Abstract
THE purpose of Dr. Mercer's communication seems to be to establish the following points: (a) that the material isolated by Alexander and Earland is not a subcuticular membrane; (b) that the β-protein contained in their material is not present in the initial fibre; and (c) that the insolubility of their membranes is not connected with the β-structure.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ambrose and Elliott, Proc. Roy. Soc., A, 206, 206 (1951).
Ambrose, Bamford, Elliott and Hanby, Nature, 167, 264 (1951).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BAMFORD, C., ELLIOTT, A. & HANBY, W. Resistant Peripheral Membranes of the Keratin Fibres. Nature 168, 824–825 (1951). https://doi.org/10.1038/168824b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/168824b0
This article is cited by
-
A Resistant Membrane in Wool
Nature (1951)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
