Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T14:10:24.217Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

387. Bacteriophage in typing lactic streptococci

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

Agnes A. Nichols  and
Margery Hoyle
Agnes A. Nichols
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
Margery Hoyle
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The present position in the problem of ‘slow’ starter due to phage lysis has been reviewed.

2. The sources of some 450 strains of lactic streptococci, collected from a wide field, are given. The methods used in their selection for use as starter together with storage conditions, suitable to maintain their activity, have been discussed.

3. The sources from which phages for the lactic streptococci have been obtained and the methods of ‘building up’ a phage of high titre from dairy products, have been discussed. Attempts have been made to isolate phages from pig-faeces, after feeding starter strains to pigs, to adapt phages to strains previously unattacked and to establish interrelationship of the phages and strains of lactic streptococci with phages and strains of enterococci.

4. The strains of lactic streptococci have been classified in eleven phage types by modifying a method described for the phage typing of staphylococci. Identification of a type has been based on the reactions of a ‘phage pattern’ and not on the reaction of a single phage. It has not been possible to adapt one phage to lyse all the strains of one type and to replace the several phages on which type identification originally depended but, adapted phages have indicated the subdivision of some types.

5. The application of the ‘phage-resistant carrier’ strain phenomenon to phage typing has been investigated. The results have helped in the typing of some strains.

6. Phages used in typing the strains have been classified by means of antiphage sera, prepared from a selection of the test phages. On the data presented the majority of the phages were divided into three groups and the results have been discussed with reference to the phage types suggested.

7. The significance of phage typing, adaptation of phage and phage carrying in the selection of starter strains has been considered and the best method of applying this information to the control of ‘slowness’ in cheese factories has been discussed.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 16 , Issue 2 , October 1949 , pp. 167 - 208
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1949

