Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-09T11:05:52.285Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neutral-Red in the Routine Examination of Water

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Ernest E. Irons
Ernest E. Irons
Affiliation:
Bacteriological Laboratory of the University of Chicago
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.

The use of neutral-red culture media has recently been suggested for the detection of B. coli in water supplies. Rothberger (1) grew a number of organisms on media containing various organic dyes, and found that while some species were able to bring about a reduction of the colouring matter in the medium, others produced no change. This difference in reaction was particularly marked in the case of B. typhosus and B. coli in media containing neutral-red. B. coli casused the reduction of the neutral-red to yellow with green fluorescence, whilst B. typhosus produced no change of colour beyond an occasional fading of the red. After testing a number of races of B. coli and B. typhosus, Rothberger proposed neutral-red media for the differentiation of the two organisms. Scheffler (2) confirmed in the main the work of Rothberger, and further observed that the reaction is by no means specific for B. coli. In addition to a number of bacterial species not commonly found in water, which gave the reaction, Scheffler found 3 of 13 organisms in spring and river waters, and 8 of 18 intestinal organisms from man which, though not belonging to the colon group, gave the neutral-red reaction.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 2 , Issue 3 , July 1902 , pp. 314 - 319
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1902

References

(1)Rothberger, C. J.Centralbl. f. Bakteriol. 1899, I. Abt. vol. xxv. pp. 15, 69.Google Scholar
(2)Scheffler, W.Centralbl. f. Bakteriol. 1900, I. Abt. vol. XXVIII. p. 199.Google Scholar
(3)Makgill, R. H.. This Journal, 1901, vol. I. p. 430.Google Scholar
(4)Savage, W. G.. This Journal, 1901, vol. I. p. 437.Google Scholar
(5)Irons, E. E.. Reports and Papers of the Amer. Pub. Health Assoc. 1900, vol. XXVI. p. 310.Google Scholar
(6)Rosenberger, E. Proc. Path. Soc. of Philadelphia, 1901, N. S. vol. v. p. 1.Google Scholar