Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T11:31:20.115Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the variation of the specific phase of Salmonella amersfoort (n.sp.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

M. W. Henning
M. W. Henning
Affiliation:
From the Department of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, and Onderstepoort Laboratories
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.

A new type of pathogenic Salmonella for the fowl has been described. Its somatic “O” antigen corresponds with factors VI, VII of potsdam. It occurs only in the specific phase, but its flagellar “H” antigen contains at least two distinct and separate antigenic complexes, which commonly occur in organisms that are not even remotely related. The one complex (the first, en-, antigen, α phase of Kauffmann and Mitsui) contains factors enx, which represent also the factors of the specific phase of abortus-equi. The other complex (the second, d-, antigen, β phase of Kauffmann and Mitsui) contains factor d, which comprises the type phase of stanley, muenchen and typhi.

Single cells containing factors enx on multiplying constantly yield variants containing factor d as well as offspring that retain antigenic complex enx. In the same way single cells containing apparently only specific factor d will bring forth new cells, most of which retain the parental antigenic structure, but a small proportion of the progeny will acquire specific factors enx instead of d.

When a broth culture of amersfoort in either the enx or d phase in an apparently pure form, as judged by the agglutination test, using heterologous sera which contain agglutinins either against factors enx (or en) or d, is used for the preparation of sera, agglutinins of approximately the same titre for both variants are produced in the sera.

As a result of the information given above the following antigenic structure is proposed for Salmonella amersfoort:

Somatic “O” antigen—VI, VII.

Flagellar “H” antigen—

(1) α phase of Kauffmann and Mitsui—enx.

(2) β phase of Kauffmann and Mitsui—d.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , October 1937 , pp. 561 - 570
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1937

References

Andrewes, F. (1922). J. Path. Bact. 25, 505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arkwright, J. A. (1921). J. Path. Bact. 24, 36–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, H. (1935). Z. Hyg. 117, 353–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridges, R. F. & Scott, M. W. (1935). J. Roy. Army Med. Corps, 65, 221–3.Google Scholar
Brown, M. H. (1936). Canad. Public Health J. 27, 171–5.Google Scholar
Craigie, J. & Brandon, K. F. (1936). Canad. Public Health J. 27, 165–70.Google Scholar
Felix, A. & Bhatnagar, S. S. (1935). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 16, 422–34.Google Scholar
Felix, A., Bhatnagar, S. S. & Pitt, R. M. (1934). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 15, 346–54.Google Scholar
Felix, A. & Pitt, R. M. (1934). J. Path. Bact. 38, 409–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felix, A. & Pitt, R. M. (1934). Lancet 07. ii, 186.Google Scholar
Felix, A. & Pitt, R. M. (1935). J. Hygiene, 35, 428–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felix, A. & Pitt, R. M. (1936). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 17, 81–6.Google Scholar
Henning, M. W. (1936). J. Hygiene, 36, 525–31.Google Scholar
Kauffman, F. (1935). Z. f. Hyg. 116, 617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffman, F. (1936a). Z. f. Hyg. 118, 540–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffman, F. (1936b). Z. f. Hyg. 119, 103–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffmann, F. & Mitsui, C. (1930). Z. f. Hyg. 111, 740–8.Google Scholar
Lovell, R. (1932). Bull. Hyg. 7, 405–15.Google Scholar
Mason, J. H. (1933). J. S. Afr. Vet. Med. Ass. 4, 1–2.Google Scholar
Salmonella Sub-Committee of the Nomenclature Committee of the International Society for Microbiology (1934). J. Hygiene, 34, 333–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholtens, R. Th. (1936). J. Hygiene, 36, 452.Google Scholar
Smith, J. (1934). J. Hygiene, 34, 351–60.Google Scholar
Tesdal, M. (1936). Z. Hyg. 118, 533–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weil, E. & Felix, A. (1920). Z. Immunitätsf. 1 Teil, Orig. 29, 24–91.Google Scholar
White, P. Bruce (1929). In A System of Bacteriology (issued by Med. Res. Council, London), 4, 86–158.Google Scholar