1969
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-85791-1_35
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of Biologically Defined Strains of Amphibians

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1969
1969
1990
1990

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Renal tumors have been found in R. pipiens obtained from commercial sources (6) and in frogs collected from a number of localities in Minnesota (17,18,19,20,21,32), Milford, Michigan (33), and Vermont (34).…”
Section: Epidemiology: Geographic Distribution and Tumor Prevalencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Renal tumors have been found in R. pipiens obtained from commercial sources (6) and in frogs collected from a number of localities in Minnesota (17,18,19,20,21,32), Milford, Michigan (33), and Vermont (34).…”
Section: Epidemiology: Geographic Distribution and Tumor Prevalencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…With selection, this mode of reproduction would lead to the development of "congenic" strains. At present, the application of such an artificial breeding system to vertebrates has been successful only in amphibians (KAWAMURA 1939;KAWAMURA and NISHIOKA 1967;NACE and RICHARDS 1969;NACE, RICHARDS and ASHER 1970;MORIWAKI 1963), although PURDOM (1969, whose work was considered in NACE, RICHARDS and ASHER (1970), has attempted an application to fish and gives reference to others who have attempted it.…”
Section: Nace Richards and Asher (1970)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A the same time, work with Rana pipiens demonstrated the acute skin graft rejection in gynogenetic families segregated into distinct classes, providing evidence for a major histocompatibility locus (Rotix & Volpe 1975). Despite the production of several partially inbred lines of Rana (Nace & Richards 1969), the work has never advanced (beyond skin grafting experiments) from the original experiments.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%