Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T05:35:02.020Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of relative humidity on swine vesicular disease virus in dried films before and during formaldehyde fumigation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Elizabeth Batty ,
Yvonne L. Farmer ,
A. J. Breame  and
W. Bruce
Elizabeth Batty
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0NF
Yvonne L. Farmer
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0NF
A. J. Breame
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0NF
W. Bruce
Affiliation:
The Animal Virus Research Institute, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0NF
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

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.

Swine Vesicular Disease virus (SVDV) did not survive drying at high relative humidities (r.h.) but there was little virus loss at low r.h.

Purified virus dried in films was inactivated by formaldehyde fumigation only at high r.h. Inactivation was also influenced by the suspending medium from which the virus was dried. Purified virus resuspended in distilled water and then dried, was rapidly killed, but that in tissue culture fluid survived.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 82 , Issue 2 , April 1979 , pp. 255 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

References

REFERENCES

Bachrach, H. L., Breese, S. S., Callis, J. J., Hess, W. R. & Patty, R. E. (1957). Inactivation of foot-and-mouth disease virus by pH and temperature changes and by formaldehyde. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine 95, 147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beeby, M. M., Kingston, D. & Whitehouse, C. E. (1967). Experiments on terminal disinfection of cubicles with formaldehyde. Journal of Hygiene 65, 115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, F. & Cartwright, B. (1963). Purification of radioactive foot-and-mouth disease virus. Nature, London 199, 1168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Castro, M. P. (1964). Behaviour of the foot-and-mouth disease virus in cell cultures: suceptibility of the IB-RS-2 cell line. Archivos do Instituto biologico, São Paulo 31, 63.Google Scholar
Gard, S. & Maaløe, O. (1959). Inactivation of viruses. In The Viruses vol. 1, (ed. Burnett, F. M. and Stanley, W. D.), ch. v. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hoffman, K. & Spiner, D. (1970). Effect of relative humidity on the pentrability and sporicidal activity of formaldehyde. Applied Microbiology 20, 611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nash, T. (1953). The colorimetric estimation of formaldehyde by means of the Hantzsch Reaction. Biochemical Journal 55, 416.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
P.H.L.S.Committee on Formaldehyde Disinfection (1958). The practical aspects of formaldehyde fumigation. Monthly Bulletin of the Ministry of Health and the Public Health Laboratory Service 17, 270.Google Scholar
Salk, J. E., Krech, U., Youngner, J. S., Bennett, M. B., Lewis, L. J. & Bazeley, P. L. (1954). Formaldehyde treatment and safety testing of experimental poliomyelitis vaccines. American Journal of Public Health 44, 563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taylor, L. A., Barbeito, M. S. & Gremillion, G. G. (1969). Paraformaldehyde for surface sterilization and detoxification. Applied Microbiology 17, 614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, J. F.Formaldehyde, 3rd ed. (1964), p. 570. New York: Reinhold.Google Scholar
Wesslén, T. & Dinter, Z. (1957). The inactivation of foot-and-mouth disease virus by formalin. Archiv für die gesamte Virusforschung 7, 394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed