- Joined
- Jan 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,880
- Reaction score
- 1,676
Just thought I should point out that FA2012 doesn't record the actual sizes for the systemic mycoses.
However, FA2009 does. That being said, FA2009 has quite a bit of good stuff that's left out of FA2012.
The only reason I'm posting this is because I just encountered a question that related to size in micrometers alone, along with having included a vague picture.
Histoplasmosis: 3-5 um
Blastomycosis: 5-15 um
Coccidioidomycosis: 20-60 um (notably 30 um)
Paracoccidioidomycosis: 40-50 um
FA2012 simply gives sizes in relation to RBCs, but not in terms of absolute #s.
The question I got mentioned an organism that's 30um, then it showed two spherules containing endospores. The picture did not look like spherules containing endospores. I had even thought about that before answering the question and was like, "there are definitely no endospores of any kind in there, so can't be coccidioidomycosis." So yeah, the knowledge of the size would have facilitated there.
Cheers,
However, FA2009 does. That being said, FA2009 has quite a bit of good stuff that's left out of FA2012.
The only reason I'm posting this is because I just encountered a question that related to size in micrometers alone, along with having included a vague picture.
Histoplasmosis: 3-5 um
Blastomycosis: 5-15 um
Coccidioidomycosis: 20-60 um (notably 30 um)
Paracoccidioidomycosis: 40-50 um
FA2012 simply gives sizes in relation to RBCs, but not in terms of absolute #s.
The question I got mentioned an organism that's 30um, then it showed two spherules containing endospores. The picture did not look like spherules containing endospores. I had even thought about that before answering the question and was like, "there are definitely no endospores of any kind in there, so can't be coccidioidomycosis." So yeah, the knowledge of the size would have facilitated there.
Cheers,
