Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:11:47.212Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Specific and Non-Specific Serum Reactions in Typhus Fever

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

A. Felix
A. Felix
Affiliation:
(From the Bacteriological Department, Lister Institute, London.)
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. In all species of animals tested—rabbit, guinea-pig, chicken and horse—normal agglutinins for B. agglutinabilis U2 are far more abundant than those for B. proteus X 19.

2. Human serum reacts in the same manner. Wassermann negative sera have been employed as normal sera. Their reaction in Weltmann's globulin test was also negative.

3. Wassermann positive sera from cases of syphilis and sera from lepers give distinctly higher agglutination reactions with U2 than normal human sera. On X 19, however, those sera do not exercise any increased agglutinating action.

4. Similar though somewhat stronger reactions with U2 are obtained with typhus sera. However, this reaction is far from being uniformly positive in typhus, while this is the case with the X 19 reaction.

5. The discordance between these results and those published by Wilson and by Fletcher, Lesslar and Lewthwaite is due to the failure by these workers to employ controls of suitable type.

6. In syphilis and leprous sera high titres of agglutination with U2 coincide with globulin-increase as indicated by the Weltmann reaction.

7. The summation effect of the non-specific agglutination by gelatine and the action of specific immune agglutinins, described by Weil, is again demonstrated.

8. The combined action of an abundance of preformed normal agglutinins and of augmented serum colloids is suggested as one of the factors involved in increased heterologous agglutination (polyagglutination).

9. B. agglutinabilis U2 is a typical representative of “polyagglutinable” organisms; B. proteus X 19, however, is not liable to the action of “polyagglutinating” sera.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 31 , Issue 3 , July 1931 , pp. 382 - 402
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1931

References

REFERENCES

Arkwright, J. A. (1921). J. Path. and Bact. 24, 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ballner, F. and Sagasser, R. (1904). Arch. f. Hyg. 51. 245.Google Scholar
Bauer, K. (1921). München. med. Wochenschr. 68, 1251.Google Scholar
Bürgi, E. (1907). Arch. f. Hyg. 62, 239.Google Scholar
Cruickshank, R. (1927). J. Hygiene, 27, 64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delta, C. (1915). Zentralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. i, Orig. 76, 50.Google Scholar
Epstein, E. (1919). Zentralbl. f. Bakt. 83, 255.Google Scholar
Epstein, E. and Morawetz, G. (1917). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 30, 399.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1917). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 26, 602.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1918). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 31, 11.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1929). J. Hygiene, 28, 418.Google Scholar
Felix, A. and Olitzki, L. (1929). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 10, 25.Google Scholar
Felix, A. and Rhodes, M. (1931). J. Hygiene, 31, 225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, W., Lesslar, J. E. and Lewthwaite, R. (1929). Trans. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. London, 23, 57.Google Scholar
Friedberger, E., Zorn, W. and Meissner, G. (1922). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 34, 259.Google Scholar
Gibson, H. J. (1930). J. Hygiene, 30, 337.Google Scholar
Gotschlich, E., Schürmann, and Bloch, (1915). Med. Klin. 11, 1310.Google Scholar
Havens, L. C. (1927). J. Infect. Dis. 40, 479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klausner, E. (1908). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 21, 214.Google Scholar
Kreuscher, A. (1918). Berlin. klin. Wochenschr. 55, 374.Google Scholar
Mamlok, L. (1909). Arch. f. Hyg. 68, 95.Google Scholar
Markl, (1913). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 26, 1234.Google Scholar
Maxcy, K. F. (1929 a). Publ. Health Rep. Washington, 44, 589.Google Scholar
Maxcy, K. F. (1929 b). Publ. Health Rep. Washington, 44, 1735.Google Scholar
Maxcy, K. F. (1929 c). Publ. Health Rep. Washington, 44, 1935.Google Scholar
Mooser, H. (1928). J. Infect. Dis. 43, 261.Google Scholar
Mooser, H. (1929). J. Infect. Dis. 44, 186.Google Scholar
Negre, L. and Raynaud, M. (1911). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, Paris, 25, 619.Google Scholar
Neukirch, P. and Kbeuscher, A. (1919). Beiträge z. Klinik d. Infektionskr. 8, 68.Google Scholar
Nicolle, C. and Comte, C. (1910). Bull. Soc. Path, exotique, 3, 214.Google Scholar
Otto, R. (1919). Deutsche med. Wochenschr. 45, 817.Google Scholar
Otto, R. and Munter, H. (1930). In Kolle, Kraus u. Uhlenhut, Handbuch d. pathog. Mikroorg., Jena, 8, 1107.Google Scholar
Paltauf, R. (1904). In Kolle, Kraus u. Uhlenhut, Handbuch d. pathog. Mikroorg., Jena, 4, Part I, 668.Google Scholar
Paltauf, R. (1913). In Kolle, Kraus u. Uhlenhut, Handbuch d. pathog. Mikroorg., Jena, 2, Part I, 483.Google Scholar
Papamabrku, (1915). Zentralbl.f. Bakt. Abt. i, Orig. 77, 186.Google Scholar
Posselt, and Sagasser, R. (1903). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. No. 24.Google Scholar
Reichenstein, J. (1917). Deutsche med. Wochenschr. 43, 554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizutti, G. and Scordo, F. (1912). Bull. Soc. Path, exotique, 5, 778.Google Scholar
Rocha-Lima, H. Da (1919). Erg. allg. Path. u. path. Anat. 19, 159.Google Scholar
Rotky, H. (1921). Zentralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. I, Orig. 87, 16.Google Scholar
Schiff, F. (1922). Zeitschr.f. Immunitätsf. 33, 511.Google Scholar
Spencer, R. R. and Maxcy, K. F. (1930). Publ. Health Rep. Washington, 45, 440.Google Scholar
Weigl, R. (1923). Zeitschr. f. Hyg. 99, 302.Google Scholar
Weigl, R. (1924). Klin. Wochenschr. 3, 1590, 1636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weigl, R. (1930). Bull. Acad. Polonaise des Sciences et des Lettres, Classe de Médecine, Cracovie, p. 25.Google Scholar
Weil, E. (1904). Zentralbl.f. Bakt. Abt. I, Orig. 37, 98, 426.Google Scholar
Weil, E. (1920). Deutsche med. Wochenschr. 46, 343.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1916). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 29, 974.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1917). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 30, 1509.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1921). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 31, 457.Google Scholar
Weltmann, O. (1916). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 29, 573.Google Scholar
Weltmann, O. (1917). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 30, 408.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1909). J. Hygiene, 9, 316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1910). J. Hygiene, 10, 155.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1920). J. Hygiene, 19, 115.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1927). J. Hygiene, 26, 213.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1929). System of Bacteriology. Med. Res. Council, London, 4, 318.Google Scholar
Wolff, G. (1922). Ergeb. Hyg. Bakt. 5, 532.Google Scholar