Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T08:13:19.295Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the susceptibility of Rickettsia burneti to chemical disinfectants, and on techniques for detecting small numbers of viable organisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

R. A. Malloch  and
M. G. P. Stoker
R. A. Malloch
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, Cambridge University
M. G. P. Stoker
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, Cambridge University
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. The susceptibility of the Henzerling strain of R. burneti to phenol, formalin, ‘Lysol’, ‘Dettol’, ‘Cetavlon’, and ether was investigated.

2. Preliminary investigation of techniques showed that, with one passage, guinea-pigs, mice and fertile hens' eggs were of similar susceptibility to small numbers of viable organisms, but the greater feasibility of sub-passage from the eggs increased the sensitivity and made this the technique of choice.

3. Under the condition of testing, ‘Lysol’ was the most active disinfectant. Treatment of the rickettsial seed with 1% ‘Lysol’ at 37° C. was in fact the only effective method for destroying completely the infectivity in 3 hr.

4. Some living organisms survived contact for 3 hr. with each of the other chemicals in concentrations up to 1%. A rough quantitative comparison of these agents was made.

5. The failure of 1% phenol to destroy R. burneti raised the possibility of this organism surviving as a contaminant in vaccine lymph. This problem was investigated and is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 50 , Issue 4 , December 1952 , pp. 502 - 514
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1952

References

REFERENCES

Huebner, R. J., Jellison, W. L., Beck, M. D., Parker, R. R. & Shepard, C. C. (1948). Q fever studies in Southern California. I. Recovery of R. burneti from raw milk. Pub. Health Rep. Wash. 63, 214.Google Scholar
Huebner, R. J., Jellison, W. L., Beck, M. D. & Wilcox, F. P. (1949). Q fever studies in Southern California. III. Effects of pasteurization on survival of C. burneti in naturally infected milk. Pub. Health Rep. Wash. 64, 499.Google Scholar
Marmion, B. P., Maccallum, F. O., Rowlands, A. & Thiel, C. C. (1951). The effect of pasteurization on milk containing Rickettsia burneti. Monthly Bull. Min. of Health and Pub. Health Lab. Ser. 10, 119.Google Scholar
Mcclean, D. (1949). ‘Purification’ of vaccine lymph. Lancet, 2, 476.Google Scholar
Ransom, S. E. & Huebner, R. J. (1951). Studies on the resistance of Coxiella burneti to physical and chemical agents. American J. Hyg. 53, 110.Google Scholar
Reed, L. J. & Muench, H. (1938). Simple method of estimating 50 per cent endpoints. American J. Hyg. 27, 493.Google Scholar