題目重復(fù)情況：第一篇From Cottage To Industry，重復(fù)2010.2.21NA/2012.1.14ML；第二篇Species Diversity，重復(fù)2011.11.12NA；第三篇The Greek Dark Ages（有配圖，古希臘地圖Ancient Greek），重復(fù)2012.10.14ML/2012.3.24ML/2011.4.30NA。

所有詞匯題：

marginally=slightly

inevitable

versatile

elaborate=complex

inducement=incentive

accelerating=increasing in speed

interrupt

stagnation

to be sure=certainly

exploit=take advantage of

第一篇：From Cottage To Industry

最早是手工業(yè)cottage，家庭作坊裝不下大型機(jī)器machinery，所以factory工廠出現(xiàn)。

早期工廠early factories里面這些機(jī)器，作坊也有，為什么要有工廠？

一般認(rèn)為是技術(shù)進(jìn)步使工業(yè)化，但是實(shí)際上應(yīng)該是反過來，工業(yè)化后有了平臺(tái)，有了對(duì)技術(shù)的需求，進(jìn)而才有的技術(shù)進(jìn)步。

1750年以后出現(xiàn)工廠生產(chǎn)。解釋一，剝削exploit。原來在家自己管自己，工作時(shí)間不確定，而在工廠有嚴(yán)格時(shí)間要求。但是，也不能確定在家就比在工廠工作時(shí)間短。同時(shí)，這也能減少把原材料運(yùn)到作坊的成本。

解釋二，便于集中組織管理。而實(shí)際上1750年以前就有集中的生產(chǎn)centralized workshop，但當(dāng)時(shí)主要是造船、軍工、奢侈品貿(mào)易luxury goods等，需要政府資助government sponsor才能夠生存。

作坊也有優(yōu)勢(shì)，在蕭條期，可以隨時(shí)減少生產(chǎn)量。

以上解釋都無法說明為何非要發(fā)生在1750年這個(gè)時(shí)間timing。文章最后說，大概就是1750年以后時(shí)機(jī)適合，所以才出現(xiàn)。

Factory System[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_system]

The factory system was a method of manufacturing first adopted in England at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the 1750s and later spread abroad. This system replaced the putting-out system. The main characteristic of the factory system was the use of machinery, usually powered by water or steam. Other characteristics of the system mostly derive from the use of machinery or economies of scale. These characteristics are:

Change from craftsman labor to mechanized production: Before factories many products such as shoes and muskets were made by skilled craftsmen who usually made an entire article, often custom and almost always unique. In contrast, factories practiced division of labour, in which most workers were either low skilled laborers who tended or operated machinery and unskilled laborers who moved materials, semi-finished and finished goods. There were a few skilled mechanics. Division of labor was also practiced by the putting out system in which, for example, pieces of leather were cut off-site and brought to a central shop to be made into shoes or other articles.

Economies of scale: Factories produced product on a much larger scale than the putting out or crafts systems. Because factories could over supply local markets, access to transportation was important.

Factories used far less manpower per unit of production and therefore lowered product cost.

Location: Before the widespread use of steam power and railroads, most factories were located at water power sites and near water transportation. After the widespread introduction of railroads, which coincided with more efficient and affordable steam engines, factories could be located away from water power sites but tended to be located along railroads or with access to water transportation.

Building design: Workers and machines were brought together in a central factory building or buildings specially designed to handle the machinery and flow of materials. Although all work was usually done under one roof in the earliest factories, in multi-story buildings, different operations were done on different floors. (Multiple story buildings were common because they facilitated transmission of power from a water wheel, turbine or steam engine through line shafts.) In large factories, such as locomotive works, different processes were performed in different buildings. Foundry and blacksmith operations were normally kept in a separate building for reasons of safety, cleanliness and health.

Product uniformity, including any components, such as soles, heels and uppers for shoes and shoes made to uniform sizes, although in the early years a given size from different manufacturers had different dimensions. Uniformity was mainly due to the precision possible from machinery, but also, quality was overseen by management. The quality of many machine operations such as sewing was superior to hand methods. Near the end of the 19th century the capability of making interchangeable parts from metal was in widespread use.

Workers were paid either daily wages or for piece work, either in the form of money or some combination of money, housing, meals or goods from a company store. (See: Truck system) Piece work went out of favor with the advent of the production line, which was designed on standard times for each operation in the sequence, and workers had to keep up with the work flow.

The cost and complexity of machinery, especially that powered water or steam, was more than cottage industry workers could afford or had the skills to maintain. The exception was the sewing machine, which allowed putting out of sewing to continue for decades after the rise of factories. Home spinning and weaving were displaced after in the years following the introduction of factory production, especially where transportation facilitated distribution.[1]

Because the efficiency of steam engines decreased with decreasing size and because cost per horsepower went up as size went down, the smallest steam engines were about 2 horsepower. This was a larger size than needed by most workshops and consequently most workshops relied on manual power until electrification in the 1910s and 1920s. To overcome this limitation many workshops rented space in power buildings which provided a take off from a line shaft powered by a central steam engine.

