This is a modern-English version of The Fundamentals of Bacteriology, originally written by Morrey, Charles Bradfield.
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

Who first saw bacteria
THE FUNDAMENTALS OF BACTERIOLOGY
CHARLES BRADFIELD MORREY, B.A., M.D.
PROFESSOR OF BACTERIOLOGY AND HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT IN THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, COLUMBUS, OHIO
Second Edition, thoroughly Revised

PHILADELPHIA AND NEW YORK
1921
LEA & FEBIGER
1921
GRACE HAMILTON MORREY
AMERICAN PIANIST
PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION
The first edition seems to have fulfilled a need for a general text-book on the subject of bacteriology. The original method of presentation is preserved. The text-book idea is adhered to, so that the individual instructor may have full liberty to expand on topics in which he is especially interested. A number of illustrations have been added, the text has been improved in many instances by the addition of further explanatory matter and the most recent general advances in the Science. Examples are the System of Classification of the Society of American Bacteriologists, which is used throughout the text, their Key to the Genera of Bacteria, a discussion of the H-ion concentration method of standardization, the selective action of anilin dyes, the mechanism of entrance of pathogenic organisms into the body, a more detailed explanation of the origin of antibodies, the nature of antigens and a table of antigens and antibodies.
The first edition seems to have met the need for a general textbook on bacteriology. The original presentation style has been maintained. The textbook format is followed, allowing each instructor the freedom to elaborate on topics they find particularly interesting. Several illustrations have been added, and the text has been enhanced in many places with additional explanations and the latest advancements in the field. Examples include the classification system from the Society of American Bacteriologists, which is used throughout the text, their Key to the Genera of Bacteria, a discussion on the H-ion concentration method for standardization, the selective effects of aniline dyes, how pathogenic organisms enter the body, a more in-depth explanation of how antibodies are formed, the nature of antigens, and a table of antigens and antibodies.
Professor Vera McCoy Masters has assisted in the revision by aiding in the preparation of manuscript and the reading of proof and in the making of the index, for which services the author’s thanks are hereby expressed.
Professor Vera McCoy Masters has helped with the revision by preparing the manuscript, reviewing the proof, and creating the index. The author sincerely thanks her for these contributions.
PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION
An experience of nearly twenty years in the teaching of Bacteriology has convinced the author that students of this subject need a comprehensive grasp of the entire field and special training in fundamental technic before specializing in any particular line of work. Courses at the University are arranged on this basis. One semester is devoted to General Bacteriology. During the second semester the student has a choice of special work in Pathogenic, Dairy, Soil, Water, or Chemical Bacteriology. A second year may be devoted to advanced work in any of the above lines, to Immunity and Serum Therapy, or to Pathogenic Protozoa.
An experience of almost twenty years in teaching Bacteriology has convinced the author that students in this field need a thorough understanding of the entire area and specialized training in fundamental techniques before focusing on any specific area of work. Courses at the University are set up this way. One semester is dedicated to General Bacteriology. In the second semester, students can choose to focus on Pathogenic, Dairy, Soil, Water, or Chemical Bacteriology. A second year can be spent on advanced work in any of these areas, Immunity and Serum Therapy, or Pathogenic Protozoa.
This text-book is intended to cover the first or introductory semester’s work, and requires two classroom periods per week. Each student is compelled to take two laboratory periods of three hours per week along with the class work. The outline of the laboratory work is given at the end of the text. Results attained seem to justify this plan. A text-book is but one of many pedagogical mechanisms and is not intended to be an encyclopedia of the subject.
This textbook is designed to cover the first semester's introductory work and requires two class sessions each week. Each student must also attend two three-hour laboratory sessions weekly in addition to the classwork. An outline of the lab work is provided at the end of the text. The results achieved seem to validate this approach. A textbook is just one of many teaching tools and is not meant to serve as a comprehensive encyclopedia of the subject.
The author makes no claim to originality of content, since the facts presented are well known to every bacteriologist, though the method of presentation is somewhat different from texts in general. During the preparation of this work he has made a thorough review of the literature of Bacteriology, covering the standard text-books as well as works of reference and the leading periodicals dealing with the subject. Thus the latest information has been incorporated.
The author doesn’t claim any originality in the content, as the facts shared are familiar to every bacteriologist, although the way they are presented is a bit different from typical textbooks. While preparing this work, he conducted a comprehensive review of the literature in Bacteriology, including standard textbooks, reference works, and major periodicals on the topic. As a result, the most up-to-date information has been included.
No attempt has been made to give detailed references in a work of this character.
No effort has been made to provide detailed references in a work like this.
The photomicrographs are original except where otherwise indicated and are all of a magnification of one thousand diameters where no statement to the contrary appears. These photographs were made with a Bausch & Lomb Projection Microscope fitted with a home-made camera box. Direct current arc light was used and exposures were five to ten seconds. Photographs of cultures are also original with a few indicated exceptions. All temperatures are indicated in degrees centigrade.
The photomicrographs are original unless stated otherwise and all are magnified one thousand times unless noted. These photos were taken with a Bausch & Lomb Projection Microscope equipped with a custom camera box. We used direct current arc light, and exposure times were between five and ten seconds. Photographs of cultures are also original, with a few exceptions noted. All temperatures are shown in degrees Celsius.
For use of electrotypes or for prints furnished the author is indebted to the following: A. P. Barber Creamery Supply Company, Chicago, Ill.; Bausch & Lomb Optical Company, Rochester, N. Y.; Creamery Package Manufacturing Company, Chicago, Ill.; Davis Milk Machinery Company, North Chicago, Ill.; Mr. C. B. Hoover, Superintendent of Sewage Disposal Plant, Columbus, O.; Mr. C. P. Hoover, Superintendent of Water Filtration Plant, Columbus, O.; The Hydraulic Press Manufacturing Company, Mt. Gilead, O.; Loew Manufacturing Company, Cleveland, O.; Metric Metal Works, Erie, Pa.; Sprague Canning Machine Company, Chicago, Ill.; U. S. Marine Hospital Service; Wallace and Tiernan Company, New York City, N. Y.
For the use of electrotypes or for prints provided, the author thanks the following: A. P. Barber Creamery Supply Company, Chicago, IL; Bausch & Lomb Optical Company, Rochester, NY; Creamery Package Manufacturing Company, Chicago, IL; Davis Milk Machinery Company, North Chicago, IL; Mr. C. B. Hoover, Superintendent of Sewage Disposal Plant, Columbus, OH; Mr. C. P. Hoover, Superintendent of Water Filtration Plant, Columbus, OH; The Hydraulic Press Manufacturing Company, Mt. Gilead, OH; Loew Manufacturing Company, Cleveland, OH; Metric Metal Works, Erie, PA; Sprague Canning Machine Company, Chicago, IL; U.S. Marine Hospital Service; Wallace and Tiernan Company, New York City, NY.
For the preparation of many cultures and slides, for great assistance in the reading of proof and in the preparation of the index, Miss Vera M. McCoy, Instructor in Bacteriology, deserves the author’s thanks.
For preparing many cultures and slides, for invaluable help in proofreading and putting together the index, Miss Vera M. McCoy, Instructor in Bacteriology, deserves the author's gratitude.
The author trusts that the book will find a place in College and University courses in Bacteriology.
The author believes that the book will be used in college and university courses in Bacteriology.
CONTENTS
Historical Introduction—Spontaneous Generation—Causation of Disease—Putrefaction and Fermentation—Study of Forms—Chronological Table | 17 |
CHAPTER I. | |
Position of Bacteria—Relationships to Algæ—Yeasts—Molds—Protozoa | 37 |
PART I. MORPHOLOGY. |
|
---|---|
CHAPTER II. | |
Cell Structures—Cell Wall—Protoplasm—Plasmolysis—Plasmoptysis—Nucleus—Vacuoles—Capsules—Metachromatic Granules—Flagella—Spores | 41 |
CHAPTER III. | |
Cell Forms—Coccus—Bacillus—Spirillum—Involution Forms | 52 |
CHAPTER IV. | |
Cell Groupings | 55 |
CHAPTER V. | |
Classification—Migula’s—Society of American Bacteriologists’—Key to the Latter | 59 |
PART II. PHYSIOLOGY. |
|
CHAPTER VI. | |
Occurrence—General Conditions for Growth—Moisture—Temperature—Light—Oxygen—Osmotic Pressure—Electricity—X-rays and Radium Emanations—Pressure—Mechanical Vibration | 71 |
CHAPTER VII. | |
Chemical Environment—Reaction of Medium—Chemical Composition | 81 |
CHAPTER VIII. | |
Chemical Environment (Continued)—General Food Relationships—Metabolism of Elements | 86 |
CHAPTER IX. | |
Physiological Activities—Fermentation of Carbohydrates—Splitting of Fats | 93 |
CHAPTER X. | |
Physiological Activities (Continued)—Putrefaction of Proteins—Cycles of Nitrogen, Carbon, Sulphur, Phosphorus | 102 |
CHAPTER XI. | |
Physiological Activities (Continued)—Production of Acids, Gases, Esters, Alcohols, Aldehydes, Aromatic Compounds—Phosphorescence—Chromogenesis—Reduction—Oxidation—Production of Heat—Absorption of Free Nitrogen—Nitrogen Nutrition of Green Plants | 110 |
CHAPTER XII. | |
Physiological Activities (Continued)—Production of Enzymes—Discussion on Enzymes—Toxins—Causation of Disease | 121 |
CHAPTER XIII. | |
Disinfection—Sterilization—Disinfectants—Physical Agents—Pasteurization | 130 |
CHAPTER XIV. | |
Disinfection and Sterilization (Continued)—Chemical Agents—Anilin Dyes | 156 |
CHAPTER XV. | |
Disinfection and Sterilization (Continued)—Choice of Agent—Standardization of Disinfectants—Phenol Coefficient—Practical Sterilization and Disinfection | 164 |
PART III. THE STUDY OF BACTERIA. |
|
CHAPTER XVI. | |
Culture Media—Broth, Milk, Gelatin, Agar, Potatoes, Blood Serum—Standardization of Media—H-ion Concentration Method—Synthetic Media | 171 |
CHAPTER XVII. | |
Methods of Using Culture Media—Culture Tubes—Plates—Anaërobic Cultures—Vignal Tubes—Fermentation Tubes—Deep Culture Tubes—Novy Jars—Inoculation of Culture Media | 184 |
CHAPTER XVIII. | |
Isolation of Bacteria in Pure Culture—Dilution—Plating—Streaking—Barber Apparatus—Aids in Isolation—Heat—Selective Antiseptics—Selective Food—-Indicators—Animal Inoculation | 194 |
CHAPTER XIX. | |
Study of the Morphology of Bacteria—Bacteriological Microscope—Hanging Drop Slides—Staining—Gram’s Method—Spores—Acid-fast Bacilli—Capsules—Flagella—Metachromatic Granules | 200 |
CHAPTER XX. | |
Study of the Physiology of Bacteria—Temperature—Incubators—Thermal Death Point—Oxygen Relationships—Study of Physiological Activities—Appearance of Growth on Culture Media—Appearance of Molds on Plate Cultures | 213 |
CHAPTER XXI. | |
Animal Inoculation—Material for Bacteriological Examination | 227 |
PART IV. GENERAL PATHOGENIC BACTERIOLOGY. |
|
CHAPTER XXII. | |
Introduction—Infection—Acute Infection—Chronic Infection—Specific—Non-specific—Koch’s Postulates—Virulence—Susceptibility | 231 |
CHAPTER XXIII. | |
Pathogenic Bacteria Outside the Body—As Saprophytes—As Facultative Saprophytes—Latent—Carriers—Universal Carriers—Accidental Carriers—Necessary Intermediate Hosts | 237 |
CHAPTER XXIV. | |
Channels of Infection—Skin—Mucosæ—Respiratory Tract—Alimentary Tract—Mechanism of Entrance of Organisms—Dissemination in the Body—Paths of Elimination—Specificity of Location | 243 |
CHAPTER XXV. | |
Immunity—Natural—Artificial—Active—Passive—Production of Immunity—Vaccine—Antiserum—Practical Applications of Immunity Reactions | 250 |
CHAPTER XXVI. | |
Theories of Immunity—Pasteur—Chauveau—Baumgärtner—Metchnikoff—Ehrlich—Principles of Ehrlich’s Theory | 256 |
CHAPTER XXVII. | |
Ehrlich’s Theory (Continued)—Receptors of the First Order—Antitoxin—Antienzyme—Preparation of Antitoxins—Units | 261 |
CHAPTER XXVIII. | |
Ehrlich’s Theory (Continued)—Receptors of the Second Order—Agglutinins—Agglutination Reaction—Precipitins—Precipitin Test | 265 |
CHAPTER XXIX. | |
Ehrlich’s Theory (Continued)—Receptors of the Third Order—Cytolysins—Amboceptor—Complement—Anti-amboceptors—Antisnake Venoms—Failure of Cytolytic Serums in Practice—Complement-fixation Test | 271 |
CHAPTER XXX. | |
Phagocytosis—Opsonins—Opsonic Index—Bacterial Vaccines—Preparation of—Use of—Lipovaccines—Aggressins | 280 |
CHAPTER XXXI. | |
Anaphylaxis—Author’s Theory—Tuberculin Test—Table of Antigens and Antibodies—Summary of Immunity as Applied to Protection from Disease | 289 |
BACTERIOLOGY.
HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION.
Bacteriology as a science is a development of the latter half of the nineteenth century. It may be said to have begun in the decade between 1870 and 1880, due largely to the wide circulation given to Koch’s work in proving that Bacillus anthracis is the cause of Anthrax in 1876, in devising new culture methods and in demonstrating that wound infections are due to microörganisms, 1878. Associated with this work were the great improvements in the microscope by Abbé and the introduction of anilin dyes for staining bacteria by Weigert. These results attracted workers throughout the world to the “new science.” Nevertheless, this work of Koch’s was preceded by numerous observations and experiments which led up to it. Certainly the most important discoveries immediately responsible were those of Pasteur. He must be considered as the greatest of the pioneer bacteriologists since he worked in all fields of the subject. Some of the antecedent work was done in attempting to disprove the old “spontaneous generation” theory as to the origin of organisms; some in searching for the causes of disease and some in the study of fermentation and putrefaction.
Bacteriology as a science developed in the second half of the nineteenth century. It really took off between 1870 and 1880, mainly thanks to Koch's work showing that Bacillus anthracis causes Anthrax in 1876, creating new culture methods, and proving that wound infections are caused by microorganisms in 1878. This work was accompanied by significant advancements in the microscope by Abbé and the introduction of aniline dyes for staining bacteria by Weigert. These achievements attracted researchers around the globe to the “new science.” However, Koch's work was built on many observations and experiments that came before it. Clearly, the most significant discoveries leading up to this point were those of Pasteur. He should be recognized as the top pioneer in bacteriology because he explored all areas of the field. Some of the earlier work focused on trying to disprove the old theory of “spontaneous generation” regarding the origin of organisms; other work was aimed at finding the causes of diseases, along with research into fermentation and decay.
SPONTANEOUS GENERATION.
Speculation as to the first origin of life is as old as history and doubtless older. Every people of antiquity had its own legends, as for example, the account in Genesis. This question never can be definitely settled, even though living matter should be made in the laboratory.
Speculation about the first origin of life is as old as history and probably even older. Every ancient culture had its own legends, like the one in Genesis. This question can never be completely resolved, even if living matter is created in a lab.
The doctrine of the “spontaneous origin” of particular animals or plants from dead material under man’s own observation is a somewhat different proposition and may be subjected to experimental test. The old Greek philosophers believed it. Anaximander (B.C. 610–547) taught that some animals are derived from moisture. Even Aristotle (B.C. 384–322) said that “animals sometimes arise in soil, in plants, or in other animals,” i.e., spontaneously. It can be stated that this belief was general from his day down through the Dark and Middle Ages and later. Cardano (A.D. 1501–1576) wrote that water gives rise to fish and animals and is also the cause of fermentation. Van Helmont (1578–1644) gives directions for making artificial mice. Kircher (1602–1680) describes and figures animals produced under his own eyes by water on plant stems.
The idea that specific animals or plants can spontaneously arise from dead material under human observation is a different concept and can actually be tested experimentally. Ancient Greek philosophers believed in this. Anaximander (BCE 610–547) taught that some animals come from moisture. Even Aristotle (B.C. 384–322) mentioned that “animals sometimes originate in soil, in plants, or in other animals,” i.e. spontaneously. This belief was common from his time through the Dark and Middle Ages and beyond. Cardano (CE 1501–1576) claimed that water produces fish and animals and is also responsible for fermentation. Van Helmont (1578–1644) provided instructions for creating artificial mice. Kircher (1602–1680) described and illustrated animals that he observed being produced by water on plant stems.
However, many thinkers of the seventeenth century doubted the truth of this long-established belief. Francesco Redi (1626–1698) made a number of experiments which tended to prove that maggots did not arise spontaneously in meat, as was generally believed, but developed only when flies had an opportunity to deposit their eggs on the meat. It seems that by the latter part of this century the idea that organisms large enough to be seen with the naked eye could originate spontaneously was generally abandoned by learned men.
However, many thinkers of the seventeenth century doubted the truth of this long-held belief. Francesco Redi (1626–1698) conducted several experiments that suggested maggots didn’t appear spontaneously in meat, as was commonly thought, but only developed when flies had the chance to lay their eggs on the meat. By the end of this century, it seems that the idea that organisms large enough to be seen without a microscope could arise spontaneously was largely dismissed by scholars.
The work of Leeuwenhoek served to suspend for a time the subject of spontaneous generation, only to have it revived more vigorously later on. He is usually called “The Father of the Microscope,” though the compound microscope was invented probably by Hans Zansz or his son Zacharias, of Holland, about 1590. Leeuwenhoek used a simple lens, but his instruments were so much more powerful that they opened up an entirely new and unknown world. (Fig. 1.)
The work of Leeuwenhoek temporarily put the debate on spontaneous generation on hold, but it was later brought back with even more intensity. He is often referred to as “The Father of the Microscope,” although the compound microscope was likely invented by Hans Zansz or his son Zacharias in Holland around 1590. Leeuwenhoek used a simple lens, but his instruments were so much more powerful that they revealed an entirely new and unfamiliar world. (Fig. 1.)
Anthony van Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723) was apprenticed to a linen draper and accumulated a comfortable fortune in this business. He became interested in the grinding of spectacle lenses, then an important industry in Delft, Holland, where he lived, and did a great deal of experimental work in this line, mainly for his own enjoyment. Finally he succeeded in making a lens so powerful that he could see in water and various infusions very minute living bodies never before observed. Leeuwenhoek contributed 112 papers to the Royal Society of Great Britain, the first in 1673, many of them accompanied by such accurate descriptions and drawings, for example a paper submitted September 12, 1683, that there is no doubt that he really saw bacteria and was the first to do so (Fig. 2). Rightly may he be styled “The Father of Bacteriology,” if not of the microscope. He says in one paper: “With the greatest astonishment I observed that everywhere through the material I was examining were distributed animalcules of the most microscopic dimness which moved themselves about in a remarkably energetic way.” Thus he considered these living objects to be animals, from their motion, and this belief held sway for nearly two hundred years.
Anthony van Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723) was trained as a linen draper and built up a decent fortune in that business. He became interested in grinding spectacle lenses, which was a significant industry in Delft, Holland, where he lived, and he did a lot of experimental work in this area mainly for his own enjoyment. Eventually, he created a lens so powerful that he could see tiny living organisms in water and various infusions that had never been observed before. Leeuwenhoek contributed 112 papers to the Royal Society of Great Britain, the first in 1673, many of which were accompanied by such accurate descriptions and drawings, like a paper submitted on September 12, 1683, that there's no doubt he actually saw bacteria and was the first to do so (Fig. 2). He is rightly considered “The Father of Bacteriology,” if not the microscope. In one paper, he stated: “With the greatest astonishment I observed that everywhere through the material I was examining were distributed animalcules of the most microscopic dimness which moved themselves about in a remarkably energetic way.” He believed these living objects were animals based on their movement, and this belief persisted for nearly two hundred years.

Leeuwenhoek was a pure observer of facts and made no attempt at speculation, but his discoveries soon started the theorists to discussing the origin of these minute organisms. Most observers, as was probably to be expected, believed that they arose spontaneously. Needham, in 1749, described the development of microörganisms around grains of barley in water. Bonnet, in 1768, suggested that probably Needham’s animalcules came from ova in the liquid. The Abbot Spallanzani, in 1769, called attention to the crudeness of Needham’s methods and later, in 1776, attempted to disprove spontaneous origin by heating infusions of organic material in flasks and then sealing them. His critics raised the objections that heating the liquids destroyed their ability to support life, and that sealing prevented the access of fresh air which was also necessary. The first objection was disproved by the accidental cracking of some of the flasks which thereafter showed an abundant growth. This accident seemed also to support the second objection, and Spallanzani did not answer it. Though Spallanzani’s experiments failed to convince his opponents, they led to important practical results, since François Appert, in 1810, applied them to the preserving of fruits, meats, etc., and in a sense started the modern canning industry.
Leeuwenhoek was a straightforward observer and didn’t speculate, but his discoveries quickly got theorists talking about the origins of these tiny organisms. Most observers, as was likely expected, believed they appeared spontaneously. Needham, in 1749, described how microorganisms developed around grains of barley in water. Bonnet, in 1768, suggested that Needham’s tiny creatures likely came from eggs in the liquid. The Abbot Spallanzani, in 1769, pointed out the flaws in Needham’s methods and later, in 1776, tried to disprove spontaneous generation by heating infusions of organic material in flasks and then sealing them. His critics argued that heating the liquids killed their ability to support life and that sealing kept out fresh air, which was also necessary. The first objection was challenged when some of the flasks accidentally cracked, leading to significant growth. This incident seemed to back the second objection, and Spallanzani didn’t address it. Although Spallanzani’s experiments didn’t convince his critics, they had important practical outcomes, as François Appert, in 1810, used them to preserve fruits, meats, and more, effectively starting the modern canning industry.


From Spallanzani to Schultze, there were no further experiments to prove or disprove spontaneous generation. Schultze, in 1836, attempted to meet the second objection to Spallanzani’s experiment, i.e., the exclusion of air, by drawing air through his boiled infusions, first causing it to bubble through concentrated sulphuric acid to kill the “germs” (Fig. 3.). His flasks fortunately showed no growths, but his critics claimed that the strong acid changed the properties of the air so that it would not support life. This experiment of Schultze’s, though devised for a different purpose, was really the first experiment in the use of chemical disinfectants, though Thaer (page 31) had used chemicals in a practical way. Schwann, in 1837, modified this experiment, by drawing the air through a tube heated to destroy the living germs (Fig. 4). His experiments were successful but the “spontaneous generation” theorists raised the same objection, i.e., the change in the air by heating. This was the first experiment in which the principle of “dry heat” or “hot air” sterilization was used. Similar arguments were brought forward, also to the use of cotton plugs as filters by Schroeder and Dusch in 1859 (Fig. 5). This was the first use of the principle of sterilization by filtration. It remained for Chevreuil and Pasteur to overcome this objection in 1861 by the use of flasks with long necks drawn out to a point and bent over. These permitted a full access of air by diffusion but kept out living germs, since these cannot fly but are carried mechanically by air currents or fall of their own weight (Fig. 6.). Hoffman, the year before (1860), had made similar experiments but these remained unnoticed. The Pasteur flasks convinced most scientists that “spontaneous generation” has never been observed by man, though some few, notably Dr. Charlton Bastian, of England, vigorously supported the theory from the early seventies until his death in November, 1915.
From Spallanzani to Schultze, there were no additional experiments to prove or disprove spontaneous generation. In 1836, Schultze tried to address the second criticism of Spallanzani’s experiment, specifically the exclusion of air, by passing air through his boiled infusions, making it bubble through concentrated sulfuric acid first to kill the “germs” (Fig. 3.) His flasks fortunately showed no growth, but his critics argued that the strong acid altered the air's properties, preventing it from supporting life. Although Schultze's experiment was designed for a different purpose, it was actually the first experiment using chemical disinfectants, although Thaer (page 31) had previously used chemicals practically. In 1837, Schwann modified this experiment by passing the air through a heated tube to destroy the living germs (Fig. 4). His experiments were successful, but proponents of spontaneous generation raised the same concern—that heating changed the air. This was the first experiment in which the principle of “dry heat” or “hot air” sterilization was applied. Similar arguments were made against the use of cotton plugs as filters by Schroeder and Dusch in 1859 (Fig. 5), marking the first use of the principle of sterilization by filtration. It was left to Chevreuil and Pasteur to resolve this objection in 1861 by using flasks with long necks that were drawn out to a point and bent over. These allowed ample air access through diffusion while keeping out living germs, since these cannot fly and are carried mechanically by air currents or fall due to their own weight (Fig. 6.) The year before (1860), Hoffman had conducted similar experiments, but they went unnoticed. The Pasteur flasks convinced most scientists that spontaneous generation has never been observed by humans, although a few, notably Dr. Charlton Bastian from England, strongly supported the theory from the early 1870s until his death in November 1915.




John Tyndall, in combating Bastian’s views showed that boiled infusions left open to the air in a closed box through which air circulated did not show any growth of organisms provided the air was so free of particles that the path of a ray of light sent through it from side to side could not be seen (Fig. 7). Or if such sterilized infusions were exposed to dust-free air, as in the high Alps, the majority showed no growth, while all infusions in dusty air did show an abundance of organisms. Tyndall’s experiments confirmed those of Pasteur and his predecessors and showed that the organisms developed from “germs” present in the air falling into the liquids and not spontaneously.
John Tyndall, in response to Bastian’s views, demonstrated that boiled infusions left exposed to the air in a sealed box with circulating air did not show any growth of organisms, as long as the air was free of particles and the path of a ray of light passing through it from one side to the other was not visible (Fig. 7). Additionally, if these sterilized infusions were exposed to dust-free air, like that in the high Alps, most showed no growth, while all infusions in dusty air exhibited a lot of organisms. Tyndall’s experiments supported those of Pasteur and his predecessors, showing that the organisms arose from “germs” present in the air falling into the liquids rather than spontaneously.
While Tyndall’s experiments were of great value as indicated, they probably were harmful in another way. These “germs in the air” were considered by bacteriologists as well as laymen to include necessarily many disease germs and to indicate the very general, if not universal, presence of these latter in the air. This idea led to many erroneous practices in sanitation and disinfection which even to this day are not eliminated.
While Tyndall's experiments were very valuable, they may have also caused some harm. Both bacteriologists and everyday people believed that these "germs in the air" included many disease germs and suggested that these germs were generally, if not universally, found in the air. This belief resulted in many mistaken practices in sanitation and disinfection that still persist today.
CAUSATION OF DISEASE.
The transmission of disease from person to person was recognized by the ancients of European and Asiatic countries. Inoculation of smallpox was practiced in China and India probably several thousand years ago and was introduced by Lady Mary Wortley Montague into England in 1721, from Constantinople. These beliefs and practices do not seem to have been associated with any speculations or theories as to the cause of the disease.
The spread of disease from one person to another was understood by ancient civilizations in Europe and Asia. People in China and India likely practiced smallpox inoculation thousands of years ago, and Lady Mary Wortley Montague brought this practice to England in 1721 from Constantinople. These beliefs and methods didn’t appear to be connected to any ideas or theories about what caused the disease.
Apparently the first writer on this subject was Varo, about B.C. 70, who suggested that fevers in swampy places were due to invisible organisms. The treatment of wounds during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries by hot wine fomentations and by the application of plasters was based on the theory that the air brought about conditions in the wounds which led to suppuration. These practices were indeed primitive antisepsis, yet were not based on a germ theory of the conditions which were partially prevented. Fracastorius (1484–1553), in a work published in 1546, elaborated a theory of “disease germs” and “direct and indirect contagion” very similar to modern views, though based on no direct pathological knowledge. Nevertheless Kircher (mentioned already) is usually given undeserved credit for the “contagium vivum” theory. In 1657 by the use of simple lenses he observed “worms” in decaying substances, in blood and in the pus from bubonic plague patients (probably rouleaux of corpuscles in the blood, certainly not bacteria in any case). Based on these observations and possibly also on reading the work of Fracastorius, his theory of a “living cause” for various diseases was published in 1671, but received little support.
Apparently, the first writer on this topic was Varo around BCE 70, who proposed that fevers in swampy areas were caused by invisible organisms. The way wounds were treated during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries involved hot wine compresses and the use of plasters, based on the idea that the air created conditions in the wounds that led to pus formation. These methods were actually primitive antisepsis, but they weren't grounded in a germ theory of the conditions they somewhat alleviated. Fracastorius (1484–1553), in a work published in 1546, developed a theory of “disease germs” and “direct and indirect contagion” that closely resembles modern perspectives, even though it lacked direct pathological knowledge. Still, Kircher (who’s already been mentioned) often receives undue credit for the “contagium vivum” theory. In 1657, using simple lenses, he observed “worms” in decaying matter, in blood, and in the pus from bubonic plague patients (likely rouleaux of blood cells, definitely not bacteria). Based on these observations and possibly influenced by Fracastorius's work, his theory of a “living cause” for different diseases was published in 1671, but it didn't gain much traction.
The discoveries of Leeuwenhoek which proved the existence of microscopic organisms soon revived the “contagium vivum” idea of Kircher. Nicolas Andry in a work published in 1701 upheld this view. Lancisi in 1718 advanced the idea that “animalcules” were responsible for malaria, a view not proved until Laveran discovered the malarial parasite in 1880.1 Physicians ascribed the plague which visited Southern France in 1721 to the same cause, and many even went so far as to attribute all disease to animalcules, which brought the theory into ridicule. Nevertheless the “contagium vivum” theory survived, and even Linnaeus in his Systema Naturæ (1753–6) recognized it by placing the organisms of Leeuwenhoek, the contagia of diseases and the causes of putrefaction and fermentation in one class called “Chaos.”
The discoveries of Leeuwenhoek that proved the existence of microscopic organisms soon revived Kircher's idea of "contagium vivum." Nicolas Andry supported this view in a work published in 1701. Lancisi, in 1718, suggested that "animalcules" were responsible for malaria, a theory that wasn't confirmed until Laveran identified the malarial parasite in 1880.1 Physicians attributed the plague that struck Southern France in 1721 to the same cause, and many even went so far as to blame all diseases on animalcules, which led to ridicule of the theory. Nonetheless, the "contagium vivum" theory persisted, and even Linnaeus in his Systema Naturæ (1753–6) acknowledged it by grouping Leeuwenhoek's organisms, the contagia of diseases, and the causes of decay and fermentation into one category called "Chaos."
Plenciz, a prominent physician and professor in the Vienna Medical School, published in 1762 a work in which he gave strong arguments for the “living cause” theory for transmissable diseases. He taught that the agent is evidently transmitted through the air and that there is a certain period of incubation pointing to a multiplication within the body. He also believed that there was a specific agent for each disease. His writings attracted little attention at the time and the “contagium vivum” theory seems to have been almost lost sight of for more than fifty years. Indeed, Oznam, in 1820, said it was no use to waste time in refuting hypotheses as to the animal nature of contagium.
Plenciz, a notable doctor and professor at the Vienna Medical School, published a work in 1762 where he made strong arguments for the “living cause” theory of transmissible diseases. He explained that the agent is clearly transmitted through the air and that there is a specific incubation period that indicates multiplication within the body. He also thought that each disease had a specific agent. His writings garnered little attention at the time, and the “contagium vivum” theory seems to have been almost forgotten for over fifty years. In fact, Oznam stated in 1820 that it was pointless to waste time refuting theories about the animal nature of contagium.
Isolated observers, were, however, keeping the idea alive, each in his own locality. In 1787 Wollstein, of Vienna, showed that the pus from horses with glanders could infect other horses if inoculated into the skin. Abilgaard, of Copenhagen, made similar experiments at about the same time. In 1797 Eric Viborg, a pupil of Abilgaard’s, published experiments in which he showed the infectious nature not only of the pus but also of the nasal discharges, saliva, urine, etc., of glandered horses. Jenner in 1795–98 introduced vaccination as a method of preventing smallpox. This epoch-making discovery attracted world wide attention and led to the overcoming of this scourge which had devastated Europe for centuries, but contributed little or nothing to the question of the causation of disease. Prevost’s discovery of the cause of grain rust (Puccinia graminis) in 1807 was the first instance of an infectious disease of plants shown to be due to a microscopic plant organism, though not a bacterium in this case.
Isolated observers, however, were keeping the idea alive, each in his own area. In 1787, Wollstein from Vienna showed that the pus from horses with glanders could infect other horses if injected into the skin. Abilgaard from Copenhagen conducted similar experiments around the same time. In 1797, Eric Viborg, a student of Abilgaard, published experiments demonstrating the infectious nature not only of the pus but also of the nasal discharges, saliva, urine, etc., from glandered horses. Jenner introduced vaccination as a method for preventing smallpox between 1795 and 1798. This groundbreaking discovery drew global attention and helped to eliminate this plague that had plagued Europe for centuries, but it contributed little or nothing to understanding the cause of disease. Prevost's discovery of the cause of grain rust (Puccinia graminis) in 1807 was the first instance of an infectious disease of plants shown to be due to a microscopic plant organism, though it wasn't a bacterium in this case.
Doubtless one reason why the work on glanders and grain rust attracted little attention among the practitioners of human medicine was owing to the prevalent belief in man’s complete separation from all lower forms of life. The evolutionists had not yet paved the way for experimental medicine.
Surely one reason why the work on glanders and grain rust got little attention from doctors was the widespread belief that humans were completely separate from all lower forms of life. Evolutionists hadn't yet laid the groundwork for experimental medicine.
In 1822 Gaspard showed the poisonous nature of material from infected wounds by injecting it into animals and causing their death. Tiedemann (1822), Peacock (1828) described “little bodies” in the muscles of human cadavers which Hilton (1832) considered to be parasitic in nature. Paget (1835) showed that these bodies were round worms and Owen (1835) described them more accurately and gave the name Trichina spiralis to them. Leidy (1846) found organisms in the muscles of hogs which he considered to be the same as Owen’s Trichina and paved the way for the work of Zenker (1860) in showing the pathological relation between the Trichina of pork and human Trichinosis. Bearing on the “contagium vivum” theory was the rediscovery of the “itch mite” (Sarcoptes scabiei) by Renucci (1834), an Italian medical student. This had been declared several hundred years before but had been lost sight of. Chevreuil and Pasteur, in 1836, showed that putrefaction did not occur in meat protected from contamination, and suggested that wound infection probably resulted from entrance of germs from without. Bassi, investigating a disease of silkworms in Italy, demonstrated that a certain mold-like fungus (Botrytis bassiana) was the cause in 1837. This was the first instance of a microscopic vegetable organism proved to be capable of causing disease in an animal.
In 1822, Gaspard demonstrated the toxic nature of material from infected wounds by injecting it into animals, which resulted in their deaths. Tiedemann (1822) and Peacock (1828) described "little bodies" found in the muscles of human cadavers, which Hilton (1832) believed to be parasitic. Paget (1835) revealed that these bodies were round worms, and Owen (1835) provided a more accurate description, naming them Trichina spiralis. Leidy (1846) discovered organisms in the muscles of hogs that he identified as the same as Owen’s Trichina, setting the stage for Zenker’s work in 1860, which showed the pathological link between the Trichina in pork and human Trichinosis. Related to the "contagium vivum" theory was the rediscovery of the "itch mite" (Sarcoptes scabiei) by Renucci (1834), an Italian medical student. This had been noted several hundred years earlier but had been overlooked. In 1836, Chevreuil and Pasteur demonstrated that meat protected from contamination did not undergo putrefaction and suggested that wound infection likely resulted from germs entering from the outside. Bassi investigated a disease in silkworms in Italy and demonstrated that a certain mold-like fungus (Botrytis bassiana) was the cause in 1837. This was the first instance of a microscopic plant organism proved to be capable of causing disease in an animal.
Boehm, in 1838, observed minute organisms in the stools of cholera patients and conjectured that they might have a causal connection with the disease. Dubini of Milan in 1838 discovered the Ankylostoma duodenale which later was further described by Omodei in 1843 and shown to be the cause of Egyptian chlorosis by Griesinger (1851). The fungous nature of favus, a scalp disease, was recognized by Schönlein in 1839, and the organism was afterward called “Achorion schoenleinii.” Berg, in 1839–41, showed that thrush is likewise due to a fungus, “Oidium albicans.”
Boehm, in 1838, noticed tiny organisms in the stools of cholera patients and suggested that they might be linked to the disease. Dubini from Milan discovered the Ankylostoma duodenale in 1838, which was later further described by Omodei in 1843 and identified as the cause of Egyptian chlorosis by Griesinger in 1851. The fungal nature of favus, a scalp condition, was recognized by Schönlein in 1839, and the organism was later named “Achorion schoenleinii.” Berg, between 1839 and 1841, demonstrated that thrush is also caused by a fungus, “Oidium albicans.”
These discoveries led Henle, in 1840, to publish a work in which he maintained that all contagious diseases must be due to living organisms, and to propound certain postulates (afterward restated by Koch and now known as “Koch’s postulates” p. 233) which must be demonstrated before one can be sure that a given organism is the specific cause of a given disease. The methods then in vogue and the instruments of that period did not enable Henle to prove his claims, but he must be given the credit for establishing the “contagium vivum” theory on a good basis and pointing the way for men better equipped to prove its soundness in after years.
These discoveries led Henle, in 1840, to publish a work in which he argued that all contagious diseases must come from living organisms. He proposed certain conditions (later rephrased by Koch and known as “Koch’s postulates” p. 233) that need to be demonstrated to confirm that a specific organism is the actual cause of a specific disease. The methods and tools available at that time did not allow Henle to prove his claims, but he deserves credit for establishing the “contagium vivum” theory on a solid foundation and guiding others who were better equipped to validate its accuracy in the years that followed.

In 1842–43 Gruby showed that Herpes tonsurans, a form of ringworm, is due to the fungus Trichophyton tonsurans. Klencke, in 1843, produced generalized tuberculosis in a rabbit by injecting tuberculous material into a vein in the ear, but did not carry his researches further. In 1843, Doctor Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote a paper in which he contended that puerperal fever was contagious. Liebert identified the Peronospora infestans as the cause of one type of potato rot in 1845. The skin disease Pityriasis (tinea) versicolor was shown to be due to the Microsporon furfur by Eichstedt in 1846. In 1847 Semmelweiss of Vienna recommended disinfection of the hands with chloride of lime by obstetricians because he believed with Holmes in the transmissibility of puerperal fever through poisons carried in this way from the dissecting room but his theories were ridiculed.
In 1842–43, Gruby demonstrated that Herpes tonsurans, a type of ringworm, is caused by the fungus Trichophyton tonsurans. In 1843, Klencke created generalized tuberculosis in a rabbit by injecting tuberculous material into a vein in its ear, but he did not continue his research. Also in 1843, Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes published a paper arguing that puerperal fever was contagious. In 1845, Liebert identified Peronospora infestans as the cause of a specific type of potato rot. Eichstedt showed in 1846 that the skin condition Pityriasis (tinea) versicolor was caused by Microsporon furfur. In 1847, Semmelweiss from Vienna recommended that obstetricians disinfect their hands with chloride of lime because he, like Holmes, believed that puerperal fever could be transmitted through toxins carried from the dissecting room, but his theories were mocked.

