Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T17:49:37.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the agent of canine virus hepatitis (Rubarth's disease): III. The Properties of the complement-fixing antigen and its probable structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

N. M. Larin  and
W. G. Orbell
N. M. Larin
Affiliation:
Canine Research Station of the Animal Health Trust, Kennett, nr Newmarket, Suffolk
W. G. Orbell
Affiliation:
Canine Research Station of the Animal Health Trust, Kennett, nr Newmarket, Suffolk
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 complement-fixing antigen activity of canine hepatitis virus is due to particles which are estimated to measure from 70 to 105 mμ and which probably can form larger aggregates. The active particles in the original virus tissue suspension were of sizes similar to those in the purified preparations, their serological properties being identical. The chemical properties of the antigen are those of protein, probably ribonucleoprotein. No evidence has been obtained to explain the association of a high concentration of the antigen with the presence of numerous intranuclear inclusion bodies in the lesions. It is evident, however, from these experiments that the inclusion bodies are not just deposits of the serologically active material. Since the intranuclear inclusion bodies and also the antigen are probably composed of ribonucleoprotein, it is possible that they both represent certain stages in the formation of virus protein by a catalytic reaction from the denatured host proteinogen.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 54 , Issue 1 , March 1956 , pp. 141 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1956

References

REFERENCES

Coffin, D. L., Coons, A. H. & Cabasso, V. J. (1953). J. exp. Med. 98, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dounce, A. L. (1943 a). J. biol. Chem. 147, 685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dounce, A. L. (1943 b). J. biol. Chem. 151, 221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elford, W. J. (1933). Proc. roy. Soc. B, 112, 384.Google Scholar
Larin, N. M. (1951 a). J. Hyg., Camb., 49, 410.Google Scholar
Larin, N. M. (1951 b). Nature, Lond., 168, 745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larin, N. M. (1953). Trans. 4th Meeting Int. Soc. Geogr. Path. Schweitz, Z. allg. Path. Bakt. Separatum, 16, 3, 614.Google Scholar
Laughton, N. & Larin, N. M. (1954). Nature, Lond., 173, 84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levaditi, C., Paic, M. & Krassnoff, D. (1936). C.R. Soc. Biol., Paris, 123, 1048.Google Scholar
Vendrely, C. (1952). Bull. biol. 86, 1.Google Scholar
Wallace, A. L., Osler, A. G. & Mayer, M. M. (1950). J. Immunol. 65, 661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar