This article discusses several important points of the methodology of microscopic histochemistry. Stress is put on the specifity of histochemical methods, which is one of the most influential factors in carrying out a method.
It is to be remarked that the usefulness of a method lies not only in its excellence but also in the importance of detecting substances and applicable scope of methods employed.
It means, I suppose, to satisfy two requirements as follows, that a method has a sufficient specifity:
(a) the end result produced of a method must be a special chemical substance to be identified, and (b) it must be sufficiently discriminated from other similar reaction products, in the case where condition (a) has been satisfied.
It must be admitted, however, that condition (a) does not always define the value of a method. For instance, Kossa's method can not theoretically satisfy both (a) and (b) conditions. Nevertheless it is extensively employed for the detection of calcium. Such method can be said to have a“histochemical specifity”.
This“histochemical specifity”is different from a specifity of a analytical chemistry in various respects. There exist several methods (e. g., Okamoto, Maeda and Hayashi method for the pigment of hemolytic jaundice), whose reaction products can be regarded as specific chemical substances, even though chemical organization of the principle of methods has been yet unknown.
Even in the case where the entity of reaction products of methods is not adequately clarified, some of the methods may be useful ones (e. g., Kon's argentaffin reaction).
The next consideration is made of a case where condition (b) is not enough satisfied while condition (a) is satisfied. In such case the methods used seem rather unsatisfactory like Quincke's iron sulfide test or Fischler's method for fatty acids.
Under such condition, however, some methods as PAS reaction etc. are found very useful.
抄録全体を表示