽绮崑鎰亜閺冨倹鍤€濞存粓绠栭弻娑㈠箛闂堟稑绠婚梺姹囧€愰崑鎾寸節閻㈤潧浠﹂柛銊ㄦ硾閻滃宕稿Δ浣规珫濠电偞鍨崹娲煕閹寸姷纾兼い鏍ㄧ⊕缁€鈧繝鈷€鍡楃毢缂佽鲸甯為埀顒婄秵閸嬪嫰鎮樼€电硶鍋撳▓鍨灈闁硅绱曠划顓㈡偄閻撳海鍔﹀銈嗗笒鐎氼剟鎷戦悢鍏肩厽闁哄啫鍊哥敮鍓佺磼閻樺磭鍙€闁哄瞼鍠愮€佃偐鈧稒蓱闁款厼鈹戦悙鑼⒈闁告ê澧藉Σ鎰板箻鐎涙ê顎撻梺鍛婄箓鐎氬懘鏁愭径瀣幈闂侀潧枪閸庢煡宕戦妷褉鍋撳▓鍨灈妞ゎ厾鍏樺顐﹀箻缂佹ê浜归梺鑲┾拡閸擄箑危鐟欏嫪绻嗛柣鎰典簻閳ь剚鐗犲畷婵婎槾鐎垫澘锕畷绋款渻鐏忔牕浜鹃柛娑卞枛椤曢亶鎮楀☉娅辨岸骞忓ú顏呪拺闁告稑锕︾紓姘舵煕鎼粹€宠埞闁宠绉归獮鍥偋閸垹骞嶉梻浣告啞閸垶宕愰弽顐熷亾濮樼偓瀚�
濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳娼¢弻鐔衡偓鐢登瑰瓭缂備浇缈伴崐婵嬪蓟閿曗偓铻e〒姘煎灡閿涘棗鈹戦悙鍙夆枙濞存粍绻堝鎻掆堪閸喓鍘介梺閫涘嵆濞佳勬櫠椤曗偓楠炴牠寮堕幋顖濆惈濠殿喖锕ㄥ▍锝囧垝濞嗘挸绠伴幖娣灪鐎氬磭绱撻崒娆戭槮妞ゆ垵妫濋獮鎴﹀炊椤掆偓杩濋梺鍛婄☉閻°劑宕愭繝姘厾闁诡厽甯掗崝銈夋煕濞嗗繑顥㈡慨濠呮缁辨帒螣閼姐値妲梻浣呵归敃銈咃耿闁秴鐒垫い鎺嶈兌閸熸煡鏌熼崙銈嗗: 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛婵°倗濮烽崑鐐烘偋閻樻眹鈧線寮撮姀鈩冩珖闂侀€炲苯澧板瑙勬礉閵囨劙骞掗幘璺哄箺闂備胶顢婇幓顏嗗緤妤e叝澶嬪緞瀹€鈧Λ顖涖亜閹惧鈽夊ù婊堢畺濮婂宕掑▎鎴М闂佺顕滅换婵嗙暦濠靛鍗抽柣鎰Ф閸犳劗鎹㈠┑瀣<婵☆垰鍢叉禍楣冩煙閻戞ɑ灏电紒鈾€鍋撴繝娈垮枟閿曗晠宕㈡ィ鍐ㄧ煑闁糕剝绋掗埛鎴犵磽娴h偂鎴犵矆閳ь剟姊虹粙鍖″伐婵犫偓闁秴鐒垫い鎺嶈兌閸熸煡鏌熼崙銈嗗 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾圭€瑰嫭鍣磋ぐ鎺戠倞鐟滃繘寮抽敃鍌涚厱妞ゎ厽鍨垫禍婵嬫煕濞嗗繒绠婚柡灞稿墲瀵板嫮鈧綆浜濋鍛攽閻愬弶鈻曞ù婊勭矊濞插潡姊绘担瑙勫仩闁稿氦宕靛濠囨嚍閵壯屾锤闂佺粯鍔﹂崜姘跺矗韫囨柧绻嗘い鏍ㄧ矊鐢爼鎮介姘卞煟闁哄矉缍€缁犳盯濡烽埡鍌も偓宥夋⒑闂堟稒鎼愰悗姘卞閹便劑鍩€椤掑嫭鐓ユ繛鎴灻顏堟煕閿濆嫬宓嗘慨濠勫劋濞碱亪骞嶉鐓庮瀴闂備礁婀遍幊鎾趁洪鐑嗗殨妞ゆ劧绠戠粻鑽ょ磽娴h偂鎴濃枍閵忋倖鈷戦悹鎭掑妼濞呮劙鏌熼崙銈嗗 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾圭€瑰嫭鍣磋ぐ鎺戠倞鐟滃繘寮抽敃鍌涚厽闁靛繆鎳氶崷顓犵幓婵°倕鎳忛悡娆撴煙濞堝灝鏋涙い锝呫偢閺屾稓鈧絽澧庣弧鈧梺鍝勬湰濞叉ê顕ラ崟顖氶唶婵犻潧妫楅ˉ娆愮節閻㈤潧浠﹂柛銊﹀劶瑜版粌鈹戦埄鍐ㄧ祷闁绘鎹囧濠氬即閿涘嫮鏉搁梺鍝勬川閸婎偊濡烽埡鍌滃弳濠电偞鍨堕悷褍煤鐎涙ɑ鍙忓┑鐘叉噺椤忕娀鏌熼悷鏉款伃濠碘剝鎮傛俊鐑芥晜閹呯▓闂傚倸鍊烽懗鍫曞箠閹捐鍚归柡宥庡幖缁狀垶鏌ㄩ悤鍌涘 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柣鎴eГ閸婂潡鏌ㄩ弴鐐测偓褰掑磿閹寸姵鍠愰柣妤€鐗嗙粭鎺楁煛閸曗晛鍔﹂柡灞剧洴瀵挳濡搁妷褌鍝楅梻浣规偠閸斿矂宕愰崹顕呮綎婵炲樊浜堕弫鍡涙煃瑜滈崜娑氬垝閺冨牊鍋ㄧ紒瀣硶閿涙盯姊洪棃娑氬妞わ缚鍗抽幃鈥斥槈閵忥紕鍘遍梺闈涱檧缁蹭粙宕濆鑸电厽闊浄绲奸柇顖炴煛鐏炲墽鈯曢柟顖涙閸┿儵宕ㄩ弶鎸庡創闂傚倷绀侀幖顐ゆ偖椤愶箑绀夐柟杈剧畱缁犳牠鏌曢崼婵愭Ц缁炬儳鍚嬬换娑㈠箣閻戝洣绶垫繛瀵搞€嬮幏锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛濠傛健閺屻劑寮撮悙娴嬪亾瑜版帒纾块柟瀵稿У閸犳劙鏌eΔ鈧悧鍡欑箔閹烘梻妫柟顖嗗懐楔闂佸搫鐭夌换婵嗙暦閸洖鐓涘ù锝呮贡閳ь剚鍎抽埞鎴︽倷閸欏娅ф繝鐢靛亹閸嬫捇姊洪崫鍕効缂佺姵鍨奸悘鎺撶箾閹炬潙鍤柛銊╀憾閸┿垽骞橀弬銉︽杸闂佺粯鍔栬ぐ鍐箖閹达附鐓熸俊銈呭暙閳诲牏鈧鍠栭…閿嬩繆閹间礁鐓涢柛灞剧煯缁ㄤ粙姊绘担鍛靛綊寮甸鍌滅煓闁硅揪瀵岄弫鍌炴煥閻曞倹瀚� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛濠傛健閺屻劑寮撮悙娴嬪亾瑜版帒纾块柟瀵稿У閸犳劙鏌eΔ鈧悧鍡欑箔閹烘梻妫柟顖嗗嫬浠撮梺鍝勬湰缁嬫垼鐏冮梺鍛婂壃閸涘瓨锛楀┑鐘垫暩閸嬫稑螣婵犲啰顩叉繝濠傚閸旀棃姊婚崒娆戝妽閻庣瑳鍏炬稒鎷呴懖婵囩洴瀹曠喖顢曢銏☆吙闂備胶顫嬮崟鍨暦闂佹娊鏀遍崹鍧楀箖瑜版帒绠掗柟鐑樺灥椤牆鈹戦悙鍙夊櫤闁告梹鐟╁濠氭偄閻撳海顦╅梺闈涚墕濡顢旈敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屻倝宕妷锔芥瘎婵炲濮靛銊ф閹捐纾兼繛鍡樺笒閸橈紕绱撴笟鍥ф珮闁搞劌鐖兼俊鎾礃椤旂厧绐涢柣搴㈢⊕閿氬ù鐘层偢濮婅櫣绱掑Ο铏逛紘婵犳鍠撻崐婵嗙暦閹达箑惟鐟滃繒澹曟總鍛婂€甸柨婵嗛娴滄粍銇勯弴鐔虹煉闁哄矉绲鹃幆鏃堫敊閻撳簶鎷繝娈垮枛閿曘劌鈻嶉敐澶婄闁告洦鍨版儫闂侀潧顧€婵″洩銇愬鑸碘拻濞达絿鍎ら崵鈧梺鎼炲€栭悧鐘荤嵁韫囨稒鏅搁柨鐕傛嫹 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屾盯顢曢敐鍡欘槬缂佺偓鍎冲ḿ锟犲蓟閿濆顫呴柍鎯版硾濠€杈ㄧ珶閺囩喓绡€婵﹩鍘鹃崢鐢告⒑绾拋娼愰柛鏃撶畵瀹曢潧鈻庨幋鐘碉紲闂侀€炲苯澧€垫澘瀚伴獮鍥敊閻撳海瀵奸梻鍌欑劍閹爼宕曢鐐茬鐎广儱娲i悞濠囨煟閵忕姵鍟為柣鎾寸洴閺屾盯鍩勯崘銊ヮ潓闂侀€炲苯澧紒璇茬墕椤曪絾绻濆顑┾晠鏌嶉崫鍕偓鍛婄閻愮儤鈷戠紒瀣濠€鎵磼鐎n偄鐏存い銏℃閺佹捇鏁撻敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屾盯顢曢敐鍡欙紭闂侀€炲苯鍘搁柣鎺炲閹广垹鈹戠€n亞顦板銈嗘尵婵厼危閸楃偐鏀介柣鎰摠缂嶆垿鏌涘顒夊剰瀹€锝呯仢閳诲酣骞嬪┑鎰棥闂佽崵鍠愰悷銉р偓姘间簽閹广垽宕卞☉娆戝帾闂佸壊鍋呯换鍐闯濞差亝鐓曢柨婵嗘噺鐠愶紕绱掓潏銊ユ诞闁诡喒鏅涢悾鐑藉炊瑜夐幏浼存⒒娴e憡鎯堥悶姘煎亰瀹曟繈骞嬮敃鈧粻鏍煏閸繍妲哥痪鎯у悑缁绘盯骞嬮悜鍥︾返婵炲銆嬮幏锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊炲銈嗗笒椤︿即寮查鍫熲拺闁告繂瀚埢澶愭煕濡灝浜圭紒顔肩墦瀹曟帒鈽夊槌栧晭闂備胶纭堕崜婵婃懌闁诲繐娴氶崢楣冩儉椤忓牆绠氱憸搴ㄥ磻閵夆晜鐓涚€光偓鐎n剛锛熸繛瀵稿婵″洭骞忛悩璇茬闁圭儤鍩堝ḿ娑㈡⒒閸屾瑧鍔嶉柣顏勭秺瀹曟劕鈹戦崼顫瑝闂佸搫绋侀崢濂告嫅閻斿吋鐓忓┑鐐靛亾濞呭棝鏌涚€n亝顥㈤柡灞剧〒娴狅箓宕滆濡插牆顪冮妶鍛寸崪闁瑰嚖鎷� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屻倝宕妷锔芥瘎婵炲濮电喊宥嗙┍婵犲洦鍊锋い蹇撳閸嬫捇寮介鐐茬€梺姹囧灮鏋柣銈庡櫍閺屸剝寰勭€n亞浠奸梺鍝勬4缁犳捇寮婚敓鐘茬倞闁靛鍎虫禒鑲╃磽娴e搫啸缂侇噮鍨舵俊鐢稿礋椤栨氨鐫勯梺绋挎湰缁秹骞夊Ο琛℃斀闁宠棄妫楁禍婊堟煙閾忣個顏堬綖韫囨稒鎯為悷娆忓绾绢垶姊洪棃娴ㄥ綊宕曢弻銉﹀仧闁靛繈鍊栭埛鎴︽煟閻斿憡绶叉繛鍫氭櫊閺岀喖宕欓妶鍡楊伓 缂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳缍婇弻鐔兼⒒鐎靛壊妲紒鐐劤濠€杈╂閹烘柡鍋撻敐搴′壕缂佹墎鏅滅换娑橆啅椤旇崵鐩庨柛銉︽尦濮婅櫣鍖栭弴鐕佲偓鍡涙煛閸涱喚鐭掓い銏$懇瀵噣宕奸悢鍙夊闁荤喐绮庢晶妤冩暜濡ゅ懏鏅柣鏃囨绾惧ジ鎮规担鍛婅础缂佲檧鍋撻柣搴㈩問閸n噣宕戦崨顖涘床婵犻潧顑呴悙濠囨煏婵炑冨暙濮规煡姊婚崒娆掑厡缂侇噮鍨扮叅闁哄稁鍘肩壕褰掓煕閿旇骞愰柛瀣尭椤繈鎮欓鈧锟� 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳顭烽弻锝夊箛椤掍焦鍎撻梺鎼炲妼閸婂潡寮诲☉銏╂晝闁挎繂妫涢ˇ銉х磽娴e搫小闁告濞婂璇测槈閵忊晜鏅濋梺鎸庣箓濡盯藝閵壯呯<闁绘劦鍓欓崝銈囩磽瀹ュ拑韬€殿喖顭烽崹楣冨箛娴e憡鍊梺纭呭亹鐞涖儵鍩€椤掆偓绾绢參顢欓幇鐗堚拻濞达綀娅g敮娑㈡偨椤栨稑娴柟顔矫~婵堟崉娴f洩绠撻弻娑㈠即閵娿儳浠╃紓浣哄У婵炲﹪寮婚悢鐓庣妞ゆ挾鍋熸禒顓㈡⒑鏉炴壆绐旂紒鐘崇墵瀵鏁愰崱妯哄妳闂侀潧绻堥崹褰掑汲閿熺姵鈷戦柣鐔告緲濞堚晠鏌熼崙銈嗗 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屾盯顢曢敐鍡欘槬闂佺ǹ琚崝搴ㄥ箟缁嬫鍚嬪鑸瞪戦弲顏堟⒑閹稿海绠撴い锔诲灣缁顫濋懜鐢靛幘闂佸憡鎸昏ぐ鍐储閸涘﹥鍙忛悷娆忓濞堟粍鎱ㄦ繝鍐┿仢鐎规洏鍔嶇换婵嬪磼濮f寧娲熷娲传閵夈儛锝夋煟濡や胶鐭岄柛鎺撳浮瀹曞ジ鎮㈡搴g嵁闂備礁缍婇崑濠囧储妤e啫鐭楅柛鈩冪⊕閳锋垹绱撴担鑲℃垹绮堥埀顒勬⒑缁嬪尅宸ユ繝鈧柆宥呯劦妞ゆ帊鑳堕崯鏌ユ煙閸戙倖瀚� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛濠傛健閺屻劑寮村Δ鈧禍鎯ь渻閵堝簼绨婚柛鐔告綑閻g柉銇愰幒婵囨櫔闂佸憡渚楅崹浼村极缁嬪簱鏀介柣鎰摠鐏忎即鏌涢埡浣告殻鐎规洘鍨块獮姗€骞栭鐕佸晬闂備胶绮崝妯间焊濞嗘垹涓嶅┑鐘崇閻撴稑霉閿濆牜娼愮€规洖鐭傞弻鈩冩媴鐟欏嫬纾抽梺杞扮劍閹瑰洭寮幘缁樻櫢闁跨噦鎷� 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌涘☉姗堝姛缂佺娀绠栭弻宥堫檨闁告挻姘ㄩ幑銏犫槈濞嗘劕顎撻梺鍛婂姇瀵爼骞栭幇顔炬/闁硅鍔﹂崵娆撴煃鐟欏嫬鐏撮柟顔规櫊瀹曪絾寰勭€n偄鈧绱撻崒娆掑厡濠殿垼鍙冨畷褰掑醇閺囩偠鎽曢梺闈浥堥弲婊堝磻閸℃稒鐓曢悘鐐插⒔閳藉銇勮箛銉﹀ 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屾盯顢曢敐鍡欘槬闂佺ǹ琚崝搴ㄥ箟閸涘﹥鍎熼柕濞垮劤閻i箖姊洪崫鍕偓鍝ヨ姳闁秴閱囨い蹇撶墛閻撴洘銇勯幇鍓佹偧缂佺姵蓱閵囧嫰寮幐搴&濠殿喖锕ㄥ▍锝夊箲閸曨垰惟闁靛濡囪ぐ姘舵⒒娴g儤鍤€闁搞倖鐗犻獮蹇涙晸閿燂拷 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾圭€瑰嫭鍣磋ぐ鎺戠倞妞ゆ帒顦伴弲顏堟偡濠婂啰绠绘鐐村灴婵偓闁靛牆鎳愰悿鈧俊鐐€栭幐鍡涘礋闂堟稒娅栭梻鍌氬€搁オ鎾磻閸曨個娲晜閸撗呯厯闂佺懓顕慨閿嬬▔瀹ュ棎浜滈柡宥庡亜娴狅箓鏌i幘鍗炲姦闁哄矉缍佸鎾倷濞村浜鹃柛锔诲幐閸嬫挸顫濋悙顒€顏� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛濠傛健閺屻劑寮撮悙娴嬪亾閸濄儳涓嶉柡宥庡幗閻撴洘銇勯幇鍓佺ɑ缂佲偓閳ь剛绱掗悙顒€鍔ゆ繛纭风節瀵濡堕崶褎鐎抽梺鍛婎殘閸嬫盯锝為锔解拺婵炶尪顕ч獮妤呮煟閻斿弶娅婄€殿喖顭烽幃銏ゅ川婵犲嫮肖闂備浇顕栭崹搴ㄥ川椤斞勫浮濮婄粯鎷呴懞銉b偓鍐磼閳ь剚鎷呴懖婵囩☉閳规垹鈧綆浜i幗鏇㈡⒑闂堟单鍫ュ疾濠婂牆纾婚柛鈩冪⊕閻撴洟鎮橀悙鎻掆挃闁宠棄顦伴妵鍕疀閵夛箑顏� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾圭€瑰嫭鍣磋ぐ鎺戠倞鐟滃繘寮抽敃鍌涚厱妞ゎ厽鍨垫禍婵嬫煕濞嗗繒绠婚柡灞稿墲瀵板嫮鈧綆浜濋鍛攽閻愬弶鈻曞ù婊勭矒閹€斥槈濡繐缍婇弫鎰板炊瑜嶆俊鍝勨攽閻愯尙澧︾紒鐘崇墪椤繐煤椤忓嫮顦梺鑲┾拡閸撴瑧鏁妷鈺傗拺缂佸顑欓崕蹇涙煙閸愭煡鍙勯柛鈹垮灩椤撳吋寰勭€n亙姹楃紓鍌氬€烽悞锕€鐜婚崸妤€鐭楅柛鈩冪⊕閳锋垹绱撴担鑲℃垹绮堥埀顒勬⒑缁嬪尅宸ユ繝鈧柆宥呯劦妞ゆ帊鑳堕崯鏌ユ煙閸戙倖瀚� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛婵°倗濮烽崑鐐烘偋閻樻眹鈧線寮撮姀鐘靛幈濠殿喗锕╅崢浠嬪Φ濠靛鐓涘ù锝嚽归弳锝夋煕閳规儳浜炬俊鐐€栧濠氬磻閹剧粯鐓熸繝濠傚枤閻撹偐鈧娲栫紞濠囥€佸▎鎴炲枂闁告洦鍘搁崑鎾寸節濮橆厸鎷洪柣鐔哥懃鐎氼剟宕濋妶鍥╃<濠㈣泛顑嗙紞鎴︽偂閵堝棎浜滈柟鎯у船閻忊晠鏌$€b晝绐旈柡宀€鍠栧畷婊嗩槾閻㈩垱鐩弻锟犲川椤旇棄鈧劙鏌$仦璇插闁诡喓鍊濆畷鎺戔槈濮楀棔绱�
濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳顭烽弻锝夊箛椤掍焦鍎撻梺鎼炲妼閸婂潡寮诲☉銏╂晝闁挎繂妫涢ˇ銉х磽娴e搫孝缂傚秴锕璇差吋婢跺﹣绱堕梺鍛婃处閸撴瑥鈻嶉敐澶嬧拺缂佸鍎婚~锕傛煕閺冣偓閸ㄥ灝顕f繝姘ч柛姘ュ€曞﹢閬嶅焵椤掑﹦绉甸柛瀣嚇閹敻骞掑Δ浣叉嫼缂傚倷鐒﹂敋缂佹甯¢弻銊╁即閵娿倝鍋楅悗娈垮枛椤攱淇婇幖浣哥厸闁稿本鐭花浠嬫⒒娴e懙褰掑嫉椤掑倻鐭欓柟杈惧瘜閺佸倿鏌ㄩ悤鍌涘: 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柣鎴eГ閸婂潡鏌ㄩ弴鐐测偓褰掑磿閹寸姵鍠愰柣妤€鐗嗙粭鎺楁煛閸曗晛鍔﹂柡灞剧洴瀵挳濡搁妷褌鍝楅梻浣规偠閸斿矂宕愰崹顕呮綎婵炲樊浜堕弫鍡涙煃瑜滈崜娑氬垝閺冨牊鍋ㄧ紒瀣硶閿涙盯姊洪棃娑氬妞わ缚鍗抽幃鈥斥槈閵忥紕鍘遍梺闈涱檧缁蹭粙宕濆鑸电厽闊浄绲奸柇顖炴煛鐏炲墽鈯曢柟顖涙閸┿儵宕ㄩ弶鎸庡創闂傚倷绀侀幖顐ゆ偖椤愶箑绀夐柟杈剧畱缁犳牠鏌曢崼婵愭Ц缁炬儳鍚嬬换娑㈠箣閻戝洣绶垫繛瀵搞€嬮幏锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊為悷婊勭矊闇夐柡宥庡幗閻撳繐鈹戦悙闈涗壕婵炲懎妫濋弻娑欑節閸屾稑浠撮梺鍝勮閸旀垵顕i幘顔藉€锋繛鏉戭儏娴滃墽鎲搁悧鍫濈瑨缁炬儳顭烽弻銊╂偄閸濆嫅锝夋煟閹惧崬鍔﹂柡宀嬬節瀹曞爼鈥﹂幋鐐垫殽濠电偛鐡ㄧ划灞炬櫠娴犲鐒垫い鎺嗗亾闁告ɑ绮撳畷鎴﹀箻缂佹ḿ鍙嗗┑鐘绘涧濡瑩宕冲ú顏呯厱閻庯絻鍔岄崝锕傛煛鐏炵ǹ澧查柟宄版噽閹叉挳宕熼銈忕处闂傚倷娴囧銊╂倿閿曞倸绠查柛銉墮閺嬩線鏌熼崜褏甯涢柡鍛倐閺屻劑鎮ら崒娑橆伓 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊炲銈嗗笒椤︿即寮查鍫熲拺闁告繂瀚埢澶愭煕濡灝浜圭紒顔肩墦瀹曞ジ鎮㈢粙鍨紟婵犵妲呴崹鏉酷缚閿熺姴浼犻柧蹇撳帨閸嬫挾鎲撮崟顒傤槰闂佺粯鎼换婵嗩嚕鐠囨祴妲堥柕蹇曞Х閸旀挳姊洪崨濠傚Е濞存粍鐗曞嵄闁割偁鍎查埛鎴犵磽娴e顏嗙箔閹烘鐓熼煫鍥ㄦ煥閸濆搫鈹戦敍鍕毈鐎规洜鍠栭、娑橆潩妲屾牕鏁介梻鍌欐祰椤骞嗗畝鍕瀭闂侇剙绉撮弸浣肝旈敐鍛殲闁绘挾鍠栭獮鏍庨鈧悘顕€鏌涢悢鍝ュ弨闁哄瞼鍠栧畷娆撳Χ閸℃浼� 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳顭烽弻锝夊箛椤掍焦鍎撻梺鎼炲妼閸婂潡寮诲☉銏╂晝闁挎繂妫涢ˇ銉х磽娴e搫孝缂傚秴锕璇差吋婢跺﹣绱堕梺鍛婃处閸撴瑥鈻嶉敐澶嬧拺婵炶尪顕ч獮妤併亜閵娿儻韬€殿喛顕ч濂稿醇椤愶綆鈧洭姊绘担鍛婂暈闁圭ǹ顭烽幆鍕敍閻愬弶妲梺閫炲苯澧柕鍥у楠炴帡骞嬪┑鍥╀壕婵犵數鍋涢崥瀣礉濞嗘挸钃熼柣鏂挎惈閺嬪牓鏌涘Δ鍐ㄤ粧闁哥姴锕よ灃闁绘﹢娼ф禒婊呯磼缂佹﹫鑰跨€殿噮鍋婇獮妯肩磼濡粯顏熼梻浣芥硶閸o箓骞忛敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛婵°倗濮烽崑娑⑺囬悽绋挎瀬闁瑰墽绮崑鎰版煕閹邦垰绱︾紓鍐╂礋濮婄粯鎷呴搹鐟扮闂佸憡姊瑰玻鎸庣缁嬪簱鏋庨柟鎹愭珪鏉堝牓姊洪幐搴㈢闁稿﹤缍婇幃锟犳偄閸忚偐鍘棅顐㈡搐閿曘儵宕垫径鎰厱闁挎棁顕ч獮妯衡槈閹惧磭效闁哄备鈧剚鍚嬮幖绮光偓宕囶啈闂備胶绮幐鍫曞磿閻㈢ǹ钃熼柨婵嗩槸閸楁娊鏌i幇顓犮偞闁稿鎹囧畷鐑筋敇濞戞ü澹曞┑顔结缚閸嬫挾鈧熬鎷� 