Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m42fx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T06:40:14.301Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evidence for a two-stage model of microbial infection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

G. G. Meynell  and
Joan Maw
G. G. Meynell
Affiliation:
Guinness-Lister Research Unit, Lister Institute of Preventive Medicine, Chelsea Bridge Road, London, S. W. 1
Joan Maw
Affiliation:
Guinness-Lister Research Unit, Lister Institute of Preventive Medicine, Chelsea Bridge Road, London, S. W. 1
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

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.

Colony counts on mice given the same number of Salmonella always differ considerably. However, the standard error of the mean log count does not increase after the first 1·5 hr. of infection until the 8th or 10th day. These infections therefore appear to pass through an initial stage lasting a few hours, in which a varying proportion of the inoculum is killed, followed by a prolonged second stage in which the scatter in individual colony counts remains constant.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 66 , Issue 2 , June 1968 , pp. 273 - 280
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1968

References

Armitage, P., Meynell, G. G. & Williams, T. (1965). Birth-death and other models for microbial infection. Nature, Lond. 207, 570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavalli, L. & Magni, G. (1943). Quantitative Untersuchungen über die Virulenz. Zentbl. Bakt. ParasitKde (Abt. 1, Orig.) 150, 353.Google Scholar
Druett, H. A., Robinson, J. M., Henderson, D. W., Packman, L. & Peacock, S. (1956). Studies on respiratory infection. II. The influence of aerosol particle size on infection of the guinea-pig with Pasteurella pestis. J. Hyg., Camb. 54, 37.Google Scholar
Eckert, E. A., Beard, D. & Beard, J. W. (1951). Dose-response relations in experimental transmission of avian erythromyeloblastic leukosis. I. Host-response to the virus. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 12, 447.Google Scholar
Eckert, E. A., Beard, D. & Beard, J. W. (1954). Dose-response relations in experimental transmission of avian erythromyeloblastic leukosis. III. Titration of the virus. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 14, 1055.Google Scholar
Eckert, E. A., Beard, D. & Beard, J. W. (1956). Virus of avian erythroblastosis. I. Titration of infectivity. J. natn. Cancer Inst. 16, 1099.Google ScholarPubMed
Gard, S. (1940). Encephalomyelitis of mice. II. A method for the measurement of virus activity. J. exp. Med. 72, 69.Google Scholar
Gard, S. (1943). Purification of poliomyelitis viruses. Experiments on murine and human strains. Acta med. scand. (Suppl.), no 143.Google Scholar
Hobson, D. (1957). Chronic bacterial carriage in survivors of experimental mouse typhoid. J. Path. Bact. 73, 399.Google Scholar
Litchfield, J. T. Jr., (1949). A method for rapid graphic solution of time-per cent effect curves. J. Pharmac. exp. Ther. 97, 399.Google Scholar
Mackaness, G. B. (1962). Cellular resistance to infection. J. exp. Med. 116, 381.Google Scholar
Martin, A. R. (1946). The use of mice in the examination of drugs for chemotherapeutic activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. J. Path. Bact. 58, 580.Google Scholar
Maw, J. & Meynell, G. G. (1968). The true kinetics of salmonella infection determined by the superinfecting phage technique. (In preparation).Google Scholar
Meynell, G. G. (1957). Inherently low precision of infectivity titrations using a quantal response. Biometrics, 13, 149.Google Scholar
Meynell, G. G. (1963). Interpretation of distributions of individual response times in microbial infections. Nature, Lond. 198, 970.Google Scholar
Meynell, G. G. & Meynell, E. W. (1958). The growth of micro-organisms in vivo with particular reference to the relation between dose and latent period. J. Hyg., Camb. 56, 323.Google Scholar
Meynell, G. G. & Stocker, B. A. D. (1957). Some hypotheses on the aetiology of fatal infections in partially resistant hosts and their application to mice challenged with Salmonella paratyphi B or Salmonella typhi-murium by intraperitoneal injection. J. gen. Microbiol. 16, 38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meynell, G. G. & Williams, T. (1967). Estimating the date of infection from individual response times. J. Hyg., Camb. 65, 131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miles, A. A. (1956). Nonspecific defense reactions in bacterial infections. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 66, 356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, A. A. (1963). Mechanisms of immunity in bacterial infections. Recent Progress in Microbiology, 8, 399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, D. B. W. & Macleod, D. R. E. (1954). The relation between dose and mortality for Salmonella dublin. J. Hyg., Camb. 52, 18.Google Scholar
Roth, N. G., DeArmon, I. A. Jr., & Lively, D. H. (1956). Survival time as a rapid method of determining virulence with Bacillus anthracis. J. Bact. 72, 666.Google Scholar
Sartwell, P. E. (1950). The distribution of incubation periods of infectious disease. Am. J. Hyg. 51, 310.Google ScholarPubMed
Sartwell, P. E. (1966), The incubation period and the dynamics of infectious disease. Am. J. Epidem. 83, 204.Google Scholar
Shortley, G. & Wilkins, J. R. (1965). Independent-action and birth-death models in experimental microbiology. Bact. Rev. 29, 102.Google Scholar
Williams, Smith H. (1956). The susceptibility of different breeds of chickens to experimental Salmonella gallinarum infection. Poult. Sci. 35, 701.Google Scholar
Williams, T. (1965 a). The basic birth death model for microbial infections. Jl R. statist. Soc. 27, 338.Google Scholar
Williams, T. (1965 b). The distribution of response times in a birth-death process. Biometrika 52, 581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, T. & Meynell, G. G. (1967). Time-dependence and count-dependence in microbial infection. Nature, Lond. 214, 473.Google Scholar