1958
DOI: 10.1007/bf00888638
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Randomness of nuclear distribution in conidia ofNeurospora heterokaryons

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

1960
1960
1977
1977

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar results have been obtained often since then (e.g. Klein 1958). The cytology of the monilioid stage of this fungus then is probably very similar to that of M. fructicola.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Similar results have been obtained often since then (e.g. Klein 1958). The cytology of the monilioid stage of this fungus then is probably very similar to that of M. fructicola.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Numerous determinations of the num ber of nuclei per conidium have subsequently been made for Neurospora (Atwood and Norman 1949, Heubschman 1952, Klein 1958.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proportion of heterocaryotic conidia isolated from all heterocaryons indicated that any deviation from random distribution was not extreme. However, as homocaryotic conidia are occasionally produced in excess of expectation (Atwood and Mukai, 1955;Klein, 1958), the nuclear frequencies given must be thought of as maximal estimates of pan nuclear frequency and will be denoted EMP.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Phycomyces their correctness seems to be experimentally verified (Oerda-Olmedo & Reau, 1970) but in Neurospora the proportion of homokaryotic spores is, frequently, greater than expected (Atwood & Mukai, 1955;Klein, 1958). In Phycomyces their correctness seems to be experimentally verified (Oerda-Olmedo & Reau, 1970) but in Neurospora the proportion of homokaryotic spores is, frequently, greater than expected (Atwood & Mukai, 1955;Klein, 1958).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%