Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wp2c8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-02T09:18:40.494Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of the soluble antigen production by tissues infected with preparations of extracellular and intracellular influenza virus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

A. J. Beale
A. J. Beale
Affiliation:
Public Health Laboratory, Northampton
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 production of soluble antigen in the chorioallantoic membranes at 6 hr. can be used to measure the infectivity of influenza virus preparations.

2. Intracellular virus is much more infective when tested by soluble antigen production at 6 hr. than when tested by conventional methods.

3. It is suggested that intracellular virus differs from extracellular because more virus particles per cell are required to initiate infection.

The author is greatly indebted to Dr L. Hoyle for his advice and encouragement throughout this work. Mr G. Field gave valuable help with the mathematics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , June 1954 , pp. 225 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1954

References

REFERENCES

Burnet, F. M. & Lind, P. E. (1951). A genetic approach to variation in influenza viruses. 4. Recombination of characters between the influenza virus A strain NWS and strains of different serological subtypes. J. gen. Microbiol. 5 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnet, F. M. (1953). Recent work on the intrinsic qualities of influenza virus somatic and genetic aspects. Bull. World Hlth Org. 8 661–82.Google ScholarPubMed
Fulton, F. & Isaacs, A. (1953). Influenza virus multiplication in the chick chorioallantoic membrane. J. gen. Microbiol. 9 119–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henle, W. & Henle, G. (1949). Studies of host virus interactions in the chick embryo influenza virus system. III. Development of infectivity, haemagglutinin and complement-fixation activities during the first infectious cycle. J. exp. Med. 90 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henle, W. & Liu, O. C. (1951). Studies of host virus interactions in the chick embryo influenza virus system. VI. Evidence for multiplicity reactivation of inactivated virus. J. exp. Med. 94 305–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoyle, L. (1945). An analysis of the complement fixation reaction in influenza. J. Hyg., Camb., 44 170–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoyle, L. (1948). The growth cycle of influenza A. A study of the relations between virus, soluble antigen and host cell in fertile eggs inoculated with influenza virus. Brit. J. exp. Path. 29 390–9.Google Scholar
Hoyle, L. (1950). The multiplication of influenza viruses in the fertile egg. J. Hyg., Camb., 48 277–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoyle, L. (1952). The multiplication of complement fixing antigen and red cell agglutinin in the chorioallantoic membrane of fertile eggs inoculated with influenza virus. J. Path. Bact. 64 419–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoyle, L. (1953). In Nature of virus multiplication, pp. 225–43. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Isaacs, A. & Fulton, F. (1953). Interference in the chick chorion. J. gen. Microbiol. 9 132–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salk, J. E. (1944). A simplified procedure for titrating haemagglutinating capacity of influenza virus and the corresponding antibody. J. Immunol. 49 87–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, W. R. (1947). Use of moving averages and interpolation to estimate median-effective dose. Bact. Rev. 11 115–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wyckoff, R. W. G. (1953). Formation of the particles of influenza virus. J. Immunol. 70 187–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed