检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:王婷婷[1] 胡萍[2] WANG Ting-ting;HU Ping(Luohe Vocational Technology College,Luohe 462000,China;Xuchang Vocational Technical College,Xuchang 461000,China)
机构地区:[1]漯河职业技术学院科研处,河南漯河462000 [2]许昌职业技术学院园林与食品工程学院,河南许昌461000
出 处:《漯河职业技术学院学报》2019年第3期29-31,共3页Journal of Luohe Vocational Technical College
基 金:漯河职业技术学院重点科研创新团队项目“天然产物的提取及应用研发”(LZYCXTD-201805)
摘 要:本实验对单抗制备过程中小鼠的三种免疫方法进行比较,确定三种免疫方法对小鼠免疫的免疫效价、操作难易程度、耗费时间和免疫成本等关键参数,同时指出肌肉注射法在免疫效价方面的缺陷、静脉注射法在操作方面的缺陷,建议采用经济省时、简便易行、免疫效价高的皮下多点注射结合腹腔注射法作为小鼠免疫方法的优先选择,应用于单抗的制备。In this experiment,three immunization methods of mice in the preparation of monoclonal antibody were compared,and the key parameters such as immune potency,operation difficulty,time-consuming and immune cost of the three immunization methods were determined. At the same time,the shortcomings of intramuscular injection method in immune potency and intravenous injection method in operation were pointed out. It is suggested that the economical,time-saving,simple and feasible subcutaneous multi-point injection combined with intraperitoneal injection,which is a preferred method for the preparation of monoclonal antibodies in mice.
分 类 号:TS207[轻工技术与工程—食品科学]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15