Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-wpx69 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-26T23:54:40.025Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The specificity of antisera against crystalline serum albumin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Muriel E. Adair  and
John Hamilton
Muriel E. Adair
Affiliation:
From the Department of Pathology, University of Cambridge
John Hamilton
Affiliation:
From the Department of Pathology, University of Cambridge
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Antisera prepared in the rabbit by injection of crystalline horse-serum albumin or crystalline human-serum albumin show a considerable diminution in specificity after more than one course of six to eight injections has been given.

The ratio of precipitate nitrogen to antigen nitrogen at the optimal point is smaller in antisera obtained after one course of injections than in antisera derived from subsequent bleedings.

In the case of antisera obtained from first bleedings, the ratio of precipitate nitrogen to antigen nitrogen determined at the optimal point with homologous antigen is of approximately the same value in both the antigen-antibody systems studied. The increase in the values of the ratios for antisera from subsequent bleedings is also the same for both systems.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , March 1939 , pp. 170 - 180
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1939

References

REFERENCES

Adair, G. S. & Robinson, Muriel E. (1930). Biochem. J. 24, 993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adair, Muriel E. & Taylor, G. L. (1935). Nature, Lond., 135, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adair, Muriel E. & Taylor, G. L. (1936). J. Hyg., Camb., 36, 564.Google Scholar
Baumgartner, Leona (1937). J. Immunol. 33, 477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, W. C. & Hooker, S. B. (1934). J. gen. Physiol. 17, 341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, A. (1938). Arch. Pathol. 26, 96.Google Scholar
Dean, H. R. & Webb, R. A. (1926). J. Path. Bact. 29, 473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, R. (1915). Lancet, 2, 1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidelberger, M. & Kendall, F. E. (1934). J. exp. Med. 59, 519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooker, S. B. & Boyd, W. C. (1934). J. Immunol. 26, 469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hooker, S. B. & Boyd, W. C. (1936). J. Immunol. 30, 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kabat, E. & Heidelberger, M. (1937). J. exp. Med. 66, 229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landsteiner, K. (1936). The Specificity of Serological Reactions. Springfield, III.Google Scholar
Landsteiner, K. & Van Der Scheer, J. (1936). J. exp. Med. 63, 325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrack, J. (1938). The Chemistry of Antigens and Antibodies. London: Medical Research Council, Special Report.Google Scholar
Marrack, J. & Carpenter, Blanche R. (1938). Brit. J. exp. Path. 19, 53.Google Scholar
SØrensen, S. P. L. (1930). C. R. Lab. Carlsberg, 18, 45.Google Scholar
Taylor, G. L., Adair, G. S. & Adair, Muriel E. (1932). J. Hyg., Camb., 32, 340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, G. L., Adair, G. S. & Adair, Muriel E. (1934). J. Hyg., Camb., 34, 118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiselius, A. (1937). Trans. Faraday Soc. 33, 524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, H. R. (1935). J. Immunol. 29, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, H. R. (1936). J. Immunol. 31, 103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar