1960
DOI: 10.3314/jjmm1960.1.4_323
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supplementary Studies on the Serological Classification of Yeasts

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
2
1

Year Published

1985
1985
1985
1985

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Since we did not employ D. subglobosus HUT 7240, which they employed as the standard strain for antigenic analysis, further investigation is necessary in this respect. Our result coincided with that of TsUCHIYA et al (3)(4)(5)(6) in the difference of D. hansenii-T, famata and T, candida. We found, however, that D. hansenii-T, famata had specific antigen which was not detected in T. candida (Table 6).…”
Section: Vol 31supporting
confidence: 80%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Since we did not employ D. subglobosus HUT 7240, which they employed as the standard strain for antigenic analysis, further investigation is necessary in this respect. Our result coincided with that of TsUCHIYA et al (3)(4)(5)(6) in the difference of D. hansenii-T, famata and T, candida. We found, however, that D. hansenii-T, famata had specific antigen which was not detected in T. candida (Table 6).…”
Section: Vol 31supporting
confidence: 80%
“…In the present study, we could not confirm the results of TsUCHIYA et al (4,5) who reported that T. candida and D. subglobosus had specific antigen 33 in addition to the antigens common to D, hansenii, D. kloeckeri, D, nicotianae, and T. famata. Since we did not employ D. subglobosus HUT 7240, which they employed as the standard strain for antigenic analysis, further investigation is necessary in this respect.…”
Section: Vol 31contrasting
confidence: 57%
See 2 more Smart Citations