第二篇：Species Diversity

1. 物種多樣性從赤道向極地減少。

2. 一般認(rèn)為物種數(shù)量變化受到光照或者溫度等變化影響。然后談到深海生物，到水下2-3千米以后，一直都是冷的，且深海是一直沒有光照的，但那里生物很多。證明原來觀點(diǎn)不對(duì)。

3. 經(jīng)研究是受到食物供給food supply影響。動(dòng)物在一種環(huán)境生存，當(dāng)有入侵者invader時(shí)，原來的動(dòng)物可能會(huì)掛掉。以前認(rèn)為這是兩動(dòng)物之間發(fā)生物種競(jìng)爭，現(xiàn)在發(fā)現(xiàn)實(shí)際是食物供給，因?yàn)槿肭终咭参幢啬茉谶@一新環(huán)境生存。

4. 在熱帶物種多樣性好，是因?yàn)榭此浦挥幸粌煞N食物，但不同生物吃該食物的不同部位，所以食物供給充足。這類專吃某種食物的動(dòng)物稱為specialist。

5. 但并非是食物供給是否充足影響物種多樣性，而是食物供給的波動(dòng)性。在極地的海里，春天和冬天的食物供給大為不同。春天某海洋植物豐富，微生物吃該植物，魚吃微生物，還有動(dòng)物不遠(yuǎn)萬里從一極趕到另一極來吃。而在冬天食物稀少的地區(qū)，則生物要競(jìng)爭。舉例，某種灰狼grey wolf什么都吃，rabbit、caribou啥的都吃，這類動(dòng)物被稱為generalist，它們會(huì)根據(jù)實(shí)際情況調(diào)整飲食，而不是只吃某種特定食物。所以，就會(huì)出現(xiàn)物種之間的競(jìng)爭，從而影響到物種多樣性。

Latitudinal Diversity Gradient

The increase in species richness or biodiversity that occurs from the poles to the tropics, often referred to as the latitudinal diversity gradient (LDG), is one of the most widely recognized patterns in ecology. Put another way, in the present day localities at lower latitudes generally have more species than localities at higher latitudes. The LDG has been observed to varying degrees in Earth's past.[ Sahney, S. and Benton, M.J. (2008). "Recovery from the most profound mass extinction of all time". Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological 275 (1636): 759.]

Explaining the latitudinal diversity gradient is one of the great contemporary challenges of biogeography and macroecology (Willig et al. 2003, Pimm and Brown 2004, Cardillo et al. 2005).[ Mora C & Robertson DR (2005). "Causes of latitudinal gradients in species richness: a test with fishes of the Tropical Eastern Pacific". Ecology 86: 1771-1792.] The question "What determines patterns of species diversity?" was among the 25 key research themes for the future identified in 125th Anniversary issue of Science (July 2005). There is a lack of consensus among ecologists about the mechanisms underlying the pattern, and many hypotheses have been proposed and debated.

Understanding the global distribution of biodiversity is one of the most significant objectives for ecologists and biogeographers. Beyond purely scientific goals and satisfying curiosity, this understanding is essential for applied issues of major concern to humankind, such as the spread of invasive species, the control of diseases and their vectors, and the likely effects of global climate change on the maintenance of biodiversity (Gaston 2000). Tropical areas play a prominent role in the understanding of the distribution of biodiversity, as their rates of habitat degradation and biodiversity loss are exceptionally high.[ Tittensor D. et al. (2011). "Global patterns and predictors of marine biodiversity across taxa". Nature 466: 1098-1101.]

Climate Harshness Hypothesis

Another climate-related hypothesis is the climate harshness hypothesis, which states the latitudinal diversity gradient may exist simply because fewer species can physiologically tolerate conditions at higher latitudes than at low latitudes because higher latitudes are often colder and drier than tropical latitudes. Again, Cardillo et al. (2005) find fault with this hypothesis, stating that although it is clear that climatic tolerance can limit species distributions, it appears that species are often absent from areas whose climate they can tolerate.

Biotic hypotheses

Biotic hypotheses claim ecological species interactions such as competition, predation, mutualism, and parasitism are stronger in the tropics and these interactions promote species coexistence and specialization of species, leading to greater speciation in the tropics. These hypotheses are problematic because they cannot be the proximate cause of the latitudinal diversity gradient as they fail to explain why species interactions might be stronger in the tropics. An example of one such hypothesis is the greater intensity of predation and more specialized predators in the tropics has contributed to the increase of diversity in the tropics (Pianka 1966). This intense predation could reduce the importance of competition (see competitive exclusion) and permit greater niche overlap and promote higher richness of prey. However, as discussed above, even if predation is more intense in the tropics (which is not certain), as it cannot be the ultimate cause of species diversity in the tropics because it fails to explain what gives rise to the richness of the predators in the tropics.

Conclusion

The fundamental macroecological question that the latitudinal diversity gradient depends on is 'What causes patterns in species richness?'. Species richness ultimately depends on whatever proximate factors are found to affect processes of speciation, extinction, immigration, and emigration. While some ecologists continue to search for the ultimate primary mechanism that causes the latitudinal richness gradient, many ecologists suggest instead this ecological pattern is likely to be generated by several contributory mechanisms (Gaston and Blackburn 2000, Willig et al. 2003, Rahbek et al. 2007). For now the debate over the cause of the latitudinal diversity gradient will continue until a groundbreaking study provides conclusive evidence or there is general consensus that multiple factors contribute to the pattern.