Pollender, in 1849, and Davaine and Rayer, in 1850, independently observed small rod-like bodies in the blood of sheep and cattle which had died of splenic fever (anthrax). That Egyptian chlorosis, afterward identified with Old World “hookworm disease,” is caused by the Ankylostoma duodenale was shown by Greisinger in 1851. In the same year the Schistosomum hematobium was shown to be the cause of the “Bilharzia disease” by Bilharz. Küchenmeister discovered the tapeworm, Tænia solium, in 1852, Cohn, an infectious disease of flies due to a parasitic fungus (Empusa muscæ) in 1855, and Zenker showed the connection between trichinosis of pork (“measly pork”) and human trichinosis (1860) as indicated above. The organisms just mentioned are, of course, not bacteria, but these discoveries proved conclusively that living things of one kind or another, some large, most of them microscopic, could cause disease in other organisms and stimulated the search for other “living contagiums.” In 1863 Davaine, already mentioned, showed that anthrax could be transmitted from animal to animal by inoculation of blood, but only if the blood contained the minute rods which he believed to be the cause. Davaine later abandoned this belief because he transmitted the disease with old blood in which he could find no rods. It is now known that this was because the bacilli were in the “spore” form which Davaine did not recognize. He thus missed the definite proof of the bacterial nature of anthrax because he was not familiar with the life history of the organism which was worked out by Koch thirteen years later. In 1865 Villemin repeatedly caused tuberculosis in rabbits by subcutaneous injection of tuberculous material and showed that this disease must be infectious also. In the same year Lord Lister introduced antiseptic methods in surgery. He believed that wound infections were due to microörganisms getting in from the air, the surgeon’s fingers, etc., and without proving this, he used carbolic acid to kill these germs and prevent the infection. His pioneer experiments made modern surgery possible. In this year also, Pasteur was sent to investigate a disease, Pebrine, which was destroying the silkworms in Southern France. He showed the cause to be a protozoan which had been seen previously by Cornalia and described by Nägeli under the name Nosema bombycis and devised preventive measures. This was the first infectious disease shown to be due to a protozoan. In 1866 Rindfleisch observed small pin-point-like bodies in the heart muscle of persons who had died of wound infection. Klebs, in 1870–71, published descriptions and names of organisms he had found in the material from similar wounds, though he did not establish their causal relation. Bollinger, in 1872, discovered the spores of anthrax and explained the persistence of the disease in certain districts as due to the resistant spores. In 1873 Obermeier observed in the blood of patients suffering from recurrent fever long, flexible spiral organisms which have been named Spirochæta obermeieri. Lösch ascribed tropical dysentery to an ameba, named by him Amœba coli, in 1875. Finally, Koch, in 1876, isolated the anthrax bacillus, worked out the life history of the organism and reproduced the disease by the injection of pure cultures and recovered the organism from the inoculated animals, thus establishing beyond reasonable doubt its causal relationship to the disease. This was the first instance of a bacterium proved to be the cause of a disease in animals. Pasteur, working on the disease at the same time, confirmed all of Koch’s findings, though his results were published the next year, 1877. Bollinger determined that the Actinomyces bovis (Streptothrix bovis) is the cause of actinomycosis in cattle in 1877. Woronin in the same year discovered a protozoan (Plasmodiophora brassicæ) to be the cause of a disease in cabbage, the first proved instance of a unicellular animal causing a disease in a plant. In 1878 Koch published his researches on wound infection in which he showed beyond question that microörganisms are the cause of this condition, though Pasteur in 1837, had suggested the same thing and Lister had acted on the theory in preventing infection.
Pollender, in 1849, and Davaine and Rayer, in 1850, independently noticed small rod-like structures in the blood of sheep and cattle that had died of splenic fever (anthrax). Greisinger demonstrated in 1851 that the Egyptian chlorosis, later linked to Old World “hookworm disease,” is caused by the Ankylostoma duodenale. In the same year, Bilharz identified the Schistosomum hematobium as the cause of “Bilharzia disease.” Küchenmeister discovered the tapeworm Tænia solium in 1852, Cohn identified an infectious disease in flies caused by a parasitic fungus (Empusa muscæ) in 1855, and Zenker established the link between pork trichinosis (“measly pork”) and human trichinosis in 1860, as mentioned earlier. The organisms listed are not bacteria, but these findings conclusively proved that living organisms of various types, some large and many microscopic, could cause diseases in other organisms and encouraged the search for other “living contagiums.” In 1863, Davaine showed that anthrax could be transferred from one animal to another by inoculating blood, but only if the blood contained the tiny rods he believed were the cause. Davaine later changed his mind because he transmitted the disease using old blood that contained no rods. It's now understood that this was due to the bacilli being in the “spore” form, which Davaine did not recognize. Because of this, he missed the definitive evidence of anthrax's bacterial nature, which was elucidated by Koch thirteen years later. In 1865, Villemin consistently induced tuberculosis in rabbits through subcutaneous injections of tuberculous material, demonstrating that this disease was also infectious. That same year, Lord Lister introduced antiseptic methods in surgery. He believed that wound infections were caused by microorganisms entering from the air, the surgeon's fingers, etc., and although he didn’t prove this at the time, he used carbolic acid to kill these germs and prevent infections. His groundbreaking experiments made modern surgery possible. Also in this year, Pasteur was sent to investigate a disease, Pebrine, that was killing silkworms in Southern France. He identified the cause as a protozoan previously seen by Cornalia and described by Nägeli as Nosema bombycis and developed preventive measures. This marked the first infectious disease proven to be due to a protozoan. In 1866, Rindfleisch observed tiny pin-point bodies in the heart muscle of people who had died from wound infections. Klebs, in 1870–71, published descriptions and names of organisms he found in material from similar wounds, although he didn’t confirm their causal connection. In 1872, Bollinger discovered anthrax spores and explained the persistence of the disease in certain areas as a result of the resistant spores. In 1873, Obermeier noted long, flexible spiral organisms in the blood of patients with recurrent fever, which were later named Spirochæta obermeieri. Lösch attributed tropical dysentery to an ameba he named Amœba coli in 1875. Finally, Koch isolated the anthrax bacillus in 1876, worked out its life cycle, and reproduced the disease by injecting pure cultures and recovering the organism from the inoculated animals, thereby establishing beyond reasonable doubt its causal link to the disease. This represented the first instance of a bacterium proven to be the cause of a disease in animals. Pasteur, who was researching the same disease at the same time, validated all of Koch's findings, although his results were published the following year, in 1877. In 1877, Bollinger determined that Actinomyces bovis (Streptothrix bovis) causes actinomycosis in cattle. Woronin discovered a protozoan (Plasmodiophora brassicæ) that causes a disease in cabbage in the same year, marking the first proven case of a unicellular organism causing a disease in a plant. In 1878, Koch published his studies on wound infections, conclusively showing that microorganisms are the cause of this condition, even though Pasteur had suggested a similar idea in 1837 and Lister had acted on that theory to prevent infections.
These discoveries, especially those of Koch, immediately attracted world-wide attention and stimulated a host of workers, so that within the next ten years most of the bacteria which produce disease in men and animals were isolated and described. It is well to remember that the first specific disease of man proved to be caused by a bacterium was tuberculosis, by Koch in 1882.
These discoveries, especially those of Koch, quickly gained global attention and inspired many researchers, so that within the next ten years, most of the bacteria responsible for diseases in humans and animals were isolated and identified. It's important to note that the first specific disease in humans that was shown to be caused by a bacterium was tuberculosis, identified by Koch in 1882.
Progress was greatly assisted by the introduction of anilin dyes as suitable stains for organisms by Weigert in 1877, by Koch’s application of special technic and gelatin cultures for isolation and study, 1881, and the great improvements in the microscope by Prof. Abbé, of Jena.
Progress was significantly aided by the introduction of anilin dyes as effective stains for organisms by Weigert in 1877, by Koch’s use of special techniques and gelatin cultures for isolation and study in 1881, and by the major improvements in the microscope made by Prof. Abbé of Jena.
Laveran’s discovery of the malarial parasite in 1880 turned attention to protozoa as the causes of disease and led to the discovery of the various piroplasmoses and trypanosomiases in man and the lower animals.
Laveran’s discovery of the malaria parasite in 1880 focused attention on protozoa as the causes of disease and resulted in the identification of various piroplasmoses and trypanosomiases in humans and animals.
Pasteur’s protective inoculations in chicken cholera and anthrax directed attention to the possibility of using bacteria or their products as a specific protective or curative means against particular diseases. This finally led to the discovery of diphtheria antitoxin by Behring, and independently by Roux, in 1890, a discovery which opened up the wide field of immunity which is so persistently cultivated at the present time.
Pasteur's protective vaccinations for chicken cholera and anthrax focused attention on the idea of using bacteria or their byproducts as specific protective or healing methods for certain diseases. This eventually resulted in Behring's discovery of diphtheria antitoxin, which Roux also discovered independently in 1890, a breakthrough that opened up the vast area of immunity that is so actively explored today.

While the causation of disease by bacteria has probably attracted most attention, especially in the popular mind, it should not be forgotten that this is but one of the numerous ways in which these organisms manifest their activities, and in a sense it is one of their least-important ways, since other kinds are essential in many industries (dairying, agriculture) and processes (sewage purification) and are even indispensable for the very existence of all green plants and hence of animals, including man himself.
While bacteria causing disease has probably gotten the most attention, especially among the general public, it’s important to remember that this is just one of the many ways these organisms show their effects. In fact, it’s one of the less significant ways, since other types are crucial in many industries (like dairy and agriculture) and processes (such as sewage treatment) and are even essential for the very existence of all green plants and, consequently, animals, including humans.
PUTREFACTION AND FERMENTATION.
The idea that there is a certain resemblance between some infectious diseases and the processes of putrefaction and fermentation seems to have originated during the discussion on spontaneous generation and the “contagium vivum” theory which followed Leeuwenhoek’s discoveries. Plenciz (1762) appears to have first formulated this belief in writing. He considered putrefaction to be due to the “animalcules” and said that it occurred only when there was a coat of organisms on the material and only when they increased and multiplied. Spallanzani’s experiments tended to support this view since his infusions did not “spoil” when boiled and sealed. Appert’s practical application of this idea has been mentioned.
The idea that some infectious diseases are similar to the processes of decay and fermentation seems to have started during the discussions on spontaneous generation and the “contagium vivum” theory that followed Leeuwenhoek’s discoveries. Plenciz (1762) appears to have been the first to put this belief in writing. He thought that decay was caused by “animalcules” and said it only happened when there was a layer of organisms on the material and only when they grew and multiplied. Spallanzani’s experiments seemed to support this view since his infusions didn’t “spoil” when boiled and sealed. Appert's practical application of this idea has been noted.
Thaer, in his Principles of Rational Agriculture, published in the first quarter of the nineteenth century, expressed the belief that the “blue milk fermentation” was probably due to a kind of fungus that gets in from the air, and stated that he had prevented it by treating the milk cellars and vessels, with sulphur fumes or with “oxygenated hydrochloric acid” (hypochlorous acid).
Thaer, in his Principles of Rational Agriculture, published in the early 1800s, believed that the “blue milk fermentation” was likely caused by a type of fungus that comes from the air. He mentioned that he had prevented it by treating the milk storage areas and containers with sulfur fumes or “oxygenated hydrochloric acid” (hypochlorous acid).
In 1836 Chevreuil and Pasteur showed that putrefaction did not occur in meat protected from contamination. In 1837 Caignard-Latour, in France, and Schwann, in Germany, independently showed that alcoholic fermentation in beer and wine is due to the growth of a microscopic plant, the yeast, in the fermenting wort. C. J. Fuchs described the organism which is commonly called the “blue milk bacillus” in 1841 and conjectured that the souring of milk was probably bacterial in origin. It remained for Pasteur to prove this in 1857. During the following six or seven years Pasteur also proved that acetic acid fermentation, as in vinegar making, butyric acid fermentation (odor of rancid butter and old cheese) and the ammoniacal fermentation of urea, so noticeable around stables, were each due to different species of bacteria. Pasteur also, during the progress of this work, discovered the class of organisms which can grow in the absence of free oxygen—the anaërobic bacteria. There is no question that Pasteur from 1857 on did more to lay the foundations of the science of bacteriology than any other one man. Influenced by Pasteur’s work von Hesseling, in 1866, stated his belief that the process of cheese ripening, like the souring of milk, was associated with the growth of fungi, and Martin also, in 1867, stated that cheese ripening was a process which was akin to alcoholic, lactic and butyric fermentations. Kette, in 1869, asserted the probability of Pasteur’s researches furnishing a scientific basis for many processes of change in the soil. In 1873 Schlösing and Müntz showed that nitrification must be due to the action of microörganisms, though the discovery of the particular ones remained for Winogradsky in 1889. Thus the belief that fermentation and putrefaction are due to microörganisms was as well established by the early eighties of the last century as that similar organisms are the causes of infectious diseases.
In 1836, Chevreuil and Pasteur demonstrated that meat kept safe from contamination does not decay. In 1837, Caignard-Latour in France and Schwann in Germany discovered independently that the fermentation of beer and wine results from the growth of a microscopic organism, yeast, in the fermenting wort. C. J. Fuchs identified the organism commonly known as the “blue milk bacillus” in 1841 and speculated that the souring of milk was likely caused by bacteria. Pasteur ultimately proved this in 1857. Over the next six or seven years, Pasteur also established that acetic acid fermentation, as seen in vinegar production, butyric acid fermentation (which gives off the smell of rancid butter and old cheese), and the ammoniacal fermentation of urea, common around stables, were each caused by different species of bacteria. Additionally, during this research, Pasteur discovered a class of organisms that can thrive without free oxygen—the anaerobic bacteria. There’s no doubt that starting in 1857, Pasteur did more than anyone else to lay the groundwork for the science of bacteriology. Influenced by Pasteur's work, von Hesseling, in 1866, expressed his belief that cheese aging, like milk souring, was linked to the growth of fungi. Martin, in 1867, also noted that cheese ripening was akin to alcoholic, lactic, and butyric fermentations. In 1869, Kette suggested that Pasteur’s research could provide a scientific basis for many soil processes. In 1873, Schlösing and Müntz proved that nitrification must be caused by microorganisms, although identifying the specific ones was left to Winogradsky in 1889. By the early 1880s, it was well established that fermentation and putrefaction are caused by microorganisms, just as similar organisms are responsible for infectious diseases.
STUDY OF FORMS.
An important part of the scientific knowledge of living organisms is dependent on a study of their forms and relationships. As has been stated, Leeuwenhoek considered bacteria to be “animalcules” because they showed independent movement. But little attention was paid to the natural history of these animalcules for nearly a hundred years after Leeuwenhoek. During the last quarter of the eighteenth century, however, workers busied themselves chiefly with the discovery and description of new forms. Among these students were Baron Gleichen, Jablot, Lesser, Reaumur, Hill and others. Müller, of Copenhagen, in 1786 published the first attempt at classification, a most important step in the study of these organisms. Müller introduced the terms Monas, Proteus and Vibrio, which are still in use. Ehrenberg, in his work on Infusoria, or the organisms found in infusions, published in 1838, introduced many generic names in use at present, but still classed the bacteria with protozoa. Joseph Leidy, the American naturalist, considered that the “vibrios” of previous writers were plants and not “animalcules.” He seems to have been the first to have made this distinction (1849). Perty (1852) recognized the presence of spores in some of his organisms. Ferdinand Cohn (1854) classed the bacteria among plants. Nägeli (1857) proposed the name “Schizomycetes” or “fission fungi,” which is still retained for the entire class of bacteria. Cohn in the years 1872–1875 established classification on a modern basis and added greatly to the knowledge of morphology and natural history of bacteria. He described spore formation and the development of spores into active bacteria, and showed the close relationships as well as differences between the bacteria and the lower algæ. Robert Koch was a pupil of Cohn.
An important part of understanding living organisms comes from studying their forms and relationships. As mentioned, Leeuwenhoek referred to bacteria as “animalcules” because they displayed independent movement. However, the natural history of these animalcules received little attention for nearly a hundred years after Leeuwenhoek. During the last quarter of the eighteenth century, though, researchers busied themselves mainly with discovering and describing new forms. Among these scholars were Baron Gleichen, Jablot, Lesser, Reaumur, Hill, and others. In 1786, Müller from Copenhagen published the first attempt at classification, marking a significant step in studying these organisms. Müller introduced the terms Monas, Proteus, and Vibrio, which are still used today. Ehrenberg, in his 1838 work on Infusoria, or the organisms found in infusions, introduced many generic names still in use, but he still classified bacteria with protozoa. The American naturalist Joseph Leidy believed that the “vibrios” described by earlier writers were actually plants and not “animalcules,” appearing to be the first to make this distinction in 1849. Perty (1852) identified the presence of spores in some of his organisms. Ferdinand Cohn (1854) categorized bacteria as plants. Nägeli (1857) proposed the name “Schizomycetes” or “fission fungi,” which is still used for the entire class of bacteria. Between 1872 and 1875, Cohn established a modern classification and made significant contributions to the knowledge of the morphology and natural history of bacteria. He described spore formation and how spores develop into active bacteria, illustrating the close relationships and differences between bacteria and lower algae. Robert Koch was one of Cohn's students.
An examination of the accompanying chronological table will show how the investigations and discoveries in connection with “spontaneous generation,” the “contagium vivum” theory and putrefaction and fermentation must have been mutually suggestive:
An examination of the accompanying chronological table will show how the investigations and discoveries related to "spontaneous generation," the "contagium vivum" theory, and putrefaction and fermentation must have influenced each other:
CHAPTER I.
POSITION—RELATIONSHIPS.
Bacteria are considered to belong to the plant kingdom not because of any one character they possess, but because they most nearly resemble organisms which are generally recognized as plants. While it is not difficult to distinguish between the higher plants and higher animals, it becomes almost, if not quite, impossible to separate the lowest, forms of life. It is only by the method of resemblances above mentioned that a decision is finally reached. It has even been proposed to make a third class of organisms neither plants nor animals but midway between in which the bacteria are included, but such a classification has not as yet been adopted.
Bacteria are thought to be part of the plant kingdom not because of any single trait they have, but because they resemble organisms that are generally recognized as plants. While it’s easy to tell apart higher plants and higher animals, it becomes almost, if not completely, impossible to distinguish the most basic forms of life. The final decision is reached only through the method of resemblance mentioned earlier. It has even been suggested to create a third category of organisms that are neither plants nor animals but somewhere in between, which would include bacteria, but this classification hasn’t been adopted yet.
In many respects the bacteria are most nearly related to the lowest algæ, since both are unicellular organisms, both reproduce by transverse division and the forms of the cell are strikingly similar. The bacteria differ in one important respect, that is, they do not contain chlorophyl, the green coloring matter which enables all plants possessing it to absorb and break up carbon dioxide in the light, and hence belong among the fungi. Bacteria average much smaller than even the smallest algæ.
In many ways, bacteria are most closely related to the simplest algae, since both are single-celled organisms, both reproduce by splitting in half, and their cellular shapes are remarkably similar. However, bacteria differ in one key way: they lack chlorophyll, the green pigment that allows all plants with it to absorb and break down carbon dioxide in light, which is why they are classified with fungi. Bacteria are generally much smaller than even the tiniest algae.
Bacteria are closely connected with the fission yeasts and the yeasts and torulæ. All are unicellular and without chlorophyl. The bacteria, as has been stated, reproduce by division but the others characteristically by budding or gemmation, though the fission yeasts also by division.
Bacteria are closely related to the fission yeasts, yeasts, and torulæ. All of them are unicellular and lack chlorophyll. Bacteria reproduce by division, while the others typically reproduce by budding or gemmation, although fission yeasts also reproduce by division.
There is a certain resemblance to the molds in their absence of chlorophyl. But the molds grow as branching threads and also have special fruiting organs for producing spores as a means of reproduction, neither of which characteristics is found among the true bacteria. The higher thread bacteria do show true branching and rudimentary fruiting bodies (Streptothrix) and appear to be a link connecting the true bacteria and the molds.
There is a similarity to the molds in that they both lack chlorophyll. However, molds grow as branching threads and have special fruiting structures for producing spores to reproduce, which are not characteristics found in true bacteria. The higher thread bacteria do show actual branching and basic fruiting bodies (Streptothrix) and seem to connect true bacteria and molds.







The food of bacteria is always taken up in solution by diffusion through the outer covering of the cell as it is in all plants. Plant cells never surround and engulf particles of solid food and digest them within the cell as many single-celled animals do, and as the leukocytes and similar ameboid cells in practically all multicelled animals do.2
The food of bacteria is always absorbed in solution by diffusion through the outer layer of the cell, just like in all plants. Plant cells never surround and engulf solid food particles to digest them inside the cell, like many single-celled animals do, and like the leukocytes and similar amoeboid cells in almost all multicellular animals do.2

One of the most marked differences between animals and plants is with respect to their energy relationships. Plants are characteristically storers of energy while animals are liberators of it. Some bacteria which have the power of swimming in a liquid certainly liberate relatively large amounts of energy, and in the changes which bacteria bring about in the material which they use as food considerable heat is evolved (“heating” of manure, etc.). Nevertheless the evidence is good that the bacteria as a class store much more of the energy contained in the substances actually taken into the body cell as food than is liberated in any form.
One of the most noticeable differences between animals and plants is how they handle energy. Plants typically store energy, while animals release it. Some bacteria that can swim in liquid do release a significant amount of energy, and the changes they cause in the materials they consume for food generate a fair amount of heat (like the "heating" of manure, etc.). However, the evidence shows that bacteria, as a whole, store much more energy from the substances they take in as food than they release in any form.
Bacteria do show some resemblance to the protozoa, or single-celled animal forms, in that the individuals of each group consist of one cell only and some bacteria have the power of independent motion from place to place in a liquid as most “infusoria” do, but here the resemblance ceases.
Bacteria do resemble protozoa, or single-celled organisms, in that both groups are made up of a single cell and that some bacteria can move independently through liquid, similar to most "infusoria." However, that’s where the similarities end.
Bacteria are among the smallest of organisms, so small that it requires the highest powers of the microscope for their successful study, and the use of a special unit for their measurement. This unit is the one-thousandth part of a millimeter and is called the micro-millimeter or micron. Its symbol is the Greek letter mu (µ).
Bacteria are some of the tiniest organisms, so small that you need the most powerful microscopes to study them, and a special unit to measure their size. This unit is one-thousandth of a millimeter and is called the micro-millimeter or micron. Its symbol is the Greek letter mu (µ).
The size varies widely among different kinds but is fairly constant in the same kind. The smallest described form is said to be only 0.18µ long by 0.06µ thick and is just visible with the highest power of the microscope, though it is possible and even probable that there are forms still smaller which cannot be seen. Some large rare forms may measure 40µ in length, but the vast majority are from 1µ to 4µ or 5µ long, and from one-third to one-half as wide.
The size varies significantly among different types but remains fairly consistent within the same type. The smallest identified form is said to be only 0.18µ long by 0.06µ thick and is barely visible under the highest power of a microscope, though it's likely that there are even smaller forms that cannot be seen. Some large rare forms may be up to 40µ in length, but the majority range from 1µ to 4µ or 5µ long, and are about one-third to one-half as wide.
From the above description a bacterium might be said to be a microscopic, unicellular plant, without chlorophyl, which reproduces by dividing transversely.
From the above description, a bacterium can be described as a tiny, single-celled organism without chlorophyll that reproduces by dividing across its body.
PART I.
MORPHOLOGY
CHAPTER II.
CELL STRUCTURES.
The essential structures which may by appropriate means be distinguished in the bacterial cell are cell wall and cell contents, technically termed protoplasm, cytoplasm. The cell wall is not so dense, relatively, as that of green plants, but is thicker than the outer covering of protozoa. It is very similar to the cell wall of other lower fungi. Diffusion takes place readily through it with very little selective action on substances absorbed as judged by the comparative composition of bacteria and their surrounding medium.
The basic structures that can be identified in a bacterial cell are the cell wall and the cell contents, technically known as protoplasm or cytoplasm. The cell wall is not as dense as that of green plants, but it is thicker than the outer layer of protozoa. It closely resembles the cell wall of other lower fungi. Substances can easily diffuse through it with minimal selectivity based on the composition of bacteria and their surrounding environment.
Cytoplasm.—The cytoplasm according to Bütschli and others is somewhat different and slightly denser in its outer portion next to the cell wall. This layer is designated the ectoplasm, as distinguished from the remainder of the cell contents, the endoplasm. When bacteria are suddenly transferred from a given medium into one of decidedly greater density, there sometimes results a contraction of the endoplasm, due to the rapid diffusion of water. This phenomenon is designated plasmolysis (Fig. 17), and is similar to what occurs in the cells of higher plants when subjected to the same treatment. This is one of the methods which may be used to show the different parts of the cell just described.
Cytoplasm.—The cytoplasm, according to Bütschli and others, is somewhat different and slightly denser in its outer part next to the cell wall. This layer is called the ectoplasm, in contrast to the rest of the cell contents, the endoplasm. When bacteria are suddenly moved from one medium to another with a significantly higher density, it can sometimes cause the endoplasm to contract, due to the rapid movement of water. This phenomenon is called plasmolysis (Fig. 17), and it is similar to what happens in the cells of higher plants when exposed to the same conditions. This is one of the methods that can be used to demonstrate the different parts of the cell just mentioned.
If bacteria are suddenly transferred from a relatively dense medium to one which is of decidedly less density, it occasionally happens that water diffuses into the cell and swells up the endoplasm so much more rapidly than the cell wall that the latter ruptures and some of the endoplasm exudes in the form of droplets on the surface of the cell wall. This phenomenon is called plasmoptysis. Students will seldom observe the distinction between cell wall and cell contents, except that in examining living bacteria the outer portion appears more highly refractive. This is chiefly due to the presence of a cell wall, but is not a proof of its existence.
If bacteria are suddenly moved from a relatively dense medium to one with clearly less density, it sometimes happens that water rushes into the cell and causes the endoplasm to swell much more quickly than the cell wall can handle, resulting in the wall rupturing and some of the endoplasm leaking out in droplets on the surface of the cell wall. This occurrence is called plasmoptysis. Students will rarely notice the difference between the cell wall and the cell contents, except that when looking at living bacteria, the outer part appears more reflective. This is mainly due to the presence of a cell wall, but it doesn't prove that it exists.


