217 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12634753)
21. Biotech funding deal judged to be 'a mistake' for Berkeley.
Dalton R
Nature; 2004 Aug; 430(7000):598. PubMed ID: 15295560
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. The number on biotech indexes.
Jacobs T
Nat Biotechnol; 2005 Nov; 23(11):1356. PubMed ID: 16273059
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. Syngenta ready to drop plans for Indian rice venture.
Jayaraman KS
Nature; 2002 Dec; 420(6916):596. PubMed ID: 12478254
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Germany biotech gets second chance.
Sheridan C
Nat Biotechnol; 2003 Dec; 21(12):1414-5. PubMed ID: 14647310
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. Almost in bloom.
Marris E
Nature; 2008 Mar; 452(7183):122-4. PubMed ID: 18396501
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. What's hot in biotech employment.
Hochberg SP
Nat Biotechnol; 2001 Apr; 19(4):389. PubMed ID: 11283604
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Australian biotech suffers growing pains.
O'Neill G
Nat Biotechnol; 2005 Apr; 23(4):401-2. PubMed ID: 15815652
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. OECD says industrial biotech not realizing potential.
Niiler E
Nat Biotechnol; 2001 Jun; 19(6):493-4. PubMed ID: 11385413
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
29. Boosting biotech in Finland.
Smaglik P
Nature; 2004 Oct; 431(7011):1020-1. PubMed ID: 15496931
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Biotech project in turmoil as Michigan balances books.
Knight J
Nature; 2003 Mar; 422(6928):102. PubMed ID: 12634742
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. Biotech round the world: focus on Canada.
Biotechnol J; 2008 Jul; 3(7):848-51. PubMed ID: 18624341
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Today's biotech industry in India.
Suresh N
Biotechnol J; 2009 Mar; 4(3):291-4. PubMed ID: 19296434
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. State of the biotech sector - 2006.
Lawrence S
Nat Biotechnol; 2007 Jul; 25(7):706. PubMed ID: 17621283
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Perspective: Biotech funding trends: Insights from entrepreneurs and investors.
Gruber AC
Biotechnol J; 2009 Aug; 4(8):1102-5. PubMed ID: 19685460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. A testing approach based on tiny doses still awaits big results.
Coombs A
Nat Med; 2008 Aug; 14(8):796. PubMed ID: 18685584
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. A boost for the Big Apple.
Smaglik P
Nature; 2005 Sep; 437(7055):163. PubMed ID: 16156043
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Capital collaboration Washington DC.
Russo E
Nature; 2005 Feb; 433(7026):664-5. PubMed ID: 15703754
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Canadian lab loses Amgen backing.
Knight J
Nature; 2002 May; 417(6884):4. PubMed ID: 11986629
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. The European university as a startup generator.
Witholt B
Nat Biotechnol; 1999 Feb; 17 Suppl():BE7-8. PubMed ID: 10052313
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Biotech marks time in Q3.
Lawrence S
Nat Biotechnol; 2005 Nov; 23(11):1332. PubMed ID: 16273049
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
