Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T10:23:35.459Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leptospiral infections in rats. The presence of specific leptospiral immune bodies in the serum and their relationship to carrier conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

J. Smith
J. Smith
Affiliation:
From the City Hospital Laboratory, Aberdeen
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. One hundred and seventeen rats have been examined, and thirty-two or 27·3% were found to harbour virulent Leptospira.

2. The correlation of carrier conditions with the presence of immune bodies in the serum showed:

(a) Leptospira-positive, sero-reaction negative, four or 3·4%.

(b) Leptospira-positive, sero-reaction positive, twenty-eight or 23·8%.

(c) Leptospira-negative, sero-reaction positive, twenty-one or 17·9%.

(d) Leptospira negative, sero-reaction negative, sixty-four or 54·7%.

3. The titres of the immune bodies in their sera have been determined. A positive reaction in the lower dilutions of the serum does not necessarily indicate that the rat is a carrier of virulent Leptospira.

4. There is evidence to show that there is a greater incidence of carriers amongst fully grown animals than in the young rodents.

5. Rodents which have been killed prior to examination in the laboratory are unsuitable for the determination of the presence of Leptospira.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 38 , Issue 5 , September 1938 , pp. 521 - 526
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1938

References

REFERENCES

Alston, J. M. & Brown, H. C. (1937). Proc. Roy. Soc. Med. 30, 47.Google Scholar
Brown, H. C. & Davis, J. C. (1927). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 8, 397.Google Scholar
Buchanan, G. (1927). Spec. Rep. Ser. Med. Res. Coun., Lond., 113, p. 37.Google Scholar
Coles, A. C. (1918). Parasitology, 11, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coppinger, C. J. (1936). J. R. Army Med. Corps, 66, 82.Google Scholar
Davidson, L. S. P., Campbell, R. M., Rae, H. J. & Smith, J. (1934). Brit. Med. J. 11, 1137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, W. (1927). Trans. Roy. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. 21, 265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foulerton, A. G. R. (1919). J. Path. Bact. 23, 78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaneko, K., Kotori, S. & Aoki, Y. (1936). Trop. Dis. Bull. 33, 60.Google Scholar
Kristensen, B. (1935). Ugeskr. Laeg. 97, 1033.Google Scholar
Langworthy, V. & Moore, A. E. (1927). J. Inf. Dis. 41, 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Middleton, A. D. (1929). J. Hyg., Camb., 29, 219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. (1924). Report M.O.H. Aberdeen, p. 56.Google Scholar
Smith, J. (1937). J. Hyg., Camb., 37, 262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. & Tulloch, W. J. (1937). Lancet, 2, 846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, A. C. (1922). Amer. J. Trop. Med. 11, 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, J. & Goyle, A. N. (1931). Indian Med. Res. Mem. No. 20, p. 144.Google Scholar