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1)Whitehead, H. R. & Cox, G. A. (1935). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. 16, 319.Google Scholar
(2)Nelson, F. E. & Hammer, B. W. (1937). J. Dairy Sci. 20, 444.Google Scholar
(3)Babel, F. J. (1946). J. Dairy Sci. 29, 597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Johns, C. K. & Katznelson, H. (1941). Canad. J. Res. 19 C, 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5)Johns, C. K. & Katznelson, H. (1943). J. Dairy Res. 13, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6)Sutton, W. S. (1939). J. Aust. Inst. agric. Sci. 5, 168.Google Scholar
(7)Yakovlev, D. A. (1939). Mikrobiologiya (U.S.S.R.), 8, 932.Google Scholar
(8)Palladina, O. K., Peretz, L. G. & Mazukevttch, V. A. (1943). Mikrobiologiya (U.S.S.R.), 12, 52.Google Scholar
(9)Mazé, P. (1937). C.R. Soc. Biol., Paris, 125, 412.Google Scholar
(10)Josse, J. (1947). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 73, 906.Google Scholar
(11)Pette, J. W. (1946). Versl. RijkslandbProefsts, 's Grav. 51 (8)C, 133.Google Scholar
(12)Anderson, E. B. & Meanwell, L. J. (1942). J. Dairy Res. 13, 58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)Mattick, A. T. R., Nichols, A. A. & Wolf, J. Z. (1944). Bacteriopliage and Cheese-making. Reading: National Institute for Research in Dairying.Google Scholar
(14)Whitehead, H. R. & Hunter, G. J. E. (1945). J. Dairy Res. 14, 64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(15)Whitehead, H. R. & Hunter, G. J. E. (1941). J. Dairy Res. 12, 63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(16)Nichols, A. A. & Wolf, J. Z. (1945). J. Dairy Res. 14, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(17)Nichols, A. A. (1945). Dairy Industr. 10, 250.Google Scholar
(18)Meanwell, L. J. (1943). Chem. & Ind. 62, 73.Google Scholar
(19)Whitehead, H. R. & Hunter, G. J. E. (1947). J. Dairy Res. 15, 112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(20)Whitehead, H. R. (1947). Aust. J. Dairy Tech. 2, 149.Google Scholar
(21)Nichols, A. A. & Hoyle, M. (1948). J. Dairy Res. 15, 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(22)Hoyle, M. & Nichols, A. A. (1948). J. Dairy Res. 15, 398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(23)Pette, J. W. (1949). Rep. Proc. 4th Int. Congr. Microbiol. 1947, p. 181.Google Scholar
(24)Sherman, J. M. & Hodge, H. M. (1934). J. Dairy Sci. 17, 495.Google Scholar
(25)Dahlberg, A. C. & Ferris, F. (1945). J. Dairy Sci. 28, 771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(26)Harriman, L. A. & Hammer, B. W. (1931). J. Dairy Sci. 14, 40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(27)Mazé, P. & Mazé, P. J. (1944). CM. Soc. Biol., Paris, 138, 270.Google Scholar
(28)Hunter, G. J. E. (1939). J. Dairy Res. 10, 464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(29)Barthel, C. (1924). Medd. CentAnst. Försöksv. Jordb., Stockh., No. 267. (Abstr. Bact. 9, 61.)Google Scholar
(30)Mattick, A. T. R. & Rogers, H. J. (1939). Proc. Soc. agric. Bad. (Abstr.), p. 40.Google Scholar
(31)Swift, H. F. (1936). Rep. Proc. 2nd Int. Congr. Microbiol. p. 40.Google Scholar
(32)Rhodes, M. (1942). Personal Communications.Google Scholar
(33)Sherman, J. M. (1937). Bad. Rev. 1, 3.Google Scholar
(34)Hunter, G. J. E. (1946). J. Hyg., Camb., 44, 264.Google Scholar
(35)Abd-El-Malek, Y. & Gibson, T. (1948). J. Dairy Res. 15, 233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(36)Whitehead, H. R. & Hunter, G. J. E. (1939). J. Dairy Res. 10, 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(37)Evans, A. C. & Sockrider, E. M. (1942). J. Bad. 44, 211.Google Scholar
(38)Asheshov, I. N. (1924). J. infect. Dis. 34, 536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(39)Nelson, F. E., Harriman, L. A. & Hammer, B. W. (1939). Res. Bull. la agric. Exp. Sta. No. 256.Google Scholar
(40)Mazé, P. (1938). C.R. Soc. Biol, Paris, 129, 139.Google Scholar
(41)Mazé, P. (1942). C.R. Soc. Biol, Paris, 136, 655.Google Scholar
(42)Johns, C. K. (1943). J. Dairy Res. 13, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(43)Nichols, A. A. & Wolf, J. Z. (1944). J. Dairy Res. 13, 302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(44)Evans, A. C. (1934). Publ. Hlth Sep., Wash., 49, 1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(45)Graham, N. C. & Bartley, E. O. (1939). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 538.Google Scholar
(46)Fisk, R. T. (1942). J. infect. Dis. 71, 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(47)Mazé, P. (1941). C.R. Soc. Biol, Paris, 135, 807.Google Scholar
(48)Mazé, P. (1941). C.R. Soc. Biol, Paris, 135, 1332.Google Scholar
(49)Mazé, P. (1942). C.R. Soc. Biol, Paris, 136, 416.Google Scholar
(50)Lisbonne, M. & Carrère, L. (1922). C.R. Soc. Biol., Paris, 86, 569.Google Scholar
(51)Burnet, F. M. (1932). J. Path. Bact. 35, 851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(52)Hotter, G. J. E. (1947). J. Hyg., Camb., 45, 307.Google Scholar
(53)Wilson, G. S. & Atkinson, J. D. (1945). Lancet., 248, 647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(54)Whitehead, H. R. & Hunter, G. J. E. (1939). J. Dairy Res. 10, 403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(55)Burnet, F. M. (1934). Biol. Rev. 9, 332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(56)Evans, A. C. (1934). J. Bact. 27, 49.Google Scholar
(57)Babel, F. J. (1947). J. Dairy Sci. 30, 507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(58)Fisk, E. T. (1942). J. infect. Dis. 71, 161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(59)Craigle, J. & Yen, C. H. (1938). Canad. publ. Hlth J. 29, 448.Google Scholar
(60)Williams Smith, H. (1948). J. Hyg., Camb., 46, 74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(61)Williams Smith, H. (1948). J. Hyg., Camb., 46, 82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(62)Williams Smith, H. (1948). J. comp. Path. 58, 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(63)Whitehead, H. R. & Hotter, G. J. E. (1937). J. Path. Bact. 44, 337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(64)Felix, A. &. Callow, B. R. (1943). Brit. med. J. II, 127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(65)Shattock, P. M. F. & Mattick, A. T. R. (1943). J. Hyg., Camb., 45, 173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(66)Burnet, F. M. (1933). J. Path. Bact. 36, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(67)Rountree, P. M. (1948). Personal communications.Google Scholar
(68)Delbruck, M. (1946). Biol. Rev. 21, 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(69)Wright, A. E. & Colebrook, L. (1921). Technique of the Teat and Capillary Glass Tube, 2nd ed., p. 36. London: Constable.Google Scholar
(70)Andrewes, C. H. & Elford, W. J. (1933). Brit. J. exp. Path. 14, 367.Google Scholar