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴f閺嬩線鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳顭烽弻锝夊箛椤掍焦鍎撻梺鎼炲妼閸婂潡寮诲☉銏╂晝闁挎繂妫涢ˇ銉х磽娴e搫小闁告濞婇獮鍐亹閹烘垹鍊為悷婊冪Ч瀵剟鍩€椤掑倻纾介柛灞捐壘閳ь剙婀遍崰濠傤吋閸ャ劌搴婂┑鐐村灟閸ㄥ綊鐛姀鈥茬箚妞ゆ牗绻冮鐘裁归悡搴㈠缂佺粯绻傞埢鎾诲垂椤旂晫浜跺┑鐘垫暩閸嬫盯鏁冮鍕靛殨濠电姵鑹炬儫闂佸啿鎼崐鍛婄閻愮儤鈷戠紒瀣濠€鎵磼鐎n偄鐏存い銏℃閺佹捇鏁撻敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌熼梻瀵割槮缁炬儳婀遍埀顒傛嚀鐎氼參宕崇壕瀣ㄤ汗闁圭儤鍨归崐鐐差渻閵堝骸澧婚柛鎾村哺閹嫰顢涘杈ㄦ闂佺粯姊婚埛鍫ュ极瀹ュ棛绠鹃柟瀵镐紳閼测晝纾鹃柡鍥ュ灪閳锋帒霉閿濆懏鍟為悹鎰剁節閺屾稓鈧綆鍋呯亸顓熴亜椤忓嫬鏆g€规洜枪铻栭柍褜鍓熷鍛婃媴閹肩偐鍋撻幒鎴僵闁挎繂鎳嶆竟鏇㈡⒒娴e憡鎯堥悶姘煎亰瀹曟繈骞嬮敃鈧粻鏍煏閸繍妲哥痪鎯у悑缁绘盯骞嬮悜鍥︾返婵炲銆嬮幏锟� 婵犵數濮烽弫鍛婃叏閻戣棄鏋侀柛娑橈攻閸欏繘鏌i姀鐘差棌闁轰礁锕弻鈥愁吋鎼粹€崇缂備焦鍔栭〃鍡樼┍婵犲洤围闁告侗鍙庢禒楣冩⒑閻熸澘鏆遍柣顓炲€搁~蹇曠磼濡顎撻柣鐔哥懃鐎氼剚绂掗埡鍛拺闁告稑锕ラ悡銉х磼缂佹ê濮嶉柛鈹垮灲瀵剚鎯旈幘鎼綌婵犵數濮撮敃銈夊箠瀹ュ洨纾鹃柡鍥ュ灪閳锋帡鏌涚仦鍓ф噭缂佷胶澧楃换娑欏緞鐎n偆顦伴悗瑙勬礃婵炲﹪寮崘顔肩<婵﹢纭搁崬鐢告⒒娴h姤纭堕柛锝忕畵楠炲繘鏁撻敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛婵°倗濮烽崑鐐烘偋閻樻眹鈧線寮撮姀鈩冩珖闂侀€炲苯澧板瑙勬礋瀹曠兘顢橀悩纰夌床闂佽鍑界紞鍡涘磻閹捐埖顫曢柍鍝勫€荤粻鍓р偓鐟板閸犳洜鑺辨繝姘倞闁圭虎鍠楅埛鎴︽煙閼测晛浠滈柛鏃傛暩缁辨帡鎳犵捄鐩掓挾绱掗崒姘毙х€规洘绮忛ˇ瀛樹繆椤愵偄鐏﹂柡灞稿墲瀵板嫮鈧綁娼ч崝灞解攽閳╁啫绲荤紓宥咃躬楠炲啫螖閳ь剟锝炲┑瀣€锋い鎺嗗亾妞ゅ骏鎷� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛濠傛健閺屻劑寮撮悙娴嬪亾閹间礁鍨傞柛灞剧〒缁♀偓闂傚倸鐗婃笟妤呭磿閹扮増鐓曞┑鐘插€归崑銉╂煛鐏炶濮傜€殿喗鎸抽幃娆徝圭€n亙澹曢梺鍛婄☉楗挳寮ㄦ导瀛樷拻闁稿本鐟ㄩ崗宀€绱掗鍛仸鐎规洘绻傝灃闁告侗鍘介悗顒勬⒑閸涘﹦缂氶柛搴㈠▕閹矂宕卞缁樻杸闂佺粯锚瀵埖寰勯崟顖涚厽闁规儳宕崝锕傛煛瀹€瀣М鐎殿喗鎸抽幃娆徝圭€n亙澹曢梺闈╁瘜閸樻悂宕戦幘鎰佹僵闁绘劦鍓欓锟� 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柟缁㈠枟閸庡顭块懜闈涘缂佺嫏鍥х閻庢稒蓱鐏忣厼霉濠婂懎浜惧ǎ鍥э躬婵″爼宕熼鐐差瀴闂備礁鎲¢悷銉ф崲濮椻偓瀵鎮㈤搹鍦紲闂侀潧绻掓慨鐢告倶閸儲鐓熼幖娣灱婢规ɑ銇勯敂鍨祮濠碉紕鏁诲畷鐔碱敍濮橀硸鍞洪梻浣烘嚀閻°劎鎹㈠鍡欘浄濠靛倸鎲¢埛鎴︽煢濡警妲搁柡鍡欏枛閺屾盯鎮╁畷鍥р拰閻庢鍠栭…閿嬩繆閹间礁鐓涢柛灞剧煯缁ㄤ粙姊绘担鍛靛綊寮甸鍌滅煓闁硅揪瀵岄弫鍌炴煥閻曞倹瀚� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛濠傛健閺屻劑寮撮悙娴嬪亾閸濄儳涓嶉柡宥庡幗閻撴洘銇勯幇鍓佺ɑ缂佲偓閳ь剛绱掗悙顒€鍔ゆ繛纭风節瀵鎮㈤搹鍦紲濠碘槅鍨靛▍锝夘敄閸岀偞鈷戦柛婵嗗閿涙棃姊婚崟顐㈩仾缂佸矁椴哥换婵嬪炊閼稿灚娅栨繝鐢靛仜濡瑧鏁埡鍛闁告侗鍘搁弨浠嬫煟閹邦垰鐨烘慨锝囧仱閺岋繝宕ㄩ姘f瀰閻庢鍠栭…閿嬩繆閹间礁鐓涢柛灞剧煯缁ㄤ粙姊绘担鍛靛綊寮甸鍌滅煓闁硅揪瀵岄弫鍌炴煥閻曞倹瀚� 濠电姷鏁告慨鐑藉极閸涘﹥鍙忛柣鎴濐潟閳ь剙鍊块、娆撴倷椤掑缍楅梻浣告惈濞层垽宕归崷顓烆棜缂備焦岣跨粻楣冩煙鐎涙ḿ鎳冮柣鎺撴そ閺屸剝鎷呯粙娆句純闂佸搫鏈惄顖涗繆閻戠瓔鏁婇柣鎾冲瘨濞艰崵绱撻崒娆戝妽闁告梹鐗犻妴鍐╃節閸パ嗘憰闂佺粯姊婚崢褏绮婚弻銉︾厵濞寸厧鐡ㄥ☉褎绻涢崼顐㈠籍婵﹥妞藉畷銊︾節閸屾粈鎮e┑鐘垫暩閸嬫劙宕戦幘缁樷拺闁告繂瀚~锕傛煕閺冣偓閸ㄥ潡鐛崘顔嘉у璺猴功閿涙粌鈹戦悙鏉戠仸闁挎洍鏅滅€靛ジ鏁撻敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊炲銈嗗坊閸嬫挾鐥幆褜鐓奸柡宀€鍠栭獮宥夘敊绾拌鲸姣夐梻浣呵归鍐磹濠靛钃熼柨鐔哄Т缁€鍐煏婵炑冨枤閺嗩偊姊绘担瑙勫仩闁告柨鐭傚畷鎰板锤濡も偓閽冪喓鎲搁幋鐘典笉婵炴垯鍨洪弲鏌ユ煕濞戝崬澧伴柛鎴n潐缁绘繈鎮介棃娑楃捕闂佺娅曢崝鏍崲濞戙垹鐒垫い鎺戝閻撴盯鎮橀悙棰濆殭濠殿喖鍊块弻鐔碱敊閸濆嫧鍋撳┑鍡欐殾闁圭儤鍨熷Σ鍫熸叏濡も偓濡梻妲愰敓锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊炲銈嗗坊閸嬫挾鐥幆褜鐓奸柡宀€鍠栭獮宥夘敊绾拌鲸姣夐梻浣呵归鍐磹濠靛钃熼柨鐔哄Т缁€鍐煏婵炑冨枤閺嗩偊姊绘担瑙勫仩闁告柨鐭傚畷鎰亹閹烘嚦锕傛煕閺囥劌鐏犻柛鎰ㄥ亾闂備線娼ц噹闁告侗鍨扮敮鎾剁磽閸屾艾鈧兘鎳楅懜鍨弿闂傚牊鍏氬☉銏犵妞ゆ棁澹堥幗鏇㈡⒑闂堟单鍫ュ疾濠婂牆纾婚柛鈩冪⊕閻撴洟鎮橀悙鎻掆挃闁宠棄顦伴妵鍕疀閵夛箑顏� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧湱鈧懓瀚崳纾嬨亹閹烘垹鍊炲銈嗗坊閸嬫挾鐥幆褜鐓奸柡宀€鍠栭獮宥夘敊绾拌鲸姣夐梻浣呵归鍐磹濠靛钃熼柨鐔哄Т缁€鍐煏婵炑冨枤閺嗩偊姊绘担瑙勫仩闁告柨鐭傚畷鎰板锤濡も偓閽冪喖鏌i弬璺ㄦ闁哄妫冮弻娑⑩€﹂幋婵囩亶闂佽绻戦幑鍥ь潖濞差亜宸濆┑鐘插閻g兘鎮楅崗澶婁壕闂佸綊妫跨粈渚€鎷戦悢鍏肩厪濠电偟鍋撳▍鍡涙煕鐎n亝顥㈤柡灞剧〒娴狅箓宕滆濡插牆顪冮妶鍛寸崪闁瑰嚖鎷� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛婵°倗濮烽崑鐐烘偋閻樻眹鈧線寮撮姀鈩冩珖闂侀€炲苯澧板瑙勬礉閵囨劙骞掗幘鍏呯敾婵犵數鍋涘Λ妤冩崲閹伴偊鏁傞柍鍝勬噺閻撴洟鏌曟繝蹇涙妞ゃ儱鐗撻弻鈥崇暆鐎n剛鏆犻柧浼欑到閵嗘帒顫濋悡搴d画婵°倖妫冨缁樻媴閸涘﹥鍎撳┑鈽嗗亜闁帮絽鐣烽幇顑芥斀閻庯綆浜i幗鏇㈡⒑闂堟单鍫ュ疾濠婂牆纾婚柛鈩冪⊕閻撴洟鎮橀悙鎻掆挃闁宠棄顦伴妵鍕疀閵夛箑顏� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾惧綊鏌i幋锝呅撻柛銈呭閺屾盯顢曢敐鍡欘槬缂備胶濮锋繛鈧柡宀€鍠栭獮鎴﹀箛闂堟稒顔勯梺鑽ゅ枑閻熻京绮婚幘璇茬畺婵°倕鎳忛弲鏌ュ箹缁厜鍋撻幇浣逛氦闂傚倷鐒﹂幃鍫曞礉瀹ュ洦宕查柛顐犲劤瀹撲線鏌″搴d粓閹兼惌鐓堥弫鍡涙煃瑜滈崜姘┍婵犲洦鍤冮柍鍝勫暞閿涘繘姊虹拠鈥崇€诲ù锝夋櫜閸掓帡姊绘担鍛婃儓閻炴凹鍋婂畷婵嬪箣閿曗偓缁犳牠鏌曢崼婵愭Ц缁炬儳鍚嬬换娑㈠箣閻戝洣绶垫繛瀵搞€嬮幏锟� 闂傚倸鍊搁崐鎼佸磹閹间礁纾归柟闂寸绾剧懓顪冪€n亝鎹i柣顓炴閵嗘帒顫濋敐鍛闁诲氦顫夊ú蹇涘磿閹惰棄鐒垫い鎺戯功缁夌敻鏌嶈閸擄箓宕h箛鏇犵濞撴埃鍋撻柣娑卞櫍楠炴帒螖閳ь剛绮绘繝姘厱婵炲棙鍔岀紓姘舵煟椤撶喎娴慨濠勭帛閹峰懘宕妷顬劌鈹戦埥鍡椾函婵炲娲滈崚鎺楀醇閻旇櫣鎳濋梺閫炲苯澧柣锝呭槻閳诲酣骞橀弶鎴滄睏缂傚倸鍊烽悞锕€鐜婚崸妤€鐭楅柛鈩冪⊕閳锋垹绱撴担鑲℃垹绮堥埀顒勬⒑缁嬪尅宸ユ繝鈧柆宥呯劦妞ゆ帊鑳堕崯鏌ユ煙閸戙倖瀚�
当前位置: 首页 > 期刊 > 《传染病的形成》 > 2006年第6期 > 正文
编号:11344299
Multidrug-resistant Commensal Escherichia coli in Children, Peru and Bolivia
http://www.100md.com 《传染病的形成》

     Universita di Firenze, Florence, Italy

    Universita di Siena, Siena, Italy

    Hospital Apoyo Yurimaguas, Yurimaguas–Loreto, Peru

    Servicio Departamental de Salud Santa Cruz, Camiri, Bolivia

    Hospital Moyobamba, Moyobamba–San Martin, Peru

    Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

    Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

    Using a rapid screening method, we investigated the prevalence of fecal carriage of antimicrobial drug–resistant Escherichia coli in 3,174 healthy children from 4 urban settings in Peru and Bolivia. High resistance rates were observed for ampicillin (95%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (94%), tetracycline (93%), streptomycin (82%), and chloramphenicol (70%). Lower resistance rates were observed for nalidixic acid (35%), kanamycin (28%), gentamicin (21%), and ciprofloxacin (18%); resistance to ceftriaxone and amikacin was uncommon (<0.5%). In a random sample of 1,080 resistant E. coli isolates, 90% exhibited a multidrug-resistance (MDR) phenotype. The 2 most common MDR phenotypes (ampicillin/tetracycline/trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and ampicillin/tetracycline/trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole/chloramphenicol) could be transferred en bloc in conjugation experiments. The most common acquired resistance genes were blaTEM, tet(A), tet(B), drfA8, sul1, sul2, and catI. These findings underscore the magnitude of the problem of antimicrobial drug resistance in low-resource settings and the urgent need for surveillance and control of this phenomenon.

