English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

An in vitro method and an in vivo method of excystation were compared to determine the most useful method for the retrieval of Giardia duodenalis isolates. Cysts from 11 Giardia strains were used. In vitro excystation produced motile trophozoites in 16 sets, while in vivo excystation produced trophozoites in all of the 21 comparative sets of excystations. Few cultures were lost because of contamination by either method (17% of in vitro-derived trophozoites versus 23% of in vivo-derived trophozoites; P greater than 0.05). Both methods demonstrated comparable isolate retrieval rates (15% of in vitro-derived trophozoites adapting to culture compared with 29% of in vivo-derived trophozoites; P greater than 0.05), although analysis of the strains retrieved showed that two isolates were retrieved from in vitro excystation alone, compared with four from in vivo excystation. Analysis that included results of extra in vivo cultures showed that a total of nine isolates were retrieved by using this type of excystation. Despite the disadvantages of cost and labor, in vivo excystation appears to be more useful than in vitro excystation for isolate retrieval at the present time.

Comparison of an in vitro method and an in vivo method of Giardia excystation