Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:43:19.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Utilisation of Citrates and the Fermentation of Cellobiose by Strains of Bacterium Coli Isolated from Human Faeces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

C. E. Skinner  and
H. G. Brudnoy
C. E. Skinner
Affiliation:
Department of Bacteriology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S.A.
H. G. Brudnoy
Affiliation:
Department of Bacteriology and Immunology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, U.S.A.
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. Of 585 strains of lactose-fermenting aerobes each isolated from faeces of a different person, 501 did not utilise citrate or ferment cellobiose; 20 were citrate negative and cellobiose positive; 27 were cellobiose negative and citrate positive; and 37 were positive to both tests.

2. Almost 10 per cent, of the strains isolated were indol negative.

3. One culture was methyl-red negative and Voges-Proskauer positive. Two were positive to both tests. The rest were methyl-red positive and Voges-Proskauer negative.

4. It is concluded that the results are not favourable to the use of the citrate or the cellobiose test in routine water analysis.

5. A discussion of the taxonomy of the lactose-fermenting aerobes is given. Only two species, Bacterium coli (Escherich) L. and N., and Bacterium aerogenes (Escherich) Chester, are recognised.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , October 1932 , pp. 529 - 534
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1932

References

(1)Brewster, K. C. (1929). United Fruit Company Medical Dept. 18th Annual Report, 285.Google Scholar
(2)Brown, J. W. and Skinner, C. E. (1930). J. Bact. 20, 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3)Burke-Gaffney, J. J. O'D. (1932). J. Hyg. 32, 85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Clark, W. M. and Lubs, H. A. (1915). J. Infect. Dis. 17, 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5)Jones, H. N. and Wise, L. E. (1926). J. Bact. 11, 359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Gray, J. D. A. (1932). J. Hyg. 32, 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(7)Hicks, E. P. (1927). J. Hyg. 26, 357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8)Koser, S. A. (1923). J. Bact. 8, 439.Google Scholar
(9)Koser, S. A. (1924). J. Bact. 9, 59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10)Koser, S. A. (1924). J. Infect. Dis. 35, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11)Koser, S. A. (1924). J. Amer. Water Works Assoc. 12, 200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12)Koser, S. A. (1926). J. Infect. Dis. 38, 506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)Koser, S. A. (1927). Am. J. Pub. Health, 17, 1178.Google Scholar
(14)Leiter, L. W. (1929). Am. J. Hyg. 9, 705.Google Scholar
(15)Levine, M. (1921). Iowa State Coll. Engineering Expt. Stat. Bull. 62.Google Scholar
(16)Lewis, J. M. (1928). Ztbl. Bakt. II 75, 45.Google Scholar
(17)Murray, T. J. and Skinner, C. E. (1925). Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. and Med. 23, 104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(18)Pawan, J. L. (1925). Ann. Trop. Med. and Parasit. 19, 319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(19)Ruchthoft, C. C., Kallas, J. G., Chinn, B. and Coulter, E. W. (1931). J. Bact. 22, 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(20)Ryti, E. (1930). Acta Soc. Med. Fennicae, “Duodecim,” Ser. A, 13, fasc. 3.Google Scholar
(21)Simmons, J. S. (1926). J. Infect. Dis. 39, 208.Google Scholar
(22)Tonney, F. O. and Noble, R. E. (1931). J. Infect. Dis. 48, 413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(23)Werkman, C. H. and Gillen, G. F. (1932). J. Bact. 23, 167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar