Discussion of Paper by J. H. Martin Entitled “Heredity and Avian Lymphomatosis”

Discussion of Akritas ’ paper by William H . Jefferys

In other words, the obvious thing to do can be the wrong thing to do. Oftentimes we find people using particular statistical procedures as “black boxes,” without fully understanding them. It is important to understand what you are doing and why. Unthinking use of a particular procedure without understanding its properties is a recipe for disaster. I also wish to call attention to William Wheato...

Comparison of an avian osteopetrosis virus with an avian lymphomatosis virus by RNA-DNA hybridization.

Myeloblastosis-associated virus (MAV)-2(0), a virus which was derived from avian myeloblastosis virus and induced a high incidence of osteopetrosis, was compared with avian lymphomatosis virus 5938, a recent field isolate which induced a high incidence of lymphomatosis. The following information was obtained. (i) MAV-2(0) induced osteopetrosis, nephroblastoma, and a very low incidence of hepato...

Electron microscopy of avian lymphomatosis virus propagated in tissue culture.

Viruses isolated from avian erythroblastosis and myeloblastosis have been extensively investigated with the electron microscope (3-5, 8, 11, 1~). However, avian lymphomatosis virus has been studied by electron microscopy only in infected tissue sections (7), although a particulate component has been reported in the plasma of infected fowl (13). Wi th the successful cultivation of the lymphomato...

Martin J. Evans - Nobel Lecture

Discussion of paper by Peter McCullagh