1928
DOI: 10.1001/archderm.1928.02380180022002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Ringworm Culture Ingredients: Ii and Iii

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1931
1931
1996
1996

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Two important contributions were made in 1928 at the University of Alabama (182) and the University of Pennsylvania (440) concerning the selection of a suitable medium for studying dermatophytes. Difco's (Detroit, Mich.) peptone was unacceptable as a substitute for the imported French peptone.…”
Section: Scientific Contributions 1920 To 1929mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two important contributions were made in 1928 at the University of Alabama (182) and the University of Pennsylvania (440) concerning the selection of a suitable medium for studying dermatophytes. Difco's (Detroit, Mich.) peptone was unacceptable as a substitute for the imported French peptone.…”
Section: Scientific Contributions 1920 To 1929mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus Weidman and Spring in 1928 (3) published a comparison of ringworm culture media. When, after the first world war, the French maltose and peptone which Sabouraud used were no longer available, substitutes had to be found.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%