Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T02:42:57.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Examination of two bacterial strains designated ‘Brucella suis biotype 5’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

M. J. Corbel
M. J. Corbel
Affiliation:
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Central Veterinary Laboratory, Weybridge, Surrey
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.

The morphological, cultural, biochemical, serological and pathogenic properties of two bacterial strains of the group designated ‘Br. suis biotype 5’ were examined. Both strains were found to be atypical of the genus Brucella in many of these characteristics. No serological relationship to known brucella strains could be detected. On the basis of the evidence obtained the two strains examined were classified as Moraxella duplex and the status of ‘Br. suis biotype 5’ questioned.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 71 , Issue 2 , June 1973 , pp. 271 - 282
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1973

References

REFERENCES

Alton, G. G. & Jones, L. M. (1967). Laboratory techniques in brucellosis. Monograph series, World Health Organization, no. 55.Google ScholarPubMed
Brodie, J. & Henderson, A. (1964). Further observations on Mima polymorpha and Achromobacter (Bacterium,) anitratum. Journal of Clinical Pathology 17, 513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brooke, M. S. (1951). The occurrence of B5W (B. anitratum) strains in Denmark. Acta pathologica et microbiologica scandinavica 28, 338.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christoffersen, P. A. & Ottosen, H. E. (1941). Recent staining methods. Skandinavisk veterinärtidskrift 31, 599.Google Scholar
Corbel, M. J. & Cullen, G. A. (1970). Differentiation of the serological response to Yersinia enterocolitica and Brucella abortus in cattle. Journal of Hygiene 68, 519.Google ScholarPubMed
Corbel, M. J. & Phillip, J. I. H. (1972). The relationship of Brucella abortus agglutinogenic antigens to the receptor sites for Tbilisi phage. Research in Veterinary Science 13, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, S. T. & Steel, K. J. (1965). In A Manual for the Identification of Medical Bacteria. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
de Bord, G. G. (1942). Descriptions of Mimeae Trib. Nov. with three genera and three species and two new species of Neisseria from conjunctivitis and vaginitis. Iowa State College Journal of Science 16, 471.Google Scholar
Diaz, R., Jones, L. M. & Wilson, J. B. (1967). Antigenic relationship of Brucella ovis and Brucella melitensis. Journal of Bacteriology 93, 1262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duguid, J. P. (1951). The demonstration of bacterial capsules and slime. Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology 63, 673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilardi, G. L. (1968). Morphological and biochemical differentiation of Achromobacter and Moraxella (de Bord's Tribe Mimeae). Applied Microbiology 16, 33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howie, J. W. & Kirkpatrick, J. (1934). Observations on bacterial capsules as demonstrated by a simple method. Journal of Pathology and Bacteriology 39, 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuzdas, C. D. & Morse, E. V. (1956). A selective medium for the isolation of Vibrio fetus and related vibrios. Journal of Bacteriology 71, 251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lechtman, M. D., Bartholomew, J. W., Phillips, A. & Russo, M. (1965). Rapid methods of staining bacterial spores at room temperature. Journal of Bacteriology 89, 848.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leifson, E. (1951). Staining, shape and arrangement of bacterial flagella. Journal of Bacteriology 62, 377.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreira-Jacob, M. (1968). New group of virulent bacteriophages showing differential affinity for Brucella species. Nature, London 219, 752.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, W. J. B. & Gower, S. G. M. (1966). Techniques in the identification and classification of Brucella. In Identification Methods for Microbiologists (ed. Gibbs, B. M. and Skinner, F. A.), Part A, p. 35. London, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, W. J. B., MacKinnon, D. J., Gill, K. P. W., Gower, S. G. M. & Norris, P. I. W. (1971). Standard Laboratory Techniques for the Diagnosis of Brucellosis. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.Google Scholar
Pickett, M. J. & Manclark, C. R. (1965). Tribe Mimeae. An illegitimate epithet. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 43, 161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Razin, S. & Rottem, S. (1967). Identification of Mycoplasma and other micro-organisms by polyacrylamide-gel electrophoresis of cell proteins. Journal of Bacteriology 94, 1807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renoux, G. & Philippon, A. (1969). Position taxonomique dans le genre Brucella de bactéries isolées de brebis et de vaches. Annales de l'Institut Pasteur, Paris 117, 524.Google Scholar
Schaub, I. G. & Hauber, F. D. (1948). A biochemical and serological study of a group of identical unidentifiable gram-negative bacilli from human sources. Journal of Bacteriology 56, 379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sellers, W. (1964). Medium for differentiating the Gram-negative non-fermenting bacilli of medical interest. Journal of Bacteriology 87, 46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar