The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reactions of Anti-Bee Venom Mouse Reagins and other Antibodies with Related Antigens
Abstract
Reaginic type antibodies, as well as γG 1 and hemagglutinating antibodies were raised in mice following bee venom immunization. The optimal immunizing dose was 1 μg bee venom in 1 mg Al(OH)3 gel. All antibodies were specific for bee venom and failed to react to yellow jacket and hornet venoms or to bee, wasp, yellow jacket and hornet whole body extracts.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Such envenomation not only provokes an innate inflammatory response and pathology related to the biological activities of the venoms’ toxins [86–88], but also can induce allergic sensitization associated with the development of specific IgE antibodies [89–94].”
From Mast cells and IgE in defense against lethality of venoms: Possible “benefit” of allergy (2020) · cites this paper as [90]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mast cells and IgE in defense against venoms: Possible “good side” of allergy?
Galli, S. J., Starkl, P., Marichal, T., & Tsai, M. (2016) · Allergology International · doi:10.1016/j.alit.2015.09.002 · Cited by 73
Mast cells and IgE in defense against lethality of venoms: Possible “benefit” of allergy
Galli, S. J., Metz, M., Starkl, P., Marichal, T., & Tsai, M. (2020) · Allergo Journal International · doi:10.1007/s40629-020-00118-6 · Cited by 57
Metadata
- Authors
- Charavejasarn, C., Reisman, R. E., & Arbesman, C. E.
- Venue
- International Archives of Allergy and Applied Immunology
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2009-07-23
- Pages
- 691-697
- ISSN
- 0020-5915
- 2571-6662
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
