Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:24:40.625Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Use of a Microbalance in Putting up Uniformly Sized Batches of Heterodera Cysts for Experiment.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2009

D. W. Fenwick
Affiliation:
Nemalology Department, Rothamsted ExperimentalStation, Harpenden

Extract

Tests were conducted using a capillary microbalance to estimate the errors introduced as a result of weighing out replicate cyst batches in place of counting.

Experiments with differently sized samples showed that the normal relationship between sample size and accuracy applied to such cases, the error for samples of 100 cysts being usually of the order of less than 10%. There is some evidence that the errors in cyst number introduced as a result of weighing is reflected by an increased error in the larval count, although under the conditions of experiment the increase was barely significant. It is suggested that if replication is increased by 50% or 100% then errors due to inequality in cyst numbers are more than counteracted.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1951

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Fenwick, D. W., 1940.—“ Methods for the recovery and counting of cysts of Heterodera schachtii from soilJ. Helminth., 18 (4), 155172. (W.L. 11224b.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenwick, D. W., 1949.—“ Investigations on the emergence of larvae from cysts of tire potato-root eelworm Heterodera rostochiensis. (1) Technique and variability.” J. Helminth., 23 (3/4), 157170. (W.L. 11224b.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lownsberry, B. F., 1950.—“ Stimulation of golden nematode larvae by root leachings.” (Abstract of paper presented to the 41st Annual Meeting of the American Phytopathological Society, New York City, December 28–30, 1949.) Phytopathology, 40 (1), 18. (W.L. 16273.)Google Scholar