Nucleus.—Douglas and Distaso3 summarize the various opinions with regard to the nucleus in bacteria as follows:
Nucleus.—Douglas and Distaso3 summarize the various opinions regarding the nucleus in bacteria as follows:
1. Those who do not admit, the presence of a nucleus or of anything equivalent to it. (Fischer, Migula, Massart).
1. Those who do not acknowledge the presence of a nucleus or anything similar to it. (Fischer, Migula, Massart).
2. Those who consider that the entire bacterial cell is the equivalent of a nucleus and contains no protoplasm. (Ruzicka).
2. Those who believe that the whole bacterial cell is equivalent to a nucleus and has no protoplasm. (Ruzicka).
3. Those who admit the presence of nuclein but say that this is not morphologically differentiated from the protoplasm as a nucleus. (Weigert).
3. Those who acknowledge the existence of nuclein but argue that it is not morphologically distinct from protoplasm as a nucleus. (Weigert).
5. Those who say that the bacterial cell contains a distinct nucleus, at least in most instances. These authors base their claims on staining with a Giemsa stain. (Feinberg, Ziemann, Neuvel, Dobell, Douglass and Distaso).
5. Those who claim that bacterial cells have a distinct nucleus, at least in most cases. These authors support their claims by using Giemsa staining. (Feinberg, Ziemann, Neuvel, Dobell, Douglass, and Distaso).
That nucleoproteins are present in the bacterial cell in relatively large amounts is well established. Also that there are other proteins and that the protoplasm is not all nuclein.
That nucleoproteins are found in bacterial cells in significant amounts is well known. It's also established that there are other proteins and that the protoplasm isn't made up entirely of nuclein.
Some workers as noted above have been able to demonstrate collections of nuclein by staining, especially in very young cells. In older cells this material is in most instances diffused throughout the protoplasm and can not be so differentiated.
Some workers, as mentioned above, have been able to show collections of nuclein by staining, especially in very young cells. In older cells, this material is mostly spread throughout the protoplasm and can't be easily distinguished.
The following statement probably represents the generally accepted view at the present time:
The following statement likely reflects the widely accepted perspective today:
A nucleus as such is not present in bacterial cells, except in a few large rare forms and in very young cells. Nuclein, the characteristic chemical substance in nuclei, which when aggregated forms the nucleus, is scattered throughout the cell contents and thus intimately mingled with the protoplasm, and cannot be differentiated by staining as in most cells.
A nucleus as such isn’t found in bacterial cells, except in a few large rare types and in very young cells. Nuclein, the specific chemical substance in nuclei that forms the nucleus when grouped together, is spread throughout the cell and is closely mixed with the protoplasm, making it hard to distinguish with staining like in most cells.
The close association of nuclein and protoplasm may explain the rapid rate of division of bacteria (Chapter VIII, p. 91).
The close connection between nuclein and protoplasm might explain the quick division rate of bacteria (Chapter VIII, p. 91).
The chemical composition of the bacterial cell is discussed in Chapter VII.
The chemical makeup of the bacterial cell is discussed in Chapter VII.
In addition to the essential parts just described the bacterial cell may show some of the following accidental structures: vacuoles, capsules, metachromatic granules, flagella, spores.
In addition to the essential parts just described, the bacterial cell may show some of the following accidental structures: vacuoles, capsules, metachromatic granules, flagella, spores.
Vacuoles.—Vacuoles appear as clear spaces in the protoplasm when the organism is examined in the living condition or when stained very slightly (Fig. 18). During life these are filled with liquid or gaseous material which is sometimes waste, sometimes reserve food, sometimes digestive fluids. Students are apt to confuse vacuoles with spores (p. 47). Staining is the surest way to differentiate (Chapter XIX, p. 209). If vacuoles have any special function, it is an unimportant one.
Vacuoles.—Vacuoles look like clear spaces in the protoplasm when the organism is observed in its living state or when stained very lightly (Fig. 18). In living organisms, these spaces are filled with liquid or gas, which can be waste, reserved food, or digestive fluids. Students often confuse vacuoles with spores (p. 47). Staining is the best method to tell them apart (Chapter XIX, p. 209). If vacuoles have any specific role, it is not a significant one.


Capsule.—The capsule is a second covering outside the cell wall and probably developed from it (Fig. 19). It is usually gelatinous, so that bacteria which form capsules frequently stick together when growing in a fluid, so that the whole mass has a jelly-like consistency. The term zoöglœa was formerly applied to such masses, but it is a poor term and misleading (zoön = an animal) and should be dropped. The masses of jelly-like material frequently found on decaying wood, especially in rainy weather, are in some cases masses of capsule-forming bacteria, though a part of the jelly is a product of bacterial activity, a gum-like substance which lies among the capsulated organisms. When these masses dry out, they become tough and leathery, but it is not to be presumed that capsules are of this consistency. On the contrary, they are soft and delicate, though they certainly serve as an additional protection to the organism, doubtless more by selective absorption than mechanically. Certain bacteria which cause disease form capsules in the blood of those animals which they kill and not in the blood of those in which they have no effect (Bacterium anthracis in guinea pig’s blood and in rat’s blood). The presence of capsules around an organism can be proved only by staining the capsule. Many bacteria when stained in albuminous fluids show a clear space around them which appears like a capsule. It is due to the contraction of the fluid away from the organism during drying.
Capsule.—The capsule is an additional layer outside the cell wall and likely evolved from it (Fig. 19). It is usually gelatinous, causing bacteria that form capsules to frequently clump together when growing in a fluid, resulting in a jelly-like structure. The term zoöglœa was previously used for these clusters, but it's an inadequate and misleading term (zoön = an animal) and should be eliminated. The jelly-like masses often found on decaying wood, particularly in wet weather, are sometimes clusters of capsule-forming bacteria, although part of the jelly is a byproduct of bacterial activity, a gum-like substance interspersed among the capsulated organisms. When these masses dry out, they turn tough and leathery, but that doesn't mean that capsules are like that. In fact, they are soft and delicate, although they provide extra protection to the organism, likely more through selective absorption than mechanical means. Certain bacteria that cause disease form capsules in the blood of the animals they affect and not in those they don't impact (Bacterium anthracis in guinea pig blood and in rat blood). The presence of capsules around an organism can only be confirmed by staining the capsule. Many bacteria, when stained in protein-rich fluids, show a clear space around them that looks like a capsule. This is due to the contraction of the fluid away from the organism during drying.
Metachromatic Granules.—The term “metachromatic” is applied to granules which in stained preparations take a color different from the protoplasm as a whole (Fig. 20). They vary widely in chemical composition. Some of them are glycogen, some fat droplets. Others are so-called “granulose” closely related to starch but probably not true starch. Others are probably nuclein. Of many the chemical composition is unknown. They are called “Babes-Ernst corpuscles” in certain bacteria (typhoid bacillus). Since they frequently occur in the ends of cells the term “polar granules” is also applied. Their presence is of value in the recognition of but few bacteria (“Neisser granules” in diphtheria).
Metachromatic Granules.—The term “metachromatic” refers to granules that, when stained, take on a color that differs from the overall color of the protoplasm (Fig. 20). They can have a wide range of chemical compositions. Some are glycogen, others are fat droplets. There are also substances referred to as “granulose,” which are closely related to starch but are probably not actual starch. Some may be nuclein. The chemical makeup of many is still unknown. In certain bacteria (like the typhoid bacillus), they are called “Babes-Ernst corpuscles.” Since they often appear at the ends of cells, they are also referred to as “polar granules.” Their presence is helpful in identifying only a few bacteria, such as the “Neisser granules” found in diphtheria.
Flagellum.—A flagellum is a very minute thread-like process growing out from the cell wall, probably filled with a strand of protoplasm. The vibrations of the flagella move the organism through the liquid medium. Bacteria which are thus capable of independent movement are spoken of as “motile bacteria.” The actual rate of movement is very slight, though in proportion to the size of the organism it may be considered rapid. Thus Alfred Fischer determined that some organisms have a speed for short periods of about 40 cm. per hour. This is equivalent to a man moving more than 200 miles in the same time.
Flagellum.—A flagellum is a tiny thread-like structure that extends from the cell wall, likely filled with a strand of protoplasm. The vibrations of the flagella propel the organism through the liquid medium. Bacteria that can move independently are referred to as “motile bacteria.” The actual speed of movement is quite slow, but considering the size of the organism, it can be viewed as fast. For example, Alfred Fischer found that some organisms can reach speeds of about 40 cm per hour for short periods. This is similar to a person walking more than 200 miles in the same timeframe.
It is obvious that bacteria which can move about in a liquid have an advantage in obtaining food, since they do not need to wait for it to be brought to them. This advantage is probably slight.
It’s clear that bacteria that can move around in a liquid have an edge in finding food, since they don’t have to wait for it to come to them. However, this advantage is likely minimal.


An organism may have only one flagellum at the end. It is then said to be monotrichic (Fig. 21) (μόνος = alone, single; τριχος = hair). This is most commonly at the front end, so that the bacterium is drawn through the liquid by its motion. Rarely it is at the rear end. Other bacteria may possess a bundle of flagella at one end and are called lophotrichic (Fig. 22) (λοφος = tuft). Sometimes at approaching division the flagella may be at both ends and are then amphitrichic (Fig. 23) (αμφι = both). It is probable that this condition does not persist long, but represents the development of flagella at one end of each of a pair resulting from division of an organism which has flagella at one end only. In many bacteria the flagella arise from all parts of the surface of the cell. Such bacteria are peritrichic (Fig. 24) (περι = around). The position and even the number of the flagella are very constant for each kind and are of decided value in identification.
An organism can have just one flagellum at the end. This is called monotrichic (Fig. 21) (alone = alone, single; τριχος = hair). It’s usually located at the front, allowing the bacterium to move through the liquid by its motion. Rarely, it can be found at the back. Other bacteria might have a bundle of flagella at one end, known as lophotrichic (Fig. 22) (hill = tuft). Sometimes, as they prepare to divide, the flagella can appear at both ends, described as amphitrichic (Fig. 23) (αμφι = both). This situation probably doesn't last long; it's likely a stage in the development of flagella at one end of each organism after it divides. In many bacteria, flagella emerge from all over the cell surface. These bacteria are referred to as peritrichic (Fig. 24) (περι = around). The position and even the number of flagella are consistent for each type and are very useful for identification.


Flagella are too fine and delicate to be seen on the living organism, or even on bacteria which have been colored by the ordinary stains. They are rendered visible only by certain methods which cause a precipitate on both bacteria and flagella which are thereby made thick enough to be seen (Chapter XIX, p. 210). The movement of liquid around a bacterium caused by vibrations of flagella can sometimes be observed with large forms and the use of “dark-field” illumination.
Flagella are too thin and delicate to be seen on living organisms, or even on bacteria that have been stained with regular dyes. They can only be made visible through specific methods that create a deposit on both the bacteria and the flagella, thickening them enough to be seen (Chapter XIX, p. 210). The movement of liquid around a bacterium caused by the vibrations of flagella can sometimes be observed in larger forms using “dark-field” illumination.
Flagella are very delicate and easily broken off from the cell body. Slight changes in the density or reaction of the medium frequently cause this breaking off, so that preparations made from actively motile bacteria frequently show no flagella. For this reason and also on account of their fineness the demonstration of flagella is not easy, and it is not safe to say that a non-motile bacterium has no flagella except after very careful study.
Flagella are very delicate and can easily break off from the cell body. Small changes in the medium's density or reaction often lead to this breakage, which means that samples from actively moving bacteria frequently show no flagella. Because of this and their thinness, demonstrating flagella is not easy, and it's not reliable to conclude that a non-motile bacterium lacks flagella without thorough examination.
The motion of bacteria is characteristic and a little practice in observing will enable the student to recognize it and distinguish between motility and “Brownian” or molecular motion. Dead and non-motile bacteria show the latter. In fact, any finely divided particles suspended in a liquid which is not too viscous and in which the particles are not soluble show Brownian motion or “pedesis.” This latter is a dancing motion of the particle within a very small area and without change of place, while motile bacteria move from place to place or even out of the field of the microscope with greater or less speed. There is a marked difference in the character of the motion of different kinds of bacteria. Some rotate around the long axis when moving, others vibrate from side to side.
The movement of bacteria is distinctive, and with a bit of practice in observing, students can learn to recognize it and differentiate between genuine motility and “Brownian” or molecular motion. Dead and non-moving bacteria exhibit the latter. In fact, any small particles suspended in a liquid that isn't too thick and where the particles aren't soluble will display Brownian motion or “pedesis.” This type of motion involves the particle dancing within a very small area without actually changing its position, while motile bacteria move from one place to another or even out of the microscope's view at varying speeds. There's a significant difference in the type of movement among different kinds of bacteria. Some rotate around their long axis while moving, while others shift back and forth.
Among the higher thread bacteria there are some which show motility without possessing flagella. Just how they move is little understood.
Among the higher thread bacteria, there are some that can move around without having flagella. It's not very clear how they do this.
Spores.—Under certain conditions some bacterial cells undergo transformations which result in the formation of so-called spores. If the process is followed under the microscope, the changes observed are approximately these: A very minute point appears in the protoplasm which seems to act somewhat like the centrosome of higher cells as a “center of attraction” so that the protoplasm gradually collects around it. The spot disappears or is enclosed in the collected protoplasm. This has evidently become denser as it is more highly refractive than before. In time all or nearly all of the protoplasm is collected. A new cell wall is developed around it which is thicker than the cell wall of the bacterium. This thickened cell wall is called the “spore capsule.” Gradually the remnants of the former cell contents and the old cell wall disappear or dissolve and the spore becomes “free” (Fig. 25).
Spores.—Under certain conditions, some bacterial cells undergo changes that lead to the formation of what are called spores. When observed under a microscope, the changes look like this: a tiny point appears in the protoplasm that functions similarly to the centrosome in higher cells as a "center of attraction," causing the protoplasm to gradually gather around it. The spot either disappears or becomes enclosed in the collected protoplasm, which has clearly become denser and more refractive than before. Eventually, almost all of the protoplasm is gathered. A new cell wall is formed around it, which is thicker than the original cell wall of the bacterium. This thicker cell wall is known as the “spore capsule.” Over time, the remains of the old cell contents and the previous cell wall dissolve or disappear, and the spore becomes “free” (Fig. 25).

If the spore is placed in favorable conditions the protoplasm absorbs water, swells, the capsule bursts at some point, a cell wall is formed and the bacterium grows to normal size and divides, that is, it is an active growing cell again. This process is called “germination” of the spore. The point at which the spore capsule bursts to permit the new cell to emerge is characteristic for each kind of bacterium. It may be at the end when the germination is said to be polar (Fig. 26). It may be from the middle of one side which gives equatorial germination (Fig. 27). Rarely it is diagonally from a point between the equator and the pole, which type may be styled oblique germination. In one or two instances the entire spore swells up, lengthens and becomes a rod without any special germination unless this type might be designated bi-polar.
If the spore is placed in suitable conditions, the protoplasm absorbs water, expands, the capsule bursts at some point, a cell wall forms, and the bacterium grows to its normal size and divides, meaning it's an actively growing cell again. This process is called the "germination" of the spore. The point where the spore capsule bursts to allow the new cell to emerge is unique to each type of bacterium. It may occur at the end, known as polar (Fig. 26). It may happen from the middle of one side, which is referred to as equatorial germination (Fig. 27). Rarely, it happens diagonally from a point between the equator and the pole, which can be called oblique germination. In one or two cases, the entire spore swells, elongates, and turns into a rod without any specific germination process unless this is referred to as bi-polar.




Spores are most commonly oval or elliptical in shape, though sometimes spherical. A spore may be formed in the middle of the organism without (Fig. 28) or with (Fig. 29) a change in size of the cell around it. If the diameter through the cell is increased, then the cell with the contained spore becomes spindle-shaped. Such a cell is termed a “clostridium.” Sometimes the spore develops in the end of the cell either without (Fig. 30) or with enlarging it (Fig. 31). In a few forms the spore is placed at the end of the rod and shows a marked enlargement. This is spoken of as the “plectridium” or more commonly the “drumstick spore” (Fig. 32). The position and shape of the spore are constant for each kind of bacteria. In one or two instances only, two spores have been observed in a single organism.
Spores are usually oval or elliptical in shape, but can sometimes be spherical. A spore can form in the middle of the organism without changing the size of the surrounding cell, or with a change. If the diameter of the cell increases, the cell containing the spore becomes spindle-shaped. This type of cell is called a “clostridium.” Sometimes the spore develops at the end of the cell, either without enlarging it or with enlargement. In some forms, the spore is located at the end of the rod and shows significant enlargement. This is referred to as the “plectridium” or more commonly as the “drumstick spore.” The position and shape of the spore are consistent for each type of bacteria. In just a couple of cases, two spores have been seen in one organism.



The fact that the protoplasm is denser and the spore capsule thicker (the percentage of water in each is decidedly less than in the growing cell) gives the spore the property of much greater resistance to all destructive agencies than the active bacterium has. For example, all actively growing cells are destroyed by boiling in a very few minutes, while some spores require several hours’ boiling. The same relation holds with regard to drying, the action of chemicals, light, etc. That the coagulation temperature of a protein varies inversely with the amount of water, it contains, is shown by the following table from Frost and McCampbell, “General Bacteriology”:
The fact that the protoplasm is denser and the spore capsule is thicker (the water content in each is significantly lower than in the active cell) gives the spore a much greater resistance to destructive forces than the active bacterium. For instance, all actively growing cells can be destroyed by boiling in just a few minutes, while some spores need several hours of boiling. The same relationship applies to drying, the effects of chemicals, light, etc. The coagulation temperature of a protein varies inversely with its water content, as shown in the following table from Frost and McCampbell, “General Bacteriology”:
Egg albumin | plus | 50 per cent. water | coagulates at | 56° |
Egg albumin | plus | 25 per cent. water | coagulates at | 74–80° |
Egg albumin | plus | 18 per cent. water | coagulates at | 88–90° |
Egg albumin | plus | 6 per cent. water | coagulates at | 145° |
Egg albumin | dry | water | coagulates at | 160–170° |
This resistance explains why it happens that food materials boiled and sealed in cans to prevent the entrance of organisms sometimes spoil. The spores have not been killed by the boiling. It explains also in part the persistence of some diseases like anthrax and black leg in pastures for years. From the above description it follows that the spore is to be considered as a condensation of the bacterial protoplasm surrounded by an especially thick cell wall. Its function is the preservation of the organism under adverse conditions. It corresponds most closely to the encystment of certain protozoa—the ameba for example. Possibly the spore represents a very rudimentary beginning of a reproductive function such as is gradually evolved in the higher thread bacteria, the fission yeasts, the yeasts, the molds, etc. Its characteristics are so markedly different, however, that the function of preservation is certainly the main one.
This resistance explains why food materials that are boiled and sealed in cans to keep out organisms sometimes spoil. The boiling process hasn’t killed the spores. It also partially explains why certain diseases like anthrax and black leg can persist in pastures for years. From this description, we can see that the spore is considered a condensation of bacterial protoplasm surrounded by a particularly thick cell wall. Its purpose is to help the organism survive under unfavorable conditions. It’s similar to the encystment of some protozoa, like the ameba, for instance. The spore might represent a very basic form of a reproductive function that evolves gradually in more advanced thread bacteria, fission yeasts, yeasts, molds, etc. However, its characteristics are so distinctly different that its primary function is definitely preservation.
It must not be supposed that spores are formed under adverse conditions only, because bacteria showing vigorous growth frequently form spores rapidly. Special conditions are necessary for their formation just as they are for the growth and other functions of bacteria (Chapters VI and VII).
It shouldn't be assumed that spores are only produced under unfavorable conditions, because bacteria that exhibit strong growth can also quickly produce spores. Specific conditions are required for their formation, just like for the growth and other activities of bacteria (Chapters VI and VII).
CHAPTER III.
CELL FORMS.
Though there is apparently a wide variation in the shapes of different bacterial cells, these may all be reduced to three typical cell forms. These are: first and simplest, the round or spherical, typified by a ball and called the coccus form, or coccus, plural cocci4 (Fig. 33). The coccus may be large, that is, from 1.5µ to 2µ in diameter. The term macrococcus is sometimes applied to these large cocci. If the coccus is less than 1µ in diameter, it is sometimes spoken of as a micrococcus; in fact, this term is very commonly applied to any coccus. When cocci are growing together, many of the cells do not appear as true spheres but are more or less distorted from pressure of their neighbors or from failure to grow to full size after recent division. Most cocci divide into hemispheres and then each half grows to full size. A few cocci elongate before division and then appear oval or elliptical.
Although there seems to be a wide variety in the shapes of different bacterial cells, they can all be categorized into three main cell forms. The first and simplest is the round or spherical shape, represented by a ball and known as the coccus form, or coccus, plural cocci4 (Fig. 33). The coccus can be large, typically ranging from 1.5µ to 2µ in diameter. The term macrococcus is sometimes used for these larger cocci. If the coccus is smaller than 1µ in diameter, it may be referred to as a micrococcus; in fact, this term is often applied to any coccus. When cocci grow together, many of the cells do not appear as true spheres but rather become distorted due to pressure from their neighbors or because they haven't fully grown after recent division. Most cocci divide into hemispheres, and then each half grows to full size. A few cocci elongate before division and may appear oval or elliptical.
The second cell form is that of a cylinder or rod typified by a section of a lead-pencil. The name bacillus, plural bacilli, is applied to this type (Fig. 34). The bacillus may be short (Fig. 35), 1µ or less in length, or long, up to 40µ in rare cases. Most bacilli are from 2µ to 5µ or 6µ long. The ends of the rod are usually rounded, occasionally square and very rarely pointed. It is evident that a very short rod with rounded ends approaches a coccus in form and it is not always easy to differentiate in such cases. Most bacilli are straight, but some are slightly curved (Fig. 36).
The second cell shape is that of a cylinder or rod, like a piece of lead pencil. The term bacillus, plural bacilli, is used for this type (Fig. 34). A bacillus can be short (Fig. 35), measuring 1µ or less in length, or long, reaching up to 40µ in rare instances. Most bacilli range from 2µ to 5µ or 6µ long. The ends of the rod are usually rounded, sometimes square, and very rarely pointed. It's clear that a very short rod with rounded ends resembles a coccus in shape, making differentiation in such cases not always straightforward. While most bacilli are straight, some have a slight curve (Fig. 36).
The third cell form is the spiral, typified by a section of a cork-screw and named spirillum, plural spirilla (Fig. 37). A very short spiral consisting of only a portion of a turn is sometimes called vibrio (Fig. 38). Vibrios when seen under the microscope look like short curved rods. The distinction between the two can be made only by examining the organism alive and moving in a liquid. The vibrio shows a characteristic spiral twisting motion. Very long, flexible spirals are usually named spirochetes (Fig. 39). The spirochetes are motile but flagella have not been shown to be present.
The third type of cell is the spiral, which is like a section of a corkscrew and is called spirillum, with the plural being spirilla (Fig. 37). A very short spiral that only has part of a turn is sometimes referred to as vibrio (Fig. 38). When vibrios are viewed under the microscope, they appear as short curved rods. The difference between the two can only be observed by looking at the organism alive and moving in a liquid. The vibrio exhibits a distinctive spiral twisting motion. Very long, flexible spirals are typically called spirochetes (Fig. 39). Spirochetes are capable of movement, but it hasn’t been proven that they have flagella.




Besides the three typical cell forms bacteria frequently show very great irregularities in shape. They may be pointed, bulged, club-shaped or even slightly branched. These peculiar and bizarre forms practically always occur when some of the necessary conditions for normal growth, discussed in Chapters VI and VII, are not fulfilled. They are best regarded as involution or degeneration forms for this reason (Fig. 40). In a very few cases it is not possible to obtain the organism without these forms (the diphtheria group). It is probable that these cell forms are normal in such cases, or else conditions suitable for the normal growth have not been obtained.
Besides the three typical shapes, bacteria often exhibit significant irregularities in form. They can be pointed, swollen, club-shaped, or even slightly branched. These unusual and strange shapes usually appear when some of the essential conditions for normal growth, discussed in Chapters VI and VII, are not met. They are best seen as involution or degeneration forms for this reason (Fig. 40). In very few instances, it's impossible to obtain the organism without these forms (the diphtheria group). It's likely that these cell shapes are normal in these cases, or that suitable conditions for normal growth have not been achieved.



CHAPTER IV.
CELL GROUPINGS.
It has been stated that bacteria reproduce by transverse division, that is, division across the long axis. Following repeated divisions the new cells may or may not remain attached. In the latter case the bacteria occur as separate isolated individuals. In the former, arrangements characteristic of the particular organism almost invariably result. These arrangements are best described as cell groupings or growth forms.
It has been said that bacteria reproduce by dividing across their long axis. After several rounds of division, the new cells may or may not stay attached. If they don't stay attached, the bacteria exist as individual, separate cells. If they do stay attached, they usually form specific arrangements that are typical of that organism. These arrangements are best referred to as cell groupings or growth forms.


In the case of spiral forms it is obvious that there is only one possible grouping, that is, in chains of two or more individuals adherent end to end. A chain of two spirilla might be called a diplospirillum (διπλός = double); of three or more, a streptospirillum (στρεπτός = necklace, chain) (Fig. 41). These terms are rarely used, since spirilla do not ordinarily remain attached. Likewise the bacillus can grow only in chains of two or more, and the terms diplobacillus (Fig. 42), bacilli in groups of two, and streptobacillus (Fig. 43), bacilli in chains are frequently used. Still the terms thread, filament, or chain are more common for streptobacillus.
In the case of spiral shapes, it’s clear that there’s only one possible arrangement: in chains of two or more individuals connected end to end. A chain of two spirilla could be called a diplospirillum (double = double); and a chain of three or more could be called a streptospirillum (bent = necklace, chain) (Fig. 41). These terms are rarely used because spirilla don’t usually stay attached. Similarly, bacilli can only grow in chains of two or more, and the terms diplobacillus (Fig. 42), referring to bacilli in groups of two, and streptobacillus (Fig. 43), referring to bacilli in chains, are commonly used. Still, the terms thread, filament, or chain are more frequently used for streptobacillus.




Since the coccus is spherical, transverse division may occur in any direction, though in three planes only at right angles to each other. Division might occur in one plane only as in spirilla and bacilli, or in two planes only or in all three planes. As a matter of fact these three methods of division are found among the cocci, but only one method for each particular kind of coccus. As a result there may be a variety of cell groupings among the cocci. When division occurs in one plane only, the possible groupings are the same as among the spirilla or bacilli. The cocci may occur in groups of two—diplococcus grouping (Fig. 44), or in chains—streptococcus grouping (Figs. 45 and 46). When the grouping is in diplococci, the individual cocci most commonly appear as hemispheres with the plane surfaces apposed (Fig. 44). Sometimes they appear as spheres and occasionally are even somewhat elongated. The individuals in a streptococcus grouping are most commonly elongated, either in the same direction as the length of the chain, or at right angles to it. The latter appearance is probably due to failure to enlarge completely after division. Streptococci frequently appear as chains of diplococci, that is, the pair resulting from the division of a single coccus remain a little closer to each other than to neighboring cells, as a close inspection of Fig. 45 will show.
Since the coccus is spherical, transverse division can happen in any direction, although only in three planes that are perpendicular to each other. Division can occur in one plane only like in spirilla and bacilli, or in two planes only, or in all three planes. In fact, these three division methods are found among the cocci, but only one method applies to each specific type of coccus. As a result, there can be a variety of cell groupings among the cocci. When division occurs in just one plane, the possible groupings are the same as those among the spirilla or bacilli. The cocci can form groups of two—diplococcus grouping (Fig. 44), or in chains—streptococcus grouping (Figs. 45 and 46). In a diplococci grouping, the individual cocci usually look like hemispheres with their flat surfaces facing each other (Fig. 44). Sometimes they appear as spheres and occasionally are even a bit elongated. The individual cells in a streptococcus grouping are generally elongated, either in line with the length of the chain or perpendicular to it. The latter appearance likely occurs because they don't fully enlarge after division. Streptococci often look like chains of diplococci, meaning the pairs resulting from the division of a single coccus stay a bit closer to each other than to neighboring cells, as a close look at Fig. 45 will show.
If division occurs in two planes only, there may result the above groupings and several others in addition. The four cocci which result from a single division may remain together, giving the tetracoccus or tetrad grouping. Very rarely all the cocci divide evenly and the result is a regular rectangular flat mass of cells, the total number of which is a multiple of four. The term merismopedia (from a genus of algæ which grows the same way) is applied to such a grouping. If the cells within a group after a few divisions do not reproduce so rapidly (lack of food), as usually happens, the number of cells becomes uneven or at least not necessarily a multiple of four and the resultant flat mass has an irregular, uneven outline. This grouping is termed staphylococcus (σταφυλος = a bunch of grapes) (Fig. 47). It is the most common grouping among the cocci.
If division happens in two planes only, it can lead to the groupings mentioned above and several others. The four cocci that come from a single division may stay together, forming the tetracoccus or tetrad grouping. Very rarely, all the cocci divide evenly, resulting in a regular rectangular flat mass of cells, where the total number is a multiple of four. This kind of grouping is called merismopedia (after a genus of algae that grows similarly). If the cells within a group slow down their reproduction after a few divisions (due to a lack of food), which usually happens, the number of cells becomes uneven or at least not necessarily a multiple of four, and the resulting flat mass has an irregular, uneven outline. This type of grouping is known as staphylococcus (grape = a bunch of grapes) (Fig. 47). It is the most common grouping among the cocci.
When division occurs in all three planes, there is in addition to all the groupings possible to one- and two-plane division a third grouping in which the cells are in solid packets, multiples of eight. The name sarcina is applied to this growth form (Fig. 48). The individual cells in a sarcina packet never show the typical coccus form so long as they remain together, but are always flattened on two or more sides.
When division happens in all three planes, there’s an extra type of grouping in addition to the ones possible with one- and two-plane division. This third grouping has the cells in solid packets, multiples of eight. The term sarcina refers to this growth form (Fig. 48). The individual cells in a sarcina packet don’t display the usual coccus shape as long as they’re grouped together; instead, they are always flattened on two or more sides.
The above descriptions indicate how the method of division may be determined. If in examining a preparation the sarcina grouping appears, that shows three-plane division. If there are no sarcina, but tetrads or staphylococci (rarely merismopedia), then the division is in two planes. If none of the foregoing is observed but only diplo- or streptococci, these indicate one-plane division only. Cocci show their characteristic groupings only when grown in a liquid medium, and such should always be used before deciding on the plane of division.
The descriptions above show how you can determine the method of division. If you see a preparation with the sarcina grouping, that indicates three-plane division. If there are no sarcina, but you find tetrads or staphylococci (rarely merismopedia), then the division is two planes. If none of the above is present but only diplo- or streptococci, that indicates one-plane division only. Cocci show their characteristic groupings only when grown in a liquid medium, which should always be used before deciding on the plane of division.


As the above description shows, these terms which are properly adjectives describing the cell grouping, are quite generally used as nouns. Thus the terms a diplococcus, a tetrad, a streptococcus, etc., are common, meaning a bacterium of the cell form and cell grouping indicated.
As the description above shows, these terms, which are actually adjectives that describe the group of cells, are commonly used as nouns. So, terms like diplococcus, tetrad, streptococcus, etc., are frequently used to refer to a bacterium that has the specific cell form and grouping described.
Cell Form. | Cell Grouping. |
---|---|
coccus—round or spherical. |
|
bacillus—rod-shaped or cylindrical. |
|
spirillum—spiral-shaped. |
|
CHAPTER V.
CLASSIFICATION.
The arrangement of living organisms in groups according to their resemblances and the adoption of fixed names is of the greatest advantage in their scientific study. For animal forms and for the higher plants this classification is gradually becoming standardized through the International Congress of Zoölogists and of Botanists respectively. Unfortunately, the naming of the bacteria has not as yet been taken up by the latter body, though announced as one of the subjects for the Congress of 1916 (postponed on account of the war). Hence there is at present no system which can be regarded as either fixed or official.
The arrangement of living organisms into groups based on their similarities and the use of fixed names is immensely beneficial for scientific study. For animal species and higher plants, this classification is slowly becoming standardized through the International Congress of Zoologists and Botanists, respectively. Unfortunately, naming bacteria hasn’t yet been addressed by the latter group, although it was announced as a topic for the Congress of 1916 (which was postponed due to the war). As a result, there is currently no system that can be considered either fixed or official.




Since Müller’s first classification of “animalcules” in 1786 numerous attempts have been made to solve the problem. Only those beginning with Ferdinand Cohn (1872–75) are of any real value. As long as bacteria are regarded as plants it appears that the logical method is to follow the well-established botanical principles in any system for naming them. Botanists depend on morphological features almost entirely in making their distinctions. The preceding chapters have shown that the minute plants which are discussed have very few such features. They are, to recapitulate, cell wall, protoplasm, vacuoles, metachromatic granules, capsules, flagella, spores, cell forms and cell groupings. Most bacteria show not more than three or four of these features, so that it is impossible by the aid of morphology alone to distinguish from each other the large number of different kinds which certainly exist. In the various systems which are conceded to be the best these characteristics do serve to classify them down to genera, leaving the “species” to be determined from their physiological activities. One of these systems was adopted by the laboratory section of the American Public Health Association and by the Society of American Bacteriologists and was practically the standard in this country until superseded by the Society’s own classification. It is that of the German Bacteriologist Migula and is given below for comparison. Since practically the entire discussion in this book is concerned with the first three families the generic characteristics in these only will be given. The full classification as well as a thorough discussion of this subject is given in Lafar’s Handbuch, whence the following is adopted:
Since Müller’s first classification of “animalcules” in 1786, there have been many attempts to solve the problem. Only those initiated by Ferdinand Cohn (1872–75) hold any real value. As long as bacteria are considered plants, the logical approach is to follow established botanical principles when naming them. Botanists primarily rely on morphological features to make their distinctions. The earlier chapters have shown that the tiny plants discussed have very few such features. To summarize, they include cell wall, protoplasm, vacuoles, metachromatic granules, capsules, flagella, spores, cell forms, and cell groupings. Most bacteria display at most three or four of these features, making it impossible to distinguish the many different kinds that surely exist based on morphology alone. In the various systems accepted as the best, these characteristics help classify them down to the genus level, while the “species” is determined by their physiological activities. One of these systems was adopted by the laboratory section of the American Public Health Association and by the Society of American Bacteriologists, and it was practically the standard in this country until it was replaced by the Society’s own classification. It is that of the German bacteriologist Migula and is provided below for comparison. Since nearly the entire discussion in this book focuses on the first three families, only the generic characteristics in these three will be presented. The complete classification, along with a detailed discussion of this subject, can be found in Lafar’s Handbuch, from which the following is taken:







