Fungi and Fungous Diseases

Castellani, Aldo

doi:10.1001/archderm.1928.02380070078004

Cited by 23 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Langeron and Guerra (150) reduced the six genera of Langeron and Talice (152) to one, Candida. Castellani (39) still adhering to the generic name Monilia, reduced his forty species (36) to nine. Only one important writer, C. W. Dodge in recent years, has recognized a multiplicity of genera and species.…”

Section: The Yeast-like Fungimentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Like most fungi and many bacteria, Candida in the early days was classified exclusively on morphological characters. Castellani in a series of publications (36) extending over many years used fermentation characters almost exclusively. Partly due to different, often improper, interpretations of Castellani's work, partly to differences in techniques, and partly to the inherent weakness of his system, it has fallen into disregard.…”

Section: Physiology Of Candida Cultural and Biochemical Charactersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Yeast-Like Fungi: Candida and Brettanomyces

Skinner¹

1947

Bacteriological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

names which we do not accept and have been corrected in accordance with the common interpretation of the International Rules of Botanical Nomenclature, the latter by Buchwald (26), the former by the author" (253). Henrici (111) called attention to the fact that the primary division of yeasts which produce mycelium from those which do not is one that is difficult to make in practice. Most yeasts, if they are studied sufficiently, will be found to produce pseudomycelium or sometime possibly even true mycelium. There are all gradations between no pseudomycelium at all and a pseudomycelium so well developed that it can hardly be differentiated from true mycelium except by following through its formation as it develops in the microscopic field. Stelling-Dekker avoided this difficulty by classifying together ascosporogenous yeasts with and without mycelium. Lodder chose to divide the Cryptococcaceae (Torulopsidaceae) into two subfamilies on this basis. Frankly, the author does not like this division but must confess that he cannot suggest a better one. It is evident that this has given Diddens and Lodder some difficulty also. Diddens and Lodder's subdivision of the Candidoideae into only three genera is both logical and convenient. It is made on the basis of the type of thallospores produced, blastospores or arthrospores. Forms which produce blastospores only are put in the genus Candida or the genus BreUanomyces, those which produce both blastospores and arthrospores are put in the genus Trichosporon, those which produce arthrospores but not blastospores are excluded from the family. These include such organisms as Geotrichum candidum (Oidium lactia). OLD AND RECENT CLASSIFICATIONS OF CANDIDA Candida albicans (Robin) Berkhout is not only the type species of the genus but it is the outstanding species in importance and interest. The confusion in the nomenclature of this species may be appreciated from the fact that Ciferri, Redaelli and Cavallero (52) in 1938 found 45 different binomial synonyms, Diddens and Lodder in 1942 (69) cite 87, and Conant and associates, in 1944 (56) state that there are 172 in the literature! It was just 100 years ago, in 1847, that Robin first described a species 1947] 23

show abstract

Section: The Yeast-like Fungimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Physiology Of Candida Cultural and Biochemical Charactersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Yeast-Like Fungi: Candida and Brettanomyces

Skinner¹

1947

Bacteriological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Aspergillus flavus Link: Cassells (1874), Siebenmann (1889), Ferreri (1894), Hatch and Row (1900), Lewis (1927), Gordon (1928), Drennan (1928), Trimarchi (1929), Dunlap (1937), Mood (1938), Pittenger (1938), Terasi (1939), Minchew, Collins andHarris (1940), Fujishiro (1941), Keeney and Broyles (1943), Iriarte (1943), Simon (1945), Salvin and Lewis (1946 Talice andMackinnon (1931, 1932 Thorn and Raper (1945), and the descriptions given are not sufficiently detailed to indicate identity of the species, although these forms can be assigned to the A. glaucus group with certainty. The following reports have been maintained under the name A. glaucus as a matter of convenience: Hassenstein (1869), Knapp (1869Knapp ( , 1871, Moos (1872), C. H. Burnett (1877Burnett ( , 1889, Hatch and Row (1900), Bar (1904), Forsyth (1924), Penido Monteiro (1925), Trimarchi (1929) (1870), Siebenmann (1889), Hatch and Row (1900), Liébault (1922), Carnevale-Ricci (1927), Citelli (1927), Fort (1927Fort ( , 1928, Ciampi (1928), Thévenard (1928), Castellani (1928), Trimarchi...…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…26. Lichtheimia ramosa Vuillemin: ?Jakowski (1889), Castellani and Chalmers (1919), Castellani (1928Castellani ( , 1932 (1889), Bar (1904), Chisolm and Sutton (1925), Wilson (1928), Basil-Jones (1945 Bar (1904), Simms (1939), Dobes (1943), Simon (1945 Castellani: Castellani and Chalmers (1919), Castellani (1928Castellani ( , 1932. 36.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%