What's cell biology？

what can a well-made suit reveal of the wearer?

A．He can send a message to other people's cell phones.

B．He has a considerable sum of money.

C．He is a businessman.

D．He has a good taste for food.

What can we know about the man's cello?

A．He always takes it with him.

B．It was made by his uncle.

C．He had a German make it.

D．He often gets a seat free for his cello.

What can we know about the man's cello?

A．He always takes it with him.

B．It was made by his uncle.

C．He had a German make it.

D．He often gets a seat free for his cello.

Culture unchangingly molds(影响) human biology. Culture encourages certain activities, discourages others, and sets standards of physical health and attractiveness. Sports activity, which is influenced by culture, help build phenotyep(具有共型的一类有机物). American girls are encouraged to pursue-and so, they do well in-competitive track and field, swimming, and diving. Brazilian girls are encouraged to avoid public activities. In Brazil fewer females swim, drive, and run than is the case in America. Culture standards of attractiveness also affect athletic activities. Americans nm or swim not just to compete but to keep trim(漂亮的) and fit. Brazil's beauty standards accept more fat, especially in female buttocks and hips. Years of swimming mold an enlarged upper torso, a massive neck, and powerful shoulders and back. Successful women swimmers tend to be big, strong, hard and bulky, but Brazilian culture says that women should be soft. A Brazilian beauty should have big hips and buttocks rather than big shoulders. So Brazil seldom sends female swimmers or runners to the Olympics. The countries that produce successful female swimmers are the United States, Germany, and Russia or any other one but not Latin countries including Brazil.

What is the main topic of the passage?

A．Brazil seldom sends female swimmers or runners to the Olympics.

B．Cultural standards of attractiveness also affect athletic activities.

C．The effects of culture on standards of physical health and attractiveness.

D．The effects of culture on human biology.

25℃时下列电池的电动势为0.518V(忽略液接电势)，

  Pt|H₂(10⁵Pa)，HA(0.01mol·dm^-3)，A^-(0.01mol·dm^-3)||SCE

  计算弱酸HA的K_a值。

下列电池测得溶液的pH值为6.28，。计算电池的电动势。()

  NHE|被测试液SCE

It has been a wretched few weeks for America's celebrity bosses. AIG's Maurice Greenberg has been dramatically ousted from the firm through which he dominated global insurance for decades. At Morgan Stanley a mutiny is forcing Philip Purcell, a boss used to getting his own way, into an increasingly desperate campaign to save his skin. At Boeing, Harry Stonecipher was called out of retirement to lead the scandal-hit firm and raise ethical standards, only to commit a lapse of his own, being sacked for sending e-mails to a lover who was also an employee. Carly Fiorina was the most powerful woman in corporate America until a few weeks ago, when Hewlett-Packard (HP) sacked her for poor performance. The fate of Bernie Ebbers is much grimmer. The once high-profile boss of WorldCom could well spend the rest of his life behind bars following his conviction last month on fraud charges.

In different ways, each of these examples appears to point to the same, welcome conclusion: that the imbalance in corporate power of the late 1990s, when many bosses were allowed to behave like absolute monarchs, has been corrected. Alas, appearances can be deceptive. While each of these recent tales of chief-executive woe is a sign of progress, none provides much evidence that the crisis in American corporate governance is yet over. In fact, each of these cases is an example of failed, not successful, governance.

At the very least, the boards of both Morgan Stanley and HP were far too slow to address their bosses' inadequacies. The record of the Boeing board in picking chiefs prone to ethical lapses is too long to be dismissed as mere bad luck. The fall of Messrs Greenberg and Ebbers, meanwhile, highlights the growing role of government—and, in particular, of criminal prosecutors in holding bosses to account: a development that is, at best, a mixed blessing. The Sarbanes-Oxley act, passed in haste following the Enron and WorldCom scandals, is imposing heavy costs on American companies; whether these are exceeded by any benefits is the subject of fierce debate and may not be known for years.

Eliot Spitzer, New York's attorney-general, is the leading advocate and practitioner of an energetic "law enforcement" approach. He may be right that the recent burst of punitive actions has been good for the economy, even if some of his own decisions have been open to question. Where he is undoubtedly right is in arguing that corporate America has done a lamentable job of governing itself. As he says in an article in the Wall Street Journal this week, "The honour code among CEOs didn't work. Board oversight didn't work. Self-regulation was a complete failure." AIG's board, for example, did nothing about Mr. Greenberg's use of murky accounting, or the conflicts posed by his use of offshore vehicles, or his constant bullying of his critics let alone the firm's alleged participation in bid rigging—until Mr. Spitzer threatened a criminal prosecution that might have destroyed the firm.

How many America's celebrity bosses are mentioned in the first paragraph?

A．Three.

B．Four.

C．Five.

D．Six.