No abstract

AUTHORS' SYNOPSIS. The degree of distortion in dye curves due to sampling and recording systems was estimated and appropriate correction factors were determined. These factors were used in recording corrected dye curves in circulatory models and during left heart catheterization. Calculations of ventricular ejection fractions and volumes were made .from the corrected curves. The ideal indicator dilution curve is one which measures the instantaneous time-concentration relationship of the indicator substance without distortion. In order to obtain such distortion-free curves, it has been necessary to utilize a detector for the indicator which can be placed in an intravascular site. Various techniques utilizing thermodilution, saline conductivity, polarographic or fibre-optics determinations have been introduced. Each of these is limited to a large degree by shortcomings of calibration, stability, or price. Dye dilution curves are widely used and are readily calibrated. However, withdrawing blood from the body through a cuvette densitometer necessarily introduces distortion into the curve, which is not present with the other, intravascular recording techniques. The degree of distortion is dependent upon the nature of the sampling and measuring systems. Various investigators have described the effect on dilution curves obtained by using different lengths and diameters of tubing for connection of the

considerable interest are those by Rosenfeld (optical model), Breit (nucleon transfer reactions), and Blair (inelastic excitation of collective modes).The conference discussions appear to be well reported, and there is a fine conference summary by Blair. Professional nuclear physicists will find this volume a necessity.Although Russian hydrobiologists established a high degree of competence and began a systematic study of the marine and brackish waters of the seas of their land before the Revolution, and have kept up this tradition to the present day, the vast bulk of the published literature has been inaccessible to most of us outside the Soviet Union. Not only is the language barrier formidable, but many of the journals and monographs are not in our libraries. One suspects that, with the great expansion of work in marine biology, access to this literature may be difficult in the Soviet Union too and that this well may be one of the reasons Zenkevitch undertook this unique summary of the literature. This book is not simply a review of literature; it is a critical, well-balanced analysis of a prodigious quantity of information, and its like is not to be found in any other country. It was originally published in 1947 as volume 2 of The Fauna and Biological Productivity of the Seas. A revised edition, Biologiya Morei SSSR, was published in the Soviet Union in 1963, the same time that the translation of the English edition was underway. This English version therefore is not an exact translation of the 1963 Russian edition (the arrangement of some parts and the tables and illustrations selected for use are not the same in the two versions), although both volumes have essentially the same scope and coverage. considerable interest are those by Rosenfeld (optical model), Breit (nucleon transfer reactions), and Blair (inelastic excitation of collective modes).The conference discussions appear to be well reported, and there is a fine conference summary by Blair. Professional nuclear physicists will find this volume a necessity. Although Russian hydrobiologists established a high degree of competence and began a systematic study of the marine and brackish waters of the seas of their land before the Revolution, and have kept up this tradition to the present day, the vast bulk of the published literature has been inaccessible to most of us outside the Soviet Union.Not only is the language barrier formidable, but many of the journals and monographs are not in our libraries. One suspects that, with the great expansion of work in marine biology, access to this literature may be difficult in the Soviet Union too and that this well may be one of the reasons Zenkevitch undertook this unique summary of the literature. This book is not simply a review of literature; it is a critical, well-balanced analysis of a prodigious quantity of information, and its like is not to be found in any other country. It was originally published in 1947 as volume 2 of The Fauna and Biological Productivity of the Seas. A revised edition, Biologiya More...

No abstract