ORDER I. Eubacteria.
Cells without nuclei, free from sulphur granules and from bacteriopurpurin (p. 112); colorless, or slightly colored.
Cells without nuclei, free from sulfur granules and from bacteriopurpurin (p. 112); colorless or slightly colored.
1. Family: Coccaceae (Zopf) Migula, all cocci. | |||
---|---|---|---|
Non-flagellated, Non-motile | |||
Flagellated, motile |
|
||
2. Family: Bacteria Migula, all bacilli. | |||
3. Family: Spirillaceae Migula, all spirilla. | |||
Cells stiff | |||
Cell flexible |
|
||
4. Family: Chlamydobacteria. | |||
Cells cylindrical in long threads and surrounded by a sheath. Reproduction also by gonidia formed from an entire cell. | |||
ORDER II. THIOBACTERIA: SULPHUR BACTERIA.
Cells without a nucleus, but containing sulphur granules, may be colorless or contain bacteriopurpurin and be colored reddish or violet.
Cells without a nucleus, but containing sulfur granules, may be colorless or contain bacteriopurpurin and appear reddish or violet.
- Genus 1. Thiothrix Winogradsky.
- Genus 2. Beggiatoa Trevisan. Of interest since it is without a sheath, is motile, but without flagella (Fig. 59).
This has five subfamilies and twelve genera, most of which are due to the Russian bacteriologist Winogradsky who did more work than anyone else with the sulphur bacteria.
This has five subfamilies and twelve genera, most of which are attributed to the Russian bacteriologist Winogradsky, who contributed more to the study of sulfur bacteria than anyone else.
THE CLASSIFICATION OF THE SOCIETY OF AMERICAN BACTERIOLOGISTS.
The Committee on Classification of the Society of American Bacteriologists at the meeting held in December, 1919, submitted its final report. This report has not been formally adopted as a whole, but in all probability will be substantially as outlined below. This outline does not attempt to give the detailed characterizations of the different groups as defined by the committee, but does show the names to be applied to the commoner organisms. These organisms are included in the 4th and 5th orders. Details of the first three orders have not been worked out. They are listed merely for completeness.
The Committee on Classification of the Society of American Bacteriologists met in December 1919 and submitted its final report. This report hasn't been formally accepted in its entirety, but it will likely be largely as outlined below. This outline doesn't aim to provide detailed descriptions of the different groups as defined by the committee, but it does show the names that will be applied to the more common organisms. These organisms are included in the 4th and 5th orders. Details of the first three orders haven't been finalized. They're included just for completeness.
Unicellular, chlorophyl-free plants, reproducing by transverse division (some forms by gonidia also).
Unicellular plants that don't have chlorophyll, reproducing by splitting in half (some types also by gonidia).
- A. Myxobacteriales—Cells united during vegetative stage into a pseudo-plasmodium which passes over into a highly developed cyst-producing resting stage.
- B. Thiobacteriales—Sulphur bacteria.
- C. Chlamydobacteriales—Iron bacteria and other sheathed bacteria.
- D. Actinomycetales—Actinomyces, tubercle and diphtheria bacilli.
- E. Eubacteriales—All the other common bacteria.
- D. ACTINOMYCETALES—
- Family I. Actinobacteria Buchanan, 1918.
- Genus 1. Actinobacillus, Brampt, 1900.
- Type species, Actinobacillus lignieresi Brampt, 1900.
- Genus 2. Leptotrichia Trevisan, 1879.
- Type species, Leptotrichia buccalis (Robin, 1847) Trevisan.
- Genus 3. Actinomyces Harz, 1877.
- Type species, Actinomyces bovis Harz.
- Genus 4. Erysipelothrix Rosenbach, 1909.
- Type species, Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiæ (Kitt, 1893) Rosenbach, swine erysipelas.
- Family II. Mycobacteriaceae Chester, 1897.
- Genus 1. Mycobacterium Lehmann and Neumann, 1896.
- Type species, Mycobacterium tuberculosis (Koch, 1882) L. and N.
- Genus 2. Corynebacterium Lehmann and Neumann, 1896.
- Type species, Corynebacterium diphtheriæ (Loeffler, 1882) L. and N.
- Genus 3. Fusiformis Hoelling, 1910.
- Type species, Fusiformis termitidis Hoelling. Vincent’s angina.
- Genus 4. Pfeifferella Buchanan, 1918.
- Type species, Pfeifferella mallei (Loeffler, 1896) Buchanan. Glanders bacillus.
- E. EUBACTERIALES
- Family I—Nitrobacteriaceae—Proto- or autotrophic for N or C and sometimes for both (except Acetobacter).
- Tribe I—Nitrobacter—autotrophic for C.
- Genus 1. Hydrogenomonas Jensen, 1909.
- Type species, Hydrogenomonas pantotropha (Kaserer, 1906) Jensen; oxidizes free H.
- Genus 2. Methanomonas Jensen, 1909.
- Type species, Methanomonas methanica (Söhngen) Jensen; oxidizes CH4.
- Genus 3. Carboxydomonas Jensen, 1909.
- Type species, Carboxydomonas oligocarbophila (Beijerinck and Van Delden, 1903) Jensen; oxidizes CO.
- Genus 4. Acetobacter Fuhrman, 1905.
- Type species, Acetobacter aceti (Thompson, 1852) Fuhrman; oxidizes alcohol to acetic acid.
- Genus 5. Nitrosomonas Winogradsky, 1892.
- Type species, Nitrosomonas europoea Winogradsky; oxidizes ammonia or ammonium salts to nitrous acid, hence nitrites.
- Genus 6. Nitrobacter Winogradsky, 1892.
- Type species, Nitrobacter Winogradskyi Committee of 1917; oxidizes nitrous acid (nitrites) to nitric acid (nitrates).
- Tribe II—Azotobactereae—prototrophic for N.
- Genus 7. Azotobacter Beijerinck, 1901; large, free-living, aerobic N absorbers.
- Type species, Azotobacter chroococcum Beijerinck.
- Genus 8. Rhizobium Frank, 1889.
- Type species, Rhizobium leguminosarum Frank; root tubercle bacteria of legumes.
- Family II—Pseudomonas, Committee of 1917.
- Genus 1. Pseudomonas Migula, 1894.
- Type species, Pseudomonas violacea (Schroeter, 1872) Migula.
- Family III—Spirillaceae Migula, 1894—all spiral bacteria.
- Genus 1. Vibrio Müller, 1786, emended by E. F. Smith, 1905.
- Type species, Vibrio choleræ (Koch, 1884) Schroeter, 1886.
- Genus 2. Spirillum Ehrenberg, 1830, emended Migula, 1894.
- Type species, Spirillum undula (Müller, 1786) Ehrenberg.
- Family 4—Coccaceae Zopf, 1884, emended Migula, 1894—all cocci.
- Tribe I—Neisseria.
- Genus 1. Neisseria Trevisan, 1885.
- Type species, Neisseria gonorrhoeae Trevisan.
- Tribe II—Streptococcus Trevisan, 1889.
- Genus 2. Diplococcus Weichselbaum, 1886.
- Type species, Diplococcus pneumoniae Weichselbaum.
- Genus 3. Leuconostoc Van Tieghem, 1878.
- Type species, Leuconostoc mesenterioides (Cienkowski) Van Tieghem.
- Genus 4. Streptococcus Rosenbach, 1884; emended Winslow and Rogers, 1905.
- Type species, Streptococcus pyogenes Rosenbach.
- Tribe III—Micrococcaceae Trevisan, 1889.
- Genus 5. Staphylococcus Rosenbach, 1884; animal parasites.
- Type species, Staphylococcus aureus Rosenbach.
- Genus 6. Micrococcus Cohn, 1872, emended Winslow and Rogers, 1905. Facultative parasites or saprophytes.
- Type species, Micrococcus luteus (Schroeter, 1872) Cohn.
- Genus 7. Sarcina Goodsir, 1842, emended Winslow and Rogers, 1905.
- Type species, Sarcina ventriculi Goodsir.
- Genus 8. Rhodococcus Zopf, 1891, emended Winslow and Rogers, 1905; cocci with red pigment.
- Type species, Rhodococcus rhodochrous Zopf.
- Family V—Bacteria Cohn, 1872, emended by Committee of 1917; bacilli without spores not above included.
- Tribe I—Chromobacteriaceae Committee of 1919; producing red or violet pigment, mainly water forms.
- Genus 1. Erythrobacillus Fortineau, 1905.
- Type species, Erythrobacillus prodigiosus (Ehrenberg, 1848) Fortineau.
- Genus 2. Chromobacterium Bergonzini, 1881.
- Type species, Chromobacterium violaceum Bergonzini.
- Tribe II—Erwine Committee 1919; plant pathogens.
- Genus 3. Erwinia Committee 1917.
- Type species, Erwinia amylovora (Burrill, 1883) Committee 1917.
- Tribe III—Zopfeæ Committee of 1919; Gram +, no pigment, non-carbohydrate-fermenting.
- Genus 4. Zopfius Wenner and Rettger, 1919.
- Type species, Zopfius zopfii (Kurth) Wenner and Rettger.
- Tribe IV—Bacteria Committee of 1919; Gram -, carbohydrate fermenters.
- Genus 5. Proteus Hauser, 1885; liquefy gelatin.
- Type species, Proteus vulgaris Hauser.
- Genus 6. Bacterium Ehrenberg, 1828, emended Jensen, 1909; liquefy gelatin rarely.
- Type species, Bacterium coli.
- Tribe VI—Lactobacillus Committee of 1919; Gram +, high acid, thermophils.
- Genus 7. Lactobacillus Beijerinck, 1901.
- Type species, Lactobacillus caucasicus (Kern?) Beijerinck; Bulgarian bacillus.
- Tribe VI—Pasteurella Committee of 1919; organisms of hemorrhagic septicemia.
- Genus 8. Pasteurella Trevisan, 1888.
- Type species, Pasteurella cholerae-gallinarum (Flügge, 1886); Trevisan.
- Tribe VII—Hemophilia Committee of 1917; require hemoglobin for growth.
- Genus 9. Hemophilus Committee of 1917.
- Type species, Hemophilus influenzae (Pfeiffer, 1893) Committee of 1917.
- Family 6—Bacillaceae Fischer, 1895. Spore forming rods.
- Genus 1. Bacillus Cohn, 1872; aerobic, no change of form around the spore.
- Type species, Bacillus subtilis Cohn.
- Genus 2. Clostridium Prazmowski, 1880; anaërobic, frequently enlarged around spore.
- Type species, Clostridium butyricum Prazmowski.
As compared with Migula’s classification it is to be noted that there are 38 genera listed by the Committee instead of 13 in the same general groups.
As compared to Migula’s classification, it’s important to note that there are 38 genera listed by the Committee instead of 13 in the same general groups.
The following list of Genera conservanda submitted by the Committee was formally adopted by the Society and these are therefore its official names for the organisms included in these genera.
The following list of Genera conservanda submitted by the Committee was officially approved by the Society, making these the official names for the organisms in these genera.
- Acetobacter Fuhrman
- Actinomyces Harz
- Bacillus Cohn
- Bacterium Ehrenberg
- Chromobacterium Bergonzini
- Clostridium Prazmowski
- Erythrobacillus Fortineau
- Leptotrichia Trevisan
- Leuconostoc Van Tieghem
- Micrococcus Cohn
- Rhizobium Frank
- Sarcina Goodsir
- Spirillum Ehrenberg
- Staphylococcus Rosenbach
- Streptococcus Rosenbach
- Vibrio Müller
It is greatly to be desired that the Society’s Classification when finally completed shall become the standard in the United States at least.
It is highly desirable that the Society’s Classification, when finished, will become the standard in the United States at least.
Such names as have been adopted by the Society are used throughout this work.
The names adopted by the Society are used throughout this work.
The Committee also submitted the following artificial key for determining the genera in the two orders ACTINOMYCETALES AND EUBACTERIALES:
The Committee also submitted the following artificial key for identifying the genera in the two orders ACTINOMYCETALES AND EUBACTERIALES:
- A—Typically filamentous forms ..........Actinomycetacae
- B—Mycelium and conidia formed ..........Actinomyces
- BB—No true mycelium
- C—Cells show branching
- D—Gram negative ..........Actinobacillus
- DD—Gram positive ..........Erysipelothrix
- CC—Cells never branch. Gram positive threads later fragmenting into rods ..........Leptotrichia
- AA—Typically unicellular forms (though chains of cells may occur)
- B—Cells spherical—COCCACEÆ
- C—Parasitic forms (except Leuconostoc), cells generally grouped in pairs or chains, never in packets, generally active fermenters.
- D—Cells in flattened coffee-bean-like pairs, gram -. ..........Neisseria
- DD—Not as D
- E—Saprophytes in zoögloea masses in sugar solutions. ..........Leuconostoc
- EE—Not as E. Gram +.
- F—Cells in lanceolate pairs or in chains. Growth on media not abundant.
- G—Cells in lanceolate pairs. Inulin generally fermented. ..........Diplococcus
- GG—Cells in chains. Inulin not generally fermented. ..........Streptococcus
- FF—Cells in irregular groups. Growth in media fairly vigorous. White or orange pigment. ..........Staphylococcus
- CC—Saprophytic forms. Cells in irregular groups or packets, not in chains. Fermentative powers low.
- D—Packets ..........Sarcina
- DD—No packets.
- E—Yellow pigment ..........Micrococcus
- EE—Red pigment ..........Rhodococcus
- BB—Rods:
- C—Spiral rods
- D—Short, comma-like rods. One to three flagella. ..........Vibrio
- DD—Long spirals. Five to twenty flagella. ..........Spirillum
- CC—Straight rods.
- D—No endospores.
- E—Rods of irregular shape or showing branched or filamentous involution forms.
- F—Cells irregular in shape. Staining unevenly. Animal parasites.
- G—Acid fast ..........Mycobacterium
- GG—Not acid fast.
- H—Cells elongated, fusiform ..........Fusiformis
- HH—Cells not elongated, sometimes branching.
- I—Gram positive. Slender, sometimes club-shaped. ..........Corynebacterium
- II—Gram negative. Rods sometimes form threads. Characteristic honey-like growth on potato. ..........Pfeifferella
- FF—Cells staining unevenly but with branched or filamentous forms at certain stages. Never acid fast. Not animal parasites.
- G—Metabolism simple, growth processes involving oxidation of alcohol or fixation of free N (latter in symbiosis with green plants).
- H—Cells minute. Symbiotic in roots of legumes. ..........Rhizobium
- HH—Oxidizing alcohol. Branching forms common. ..........Acetobacter
- GG—Not as G. Proteus-like colonies.
- H—Not attacking carbohydrates ..........Zopfius
- HH—Fermenting glucose and sucrose at least. ..........Proteus
- EE—Regularly formed rods.
- F—Metabolism simple, growth processes involving oxidation of C, H, or their simple compounds or the fixation of free N.—NITROBACTERIACEÆ.
- G—Fixing N or oxidizing its simple compounds.
- H—Fixing N, cells large, free in soil ..........Azotobacter
- HH—Oxidizing N compounds.
- I—Oxidizing NH4 compounds ..........Nitrosomonas
- II—Oxidizing nitrites ..........Nitrobacter
- GG—Not as G.
- H—Oxidizing free H ..........Hydrogenomonas
- HH—Oxidizing simple C compounds, not free H.
- I—Oxidizing CO ..........Carboxydomonas
- II—Oxidizing CH4 ..........Methanomonas
- FF—Not as F.
- G—Flagella usually present, polar—PSEUDOMONADACEÆ ..........Pseudomonas
- GG—Flagella when present peritrichic—BACTERIACEÆ
- H—Parasitic forms showing bi-polar staining. ..........Pasteurella
- HH—Not as H.
- I—Strict parasites growing only in presence of hemoglobin ..........Hemophilus
- II—Not as I.
- J—Water forms producing red or violet pigment.
- K—Pigment red ..........Erythrobacillus
- KK—Pigment violet ..........Chromobacterium
- JJ—Not as J.
- K—Plant pathogens ..........Erwinia
- KK—Not plant pathogens.
- L—Gram +, forming large amount of acid from carbohydrates, sometimes CO2, never H ..........Lactobacillus
- LL—Gram -, forming H as well as CO2 if gas is produced ..........Bacterium
- DD—Endospores present—BACILLACEÆ
- E—Aerobes, rods not swollen at sporulation. ..........Bacillus
- EE—Anaërobes, rods swollen at sporulation. ..........Clostridium
PART II.
PHYSIOLOGY.
CHAPTER VI.
GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR GROWTH.
OCCURRENCE.
Bacteria are probably the most widely distributed of living organisms. They are found practically everywhere on the surface of the earth. Likewise in all surface waters, in streams, lakes and the sea. They occur in the air immediately above the surface, since they are carried up mechanically by air currents. They cannot fly of themselves. There is no reason to believe that any increase in numbers occurs to an appreciable extent in the air. The upper air, for example, on high mountains, is nearly free from them. So also is the air over midocean, and in high latitudes. As a rule, the greater the amount of dust in the air, the more numerous are the bacteria. Hence they are found more abundantly in the air in cities and towns than in the open country. The soil is especially rich in numbers in the upper few feet, but they diminish rapidly below and almost disappear at depths of about six feet unless the soil is very porous and open, when they may be carried farther down. Hence the waters from deep wells and springs are usually devoid of these organisms. In the sea they occur at all levels and have been found in bottom ooze dredged from depths of several miles. It is perhaps needless to add that they are found on the bodies and in the alimentary tract of human beings and animals; on clothing, utensils; in dwellings, stables, outhouses, etc. From one-fourth to one-half of the dry weight of the feces of animals and men is due to the bacteria present. The urine is practically free from them in health.
Bacteria are probably the most widely distributed living organisms. They are found almost everywhere on the surface of the Earth, as well as in all surface waters, including streams, lakes, and the ocean. They exist in the air just above the surface because they are carried aloft by air currents, as they cannot fly on their own. There’s no reason to think that their numbers significantly increase in the air. For example, the upper atmosphere, like on high mountains, is nearly free of them. The same goes for the air over the open ocean and in high latitudes. Generally, the more dust there is in the air, the more bacteria you'll find, which is why they are more abundant in urban areas than in the countryside. The soil is particularly rich in bacteria in the top few feet, but their numbers drop off quickly below that and almost disappear at depths of around six feet unless the soil is very porous, in which case they can be carried deeper. This is why water from deep wells and springs typically doesn't contain these organisms. In the ocean, they are present at all depths and have been found in sediment collected from several miles down. It’s probably unnecessary to mention that they are present on the bodies and in the digestive tracts of humans and animals, as well as on clothing and utensils, and in homes, barns, and outhouses. About one-fourth to one-half of the dry weight of animal and human feces comes from bacteria. Urine is usually free of them when a person is healthy.
While bacteria are thus found nearly everywhere, it is an entirely mistaken idea to suppose that all are injurious to man. As a matter of fact, those which are dangerous are relatively few and are for the most part found only in close association with man. Most bacteria are harmless and the vast majority are beneficial or even essential to man’s existence on the earth. These facts must be constantly borne in mind, and it is hoped that the pages which follow will make them clear.
While bacteria are found almost everywhere, it's a common misconception that all of them are harmful to humans. In reality, the ones that pose a danger are relatively few and primarily associated with humans. Most bacteria are harmless, and the vast majority are actually beneficial or even essential for human life on Earth. These facts should always be kept in mind, and it's hoped that the following pages will clarify them.
In order that any organism may thrive there are a number of general environmental conditions which must be fulfilled. These conditions vary more or less for each kind of organism. Bacteria are no exception to this general rule. These conditions may be conveniently considered under the general heads of moisture; temperature; light; oxygen supply; osmotic pressure; action of electricity; of Röntgen and radium rays; pressure; mechanical vibration; and chemical environment, including the reaction of the medium, the effect of injurious chemicals, and especially the food requirements of bacteria. For each of these conditions there is a maximum, meaning the greatest amount of the given condition which the organism can withstand, a minimum, or the least amount, and an optimum or that amount which is most favorable for development. Further, there might be distinguished a maximum for mere existence and a lower maximum for development; also a minimum for mere existence and a higher minimum for development. These maxima, minima, and optima for bacteria have been determined with exactness for only a very few of the general conditions and for comparatively few kinds.
For any organism to thrive, there are several general environmental conditions that need to be met. These conditions can vary significantly for each type of organism. Bacteria are no exception to this. We can conveniently categorize these conditions under the following headings: moisture; temperature; light; oxygen supply; osmotic pressure; the influence of electricity; Röntgen and radium rays; pressure; mechanical vibration; and chemical environment, which includes the reaction of the medium, the impact of harmful chemicals, and especially the nutritional needs of bacteria. For each of these conditions, there is a maximum, which is the highest level of that condition the organism can tolerate; a minimum, the lowest level; and an optimum, which is the most favorable amount for growth. Additionally, we can distinguish a maximum for basic survival and a lower maximum for growth; there is also a minimum for basic survival and a higher minimum for growth. The maxima, minima, and optima for bacteria have only been precisely determined for a handful of general conditions and for relatively few types of bacteria.
MOISTURE.
The maximum moisture is absolutely pure water, and no organism can thrive in this alone owing to the factor of too low osmotic pressure and to the further factor of absence of food material. There are many bacteria which thrive in water containing only traces of mineral salts and a large class whose natural habitat is surface water. These “water bacteria” are of great benefit in the purification of streams. They are as a class harmless to men and animals. Some of the disease-producing bacteria like Bacterium typhosum (of typhoid fever) and Vibrio choleræ (of Asiatic cholera) were undoubtedly originally water bacteria, and it is rather striking that in these diseases conditions are induced in the intestine (diarrheas) which simulate the original watery environment. The minimum moisture condition is absolute dryness, and no organism can even exist, not to say develop, in such a condition since water is an essential constituent of living matter. Some bacteria and especially most spores may live when dried in the air or by artificial means for months and even years, while some are destroyed in a few hours or days when dried (typhoid, cholera, etc.). The optimum amount of moisture has not been determined with any great accuracy and certainly a rather wide range in percentage of water is permissible with many, though a liquid medium is usually most favorable for artificial growth. The “water bacteria” have been mentioned. In the soil a water content of 5 to 15 per cent. seems to be most suitable for many of the organisms which aid in plant growth. In animals and man the organisms infecting the intestinal tract prefer a high percentage of moisture as a rule, especially those causing disease here. Those found on the surface of the body (pus cocci) need a less amount of water, while those invading the tissues (tuberculosis, black-leg, etc.) seem to be intermediate in this respect. In artificial culture media a water content of less than 30 per cent. inhibits the growth of most bacteria.
The maximum moisture is completely pure water, and no organism can survive on this alone because of the low osmotic pressure and the lack of food resources. Many bacteria can thrive in water that has only small amounts of mineral salts, and a large group prefers living in surface water. These “water bacteria” play a crucial role in purifying streams. As a group, they are harmless to humans and animals. Some disease-causing bacteria, like Bacterium typhosum (which causes typhoid fever) and Vibrio choleræ (which causes Asiatic cholera), probably originated as water bacteria, and it's interesting that these diseases lead to intestinal conditions (diarrheas) that mimic the original watery habitat. The minimum moisture condition is complete dryness, and no organism can exist, let alone develop, in such a state since water is a vital component of living matter. Some bacteria, especially most spores, can survive when dried in the air or by artificial means for months or even years, while others get destroyed in just a few hours or days when dried (like typhoid and cholera). The optimum amount of moisture hasn’t been precisely determined, but there’s a fairly wide range of permissible water percentages for many organisms, although a liquid medium usually promotes better artificial growth. The “water bacteria” have already been mentioned. In soil, a water content of 5 to 15 percent seems best for many organisms that support plant growth. In animals and humans, the organisms that infect the intestinal tract typically prefer a higher moisture percentage, especially those that cause disease. Organisms found on the skin's surface (pus cocci) need less water, while those that invade tissues (like tuberculosis and black-leg) appear to be intermediate in this regard. In artificial culture media, a water content of less than 30 percent hinders the growth of most bacteria.
TEMPERATURE.
The temperature conditions for bacterial existence and growth have been determined more accurately than any of the other general conditions. The maximum for existence must be placed at or near 100° since it is known that all bacteria including spores may be killed by boiling in time. Nevertheless, certain forms have been reported as thriving in hot springs where the water temperature was 93°. This is the highest known temperature for development. The minimum for existence lies at or near the absolute zero (-273°) since certain organisms have been subjected to the temperature produced by the sudden evaporation of liquid hydrogen (-256° to -265°) and have remained alive. Whether they could withstand such temperatures indefinitely is not known. The minimum for development is near the freezing-point of water, since reproduction by division has been observed in the water from melting sea-ice at a temperature of -1.5°. Thus bacteria as a class have a range for existence of about 373° (-273° to +100°) and for development of 94.5° (-1.5° to +93°) certainly much wider ranges than any other group of organisms.5
The temperature conditions for bacterial existence and growth have been determined more accurately than any other general conditions. The highest temperature for existence is around 100° since it's known that all bacteria, including spores, can be killed by boiling eventually. However, some forms have been reported to thrive in hot springs where the water temperature was 93°. This is the highest recorded temperature for development. The lowest temperature for existence is around absolute zero (-273°) since some organisms have survived the temperature created by the sudden evaporation of liquid hydrogen (-256° to -265°). It's unknown whether they could survive such temperatures indefinitely. The minimum temperature for development is close to the freezing point of water, as reproduction by division has been observed in water from melting sea ice at a temperature of -1.5°. Therefore, bacteria as a group have a range for existence of about 373° (-273° to +100°) and for development of 94.5° (-1.5° to +93°), which is certainly much wider than any other group of organisms.5
