天天翻譯：譯摘要，得論壇幣，長英語

zsx80126

我也要試試:huahua:

zsx80126

上面的標題中應該把改善腸道健康換成“改善禽類腸道健康”呵呵，不要忘了動物對象

中國西翁

:5s: 呵呵，置頂給解除了，大家來專業英語里找。:hehes:

lhx

對于我來說，這些有點太難了

juley

我也試一試,老師幫改改.
  對傳染病的行為反映可以增強抗病能力并加快康復，到目前為止對嚴重呼吸道感染的豬的行為還沒有評估過。因此這篇文章評估了接種肺炎支原體（Mh）和呼吸繁殖綜合癥（PRRSV）的豬的行為。64頭豬，2×2因子試驗，4周齡接種Mh，6周齡接種PRRSV。四個處理組分別為對照組、Mh組、PRRSV組和MH+PRRSV組。PPRSV接種7天后由于與行為分析研究無關每個處理組中一半的豬被屠宰了.PRRSV接種后的13天通過錄象記錄了每天18小時光照下試驗豬的采食量、采食時間、活動（站立、行走、蹲坐和采食）和睡覺行為。PRRSV接種的第7天和14天豬躺下時測它的體溫，無論豬是腹臥，側臥還是和其他豬只擠在一起。接種PRRSV后，Mh、PRRSV+MH與PRRSV對豬的采食量、體溫和其它行為沒有顯著的影響。 因此把四個處理組根據PRRSV陰性和陽性分為兩組來分析。接種PRRSV后，PRRSV陽性豬比陽性豬采食時間短(P = 0.005)，采食時間短采食量也少(P < 0.001)。PRSSV陽性豬活動量比陰性豬少，躺著的時間長。此外PRRSV陽性豬腹臥和與其他豬擠在一起的時間比PRRSV陰性豬時間長。  PRRSV陽性豬在接種7天后體溫升高(P < 0.001)。 這些病態行為和發燒癥狀是疾病感染的反映，這些數據表明感染強烈PRRSV能引起一系列促使豬康復的行為。

中國西翁

the purpose 在摘要里時，最好給翻譯出來，即本文的目的是....因為摘要里“
目的”是個很關鍵的詞，更容易吸引閱讀者的眼球，呵呵看摘要就是看目的和結
果嘛。

Sixty-four pigs were subjected to one of four treatment combinations 這
句話你再看看，因為這是牽涉到試驗所用樣本大小的，所以應該準確翻譯，不應
只說64頭豬就完事了，要是四個處理組只用64頭豬，其中一半還半路給屠宰了呵
呵，那樣本就太小了，試驗結果的可信度也就大大的縮水了。

One-half of the pigs from each treatment were killed 7 days after PRRSV
inoculation for purposes unrelated to this study and hence were not
used for behavioural analysis，這句話我也沒弄太清楚，好像再說因為一些和
試驗無關的需要而殺了每個處理組中的一半的豬，因此牠們無法用來記錄行為數
據。

...phase for 13 days beginning the day of PRRSV inoculation這句話意思應
該是接種當天開始記錄行為，連續記錄13天。呵呵你可能也是這個意思，只是沒
說太清楚。

lying在行為學里不叫睡覺，叫趴臥，趴臥又分為睡眠趴臥和非睡眠趴臥呵呵

When pigs were lying a determination was made as to whether they were
lying ventrally or laterally, and in contact with a penmate. Body
temperature was measured 7 and 14，這是兩句話你把它理解成了一句話。前一
句說的是當豬趴下時要區分是側臥還是立臥（腹臥），是否挨著同伴。后一句就
不用翻譯了哈哈

or interaction between Mh and PRRSV for food intake...說的是Mh 和PRRSV
互作。

are adaptive responses...翻譯為適應性反應不叫好呵呵

呵呵其實這些不是不會翻譯，只是感覺你可能翻譯的太快了，每句話沒有仔細推
敲，剛翻譯時，不要急于速度，每句話都要多推敲幾邊，這樣堅持下去，很快你
就會感覺到自己的進步了

juley

多謝西翁老師的指點!我下次一定慢慢推敲.繼續努力!

luozengfu

2.THE FUNCTION OF SOCIALLY FACILITATED FEEDING作者A. Lundberg 等
Hypotheses of the function of social facilitation include local resource competition,
learning about new food and increasing group synchronisation. To distinguish among
these hypotheses, information about the proximate causal factors involved is required.
In a series of four experiments we studied social facilitation and feeding in hens. Factors
investigated were (1) pecking intensity and food consumed by the stimulus bird by
altering the food deprivation time between 1, 6, 12 and 24 hours, (2) feeding motivation of the test bird by depriving the test bird for 0, 1, 6 or 12 hours, (3) whether food was novel in combination with differences in familiarity and rank of the stimulus bird and
(4) the novelty of food and whether stimulus bird were feeding. None of the different
deprivation treatments in experiments 1 and 2 affected social facilitation and no effects
of rank or familiarity of the stimulus bird was found. In experiment 3, testing novel food, test birds ate more of novel than familiar food (P=0.004). But in experiment 4, test birds ate more familiar than novel food (P=0.015) and in addition test birds ate more when
stimulus birds were feeding compared to standing (P=0.034), implying social facilitation.
In conclusion, social facilitation was only found in one experiment and the hypothesis
that social facilitation is caused by local resource competition or that the function is to
learn about new food resources can not be fully supported. Since social facilitation was
not always found, not even in the basic experimental setup designed to trigger social
facilitation, we also propose that social facilitation is not as clear a phenomenon as is
often proposed.
這篇文獻我來翻譯，是不是真的有論壇幣？

山中的漫游者

有的啊，先預付了，呵呵

liamort

這個提議好。不過西翁的這幾篇文章都是動物行為方面的，這種專業的文獻翻譯一定要有良好的專業基礎，自己不懂，就不班門弄斧了。等到有合適的文章，俺再過來掙點福利。