    The spread of microbial drug resistance is a global public health challenge, which impairs the efficacy of antimicrobial agents and results in substantial increased illness and death rates and healthcare-associated costs (1–3). In low-resource countries, the extent and the impact of the phenomenon tend to be even larger than in industrialized countries. In fact, high resistance rates have often been reported in surveillance studies dealing with clinical isolates (1,4,5) and in prevalence studies of commensal bacteria taken as indicators to estimate spread of acquired resistance (6–15). Moreover, in low-resource countries the impact of antimicrobial drug resistance on illness and death rates tends to be greater because of the high prevalence of bacterial infections and the major role of antimicrobial agents in combating infectious diseases (1,3,4,16,17). The high antimicrobial drug resistance rates observed in low-resource countries are likely due to a combination of several factors, among which irrational antimicrobial drug usage and conditions of poor sanitation are thought to play a major role, even if the relative importance of additional factors remains unclear (1,4,8,9).

    ANTRES (Towards Controlling Antimicrobial Use and Resistance in Low-Income Countries: An intervention Study in Latin America) is a research project that aims to investigate this phenomenon on a large scale. The project is carried out in 2 Latin American countries, Bolivia and Peru, where 4 urban areas have been selected for studying antimicrobial drug use and bacterial resistance in healthy children by a prospective approach. An information-education-communication strategy will be developed based on the collected information and involving local health services. The impact on antimicrobial drug use and bacterial resistance trends will be evaluated (http://www.unifi.it/infdis/antres/default.htm).

    We report the results of the baseline study, carried out at the beginning of the project, to assess the antimicrobial drug resistance rates in the studied areas. Very high resistance rates to several antimicrobial agents were observed in commensal bacteria from the population of each area. Strains showing multidrug-resistance (MDR) phenotypes were widely disseminated.

    Materials and Methods

    Study Design and Population

    The study population was represented by healthy children 6–72 months of age from 4 urban areas, 2 in Bolivia (Camiri, Santa Cruz Department; Villa Montes, Tarija Department) and 2 in Peru (Yurimaguas, Loreto Department; Moyobamba, San Martin Department). The urban areas were communities of ≈25,000 to 30,000 inhabitants who had comparable demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Eight hundred children from each area were enrolled in the study to cover at least 25% of all households with children in the target age cohort. Only children who had not had diarrhea (as defined by the World Health Organization [18]) during the previous 24 hours were eligible for inclusion in the study. In each household, the youngest recruitable child in the target age cohort was selected. The studied households were selected with a modified cluster sampling: detailed maps outlining the distribution of households were obtained from each study area, and each city was divided into 80 small clusters. In each cluster a number of households selected at random were visited until 10 children were reached. A rectal swab was obtained from each child enrolled in the study, after informed consent was obtained from parents or other legal guardians. Before the sample was obtained, adult members of the household were interviewed to collect information on the family's socioeconomic and cultural setting, the household antimicrobial drug use, and the health status of the selected child. In each country, full ethical clearance was obtained from the qualified authorities who had revised and approved the study design.

    The overall acceptance rate was >95% in all studied areas. Rectal swabs were obtained from a total of 3,174 children : 794 from Camiri and 790 from Villa Montes, Bolivia; 797 from Yurimaguas, and 793 from Moyobamba, Peru. The study participants were 6–72 months of age (mean 34.7 ± 18.2 months; median age 33.5 months).The female:male ratio was 0.95. No significant differences in age or sex were observed among children enrolled from the different areas. The study was carried out for 4 months (August–November 2002). In each area, the sampling period was not longer than 7 weeks.

    Screening for Resistant Escherichia coli in Commensal Microbiota

    Rectal swabs, stored in Amies transport medium (Oxoid, Milan, Italy), were transferred in a cold box to the laboratory of the corresponding district hospital within 3 hours of collection. The 4 laboratories participate in national quality control programs. A training phase and a pilot study preceded the survey. Three European investigators (A.B., M.B., L.P.) participated in the sample analysis in the 4 laboratories. This approach was chosen to limit variability in the microbiologic procedures during the field studies.

    Screening for antimicrobial drug-resistant E. coli in the fecal microbiota was carried out by a direct plating method, as described previously (7,19). This method is preferred because it correlates well with methods based on testing of randomly collected colonies from primary stool culture, but it is more sensitive (11,19).

    Briefly, each swab was spread on a McConkey agar no. 3 plate (Oxoid) to yield uniform growth, and antimicrobial drug–containing disks were directly placed onto the seeded plate. Antimicrobial agents tested included ampicillin, ceftriaxone, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, chloramphenicol, streptomycin, kanamycin, gentamicin, amikacin, nalidixic acid, and ciprofloxacin (Oxoid). After incubation at 37°C for 12 to 14 hours, plates were inspected for growth, and inhibition zone diameters were measured. The presence of a growth inhibition zone larger than the established breakpoint diameter was considered to indicate susceptibility to that agent. The presence of a growth inhibition zone smaller than the breakpoint diameter, the absence of any inhibition zone, or the presence of isolated colonies growing inside an inhibition zone of any size was considered indicative of resistance. In the latter case, however, resistance was considered not to be represented in the dominant flora. Breakpoints were as previously described for ampicillin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, chloramphenicol, amikacin, nalidixic acid, and ciprofloxacin (19), and 14 mm, 12 mm, 12 mm, and 14 mm for kanamycin, streptomycin, gentamicin, and ceftriaxone, respectively (A. Bartoloni, unpub. data). Only bacterial growth exhibiting a shape typical of E. coli was considered valid for the analysis. Specially prepared forms were used to record microbiologic results, including growth features and susceptibility patterns. Confluent bacterial growth was obtained from 3,130 (99%) of the 3,174 collected rectal swabs . In a few cases insufficient growth (11 swabs) or noncoliform growth (33 swabs) was observed. From each plate and for each drug, the putatively resistant coliform growth (i.e., a pool of the colonies grown inside the zone of inhibition or a loopful of the microbial lawn grown in proximity of the disk) were collected (n = 18,042) . Of these, a random sample (10%–25% for each drug, depending on the prevalence of the resistance phenotype) were subjected to confirmatory analysis for resistant E. coli by using the API20E identification system (bioMerieux, Marcy l'etoile, France) and the standard agar disk diffusion method (20,21). Confirmation was obtained in >96% of the tested samples, without significant differences among the 4 laboratories.

    Analysis of Resistance Patterns of Commensal E. coli

    Susceptibility to several antimicrobial agents representative of various classes (ampicillin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, chloramphenicol, kanamycin, gentamicin, nalidixic acid, ciprofloxacin) was tested in 1,405 (8%) E. coli isolates randomly selected from the 18,042 collected samples. Each isolate was spread onto Mueller-Hinton (MH) agar plates containing each antimicrobial agent at a concentration 20% higher than the breakpoints for resistance of each antimicrobial agent, as per National Committee of Laboratory Standards guidelines (20,21). The inoculum size was ≈2 × 105 CFU per spot. A plate of antimicrobial drug–free medium was always included as a growth control. E. coli ATCC 25922, and E. coli strains from our collection resistant to the various antimicrobial agents used in the assay were always included for quality control purposes. Results were recorded after incubation at 37°C for 18 hours. A resistance phenotype was assigned when growth was observed on the medium containing an antimicrobial agent. An MDR phenotype was intended as resistance to >2 classes of antimicrobial agents. Isolates from the same study participant that exhibited the same resistance phenotype (the random sampling procedure did not initially consider the study participant source) were considered replicated isolates and were counted only once for data analysis. According to this criterion, data analysis was conducted with 1,080 isolates .

    Data entry and analysis were calculated with the EpiInfo software package (version 2002, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA). Statistical differences in the prevalence of antimicrobial drug resistances were determined by the χ2 test.

    Molecular Analysis of Resistance Genes and Conjugation Assay

    Acquired resistance genes and conjugative transfer of resistance traits were investigated in 78 isolates randomly selected from those representative of the 2 most common MDR phenotypes . Resistance genes blaTEM, catI, dfrA8, sul1, and sul2 and the intI1 integrase gene were detected by colony blot hybridization (22) with specific probes generated by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), as described previously (23–25). Tetracycline resistance genes tet(A), tet(B), tet(C), and tet(D) were detected by PCR, as described previously (26). Conjugative transfer of resistance genes was assayed in MH broth using E. coli J53 (auxotropic for proline and methionine and resistant to rifampin and nalidixic acid) as a recipient and an initial donor/recipient ratio of 0.1. Mating tubes were incubated at 30°C for 14 h. Transconjugants were selected on MH agar containing rifampin (400 μg/mL) and nalidixic acid (32 μg/mL) plus 1 of the following antimicrobial agents: ampicillin (200 μg/mL), tetracycline (5 μg/mL), chloramphenicol (30 μg/mL), or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (40/200 μg/mL). Under the above conditions, the detection sensitivity of the mating assay was >1 × 108 transconjugants/recipients.

    Results

    Antimicrobial Drug–Resistance Rates

    Overall, high resistance rates were observed for ampicillin (95%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (94%), tetracycline (93%), streptomycin (82%), and chloramphenicol (70%). Lower resistance rates were observed for nalidixic acid (35%), kanamycin (28%), gentamicin (21%), and ciprofloxacin (18%). Resistance to ceftriaxone and amikacin was uncommon (<0.5%) . For first-line oral antimicrobial agents such as ampicillin, tetracycline, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, resistant strains were present as the dominant flora in >80% of carriers .

    Resistance rates for ampicillin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, kanamycin, and streptomycin were significantly higher in Bolivia than in Peru (p<0.001), whereas ciprofloxacin resistance rates were significantly higher in Peru than in Bolivia (p<0.001) . Differences in the resistance rates were also observed within each country. In Bolivia, higher overall resistance rates were found in Camiri than in Villa Montes (p<0.001) for chloramphenicol, streptomycin, gentamicin, nalidixic acid, and ciprofloxacin . In Peru, higher overall resistance rates were found in Moyobamba than in Yurimaguas. The most significant differences (p<0.001) were noted for streptomycin, nalidixic acid, and ciprofloxacin .

    Significantly higher (p<0.05) resistant rates were observed in boys, with some agents, and in some settings (ampicillin in both Peruvian cities, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole in Moyobamba, and chloramphenicol, kanamycin, and gentamicin in Camiri). Analysis by age showed that, with all agents (ceftriaxone and amikacin were not considered in this analysis because of the low numbers of resistant isolates), resistance rates were notably higher in the youngest age group, and an overall decreasing trend by age was observed . With some agents (kanamycin, gentamicin, and the quinolones), the decreasing trend was essentially limited to the younger age groups; with other agents (ampicillin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and chloramphenicol); this phenomenon was more evident in the older age groups.

    Combinations of Antimicrobial Drug–resistance Traits in Healthy Children

    Of the 3,174 children evaluated in the study, only 84 (2.7%) carried an E. coli fecal population susceptible to all the antimicrobial agents tested, while 46 (1.5%), 73 (2.3%), 187 (5.9%), 537 (17%), 808 (26%), 624 (20%), and 816 (26%) had an E. coli population resistant to 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or >6 antimicrobial agents. No significant differences in this distribution were observed between the 2 countries. Of the 156 different combinations of resistance observed, 2 were most prevalent: 1) the pattern with 4 resistances (ampicillin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and streptomycin) in 361 (11.5%) children; and 2) the pattern with 5 resistances (ampicillin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, streptomycin, and chloramphenicol) in 567 (18%) children.

    Patterns of Resistance Phenotypes of E. coli Isolates

    Frequency and patterns of resistance phenotypes were determined on a random sample of 1,080 nonreplicate resistant E. coli isolates with 8 antimicrobial agents representative of 6 different classes (ampicillin for β-lactams, tetracycline for tetracyclines, chloramphenicol for phenicols, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for folate inhibitors, kanamycin and gentamicin for aminoglycosides, and nalidixic acid and ciprofloxacin for quinolones). Only a few isolates were resistant to a single drug (9%) . Isolates showing resistance to 3 different drugs were the most prevalent (30%), followed by those showing resistance to 4 (22%) and 2 (20%) drugs, respectively. Seven isolates (<1%) showed resistance to all tested drugs . An MDR phenotype was common (90% of isolates). Resistance patterns were quite variable. Of 97 different patterns observed, some were highly prevalent. The pattern that included ampicillin, tetracycline, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was the most prevalent, followed by that including ampicillin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and chloramphenicol, as well as that including ampicillin and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole alone (22%, 15%, and 10% of the tested isolates, respectively) .

    Acquired Resistance Genes and Transferability of Resistance Traits

    The prevalence of several acquired resistance genes (blaTEM for ampicillin resistance; tet(A)–(D) for tetracycline resistance; dfrA8 for trimethoprim resistance; sul1 and sul2 for sulfonamide resistance; catI for chloramphenicol resistance) and class 1 integrons was investigated in 78 isolates randomly selected from representatives of the 2 most prevalent MDR phenotypes (ampicillin/tetracycline/trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, n = 45; ampicillin/tetracycline/trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole/chloramphenicol, n = 33). In most cases the resistance phenotype could be accounted for by a combination of the above resistance genes, and some of them appeared to be highly prevalent . The presence of the intI1 integrase gene (associated with class 1 integrons) was detected in 35% of MDR isolates.

    These 78 isolates were also tested for transferability of resistance traits in conjugation experiments. Overall, the transfer of at least 1 resistant trait was observed in 37 cases (47%). Transfer rates for each resistance trait were as follows: ampicillin 46%, tetracycline 40%, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole 41%, and chloramphenicol 27%. Co-transfer of all the resistance traits was observed in 26 of the 37 cases that gave positive results in the conjugation experiments. Molecular analysis of the transconjugants showed that, in all the cases, the resistance phenotype could be accounted for by the acquisition of resistance genes detected in the respective donors. Conjugative transfer of class 1 integrons was observed in 10 (37%) of the 27 intI1–positive isolates.

    Discussion

    Similar to pathogenic bacteria, commensals are exposed to the selective pressure of antimicrobial agents, and commensal E. coli have often been used as an indicator of the dissemination of acquired resistance genes (7,8,11–13,15,27). To our knowledge, this study is the first to address the status of antimicrobial drug resistance in commensal E. coli in a large population of preschool-age children from urban settings of low-resource countries. Results showed a high prevalence (70%–95%) of healthy carriers of E. coli resistant to a number of older antimicrobial agents (ampicillin, tetracycline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, chloramphenicol, and streptomycin). For these drugs, the small differences observed among localities, although sometimes statistically significant, are probably of limited clinical and epidemiologic relevance and presumably attributable to the large number of antimicrobial drug–resistant E. coli carriers. A relatively high prevalence (18%–35%) of carriers of E. coli resistant to other agents (kanamycin, gentamicin, nalidixic acid, and ciprofloxacin) was also observed, while the carriage of E. coli resistant to expanded-spectrum cephalosporins and amikacin was uncommon (<0.5%). Ranking patterns of resistance rates were similar overall in each of the 4 studied areas, which suggests a common scenario in urban areas of these 2 Latin American countries. This view is further supported by data recently published for adults from Lima (Peru), where similar resistance rates were reported (12).

    Our findings were in substantial agreement with previous reports of high resistance rates in commensals of study participants from low-resource settings (7,8,11–13,15,28). Comparative analysis with previous data available for 1 studied setting (Camiri, Bolivia) surveyed 10 years earlier (7) indicated a significant increase in the resistance rates to gentamicin and nalidixic acid and the de novo appearance of resistance to ciprofloxacin.

    One aspect that was not previously reported among preschool children was the age-related differences in resistance rates; rates were significantly higher in the younger age groups. This phenomenon could reflect a larger use of antimicrobial drugs in younger children. However, this explanation cannot be the case for quinolones, which are not prescribed in this age group. Another influencing factor could be dietary changes related to weaning. In fact, a diet high in milk that contains abundant lactoferrin, which chelates dietary iron, has been hypothesized to favor the presence of strains expressing iron-uptake systems (such as aerobactin or enterobactin), which are often encoded by plasmids that also carry resistance genes (29). However, further investigation will be necessary to clarify the mechanism responsible for this phenomenon.

    Multiple resistance traits in the commensal E. coli microbiota were apparently the rule, as they were detected in most study participants. The simultaneous presence of multiple strains expressing different resistance phenotypes and single strains expressing MDR phenotypes could contribute to this phenomenon. Although the relative contribution of the 2 mechanisms was not specifically investigated, the high prevalence of strains expressing MDR phenotypes probably provides a major contribution. Some MDR patterns (e.g., ampicillin/tetracycline/trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, ampicillin/tetracycline/trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole/chloramphenicol) were common and could be accounted for by a number of known acquired resistance genes. Resistance traits could be transferred by conjugation, often en bloc, suggesting a linkage of the corresponding resistance genes in self-transferable or mobilizable plasmids.

    In conclusion, this study underscores the magnitude of the problem of antimicrobial drug resistance in low-resource settings and the urgent need for surveillance and control of this phenomenon. Inexpensive, sensitive, and simple methods to monitor antimicrobial drug resistance in commensal bacteria could be valuable tools for large-scale surveillance studies and to improve the efficacy of resistance control interventions. The direct plating method used in this study, which had previously shown high sensitivity and specificity in detecting resistant E. coli (19), was confirmed to be a valid tool to conduct such a large-scale survey.

    Acknowledgments

    We thank other members of the ANTRES Study Group for their support in this study: Ruth Arias, Vieri Boddi, Paolo Bonanni, Mirtha Camacho, Blanca Huapaya, Charlotte Kristiansson, Oscar Lanza Van den Berghe, Mattias Larsson, Luis Pacheco, Angela Pieri, Victor Suarez, Esteban Salazar, and Christian Trigoso. We are also grateful to the local health authorities for cooperation in carrying out the study, the laboratory staff for technical assistance, the field team members for valuable support in collecting samples, and all participating children and their parents for their willingness to take part to the survey.

    The study was carried out within the research activities of the ANTRES project, supported by the European Commission, INCO-DEV programme, contract no. ICA4-CT-2001-10014.

    Dr Bartoloni is associate professor of infectious diseases at the University of Florence, Italy. His research interests include antimicrobial drug resistance and tropical medicine.

    References

    Byarugaba DK. A view on antimicrobial resistance in developing countries and responsible risk factors. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2004;24:105–10.

    World Health Organization. WHO report on infectious diseases 2000. Overcoming antimicrobial resistance. Geneva: The Organization; 2000.

    World Health Organization. Global strategy for containment of antimicrobial resistance. Geneva: The Organization; 2001 [cited 2006 Jan 27]. Available from http://www.who.int/drugresistance/en/

    Okeke IN, Lamikanra A, Edelman R. Socio-economic and behavioral factors leading to acquired bacterial resistance to antimicrobrial agents in developing countries. Emerg Infect Dis. 1999;5:18–27.

