Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-25T01:03:11.974Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on poliomyelitis virus: II. The immunogenic potency of live and inactivated virus in guinea-pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

J. W. F. Hampton ,
A. Polson  and
Golda Selzer
J. W. F. Hampton
Affiliation:
Laboratories of the Poliomyelitis Research Foundation, Johannesburg, and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research Virus Research Unit, Medical School, University of Cape Town, Cape Town
A. Polson
Affiliation:
Laboratories of the Poliomyelitis Research Foundation, Johannesburg, and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research Virus Research Unit, Medical School, University of Cape Town, Cape Town
Golda Selzer
Affiliation:
Laboratories of the Poliomyelitis Research Foundation, Johannesburg, and the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research Virus Research Unit, Medical School, University of Cape Town, Cape Town
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.

The antigenic response of guinea-pigs to live poliomyelitis viruses of all three types has been studied and the loss of antigenicity involved in inactivation by formaldehyde and by ultra-violet light have been determined.

We wish to acknowledge the debt we owe to the late Prof. M. van den Ende for his great help and interest in this work, and we are grateful for the assistance received from Dr H. Malherbe and Ruth Harwin in carrying out many of the titrations, and from Dr T. Mead for synthesizing some 1:4-diphenylbutadiene for use as a filter for ultra-violet light.

We also have to thank G. S. Turner, T. Norcott, Doreen Deeks and Margaret Pakes for their technical help.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 56 , Issue 2 , June 1958 , pp. 260 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1958

References

REFERENCES

Cartwright, T. E., Ritchie, A. E. & Lauffer, M. A. (1956). Virology, 2, 689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dick, G. W. A., Schwerdt, C. E., Huber, W., Sharpless, G. R. & Howe, H. A. (1951). Amer. J. Hyg. 53, 131.Google Scholar
Fraenkel-Conrat, H. & Mecham, D. K. (1949). J. biol. Chem. 177, 477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gard, S., Wesslen, T., Fagraeus, A., Svedmyr, A. & Olin, G. (1952). Arch. ges. Virusforsch. 6, 401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kasha, M. (1948). J. Opt. Soc. Amer. 38, 929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, S. & Dalldorf, G. (1956). Amer. J. Hyg. 64, 243.Google Scholar
Largier, J. (Personal communication).Google Scholar
Morgan, I. M., Howe, H. A. & Bodian, D. (1947). Amer. J. Hyg. 45, 379.Google Scholar
Polson, A. & Hampton, J. W. F. (1957). J. Hyg., Camb., 55, 344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salk, J. E., Youngner, J. S. & Ward, E. N. (1954). Amer. J. Hyg. 60, 214.Google Scholar