Hostname: page-component-cc8bf7c57-xrnlw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-11T19:21:53.105Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Zone electrophoresis of enteroviruses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

A. Polson  and
D. Deeks
A. Polson
Affiliation:
The C.S.I.R. and U.C.T. Virus Research Unit, Medical School, Cape Town
D. Deeks
Affiliation:
The C.S.I.R. and U.C.T. Virus Research Unit, Medical School, 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.

Zone electrophoresis in a sugar concentration gradient is proposed as a complementary method for the biological classification of the enteroviruses. Under standardized experimental conditions it was found that the majority of the Coxsackie A viruses and the polioviruses have a common, low electrophoretic mobility. sackie A viruses and the polioviruses have a common, low electrophoretic mobility. The impression was gained that the ECHO viruses show the highest electrophoretic mobility, though in some cases there is overlapping with the Coxsackie Bs. The mobility of both of these groups is considerably higher than that of the other two.

Zone electrophoresis appears to be an excellent method for the purification of the enteroviruses prior to the production of specific precipitating antibodies.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 60 , Issue 2 , June 1962 , pp. 217 - 234
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1962

References

REFERENCES

Cramer, R., Lerner, K. D. & Polson, A. (1957). Sci. Tools, 4, 1.Google Scholar
Elford, W. J. (1938). In Doerr-Hallauer, Handbuch der Virusforschung. 1 Hälfte, Wien.Google Scholar
Hoyer, B. H., Bolton, E. T., Ormsbee, R. A., LeBouvier, G., Ritter, O. B. & Larson, C. L. (1958). Science, 127, 859.Google Scholar
Polson, A. & Cramer, R. (1958). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 29, 187.Google Scholar
Polson, A. & Hampton, J. W. F. (1957). J. Hyg., Camb., 55, 344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polson, A., Hampton, J. W. F. & Deeks, D. (1960). J. Hyg., Camb., 58, 419.Google Scholar
Polson, A. & Selzer, G. (1954). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 14, 67.Google Scholar
Polson, A., Selzer, G. & van den Ende, M. (1957). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 24, 600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regenmortel, , Van, M. H. V. (1960). Virology, 12, 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sickles, G. M., Mutterer, M. & Plager, H. (1959). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol., N. Y., 102, 742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svensson, H. (1960). Lab. Manual Anal. Meth. Protein Chem. Vol. 1.Google Scholar
Svensson, H. & Valmet, E. (1955). Sci. Tools, 2, 11.Google Scholar