    Shears P. Antibiotic resistance in the tropics. Epidemiology and surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in the tropics. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2001;95:127–30.

    Bartoloni A, Colao MG, Roselli M, Orsi A, Aquilini D, Corti G, et al. Antimicrobial agent susceptibility patterns of staphylococci isolated in urban and rural areas of Bolivia. J Trop Med Hyg. 1990;93:360–4.

    Bartoloni A, Cutts F, Leoni S, Austin CC, Mantella A, Guglielmetti P, et al. Patterns of antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance among healthy children in Bolivia. Trop Med Int Health. 1998;3:116–23.

    Bartoloni A, Bartalesi F, Mantella A, Dell'Amico E, Roselli M, Strohmeyer M, et al. High prevalence of acquired antimicrobial resistance unrelated to heavy antimicrobial consumption. J Infect Dis. 2004;189:1291–4.

    Walson JL, Marshall B, Pokhrel BM, Kafle KK, Levy SB. Carriage of antibiotic-resistant fecal bacteria in Nepal reflects proximity to Kathmandu. J Infect Dis. 2001;184:1163–9.

    Calva JJ, Sifuentes-Osornio J, Ceron C. Antimicrobial resistance in faecal flora: longitudinal community-based surveillance of children from urban Mexico. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1996;40:1699–702.

    Lester SC, del Pilar Pla M, Wang F, Pere Schael I, Jiang H, O'Brien TF. The carriage of Escherichia coli resistant to antibiotic agents by healthy children in Boston, in Caracas, Venezuela and in Qin Pu, China. N Engl J Med. 1990;323:285–9.

    Nys S, Okeke IN, Kariuki S, Dinant GJ, Driessen C, Stobberingh EE. Antibiotic resistance of faecal Escherichia coli from healthy volunteers from eight developing countries. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004;54:952–5.

    Okeke IN, Fayinka ST, Lamikanra A. Antibiotic resistance in Escherichia coli from Nigerian students, 1986–1998. Emerg Infect Dis. 2000;6:393–6.

    Shanahan PM, Wylie BA, Adrian PV, Koornhof HJ, Thomson CJ, Amyes GB. The prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in human faecal flora in South Africa. Epidemiol Infect. 1993;111:221–8.

    van de Mortel HJ, Jansen EJ, Dinant GJ, London N, Palacios Pru E, Stobberingh EE. The prevalence of antibiotic-resistant faecal Escherichia coli in healthy volunteers in Venezuela. Infection. 1998;26:292–7.

    Col NF, O'Connor RW. Estimating worldwide current antibiotic usage: report of Task Force 1. Rev Infect Dis. 1987;9(Suppl 3)3:232–43.

    O'Brien TF. Global surveillance of antibiotic resistance. N Engl J Med. 1992;326:339–40.

    World Health Organization. Management and prevention of diarrhoea: practical guidelines. 3rd ed. Geneva: The Organization; 1993.

    Bartoloni A, Benedetti M, Pallecchi L, Larsson M, Mantella A, Strohmeyer M, et al. Evaluation of a rapid screening method for detection of antimicrobial resistance in the commensal microbiota of the gut. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2006;100:119–25.

    National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. 6th ed. Approved standard M07-A6. Wayne (PA): The Committee; 2003.

    National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. 13th informational supplement M100-S13. Wayne (PA); The Committee; 2004.

    Sambrook J, Russel DW. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 3rd ed. Cold Spring Harbor (NY): Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press; 2001.

    Maynard C, Bekal S, Sanschagrin F, Levesque RC, Brousseau R, Masson L, et al. Heterogeneity among virulence and antimicrobial resistance gene profiles of extraintestinal Escherichia coli isolates of animal and human origin. J Clin Microbiol. 2004;42:5444–52.

    Lee JC, Oh JY, Cho JW, Park JC, Kim JM, Seol SY, et al. The prevalence of trimethoprim-resistance-conferring dihydrofolate reductase genes in urinary isolates of Escherichia coli in Korea. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2001;47:599–604.

    Infante B, Grape M, Larsson M, Kristiansson C, Pallecchi L, Rossolini GM, et al. Acquired sulfaonamide resistance genes in faecal Escherichia coli from healthy children in Bolivia and Peru. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2005;25:308–12.

    Hartman AB, Essiet II, Isenbarger DW, Lindler LE. Epidemiology of tetracycline resistance determinants in Shigella spp. and enteroinvasive Escherichia coli: characterization and dissemination of tet(A)-1. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;41:1023–32.

    Alliance for Prudent Use of Antibiotics (APUA). Reservoirs of Antibiotic Resistance Network (ROAR). Commensal bacteria are reservoirs of resistance. 2004 [cited 2006 Jan 27]. Available from http://www.tufts.edu/med/apua/ROAR/project.htm

    Grenet K, Guillemot D, Jarlier V, Moreau B, Dubourdieu S, Ruimy R, et al. Antibacterial resistance, Wayampis amerindians, French Guyana. Emerg Infect Dis. 2004;10:1150–3.

