Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T01:16:11.730Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“Bacillus anthracoides.” A Study of its Biological Characters and Relationships and its Pathogenic Properties under Experimental Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

A. M. M. Grierson
A. M. M. Grierson
Affiliation:
From the Bacteriology Department, Edinburgh University.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. There occurs in nature an organism belonging to the group of Gram-positive aerobic sporing bacilli which closely resembles B. anthracis, especially in its cultural characters.

2. These organisms occur commonly in materials that are frequently examined for the presence of B. anthracis.

3. The B. anthracoides is pathogenic to guinea-pigs and mice under experimental conditions, and would appear to occupy a position between the virulent B. anthracis and the non-pathogenic members of the group of aerobic sporing bacilli, e.g. B. subtilis, B. mesentericus.

4. Subcutaneous injection of cultures of B. anthracoides produces a local inflammation with gelatinous oedema and a fatal septicaemia.

5. Only large doses of living organisms are lethal and attempts to increase the virulence of this organism by various methods have not proved successful.

6. Individual animals vary considerably in their resistance to the organism.

7. With the exception of B. anthracis, the B. anthracoides contrasts with the other members of the group in its pathogenic properties under experimental conditions. Twenty-five strains of this organism have been isolated, each of which possesses pathogenic properties. The pathogenicity of 49 strains of other representatives of the group has been tested, and only one of these was found to have lethal effects.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , March 1928 , pp. 306 - 320
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1928

References

REFERENCES

Axenfeld, (1908). The Bacteriology of the Eye.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baenziger, and Silberschmidt, (1902). Bericht über die 30te Versammlung der ophthalmo logischen Gesellschaft.Google Scholar
Bainbridge, (1903). J. Path. and Bact. 8, 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bais, (1927). J. Infect. Diseases, 40, 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergey, (1923). Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, p. 278.Google Scholar
Bullock, and Cramer, (1919). Proc. Royal Soc. Sect. B, p. 513.Google Scholar
Burri, (1894). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Orig. Abt. I, 3, 81.Google Scholar
Chester, (1904). A review of the B. subtilis group of bacteria. Centralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. II, 13, 737.Google Scholar
Cohn, (1875). Beiträge zur Biologie, I.Google Scholar
Ehrenberg, (1838). Infusionsthierchen als volkommene Organismen. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Flugge, (1886). Die Mikroorganismen.Google Scholar
Ford, (1927). Text-book of Bacteriology, p. 660.Google Scholar
Gourfein, (1904). Internat. Ophthal. Congress, Lucerne, Verhandl. B.S. p. 11 (quoted by Axenfeld, 1908).Google Scholar
Hallermann, (1925). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Orig. Abt. I, 96, 419.Google Scholar
Hartleb, and Stutzer, (1897). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. II, 3, 81.Google Scholar
Hüppe, and Wood, (1889). Berlin. klin. Wochenschr. p. 16.Google Scholar
Hutyra, and Marek, (1926). Special Pathology and Therapeutics of the Diseases of DomesticAnimals. 3rd English ed.Google Scholar
Jarmai, (1913). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Orig. Abt. I, 70, 72.Google Scholar
Kayser, (1902). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Orig. Abt. I, 33, 241.Google Scholar
Kelemen, (1924). Gyo'gya'szat, 64, 512, 531, 548, 561. (Abstr. in Centalbl. d. ges. Tuberkfg. 1925, 24, 22.)Google Scholar
Kohler, (1921). Centralbl. f. Bakt. I Abt. Referate 72, 339.Google Scholar
Legros, and Lecene, (1901). Compt. rend. Soc. de Biol. 53, 680.Google Scholar
Lehmann, and Neumann, (1927). Bakteriologische Diagnostik. München, 2, 598.Google Scholar
McFarland, (1898). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Orig. Abt. I, 24, 556.Google Scholar
Michalski, (1904). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Orig. Abt. I, 36, 212.Google Scholar
Migula, (1900). System der Bakterien, 2, 515.Google Scholar
Page, (1909). J. Hygiene, 9, 361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ponder, (1912). J. Path. and Bact. 16, 140.Google Scholar
Seitz, (1913). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Orig. Abt. I, 70, 113.Google Scholar
Sheen, and Klein, (1915). Lancet, i, 1292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silberschmidt, (1903). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 17, 268.Google Scholar
Stregulina, (1906). Centralbl. f. Bakt. I Abt. Referate 38, 352.Google Scholar
Stueber, (1921). Ohio state Med. J. 17, 175.Google Scholar
Stutzer, (1898). Centralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. II, 4, 31.Google Scholar
Sweany, and Pinner, (1925). J. Infect. Diseases, 37, 340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyzzer, (1917). J. Med. Research, 37 (N.S. 32), 307.Google Scholar
Zikes, (1903). Centalbl. J. Bakt. I Abt. Referate 32, 389.Google Scholar