The optimum temperature for development varies within rather wide limits for different organisms. In general it may be stated that the optimum temperature is approximately that of the natural habitat of the organism, though there are exceptions. The optimum of the “hot spring” bacteria just mentioned is apparently that of the springs (93° in this case). Many soil organisms are known whose optimum is near 70° (a temperature rarely, if ever, attained in the soil), but only when grown in air or oxygen; but is very much lower when grown in the absence of oxygen. Many other soil organisms exhibit very little difference in rate or amount of growth when grown at temperatures which may vary as much as 10° or 15°, apparently an adaptation to their normal environment. The disease-producing organisms show much narrower limits for growth, especially those which are difficult to cultivate outside the body. For example, the bacterium of tuberculosis in man scarcely develops beyond the limits of 2° or 3° from the normal body temperature of man (37°), while the bacterium of tuberculosis in birds grows best at 41° to 45°, the normal for birds, and the bacterium of so-called tuberculosis of cold-blooded animals at 14° to 18°.
The ideal temperature for development varies greatly among different organisms. In general, the optimal temperature is roughly that of the organism's natural habitat, although there are exceptions. For example, the ideal temperature for the “hot spring” bacteria mentioned earlier is about that of the springs (93° in this case). Many soil organisms thrive at around 70° (a temperature that is rarely, if ever, reached in the soil), but only when grown in air or oxygen; however, it is much lower when grown in the absence of oxygen. Many other soil organisms show very little difference in their growth rates or amounts when grown at temperatures that can vary by 10° or 15°, suggesting an adaptation to their typical environment. Disease-causing organisms have much stricter growth limits, especially those that are hard to cultivate outside of the body. For instance, the tuberculosis bacterium in humans hardly grows beyond 2° or 3° from the normal human body temperature (37°), while the tuberculosis bacterium in birds grows best at 41° to 45°, which is normal for birds, and the bacterium of so-called tuberculosis in cold-blooded animals grows at 14° to 18°.
Those bacteria whose optimum temperature is above 40° are sometimes spoken of as the “thermophil” bacteria. The fixing of the “thermal death-point” that is, the minimum temperature at which the bacteria are killed is a matter of great practical importance in many ways and numerous determinations of this have been made with a great many organisms and by different observers. The factors which enter into such determinations are so many and so varied that unless all the conditions of the experiment are given together with the time of application, the mere statements are worthless. It may be stated that all young, actively growing (non-spore-containing) disease-producing bacteria, when exposed in watery liquids and in small quantities are killed at a temperature of 60° within half an hour. It is evident, that this fact has very little practical application, since the conditions stated are rarely, if ever, fulfilled except in laboratory experiments. (See Sterilization and Pasteurization, Chapter XIII.)
Bacteria that thrive at temperatures above 40° are often called “thermophil” bacteria. Determining the “thermal death-point,” which is the minimum temperature at which these bacteria are killed, is very important in many respects. Numerous studies have been conducted to identify this point for various organisms by different researchers. The factors involved in these determinations are so numerous and diverse that, without all the experimental conditions and the duration of exposure, the findings are nearly meaningless. It can be said that all young, actively growing (non-spore-forming) disease-causing bacteria, when exposed in liquid and in small amounts, are killed at a temperature of 60° in half an hour. However, this fact has minimal practical use, as the specified conditions are rarely, if ever, met outside of laboratory settings. (See Sterilization and Pasteurization, Chapter XIII.)
LIGHT.
Speaking generally, it can be said that light is destructive to bacteria. Many growing forms are killed in a few hours when properly exposed to direct sunlight and die out in several days in the diffuse daylight of a well-lighted room. Even spores are destroyed in a similar manner, though the exposure must be considerably longer. Certain bacteria which produce colors may grow in the light, since the pigments protect them. Some few kinds, like the sulphur bacteria, which contain a purplish-red pigment that serves them to break up H2S, need light for their growth. Since disease-producing bacteria are all injuriously affected by light, the advantage of well-lighted habitations both for men and animals is obvious.
Speaking generally, light can be harmful to bacteria. Many types of bacteria die within a few hours of direct sunlight exposure and will die out in several days in the bright daylight of a well-lit room. Even spores are affected similarly, though they require a significantly longer exposure. Certain bacteria that produce colors may thrive in the light, as the pigments protect them. A few types, like the sulfur bacteria, which have a purplish-red pigment that helps them break down H2S, need light to grow. Since bacteria that cause diseases are negatively impacted by light, it’s clear that well-lit environments are beneficial for both people and animals.
OXYGEN SUPPLY.
Oxygen is one of the constituents of protoplasm and is therefore necessary for all organisms. This does not mean that all organisms must obtain their supply from free oxygen, however, as animals and plants generally do. This fact is well illustrated by the differences among bacteria in this respect. Some bacteria require free oxygen for their growth and are therefore called aërobic bacteria or aërobes (sometimes strict aërobes, though the adjective is unnecessary). Others cannot grow in the presence of free oxygen and are therefore named anaërobic bacteria or anaërobes (strict is unnecessary). There are still other kinds which may grow either in the presence of free oxygen or in its absence, hence the term facultative anaërobes (usually) is applied to them. The distinction between facultative aërobe and facultative anaërobe might be made. The former means those which grow best in the absence of free oxygen, though capable of growing in its presence, while the latter term means those which grow best in the presence of free oxygen, but are capable of growing in its absence. The amount of oxygen in the atmosphere in which an organism grows may be conveniently expressed in terms of the oxygen pressure, i.e., in millimeters of mercury. It is evident that the maximum, minimum and optimum oxygen pressures for anaërobic bacteria are the same, namely, 0 mm. Hg. This is true only for natural conditions, since a number of anaërobic organisms have been gradually accustomed to increasing amounts of O, so that by this process of training they finally grew in ordinary air, that is, at an oxygen pressure of about 150 mm. Hg. (Normal air pressure is 760 mm. Hg. and oxygen makes up one-fifth of the air.) The minimum O pressure for facultative anaërobes is also 0 mm. Hg. Some experiments have been made to determine the limits for aërobes, but on a few organisms only, so that no general conclusions can be drawn from them. To illustrate: Bacillus subtilis (a common “hay bacillus”) will grow at 10 mm. Hg. pressure but not at 5 mm. Hg. It will also grow in compressed oxygen at a pressure of three atmospheres (2280 mm. Hg.), but not at four atmospheres (3040 mm. Hg.), though it is not destroyed.
Oxygen is one of the components of protoplasm and is necessary for all living organisms. However, this doesn't mean that all organisms must get their supply from free oxygen, as animals and plants typically do. This is clearly shown by the differences among bacteria in this regard. Some bacteria require free oxygen for their growth and are therefore called aërobic bacteria or aërobes (sometimes referred to as strict aërobes, although the adjective is unnecessary). Others cannot grow in the presence of free oxygen and are called anaërobic bacteria or anaërobes (the term "strict" is not needed). There are also other types that can grow either with or without free oxygen, which is why they are usually termed facultative anaërobes. A distinction can be made between facultative aërobes and facultative anaërobes. The former refers to those that prefer to grow without free oxygen but can survive in its presence, while the latter indicates those that thrive with free oxygen but can still grow without it. The amount of oxygen in the atmosphere where an organism lives can be conveniently measured in terms of oxygen pressure, i.e., in millimeters of mercury. It is clear that the maximum, minimum, and optimum oxygen pressures for anaërobic bacteria are all the same, which is 0 mm. Hg. This is only the case under natural conditions, as some anaerobic organisms have been gradually adapted to higher levels of oxygen, allowing them to eventually thrive in normal air, which has an oxygen pressure of around 150 mm. Hg. (Normal air pressure is 760 mm. Hg., and oxygen makes up one-fifth of the air.) The minimum oxygen pressure for facultative anaerobes is also 0 mm. Hg. Some experiments have been conducted to determine the limits for aërobes, but they have involved only a few organisms, so no general conclusions can be drawn. For example, Bacillus subtilis (a common "hay bacillus") will grow at 10 mm. Hg. pressure but not at 5 mm. Hg. It can also grow in compressed oxygen at a pressure of three atmospheres (2280 mm. Hg.), but not at four atmospheres (3040 mm. Hg.), although it is not harmed.
Parodko has determined the oxygen limits for five common organisms as follows:
Parodko has identified the oxygen limits for five common organisms as follows:
Maximum. | Minimum | |||
In atmospheres. | Mm. Hg. | Vol. per cent. | Mm. Hg. | |
Bacterium fluorescens | 1.94 to 2.51 | 1474 to 1908 | 0.00016 = 0.0012 | |
Sarcina lutea | 2.51 to 3.18 | 1908 to 2417 | 0.00015 = 0.0011 | |
Proteus vulgaris | 3.63 to 4.35 | 2749 to 3306 | 0 | 0 |
Bacterium coli | 4.09 to 4.84 | 3108 to 3478 | 0 | 0 |
Erythrobacillus prodigiosus | 5.45 to 6.32 | 3152 to 4800 | 0 | 0 |
These few instances do not disclose any general principles which may be applied either for the growth or for the distinction of aërobes or facultative anaërobes.
These few examples don't reveal any general principles that can be applied to the growth or distinction of aerobes or facultative anaerobes.
It has been shown that compressed oxygen will kill some bacteria but this method of destroying them has little or no practical value. Oxygen in the form of ozone, O3, is rapidly destructive to bacteria, and this fact is applied practically in the purification of water supplies for certain cities where the ozone is generated by electricity obtained cheaply from water power. The same is true of oxygen in the “nascent state” as illustrated by the use of hypochlorites for the same purpose.
It has been shown that compressed oxygen can kill some bacteria, but this method of elimination has little to no practical use. Oxygen in the form of ozone, O3, is highly effective against bacteria, and this property is used in practice for purifying water supplies in certain cities, where ozone is produced using electricity generated cheaply from hydro power. The same applies to oxygen in the “nascent state,” as demonstrated by the use of hypochlorites for the same purpose.
It was stated (p. 74) that certain thermophil bacteria in the soil have an optimum temperature for growth in the air which is much higher than is ever reached in their natural habitat and that they grow at a moderate temperature under anaërobic conditions. It has been shown that if these organisms are grown with aërobes or facultative anaërobes they thrive at ordinary room temperature. These latter organisms by using up the oxygen apparently keep the tension low, and this explains how such organisms grow in the soil.6
It was stated (p. 74) that certain thermophilic bacteria in the soil have an ideal temperature for growth in the air that is much higher than what is ever experienced in their natural environment, and they thrive at moderate temperatures under anaerobic conditions. Research has shown that if these organisms are grown alongside aerobes or facultative anaerobes, they can flourish at normal room temperature. The latter organisms utilize the oxygen, which seems to maintain low tension, explaining how these organisms can grow in the soil.6
OSMOTIC PRESSURE.
Like all living cells bacteria are very susceptible to changes in the density of the surrounding medium. If placed in a medium less concentrated than their own protoplasm water is absorbed and they “swell up”; while if placed in a denser medium, water is given off and they shrink (plasmoptysis or plasmolysis). Should these differences be marked or the transition be sudden, the cell walls may even burst and the organisms be destroyed. If the differences are not too great or if the transition is made gradually, the organisms may not be destroyed, but will either cease to grow and slowly die out, or will show very much retarded growth, or will produce abnormal cell forms. This is illustrated in the laboratory in attempting to grow bacteria on food material which has dried out. A practical application of osmotic effects is in the use of a high percentage of sugar in preserving fruits, etc., and in the salting of meats. Neither the cane-sugar nor the common salt themselves injure the bacteria chemically, but by the high concentration prevent their development. In drying material in order to preserve it there are two factors involved: first, the loss of water necessary for growth and second, the increased osmotic pressure.
Like all living cells, bacteria are very sensitive to changes in the concentration of their surrounding environment. If placed in a medium less concentrated than their own cytoplasm, they absorb water and "swell up"; conversely, if placed in a more concentrated medium, they lose water and shrink (plasmoptysis or plasmolysis). If these differences are significant or the change is abrupt, the cell walls may even burst, destroying the organisms. If the differences are not too extreme or if the transition happens gradually, the organisms might not be destroyed, but will either stop growing and gradually die off, show significantly slowed growth, or develop abnormal cell shapes. This is demonstrated in the lab when trying to grow bacteria on dried food materials. A practical application of osmotic effects is using high sugar concentrations to preserve fruits and other items, as well as salting meats. Neither cane sugar nor table salt causes chemical damage to the bacteria; instead, their high concentration prevents bacterial growth. When drying materials for preservation, there are two key factors: the loss of water necessary for growth and the increased osmotic pressure.
In a medium of greater density diffusion of water is outward from the cell and this will continue until an equilibrium is established between cell contents and medium. Food for the organism must be in solution and enter the cell by diffusion. Therefore, growth ceases in a medium too dense, since water to carry food in solution does not enter the cell.
In a denser medium, water diffuses out of the cell, and this will keep happening until there’s a balance between the cell's contents and the medium. Food for the organism has to be in solution and enter the cell through diffusion. So, growth stops in a medium that's too dense because water that carries the food in solution can't enter the cell.
ELECTRICITY.
Careful experimenters have shown that the electric current, either direct or alternating, has no direct destructive effect on bacteria. In a liquid medium the organisms may be attracted to or repelled from one or the other pole or may arrange themselves in definite ways between the poles (galvanotaxis), but are not injured. However, electricity through the secondary effects produced, may be used to destroy bacteria. If the passage of the electric current increases the temperature of the medium sufficiently, the bacteria will be killed, or if injurious chemical substances are formed (ozone, chlorine, acids, bases, etc.), the same result will follow (see Ozone, pp. 77 and 157).
Careful experimenters have shown that electric current, whether direct or alternating, doesn't have a direct destructive effect on bacteria. In a liquid medium, the organisms may be drawn to or pushed away from one pole or may arrange themselves in specific ways between the poles (galvanotaxis), but they aren't harmed. However, electricity can be used to kill bacteria through its secondary effects. If the electric current raises the temperature of the medium high enough, the bacteria will die, or if harmful chemical substances form (ozone, chlorine, acids, bases, etc.), the same thing will happen (see Ozone, pp. 77 and 157).
RADIATIONS.
Röntgen or x-rays and radium emanations when properly applied to bacteria will destroy them. The practical use of these agents for the direct destruction of bacteria in diseases of man or animals is restricted to those cases where they may be applied directly to the diseased area, since they are just as injurious to the animal cell as they are to the bacteria, and even more so. Their skilful use as stimuli to the body cells to enable them to resist and overcome bacteria and other injurious organisms or cell growths is an entirely different function and will not be considered here.
Röntgen or x-rays and radium emissions, when used correctly on bacteria, can kill them. However, the practical application of these agents for directly destroying bacteria in human or animal diseases is limited to situations where they can be applied right to the affected area, since they can harm animal cells just as much as they harm bacteria, and even more. Using them skillfully as stimuli for body cells to help resist and overcome bacteria and other harmful organisms or cell growths is a completely different process and won’t be discussed here.
PRESSURE.
Hydrostatic pressure up to about 10,000 pounds per square inch is without appreciable effect on bacteria as has been shown by several experimenters and also by finding living bacteria in the ooze dredged from the bottom of the ocean at depths of several miles.
Hydrostatic pressure of up to around 10,000 pounds per square inch has little effect on bacteria, as demonstrated by various researchers and also by the discovery of live bacteria in the sediment pulled from the ocean floor at depths of several miles.
Pressures from 10,000 to 100,000 pounds show variable effects. Some bacteria are readily killed and others, even non-spore formers, are only slightly affected. The time factor is important in this connection. The presence of acids, even CO2, or organic acids, results in the destruction of most non-spore formers.
Pressures between 10,000 and 100,000 pounds have different effects. Some bacteria are easily killed, while others, including non-spore formers, are only minimally affected. Time is a crucial factor in this context. The presence of acids, including CO2 or organic acids, leads to the destruction of most non-spore formers.
MECHANICAL VIBRATION.
Vibrations transmitted to bacteria in a liquid may be injurious to them under certain circumstances. Some of the larger forms like Bacillus subtilis may be completely destroyed by shaking in a rapidly moving shaking machine in a few hours. Bacteria in liquids placed on portions of machinery where only a slight trembling is felt, have been found to be killed after several days. Reinke has shown that the passing of strong sound waves through bacterial growths markedly inhibits their development.
Vibrations sent to bacteria in a liquid can be harmful to them under certain conditions. Some of the larger types like Bacillus subtilis can be completely destroyed by being shaken in a fast-moving shaking machine within a few hours. Bacteria in liquids that are placed on parts of machinery where only a slight vibration is felt have been found to die after several days. Reinke has demonstrated that strong sound waves passing through bacterial growths significantly slow down their development.
CHAPTER VII.
CHEMICAL ENVIRONMENT.
REACTION OF MEDIUM.
Most bacteria are very susceptible to changes in the degree of acidity or alkalinity of the medium in which they grow. Some kinds prefer a slightly acid reaction, some a slightly alkaline, and some a neutral (with reference to litmus as indicator). The organism which is the commonest cause of the souring of milk thrives so well in the acid medium it produces that it crowds out practically all other kinds, though its own growth is eventually stopped by too much acid. Acid soils are usually low in numbers of bacteria and as a consequence produce poor crops. The disease-producing bacteria as a class grow best in a medium which is slightly alkaline.
Most bacteria are very sensitive to changes in the acidity or alkalinity of the environment where they grow. Some types prefer a slightly acidic environment, some prefer a slightly alkaline one, and some thrive in a neutral environment (based on litmus as an indicator). The bacteria that most commonly causes milk to sour does really well in the acidic environment it creates, which nearly eliminates all other types, although its own growth eventually slows down due to excessive acidity. Acidic soils typically have fewer bacteria, which leads to poor crop yields. In general, disease-causing bacteria grow best in slightly alkaline conditions.
Accurate determination of limits have been made on but few organisms. The reaction is a most important factor in growing bacteria on artificial media (see Making of Media, Chapter XVI).
Accurate determination of limits has been done on only a few organisms. The reaction is a key factor in growing bacteria on artificial media (see Making of Media, Chapter XVI).
INJURIOUS CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES.
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION.
The chemical composition is subject to wide variation chiefly for two reasons: First, the cell wall in most instances seems to exert only a slight selective action in the absorption of mineral salts so that their concentration within the cell is very nearly that of the surrounding medium. Second, the chief organic constitutents vary remarkably with the kind and amount of food material available—a rich protein pabulum increases the protein, a plentiful supply of carbohydrates or of fat results in the storing of more fat, especially and vice versa. These facts must be borne in mind in considering the chemistry of bacteria.
The chemical composition can vary greatly for two main reasons: First, the cell wall generally has a minimal selective influence on how mineral salts are absorbed, so their concentration inside the cell is almost the same as in the surrounding environment. Second, the main organic components change significantly depending on the type and amount of available food—an abundant protein source boosts protein content, while a plentiful supply of carbohydrates or fat leads to more fat storage, especially and vice versa. These points should be considered when examining the chemistry of bacteria.
Of the chemical elements known, only the following seem to be essential in the structure of bacteria: carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus, chlorine, potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron, manganese. Other elements, as sodium, iodine, silicon, aluminum, lithium, copper, etc., have been reported by different analysts, but none of them can be regarded as essential, except possibly in isolated instances.
Of the known chemical elements, only the following seem to be essential for the structure of bacteria: carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, phosphorus, chlorine, potassium, calcium, magnesium, iron, and manganese. Other elements, such as sodium, iodine, silicon, aluminum, lithium, copper, etc., have been reported by various analysts, but none of them can be considered essential, except maybe in rare cases.
These elements exist in the bacterial cell in a great variety of combinations of which the most abundant is water. The amount of water varies in different species from 75 to 90 per cent. of the total weight in growing cells, and is less in spores. The amount of ash has been shown by different observers to vary from less than 2 per cent. to as much as 30 per cent. of the dry weight. The following table compiled from various sources will give an idea of the relative abundance of the different elements in the ash.
These elements are found in bacterial cells in a wide range of combinations, with the most common being water. The water content varies among different species, ranging from 75 to 90 percent of the total weight in growing cells, and is lower in spores. The amount of ash has been reported by various researchers to range from less than 2 percent to as much as 30 percent of the dry weight. The following table, gathered from multiple sources, provides an overview of the relative abundance of the different elements in the ash.
S as SO3 | 7.64 per cent. (much more in sulphur bacteria) |
P as P2O5 | 18.14 per cent. to 73.94 per cent. |
Cl | 2.29 per cent. to 73.94 per cent. |
K as K2O | 11.1 per cent. to 25.59 per cent. |
Ca as CaO | 12.64 per cent. to 14.0 per cent. |
Mg as MgO | 0.7 per cent. to 11.55 per cent. |
Fe as Fe2O3 | 1.0 per cent. to 8.15 per cent. (iron bacteria) |
Mn | traces |
As to the form in which the last six elements in the table exist in the cell, little is known. The sulphur and phosphorus are essential constituents of various proteins. The high percentage of phosphorus points to nuclein compounds as its probable source.
As for how the last six elements in the table exist in the cell, not much is known. Sulfur and phosphorus are key components of various proteins. The high percentage of phosphorus suggests that nuclein compounds are likely its source.
The carbon and nitrogen, together with most of the hydrogen and oxygen not united as water, make up the great variety of organic compounds which compose the main substances in the bacterial cell.
The carbon and nitrogen, along with most of the hydrogen and oxygen not combined as water, make up the wide range of organic compounds that form the main substances in the bacterial cell.
