1887

Abstract

SUMMARY

and were found to be sensitive to complement-mediated killing by fresh normal human serum but far less so to sera of the mouse, rat or rabbit. but not was sensitive to the microbicidal activity of adult fowl serum. was slightly sensitive to the latter serum. Day-old-chick serum was unable to kill either or even when undiluted serum was used. When human serum was absorbed at 4° by dense suspensions of dead organisms it was found that all antimicrobial activity against the three organisms was absorbed only when the homologous organism was used as the absorbing strain. This suggests that minor somatic antigenic differences occur between the three related organisms. was extremely sensitive to the action of monospecific rabbit antisera. However, serum concentrations which were highly effective against were less effective for Even highly microbicidal serum concentrations were unable to kill 100% of the within the time period of the test. The relevance of these findings to the known differences in the virulence of these three salmonellas for the mouse and the chicken is discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-46-2-247
1967-02-01
2022-01-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/46/2/mic-46-2-247.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-46-2-247&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Adler F. L. 1953; Bactericidal action of normal sera against a strain of Salmonella typhosa. J. Immunol 70:69
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Collins F. M., Mackaness G. B., Blanden R. V. 1966; Infection immunity as the basis of resistance to Salmonella infections. J. exp. Med 124:601
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Davis B. D., Mingioli E. S. 1950; Mutants of E. coli requiring methionine and vitamin b12. J. Bact 60:17
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Fisher M. W., Manning M. C. 1958; Studies on the immuno-therapy of bacterial infections. I. The comparative effectiveness of human globulin against various bacterial species in mice. J. Immunol 81:29
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Gordon J., Carter H. S. 1932; The bactericidal power of normal serum. J. Path. Bact 25:549
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Kauffmann F. 1954 The Enterobacteriaceae, 2nd. Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard;
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Mackie T. J., Finkelstein M. H. 1928; The bactericidins of normal serum: Their characters, occurrence in various animals and the susceptibility of different bacteria to their action. J. Hyg., Camb 32:1
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Mackie and McCartney’s Handbook of Bacteriology 1962 Cruickshank R. , 10th. London: Livingstone, Ltd;
  9. Michael J. G., Whitby J. L., Landy M. 1962; Studies on natural antibodies to Gram-negative bacteria. J. exp. Med 115:131
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Muschel L. H., Chamberlin R. H., Osawa E. 1958; Bactericidal activity of normal serum against bacterial cultures. I. Activity against Salmonella typhi strains. Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med 97376
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Rosenberg L. T., Tachibana D. K. 1962; Activity of mouse complement. J. Immunol 89:861
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Skarness R. C., Watson D. W. 1957; Antimicrobial factors of normal tissues and fluids. Bact. Rev 21:273
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Topley and Wilson’s Principles of Bacteriology and Immunity 1964, 5th. Wilson G. S., Miles A. A. London: Edward Arnold and Co;
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-46-2-247
Loading
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-46-2-247
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error