Gudrun, your question got me looking through more than a dozen older books,
several more recent ones and various articles, but with no clear answer!
H wasn't a routine combination in 1902. Pathology and normal human histology
textbooks in the 1950s show pictures that are clearly H but with the stain
getting scarcely a mention, and this is also true of the most recent (1999)
path text on my shelf. Forty-five alum-haematein mixtures were published
between 1868 and 1951. Of these, a majority (26) were in the period 1882-1916
and these include the best-known ones: Delafield, Ehrlich, Mayer, Harris etc,
but eosin alone was seldom the recommended counterstain before 1890. H has
never been the "routine" stain outside the fields of human and veterinary
histology and pathology. Other staining combinations are preferred for
invertebrates, protozoa, plants and bacteria. My guess is that H gradually
became "routine" for pathology in the period 1910-1930. If someone has access
to some non-technical textbooks from those decades they might be able to narrow
down the dates.
I could go on and on, with references etc, but this reply may already be too
long for Histonet. John Kiernan.
= = =
From: Gudrun Lang via Histonet
Sent: May 20, 2023 8:46 AM
To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] history of H staining
Hi all!
Does anybody know, when the H stain became that dominant routine-stain in
the pathology labs?
It was introduced by Wissowzky 1876, but I am curious when our usual
histoprocess became worldwide standard.
Regards
Gudrun Lang
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
