1967
DOI: 10.1038/2141136a0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Serum Antinuclear Factor and the Influence of Environment in Mice

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1968
1968
1981
1981

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…C57Bl mice were selected because of their ability to form large amounts of antibody to tetanus toxoid (8) and because they occasionally develop antinuclear factor (9). C3H mice were used because they neither form excessive antibody to tetanus toxoid nor demonstrate antinuclear factor.…”
Section: Materials and Metkodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…C57Bl mice were selected because of their ability to form large amounts of antibody to tetanus toxoid (8) and because they occasionally develop antinuclear factor (9). C3H mice were used because they neither form excessive antibody to tetanus toxoid nor demonstrate antinuclear factor.…”
Section: Materials and Metkodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1) Spontaneous appearance of ANF: The appearance of ANF could be spontaneous and not actually related to alloimmunization. For example, ANF incidence increases with age in many but not all inbred strains of mice (Barnes & Tuffrey 1967, Friou & Teague 1964, Norins & Holmes 1967, Siege1 et al 1972, Yunis et al 1972. For most of the antisera in Table 1 the age of the recipient is unknown, and conceivable ANF might appear in some antisera simply by virtue of the fact that the recipient mice were aging and would have produced ANF whether or not they had been alloimmunized.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Perhaps more important is that more female chimaeric F1 offspring were examined since female NZB x CFW hybrids are known to have a greater incidence of ANA (Barnes et al, 1968). Environmental factors also influence the incidence of ANA (Barnes and Tuffrey, 1967) and might have also contributed to the variation between the two groups. However, as in the natural NZB and (NZBxCFW) F l situation (Barnes et al, 1968) the incidence of ANA in the chimaeras' NZB offspring was less than that in the corresponding hybrid.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%