Effect of Maleic Hydrazide on Normal and Atypical Growth of Rumex Acetosa

Nickell, Louis G.

doi:10.1002/j.1537-2197.1953.tb06440.x

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Genetic proneness to virus tumours varies considerably. Growth of virus tumours in vitro is enhanced by alkaline hydrolysed ribonucleic acid but decreased by desoxyribonucleic acid, and markedly inhibited by alanine and related substances and by the triazolo analogue of guanine (Nickell, Greenfield & Burkholder, 1950). Unlike crown-gall, virus tumours are also inhibited by the growth-preventing ' anti-auxin', maleic hydrozide (Nickell, 1953).…”

Section: (I) Vertebratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

CANCER BIOLOGY: COMPARATIVE and GENETIC*

Huxley¹

1956

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY I employ cancer in a broad sense to cover all products of malignant neoplasia– carcinomas, sarcomas, leukaemias and ascites tumours–and tumour to cover all autonomous neoplasms. Cancer is not a biological entity, but an assemblage of many distinct diseases (malignant tumours) which share the following symptoms: (a) replication of abnormal tissue type, but often with change towards greater malignancy; (b) non‐limited proliferation; (c) some degree of histological and physiological dedifferentiation;(d) partial or often complete lack of organization; (c) invasiveness, often accompanied by metastasis. Neoplasia also includes the development of benign tumours, which exhibit symptoms (a)‐(d) above, and have therefore acquired autonomy. Neoplasia does not involve an abnormal form of tissue differentiation, but a characteristic deviation of metabolism which may affect any type of tissue. Tumours retain the specific determination of the tissues from which they arise, though in hypoplastic manifestation. Tumorigenic metabolic deviation proceeds by a series of individual chance (mutational) events, instead of by a continuous (statistical) process affecting all cells simultaneously as in normal differentiation. All autonomous neoplasms can be regarded as the equivalents of new biological species. Though the tumours of lower vertebrates, invertebrates and plants often differ in various ways from those of mammals and birds, there is no reason for regarding them as irrelevant to the human cancer problem. They are autonomous and often malignant neoplasms, and have sometimes been experimentally induced. Neoplastic tumours, whether spontaneous (in nature) (S), experimentally induced (E), or genetically induced (G), have been recorded in the following groups of organisms: The ‘cancer spectrum’ may differ markedly in different groups, species and breeds. High cancer‐proneness exists in some animal species (e.g. dogs, mice, budgerigars, domestic fowls, poecilid and cyprinodont fish) and breeds (retrievers, grey horses, some domesticated goldfish), and low cancer‐proneness in others (guinea‐pigs, rabbits, pigs, primates; Pekinese, chows). Thyroid tumours develop frequently in salmonids and some other fish in water of low oxygen content. Their invasiveness is usually not an effect of malignancy, but of the absence of a capsule in the fish thyroid. Attention is drawn to the favourable material for cancer research provided by regions of high localized growth rate (horns, horn cores, antlers, etc.), growth gradients (crustacean appendages and abdomina, molluscan mantle edges, etc.), endocrine‐dependent growth and regression (fowl‐combs, larval and metamorphosing Amphibia, stick insects, etc.), nerve‐dependent differentiation (Orthoptera), regenerating limbs (Amphibia, Crustacea, stick* insects, etc.), late‐fertilized Amphibian eggs, graft‐tolerant sites (cheek pouches of hamster), crown‐gall tumours and other plant galls, and toadstools. The rate of development of spontaneous and induced tumours is related to size of species. ...

show abstract

Section: (I) Vertebratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

CANCER BIOLOGY: COMPARATIVE and GENETIC*

Huxley¹

1956

Biological Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In evaluating the differences and similarities in the effects of the yellow dwarf virus and the maleic hydrazide it is of interest to note that both agencies may be characterized as nonstimulative in the sense that neither induces primary hyperplastic growth phenomena. Many other growth-regulating substances provoke extensive cell proliferations, whereas maleic hydrazide is principally a growth-inhibiting substance (Naylor and Davis, 1950;Nickell, 1953).8…”

Section: Yellow Dwarf Virus Compared With Other Phloem-affecting Virumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maleic hydrazide, which is sometimes classified as a growth-regulating (Currier et al, 1951), sometimes as strictly a growth-inhibiting substance (Naylor and Davis, 1950;Nickell, 1953), brings about changes that in certain respects resemble the symptoms induced by the barley yellow dwarf virus.' The depression of growth, the yellowing of leaves, the sugary exudate on leaves, and, finally, the necrosis of certain tissues, particularly of the phloem, are effects common to the yellow dwarf virus and the maleic hydrazide.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anatomic effects of barley yellow dwarf virus and maleic hydrazide on certain Gramineae

Esau¹

1957

Hilg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

and Botanist in the Experiment Station, Davis. S See "Literature Cited" for citations referred to in text by author and date. 'To simplify the writing, the term "barley yellow dwarf virus" is further abbreviated to "yellow dwarf virus" and the disease is referred to as "yellow dwarf disease" or simply "yellow dwarf," regardless of the host. Such usage is a compromise because the term "yellow dwarf" does not properly describe the symptoms in certain Gramineae (cf. Oswald and Houston, 1953a, b).

show abstract

“…The flower inductive influence of low concentrations of maleic hydrazide applied to young celery plants, and the inhibitory effect of higher concentrations on later seedstalk development has interesting parallels in other plants (Andrew, 1953;Choudhri and Bhatnagar, personal communication). Maleic hydrazide has promoted (Choudhri and Bhatnagar, personal communication;Crafts, et al, 1950), and suppressed (Choudhri and Bhatnagar, 1953;Erickson and Price, 1950;Naylor, 1950;Naylor and Davis, 1950;Nickell, 1953) flowering in a number of plant species. In commercial celery production, where on the one hand flowering and seed production is essential for the propagation of desirable slow-bolting market types and conversely, where the premature appearance of seedstalks induced by an uncontrollable environment may frequently destroy the marketability of the vegetative crop, appropriate use of maleic hydrazide may prove to be of practical significance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%