Skip to content

Please be aware that some material may contain words, descriptions or illustrations which will not reflect current scientific understanding and may be considered in today's context inaccurate, unethical, offensive or distressing.

Description

Sectional committee: Physiology

Not recommended for publication in Philosophical Transactions or Proceedings. It is a 'theoretical continuation' of parts I and II of the paper and contains few additional observations'.

[Not published].

Endorsed on verso as received 24 June 1925.

Reference number
RR/32/17
Earliest possible date
June 1925
Physical description
Standardised form (type D)
Page extent
2 pages
Format
Manuscript

Creator name

Robert Muir

View page for Robert Muir

Use this record

Citation

Robert Muir, Referee's report by Robert Muir, on a paper 'Studies on the nature of the immunity reaction. Part III - The possible eugynic value of pneumococcal anitgen' by Richard R Armstrong, June 1925, RR/32/17, The Royal Society Archives, London, https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/items/rr_32_17/referees-report-by-robert-muir-on-a-paper-studies-on-the-nature-of-the-immunity-reaction-part-iii-the-possible-eugynic-value-of-pneumococcal-anitgen-by-richard-r-armstrong, accessed on 11 December 2024

Link to this record

Embed this record

<iframe src="https://makingscience.royalsociety.org/embed/items/rr_32_17/referees-report-by-robert-muir-on-a-paper-studies-on-the-nature-of-the-immunity-reaction-part-iii-the-possible-eugynic-value-of-pneumococcal-anitgen-by-richard-r-armstrong" title="Referee's report by Robert Muir, on a paper 'Studies on the nature of the immunity reaction. Part III - The possible eugynic value of pneumococcal anitgen' by Richard R Armstrong" allow="fullscreen" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="500px"></iframe>

Related Fellows

Explore the collection

  • Referee Reports

    Date: 1832-1954

    This collection contains reports on scientific papers submitted for publication to the Royal Society. Started in 1832 when the system was formalised, it is a record of the origins of peer review publishing in practice.

    View collection