    Khachatryan AR , Hancock DD, Besser TE, Call DR. Role of calf–adapted Escherichia coli in maintenance of antimicrobial drug resistance in dairy calves. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004;70:752–7.(Alessandro Bartoloni, Luc)
    婵犵數濮烽弫鎼佸磿閹寸姴绶ら柦妯侯棦濞差亝鍋愰悹鍥皺椤︻厼鈹戦悩缁樻锭婵炲眰鍊濋、姘舵焼瀹ュ棛鍘卞┑鐐村灥瀹曨剟寮搁妶鍡愪簻闁冲搫鍟崢鎾煛鐏炲墽鈽夐柍钘夘樀瀹曪繝鎮欏顔介獎闂備礁鎼ˇ顐﹀疾濠婂吘娑㈠礃椤旇壈鎽曞┑鐐村灦鑿ら柡瀣叄閻擃偊宕堕妸锕€鐨戦梺绋款儐閹歌崵绮嬮幒鏂哄亾閿濆簼绨介柛鏃撶畱椤啴濡堕崱妤€娼戦梺绋款儐閹瑰洭寮诲☉銏″亹鐎规洖娲㈤埀顒佸笚娣囧﹪宕f径濠傤潓闂佸疇顫夐崹鍨暦閸洖鐓橀柣鎰靛墰娴滄瑩姊虹拠鏌ヮ€楃紒鐘茬Ч瀹曟洟宕¢悙宥嗙☉閳藉濮€閻橀潧濮︽俊鐐€栫敮鎺椝囬鐐村€堕柨鏃傜摂濞堜粙鏌i幇顒佲枙闁稿孩姊归〃銉╂倷閸欏鏋犲銈冨灪濡啫鐣烽妸鈺婃晣闁绘劙娼ч幖绋库攽閻樺灚鏆╅柛瀣█楠炴捇顢旈崱妤冪瓘闂佽鍨奸悘鎰洪鍕吅闂佺粯锚閸氣偓缂佹顦靛娲箰鎼达絿鐣甸梺鐟板槻椤戝鐣烽悽绋块唶婵犮埄浜濆Λ鍐极閸屾粎椹抽悗锝庝簻婵″ジ姊绘担鍛婃喐闁稿鍋ら獮鎰板箮閽樺鎽曢梺鍝勬储閸ㄥ綊鐛姀銈嗙厸闁搞儮鏅涘瓭婵犵鈧尙鐭欓柡宀嬬秮婵偓闁宠桨鑳舵禒鈺冪磽閸屾氨孝闁挎洦浜悰顔界節閸ャ劍娅㈤梺缁樓圭亸娆撴偪閳ь剚淇婇悙顏勨偓鏍箰妤e啫纾婚柣鏂挎憸椤╃兘鏌熼幍顔碱暭闁抽攱鍨块弻娑㈡晜鐠囨彃绗岄梺鑽ゅ枑閸f潙煤椤忓嫀褔鏌涢妷顔惧帥婵炶偐鍠栧娲礃閸欏鍎撻梺鐟板暱濮橈妇鎹㈠鑸碘拻濞达絽鎳欒ぐ鎺戝珘妞ゆ帒鍊婚惌娆撴煙閻戞﹩娈曢柛濠傜仛閵囧嫰寮崹顔规寖缂佺偓鍎抽妶鎼佸蓟閿熺姴绀冮柕濞垮劗閸嬫挾绮欓幐搴㈢槑濠电姷鏁告慨顓㈠箯閸愵喖绀嬮柛顭戝亞閺夊綊鏌f惔銏╁晱闁哥姵鐗犻幃銉╂偂鎼达絾娈惧┑顔姐仜閸嬫挸鈹戦埄鍐憙妞わ附濞婇弻娑㈠箻閺夋垹浠哥紓浣虹帛缁嬫捇鍩€椤掍胶鈯曞畝锝呮健閹本绻濋崑鑺ユ閹晠宕f径瀣瀾闂備浇妗ㄧ欢锟犲闯閿濆鈧線寮撮姀鈩冩珕闂佽姤锚椤︿粙鍩€椤掍胶鈽夐柍瑙勫灴閺佸秹宕熼锛勬崟濠电姭鎷冮崨顔界彧缂備緡鍠楅悷锔炬崲濠靛鐐婇柕濞у啫绠版繝鐢靛О閸ㄧ厧鈻斿☉銏℃櫇闁靛牆顦Ч鏌ユ煛閸モ晛鏋戦柛娆忕箻閺岋綁鎮㈤悡搴濆枈濠碘槅鍨崑鎾绘⒒娴h姤銆冪紒鈧担铏圭煋闁圭虎鍠楅崑鈺傜節闂堟侗鍎忕紒鈧崘鈹夸簻妞ゆ挾鍠庨悘锝夋煙鐎电ǹ鍘存慨濠勭帛閹峰懐绮电€n亝鐣伴梻浣告憸婵敻骞戦崶褏鏆︽繝闈涳功閻も偓濠电偞鍨兼ご鎼佸疾閿濆洨纾介柛灞剧懅閸斿秴鐣濋敐鍛仴闁糕斂鍨藉顕€宕奸悢鍝勫箺闂備胶鎳撻顓㈠磿閹寸偟鐟规繛鎴欏灪閻撴洟鏌¢崒姘变虎闁哄棴缍侀弻鈥崇暆鐎n剛鐦堥悗瑙勬礃鐢帡锝炲┑瀣垫晣闁绘﹢娼ч獮鈧紓鍌氬€搁崐鐑芥倿閿曞倶鈧啴宕ㄥ銈呮喘閺屽棗顓奸崨顖氬Е婵$偑鍊栫敮鎺楀窗濮橆兗缂氶柟閭﹀枤绾惧吋銇勯弮鍥т汗缂佺姴顭烽弻銊モ攽閸繀妲愰梺杞扮閸熸潙鐣烽幒鎴僵闁告鍋為幉銏ゆ⒒娴h棄鍚瑰┑鐐╁亾缂傚倸鍊归懝楣冨煝瀹ュ鏅查柛銉㈡櫇閻撳姊洪崜鑼帥闁哥姵鎹囬崺鈧い鎺嶇缁楁帗銇勯锝囩疄妞ゃ垺锕㈤幃鈺咁敃閿濆孩缍岄梻鍌氬€风欢姘缚瑜嶇叅闁靛牆鎮垮ú顏勎╅柍杞拌兌閸旓箑顪冮妶鍡楃瑨闁稿妫濆銊╂偋閸垻顔曟繝銏f硾椤戝洤煤鐎电硶鍋撶憴鍕8闁搞劏濮ゆ穱濠囧醇閺囩偟鍊為梺闈浨归崕鐑樺閺囥垺鐓熼柣鏂挎憸閻苯顭胯椤ㄥ牓寮鍢夋棃宕崘顏嗏棨濠电姰鍨奸崺鏍礉閺嶎厼纾婚柨婵嗩槹閻撴洟鏌曟径妯虹仩妞も晩鍓欓埥澶愬箻閻熸壆姣㈢紓浣介哺鐢岣胯箛娑樜╃憸蹇涙偩婵傚憡鈷戠憸鐗堝俯濡垵鈹戦悙鈺佷壕闂備浇顕栭崰妤冨垝閹捐绠板┑鐘插暙缁剁偛顭跨捄铏圭伇婵﹦鍋撶换婵嬫偨闂堟稐绮跺銈嗘处閸樹粙骞堥妸锔哄亝闁告劑鍔嶅Σ顒勬⒑閸濆嫮鈻夐柛妯恒偢瀹曞綊宕掗悙瀵稿帾婵犵數鍋熼崑鎾斥枍閸℃稒鐓曢悗锝冨妼婵″ジ妫佹径鎰叆婵犻潧妫欓崳褰掓煛閸℃瑥鏋戝ǎ鍥э躬椤㈡稑顫濋崡鐐╁徍婵犳鍠栭敃銉ヮ渻娴犲鈧線寮撮姀鈩冩珳闂佺硶鍓濋悷锕傤敇婵犳碍鈷掑ù锝堟鐢盯鏌熺喊鍗炰簽闁瑰箍鍨归埞鎴犫偓锝庡墮缁侊箓鏌f惔顖滅У闁哥姵鐗滅划濠氭晲閸℃瑧鐦堟繝鐢靛Т閸婃悂顢旈锔界厵闁哄鍋勬慨鍌涙叏婵犲啯銇濇鐐村姈閹棃鏁愰崒娑辨綌闂傚倷绀侀幖顐︽偋濠婂牆绀堥柣鏃堫棑閺嗭箓鏌i悢绋款棎闁割偒浜弻娑㈠即閵娿儱瀛e┑鐐存綑鐎氼剟鈥旈崘顔嘉ч柛鈩冾殘閻熸劙姊虹紒妯洪嚋缂佺姵鎸搁锝夊箮缁涘鏅滈梺鍓插亞閸犳捇宕㈤柆宥嗏拺闁荤喓澧楅幆鍫㈢磼婢跺缍戦柣锝囨暬瀹曞崬鈽夊▎鎴濆笚闁荤喐绮嶇划鎾崇暦濠婂喚娼╂い鎺戭槹閸嶇敻姊洪棃娴ュ牓寮插⿰鍫濈;闁稿瞼鍋為悡銉╂煟閺傛寧鎯堢€涙繈鏌i悢鍝ユ嚂缂佺姵鎹囬悰顕€寮介鐐殿啇濡炪倖鎸鹃崑鐔哥椤栨粎纾藉ù锝嗗絻娴滅偓绻濋姀锝嗙【闁愁垱娲濋妵鎰板箳閹寸媭妲梻浣呵圭换妤呭磻閹邦兘鏋旈柕鍫濐槹閳锋垹绱撴担璐細缂佺姵鐗犻弻锝夊煛婵犲倻浠╅梺浼欑悼閸忔﹢寮幘缁樺亹闁肩⒈鍓﹀Σ浼存⒒娴h棄浜归柍宄扮墦瀹曟粌顫濇0婵囨櫓闂佺鎻梽鍕煕閹达附鍋i柛銉岛閸嬫捇鎼归銈勭按闂傚倷绀侀幉锟犲蓟閵婏富娈介柟闂寸閻撴繈鏌熼幑鎰靛殭缂佺媴缍侀弻锝夊箛椤撶喓绋囧銈呭閹告悂鍩為幋锔藉亹閻犲泧鍐х矗闂備礁鎽滈崳銉╁垂閸洜宓侀柛鈩冪☉绾惧吋鎱ㄩ敐搴″箹缂傚秴锕獮鍐煛閸涱厾顔岄梺鍦劋缁诲倹淇婇柨瀣瘈闁汇垽娼цⅴ闂佺ǹ顑嗛幑鍥蓟閻斿皝鏋旈柛顭戝枟閻忔挾绱掓ィ鍐暫缂佺姵鐗犲濠氭偄鐞涒€充壕闁汇垻娅ラ悷鐗堟瘎闂佽崵鍠愮划搴㈡櫠濡ゅ懏鍋傞柨鐔哄Т閽冪喐绻涢幋娆忕仼缂佺姵濞婇弻锟犲磼濮樿鲸鐨戦梺鍝勵儏閹冲酣鍩為幋锔藉€烽柛娆忣槸濞咃綁姊绘担绋跨盎缂佽尙鍋撶粚杈ㄧ節閸パ咁啋濡炪倖妫佹慨銈呪枍閵忋倖鈷戦悹鎭掑妼濞呮劙鏌熼崙銈嗗

   闂傚倷娴囬褍霉閻戣棄鏋佸┑鐘宠壘绾捐鈹戦悩鍙夋悙缂佹劖顨婇弻锟犲炊閳轰焦鐏侀梺宕囨嚀缁夋挳鍩為幋锔藉亹闁告瑥顦伴幃娆忊攽閳藉棗浜濋柨鏇樺灲瀵鈽夐姀鐘栥劑鏌曡箛濠傚⒉闁绘繃鐗犻幃宄扳堪閸愩劎鐩庨梺鐟板殩閹凤拷  闂傚倸鍊搁崐鐑芥嚄閼哥數浠氱紓鍌欒兌缁垶銆冮崨鏉戠厺鐎广儱顦崡鎶芥煏韫囨洖校闁诲寒鍓熷铏圭磼濡搫顫庨梺绋跨昂閸婃繂鐣烽弴鐐垫殕闁告洦鍓涢崢浠嬫⒑闁稑宓嗘繛浣冲嫭娅犳い鏂款潟娴滄粓骞栭幖顓炵仭閻庢熬鎷�  闂傚倸鍊峰ù鍥х暦閸偅鍙忛柡澶嬪殮濞差亜围闁搞儻绲芥禍鐐叏濡厧甯堕柣蹇ラ檮閵囧嫰濮€閿涘嫭鍣板Δ鐘靛仜椤戝寮崘顔肩劦妞ゆ帒鍊婚惌鍡涙煕閺囥劌鐏¢柣鎾跺枑娣囧﹪顢涘┑鎰缂備浇灏畷鐢垫閹炬剚鍚嬮煫鍥ㄦ煥椤忥拷  闂傚倸鍊搁崐鐑芥嚄閸洖绠犻柟鎹愵嚙鐟欙箓鎮楅敐搴″闁搞劍绻堥獮鏍庨鈧俊鑲╃棯閹佸仮闁哄本娲樼换娑㈡倷椤掍胶褰呴梻浣告啞椤ㄥ棙绻涙繝鍥ц摕闁斥晛鍟欢鐐烘倵閿濆簼绨介柛鏃偳归埞鎴﹀煡閸℃浼堥梺鐟板殩閹凤拷   闂傚倸鍊搁崐宄懊归崶顒婄稏濠㈣泛顑囬々鎻捗归悩宸剰缂佲偓婢跺备鍋撻崗澶婁壕闂佸憡娲﹂崜娆愮闁秵鈷戦梻鍫熶腹濞戙垹宸濇い鏍ュ€楁惔濠傗攽閻樺灚鏆╅柛瀣☉铻炴繛鍡樻尭缁€澶愭煛瀹ュ骸浜炲☉鎾崇У缁绘盯宕卞Ο璇查瀺闂佺粯鎸诲ú妯兼崲濞戙垹骞㈡俊顖氬悑閸n參鏌f惔銏㈠暡闁瑰嚖鎷�   闂傚倸鍊搁崐椋庣矆娓氣偓楠炲鍨鹃幇浣圭稁缂傚倷鐒﹁摫闁告瑥绻橀弻鐔虹磼閵忕姵鐏堥梺娲诲幗椤ㄥ﹪寮诲☉銏犵労闁告劦浜栧Σ鍫㈢磽閸屾瑨顔夐柡鍛█瀵鎮㈢喊杈ㄦ櫖濠电姴锕ら崰姘跺汲椤撶儐娓婚柕鍫濆暙閸旂敻鏌熼崙銈嗗