✦ LIBER ✦

Reply to Aikin and Underwood

✍ Scribed by David D. Meisel

Publisher: Springer
Year: 1970
Tongue: English
Weight: 224 KB
Volume: 11
Category: Article
ISSN: 0038-0938
DOI: 10.1007/bf00155233

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

📜 SIMILAR VOLUMES

Reply to letter by Underwood

✍ Donald Johnston 📂 Article 📅 1994 🏛 Elsevier Science 🌐 English ⚖ 78 KB

Reply to Liu and Bilkey's reply

✍ L. Stan Leung; Kevin J. Canning 📂 Article 📅 1999 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 299 KB 👁 1 views

Reply to Nanzer and Coeuret

✍ Paul-Louis Fabre 📂 Article 📅 1997 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 262 KB

too rapidly made. Finally, the cell geometry adopted by the authors was not at all satisfactory from an electrochemical engineering point of view; this type of cell could have affected the results. Jorge 0. Nanzer and Franqois Coeuret UMR CNRS 11'6607 (Nantes) ENSCR -Av. du General Leclerc 35700 Ren

Reply to Bedard and Kandel

✍ Lester J. Layfield; Evelyn V. Gopez 📂 Article 📅 2002 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 348 KB

Reply to Meheus and Union

✍ J. G. García Lerma; J. Sequí Navarro 📂 Article 📅 1996 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 39 KB

The origin of this confusion was the product insert included in the combined RheumELISA system employed by us for the simultaneous detection of anti-Ro/SSA, La/SSB, Sm, and U1 RNP autoantibodies. In the Summary and Explanation section, there was a paragraph that led us to assume that Sm was obtained

Reply to Ferbinteanu and Milgram

✍ David Bilkey; Ping Liu 📂 Article 📅 1997 🏛 John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English ⚖ 19 KB 👁 1 views