This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (7)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

GEORGE M. LEWIS, M.D.; MARY E. HOPPER, M.S.

AMA Arch Derm. 1955;72(4):362-370.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In the identification of the dermatophytes reliance is placed chiefly on the gross characteristics of the culture. These features may be sufficiently distinctive so that additional procedures are unnecessary (i. e., Microsporum lanosum, Epidermophyton floccosum, and others). However, this is not true with some other fungi, and further investigation of the culture is then desirable. This is usually carried out by means of microscopic examination of a microculture or of material removed from the culture. The present study was undertaken to explore the possibility that histologic preparations of fungus colonies might help in their recognition.

TECHNICAL DETAILS

Source of Specimen.—Twelve common dermatophytes were chosen for study. At least three different strains of each species were used; most had been recently isolated. Six common contaminants were examined.

Culture Medium.—The fungi were grown at room temperature in 4 in. (10 cm.) Petri dishes, the medium consisting . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
New York

From the Department of Medicine (Dermatology), New York Hospital and Cornell University Medical Center.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication May 23, 1955.

Read at the 75th Annual Meeting of the American Dermatological Association, Inc., Belleair, Fla., April 19, 1955.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?