Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T13:40:03.556Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Titration of Viruses in Baby Mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

T. S. L. Beswick
T. S. L. Beswick
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, University of Cambridge*
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.

This paper describes efforts to determine the LD50 for mice, 24–48 hr. old, of pools of four strains of Herpes simplex virus, using the intraperitoneal route of inoculation.

The results have been analysed in an attempt to account for the very irregular relationship between dose of virus and mortality which was observed.

It is clear that, in addition to those difficulties which beset the interpretation of the results of any biological assay, titrations in very young animals raise difficulties of their own. The principal sources of difficulty are the high and uncertain non-specific mortality, the tendency of the mothers to eat their babies and individual variation between the litters. The latter, it is suggested, is mainly a reflexion of differences between the mothers, at least when a closely inbred strain of test animals is used.

Interesting and unexpected correlations were observed between the dose of virus and the proportion of mice eaten by the mothers and between the strain of virus and the proportion of mice eaten by the mothers.

It is emphasized that the results of titrations in very young animals must be interpreted with the greatest care and that in carrying out titrations the litter rather than the individual baby mouse should be regarded as the unit. Mice eaten by the mothers are probably best ignored altogether, although there are grave theoretical objections to doing this.

I should like to thank Professor H. R. Dean for his advice and encouragement. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the technical help which I have received throughout this investigation from Miss D. Sutton. I am also indebted to Dr M. G. P. Stoker for advice and for making available facilities in his laboratory; to Dr W. L. Smith and Mr T. H. Hollingsworth of the Department of Human Ecology, Cambridge, for advice on some of the statistical problems raised; to Miss M. E. Skinner and her staff on the ‘Animal Floor’ of this department, without whose help it would not have been possible to ensure that the large number of litters used were available when required; and to those of my colleagues who have been good enough to offer advice and criticism, especially Mr Douglas Annear.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , September 1955 , pp. 339 - 356
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1955

References

Beveridge, W. I. B. & Burnet, F. M. (1946). The cultivation of viruses and rickettsiae in the chick embryo. Spec. Rep. Ser., med. Res. Coun., Lond., no. 256.Google Scholar
Bliss, C. I. (1935). The calculation of the dosage mortality curve. Ann. appl. Biol. 22, 134–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalldorf, G., Sickles, G. M., Plager, H. & Gifford, R. (1949). A virus recovered from the feces of ‘poliomyelitis’ patients pathogenic for suckling mice. J. exp. Med. 89, 567–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fisher, R. A. (1947). The Design of Experiments, 4th ed. pp. 210et seq. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Kilbourne, E. D. & Horsfall, F. L. (1951 a). Primary Herpes simplex virus infection of the adult. Arch. intern. Med. 88, 495–502.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kilborne, E. D. & Horsfall, F. L. (1951 b). Studies of Herpes simplex virus in newborn mice. J. Immunol. 67, 321–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laboratory Animals Bureau (1953). Catalogue of Uniform Strains of Laboratory Animals maintained in Great Britain. Serial No. 776a, Medical Research Council Laboratories, London, N.W. 3.Google Scholar
Lennette, E. H. & Koprowski, H. (1944). Influence of age on the susceptibility of mice to infection with certain neurotropic viruses. J. Immunol. 49, 175–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maggiora, A. & Valenti, G. L.Ueber den Virus des exsudativen Typhus bei Huhnern. Z. Hyg. InfektKr. 48, 280–326.Google Scholar
Melnick, J. L. (1950). Studies on the Coxsackie viruses: properties, immunological aspects and distribution in nature. Bull. N. Y. Acad. Med. 26, 342–56.Google ScholarPubMed
Melnick, J. L. & Ledinko, N. (1950). Immunological reactions of the Coxsackie viruses.I. The neutralization test: technic and application. J. exp. Med. 92, 463–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigel, M. M. (1952). The influence of age on susceptibility to virus infections with particular reference to laboratory animals. Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 6, 247–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Speck, R. S., Jawetz, E. & Coleman, V. R. (1951). Studies on Herpes simplex virus. I. The stability and preservation of egg-adapted Herpes simplex virus. J. Bact. 61, 253–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Theiler, M. (1930). Studies on the action of yellow fever virus in mice. Ann. trop. Med. Parasitol. 24, 249–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trevan, J. W. (1927). The error of determination of toxicity. Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 101, 483–514.Google Scholar