It has already been stated that the essential structures in the bacterial cell are cell wall and protoplasm, including the nuclein. These differ markedly in chemical composition. It is well known that the cell walls of green plants consist largely of cellulose and closely related substances.7 True cellulose has been recognized in but very few bacteria. (Sarcina ventriculi, Migula; Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Hammerschlag, Dreyfuss, Nishimura; Bacillus subtilis, Dreyfuss; Acetobacter xylinum, Brown; Acetobacter acidi oxalici, Banning; and a few others.) It is certainly not an important constituent of the cell wall in many. On the other hand, hemicellulose and gum-like substances have been identified in numerous organisms of this class as important constituents of the cell wall and of the capsule which is probably an outgrowth from the latter. Practically always associated with these substances are compounds containing nitrogen. One of these has been certainly identified as chitin or a closely similar substance. Chitin is the nitrogenous substance which enters largely into the composition of the hard parts of insects, spiders and crustaceans. It is an interesting fact to find this substance characteristic of these animals in bacteria, as well as other fungi.
It has already been established that the key structures in the bacterial cell are the cell wall and protoplasm, which includes the nucleic material. These differ significantly in their chemical makeup. It's well known that the cell walls of green plants are mainly made up of cellulose and related substances. True cellulose has only been found in a few types of bacteria, such as Sarcina ventriculi, Migula; Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Hammerschlag, Dreyfuss, Nishimura; Bacillus subtilis, Dreyfuss; Acetobacter xylinum, Brown; Acetobacter acidi oxalici, Banning; and a handful of others. It is definitely not a major component of the cell wall in many cases. Conversely, hemicellulose and gum-like substances have been found in numerous organisms in this group as significant parts of the cell wall and of the capsule, which likely develops from the latter. These substances are almost always accompanied by compounds that contain nitrogen. One of these has been definitively identified as chitin or a closely related substance. Chitin is the nitrogen-containing material that makes up a large part of the hard components of insects, spiders, and crustaceans. It is fascinating to find this substance, which is typical of these animals, present in bacteria as well as in other fungi.
Though it is extremely difficult to separate the cell wall of bacteria from the cell contents, in the light of our present knowledge it can be stated that the cell walls are composed of a carbohydrate body closely related to cellulose, though not true cellulose, probably in close combination with chitin.
Though it's really hard to separate the cell wall of bacteria from the cell contents, based on what we currently know, we can say that the cell walls are made up of a carbohydrate structure that's similar to cellulose, but not actual cellulose, likely in close combination with chitin.
Of the organic constituents of the cell contents the most abundant are various proteins which ordinarily make up about one-half of the dry weight of the entire cell. The “Mycoproteid” of Nencki, 1879, and other earlier workers is deserving of little more than historical interest, since these substances were certainly very impure and probably consisted of mixtures of several “proteins” in the more recent sense.
Of the organic components of cell contents, the most abundant are various proteins, which typically account for about half of the dry weight of the entire cell. The "Mycoproteid" of Nencki from 1879 and other early researchers is mostly of historical interest, as these substances were likely very impure and probably made up of mixtures of several "proteins" in the modern sense.
From later studies it seems probable that substances resembling the albumin of higher forms do not occur in bacteria, at least in appreciable quantities. Globulin has been reported by Hellmich in an undetermined bacterium, but is certainly not commonly found. The larger portion of the protein is of a comparatively simple type, in fact, consists of protamins most of which are in combination with nucleic acid as nucleoprotamins. Practically all recent workers find a high percentage of nuclein, both actually isolated and as indicated by the amounts of purin bases—xanthin, guanin, adenin—obtained, as well as by the abundance of phosphorus in the ash, already mentioned. Some of these nucleins have been shown to have poisonous properties.
Later studies suggest that substances similar to the albumin found in higher organisms do not exist in bacteria, at least not in significant amounts. Hellmich reported finding globulin in an unidentified bacterium, but it's definitely not commonly found. Most of the protein is relatively simple; in fact, it mainly consists of protamines, most of which are combined with nucleic acid as nucleoprotamines. Almost all recent researchers find a high percentage of nuclein, both isolated and indicated by the amounts of purine bases—xanthine, guanine, adenine—that are obtained, as well as by the high levels of phosphorus in the ash, which I mentioned earlier. Some of these nucleins have been shown to have toxic properties.
Closely related to but not identical with the proteins are the enzymes and toxins which are formed in the cell and exist there as endo-enzymes or endo-toxins respectively. These substances will be discussed later under the heading “Physiological Activities of Bacteria” (Chapter XII).
Closely related to but not the same as proteins are the enzymes and toxins produced in the cell, which exist there as endo-enzymes or endo-toxins, respectively. These substances will be discussed later under the heading “Physiological Activities of Bacteria” (Chapter XII).
Carbohydrates are not commonly present in the cell contents, though glycogen has been observed in a few and a substance staining blue with iodine in one or two others. This latter substance was at first considered to be starch “granulose,” but is probably more closely related to glycogen.
Carbohydrates aren't usually found in cell contents, although glycogen has been seen in a few and a substance that turns blue with iodine in one or two others. This latter substance was initially thought to be starch “granulose,” but is likely more related to glycogen.
Fats seem to be very generally present. The commoner fats—tri-olein, tri-palmitin, tri-stearin have been found by many analysts. The “acid-fast bacteria” are particularly rich in fatty substances, especially the higher wax-like fats. Lecithins (phosphorized fats) and cholesterins (not fats but alcohols) have been repeatedly observed and probably occur in all bacteria as products of katabolism.
Fats appear to be widely present. Common fats—tri-olein, tri-palmitin, tri-stearin—have been identified by many analysts. The “acid-fast bacteria” are particularly high in fatty substances, especially the waxy fats. Lecithins (phosphorized fats) and cholesterols (not fats but alcohols) have been frequently observed and likely exist in all bacteria as products of metabolism.
Organic acids and esters occur as cell constituents but will be discussed in connection with their more characteristic occurrences as products of bacterial activity, as will also pigments which may likewise be intracellular in some instances.
Organic acids and esters are found as parts of cells, but we will talk about them more in the context of their typical roles as products of bacterial activity. This will also apply to pigments, which can also be found inside cells in some cases.
The following analysis of tubercle bacilli, from de Schweinitz and Dorset, while not intended as typical for all bacteria, still illustrates the high percentage of protein compounds which undoubtedly occurs in most, as well as showing the large amount of fatty substance in a typical “acid-fast” organism:
The following analysis of tubercle bacilli, from de Schweinitz and Dorset, while not meant to represent all bacteria, still shows the high percentage of protein compounds that likely exists in most, as well as demonstrating the significant amount of fatty substance in a typical “acid-fast” organism:
In the dried organisms | 8.5 | per cent. tuberculinic acid | |||
24.5 | per cent. nucleoprotamin | 55.8 per cent. protein. | |||
23.0 | per cent. neucleoprotein | ||||
8.3 | per cent. proteinoid | ||||
26.5 | per cent. fat and wax | ||||
9.2 | per cent. ash |
CHAPTER VIII.
CHEMICAL ENVIRONMENT (Ongoing).
GENERAL FOOD RELATIONSHIPS. METABOLISM.
The foregoing brief review of the chemical composition of the bacterial cell illustrates the variety of compounds which necessarily occurs, but affords no definite clue as to the source of the elements which enter into these compounds. These elements come from the material which the organism uses as food. Under this term are included elements or compounds which serve as building material, either for new cell substance or to repair waste, or as sources of energy.
The brief overview above of the chemical makeup of the bacterial cell shows the variety of compounds that are present, but it doesn't provide a clear indication of where the elements in these compounds come from. These elements are derived from the material that the organism consumes as food. This includes elements or compounds that act as building materials, either for creating new cell structures or repairing damage, or as sources of energy.
An organism which is capable of making use of an element in the free state is said to be prototrophic for that particular element. Thus aërobes and facultative anaërobes are prototrophic for O. The “root-tubercle bacteria” of leguminous and other plants and certain free living soil organisms are prototrophic for N.8
An organism that can utilize an element in its free state is considered prototrophic for that specific element. Therefore, aerobes and facultative anaerobes are prototrophic for oxygen. The "root-tubercle bacteria" found in leguminous plants and some free-living soil organisms are prototrophic for nitrogen.8
On the other hand, if the element must be secured from compounds, then the organism is metatrophic in respect to the element in question. Should the compound be inorganic, the term autotrophic is applied to the organism and heterotrophic if the compound is organic. It is very probable that anaërobes, exclusive of a few nitrogen absorbers, are metatrophic for all the elements they utilize. With the exception of the anaërobes it seems that all bacteria are mixotrophic, that is, prototrophic for one or two elements and auto- or heterotrophic for the others.9
On the other hand, if the element needs to be protected from compounds, then the organism is metatrophic regarding that element. If the compound is inorganic, the organism is referred to as autotrophic, and heterotrophic if the compound is organic. It's highly likely that anaerobes, apart from a few nitrogen absorbers, are metatrophic for all the elements they use. Aside from the anaerobes, it appears that all bacteria are mixotrophic, meaning they are prototrophic for one or two elements and auto- or heterotrophic for the others.9
Those bacteria whose food consists of dead material are spoken of as saprophytes, while those whose natural habitat, without reference to their food, is in or on other living organisms are called parasites. The host is the organism in or on which the parasite lives. Parasites may be of several kinds. Those which neither do injury nor are of benefit to the host are called non-pathogenic parasites or commensals; many of the bacteria in the intestines of man and other animals are of this class. Those which do injury to the host are called pathogenic or disease-producing, as the organisms causing the transmissible diseases of animals and plants.10 Finally, we have those parasites which are of benefit to and receive benefit from the host. These are called symbionts or symbiotic parasites and the mutual relationship symbiosis. Certain of the intestinal bacteria in man and especially in herbivorous animals are undoubted symbionts, as are also the “root-tubercle bacteria” already mentioned.
Bacteria that feed on dead material are known as saprophytes, while those that naturally live in or on other living organisms, regardless of their food source, are called parasites. The host is the organism that the parasite lives in or on. There are different types of parasites. Those that neither harm nor benefit the host are referred to as non-pathogenic parasites or commensals; many of the bacteria found in the intestines of humans and other animals belong to this group. Parasites that cause harm to the host are called pathogenic or disease-causing, like the organisms responsible for transmissible diseases in animals and plants.10 Finally, there are parasites that provide benefits to and receive benefits from the host. These are known as symbionts or symbiotic parasites, and their mutual relationship is referred to as symbiosis. Some of the intestinal bacteria in humans and especially in herbivorous animals are definitely symbionts, as are the previously mentioned “root-tubercle bacteria.”
It is evident that all parasites that may be cultivated outside the body are for the time saprophytic, hence the terms strict parasites and facultative parasites, which should require no further explanation.
It’s clear that all parasites that can be grown outside the body are temporarily saprophytic, which is why we have the terms strict parasites and facultative parasites that should need no further explanation.
The changes which the above-mentioned types of food material undergo in the various anabolic and katabolic processes within the cell are as yet but very slightly known. Nevertheless there are a number of reactions brought about by bacteria acting on various food materials, partly within but largely without the cell which are usually described as “physiological activities” or “biochemical reactions.” Some of these changes are to be ascribed to the utilization of certain of the elements and compounds in these materials as tissue builders, some as energy-yielding reactions and still others as giving rise to substances that are of direct benefit to the organism concerned in its competition with other organisms.
The changes that the food types mentioned earlier undergo in the various anabolic and catabolic processes within the cell are still not very well understood. However, there are several reactions caused by bacteria acting on different food materials, partly but largely outside the cell, which are typically referred to as “physiological activities” or “biochemical reactions.” Some of these changes are attributed to the use of certain elements and compounds in these materials as tissue builders, some as energy-producing reactions, and still others as creating substances that directly benefit the organism in its competition with other organisms.
Though all of the twelve elements already mentioned are essential for the growth of every bacterium, two of them are of especial importance for the reason that most of the “physiological activities” to be described in the next chapters are centered around their acquisition and utilization. These elements are carbon and nitrogen. Some few of the special activities of certain groups have to do with one or the other of the remaining nine, as will be shown later. But generally speaking when a bacterium under natural conditions secures an adequate supply of carbon and nitrogen, the other elements are readily available in sufficient amount.
Though all twelve elements mentioned earlier are crucial for the growth of every bacterium, two of them are particularly important because most of the "physiological activities" discussed in the following chapters revolve around their acquisition and use. These elements are carbon and nitrogen. A few specific activities of certain groups relate to one or the other of the remaining nine, as will be explained later. But generally speaking, when a bacterium in natural conditions obtains enough carbon and nitrogen, the other elements are usually available in sufficient amounts.
Carbon is necessary not only because it is an essential constituent of protoplasm but because its oxidation is the chief source of the energy necessary for the internal life of the cell, though nitrogen and sulphur replace it in this function with a few forms. This latter use of carbon constitutes what may be called its respiratory function. Bacteria like other organisms in their respiration utilize oxygen and give off carbon dioxide. The amount of the latter given off from the cell in this way is very small as compared with that which is frequently produced as an accompaniment of other reactions (see Fermentation, next chapter). But there is no doubt of its formation and it has been determined by a few investigators. On account of this use of carbon, bacteria require relatively large amounts of this element. One group of bacteria concerned in the spontaneous heating of coal seems to be able to use free carbon from this material. Another group is said to be able to oxidize marsh gas, CH4, and use this as its source of carbon. The nitrite, nitrate and sulphur bacteria mentioned later utilize carbon dioxide and carbonates as their carbon supply, and one kind has been described which uses carbon monoxide. With these few exceptions bacteria are dependent on organic compounds for their carbon and cannot use CO2 as green plants do.
Carbon is essential not only because it is a key part of protoplasm but also because its oxidation is the main source of energy needed for the cell's internal processes, although nitrogen and sulfur can perform a similar role in some cases. This role of carbon is known as its respiratory function. Like other organisms, bacteria use oxygen during respiration and release carbon dioxide. The amount of carbon dioxide released by the cell in this process is quite small compared to the amount often produced alongside other reactions (see Fermentation, next chapter). However, its formation is confirmed, as shown by several researchers. Due to this role of carbon, bacteria require relatively large amounts of this element. One type of bacteria involved in the spontaneous heating of coal appears to be capable of utilizing free carbon from this material. Another type is known to oxidize marsh gas, CH4, and use it as a carbon source. The nitrite, nitrate, and sulfur bacteria mentioned later use carbon dioxide and carbonates for their carbon needs, and one type has been identified that utilizes carbon monoxide. With these few exceptions, bacteria rely on organic compounds for their carbon and cannot use CO2 like green plants do.
The oxygen requirement is high partly for the same reason that carbon is, i.e., respiration. Oxygen is one of the constituents of protoplasm, and combined with hydrogen forms water which makes up such a large part of the living cell. Anaërobic bacteria are dependent on so-called “molecular respiration” for their energy. That is, through a shifting or rearrangement of the atoms in the compounds used as food the oxidation of carbon is brought about. Enzymes are probably responsible for this action. Carbon dioxide is produced by anaërobes as well as by aërobes, and frequently in amounts readily collected. A carbohydrate is usually though not always essential for the growth of anaërobes and serves them as the best source of energy.
The oxygen requirement is high partly for the same reason as carbon, namely respiration. Oxygen is one of the components of protoplasm, and when combined with hydrogen, it forms water, which makes up a significant part of living cells. Anaerobic bacteria rely on what's known as "molecular respiration" for their energy. This means that through a rearrangement of atoms in the compounds used as food, the oxidation of carbon occurs. Enzymes are likely responsible for this process. Carbon dioxide is produced by both anaerobes and aerobes, often in quantities that can be easily collected. A carbohydrate is usually, though not always, essential for the growth of anaerobes and serves as their best source of energy.
Nitrogen is the characteristic element of living material. Protoplasm is a chemical substance in unstable equilibrium and nitrogen is responsible for this instability. No other of the commoner elements is brought into combination with such difficulty, nor is so readily liberated when combined (all commercial explosives are nitrogen compounds). Bacteria, like other forms of protoplasm, require nitrogen. More marked peculiarities are shown by bacteria with reference to the sources from which they derive their nitrogen than for carbon. Some can even combine the free nitrogen of the air and furnish the only natural means of any importance for this reaction. Some few forms (the nitrite and nitrate formers, Chapter XI) obtain their energy from the oxidation of inorganic nitrogen compounds, ammonia and nitrites respectively, and not from carbon. These latter bacteria use carbon from carbon dioxide and carbonates. A great many bacteria can secure their nitrogen from nitrates but some are restricted to organic nitrogen. Many bacteria obtain their carbon from the same organic compounds from which their nitrogen is derived.
Nitrogen is the key element in living organisms. Protoplasm is a chemical substance that exists in an unstable balance, and nitrogen is what causes this instability. No other common elements combine as difficultly, nor are they easily released when bonded (all commercial explosives are nitrogen compounds). Bacteria, like other types of protoplasm, need nitrogen. They have more distinctive features regarding their nitrogen sources than their carbon sources. Some can even utilize the free nitrogen in the air, providing the only significant natural method for this process. A few types (the nitrite and nitrate formers, Chapter XI) get their energy from oxidizing inorganic nitrogen compounds, such as ammonia and nitrites, rather than from carbon. These bacteria use carbon from carbon dioxide and carbonates. Many bacteria can obtain their nitrogen from nitrates, but some are limited to organic nitrogen. Numerous bacteria also get their carbon from the same organic compounds that supply their nitrogen.
Sulphur serves mainly as a constituent of protein compounds in the protoplasmic structure. In some of the sulphur bacteria it is a source of energy, since either free sulphur or H2S is oxidized by them. Some of these bacteria can obtain their carbon from CO2 or carbonates, and their nitrogen from nitrates or ammonium salts.
Sulphur primarily acts as a component of protein compounds in the cell structure. In certain sulphur bacteria, it serves as an energy source, as they oxidize either free sulphur or H2S. Some of these bacteria can get their carbon from CO2 or carbonates, and their nitrogen from nitrates or ammonium salts.
Whether the iron bacteria, belonging to the genus Crenothrix of the higher, thread bacteria, use this element or its compounds as sources of energy is still a disputed question. The evidence is largely in favor of this view.
Whether the iron bacteria, part of the genus Crenothrix of the higher thread bacteria, use this element or its compounds as energy sources is still a debated question. The evidence mostly supports this idea.
Free hydrogen has been shown to be oxidized by some forms which obtain their energy in this way.
Free hydrogen has been shown to be oxidized by certain forms that get their energy this way.
Practically nothing is known about the metabolism of the other elements as such.
Practically nothing is known about the metabolism of the other elements.
From the preceding brief review of the relation of certain bacteria to some of the elements in the free state and from the further fact that there is scarcely a known natural organic compound which cannot be utilized by some kind of bacterium, it is evident that this class of organisms has a far wider range of adaptability than any other class, and this adaptability helps to explain their seemingly universal distribution.
From the previous quick overview of how certain bacteria relate to some elements in their free form, and from the additional fact that there's hardly a known natural organic compound that some type of bacterium can't use, it's clear that this group of organisms has a much broader range of adaptability than any other class. This adaptability helps to explain why they seem to be found everywhere.
As to the metabolism within the cell, no more is known than is the case with other cells, nor even as much. The materials used for growth and as sources of energy are taken into the cell, built up into various compounds some of which have been enumerated and in part broken down again. Carbon dioxide and water are formed in the latter process. What other katabolic products occur it is not easy to determine. Certainly some of the substances mentioned in the next chapters are such products but it is not always possible to separate those formed inside the cell from those formed outside. Perhaps most of the latter should be considered true metabolic products. It would seem that on account of the simplicity of structure of the bacterial cell and of the compounds which they may use as food they would serve as excellent objects for the study of the fundamental problems of cell metabolism. Their minuteness and the nearly impossible task of separating them completely from the medium in or on which they are grown makes the solution of these problems one of great difficulty.
Regarding the metabolism within the cell, we know no more than we do about other cells, and perhaps even less. The materials used for growth and as energy sources are absorbed into the cell, where they are transformed into various compounds, some of which have been identified and partially broken down. Carbon dioxide and water are produced in this breakdown process. It is challenging to pinpoint what other byproducts are created. Certainly, some of the substances discussed in the following chapters are byproducts of this process, but it’s not always easy to distinguish those produced inside the cell from those generated outside. Most of the latter should likely be regarded as true metabolic byproducts. Given the bacterial cell's simple structure and the types of compounds they can use as food, they would be excellent subjects for studying the fundamental issues of cell metabolism. However, their small size and the near impossibility of completely isolating them from the medium in or on which they are grown make resolving these issues quite challenging.
When all of the environmental conditions necessary for the best development of a given bacterium are fulfilled, it will then develop to the limit of its capacity. This development is characterized essentially by its reproduction, which occurs by transverse division. The rate of this division varies much with the kind even under good conditions. The most rapid rate so far observed is a division in eighteen minutes. A great many reproduce every half-hour and this may be taken as a good average rate. If such division could proceed without interruption, a little calculation will show that in about sixty-five hours a mass as large as the earth would be produced.
When all the environmental conditions required for the best growth of a specific bacterium are met, it will grow to its full potential. This growth is mainly characterized by its reproduction, which happens through a process called transverse division. The speed of this division varies significantly among different types, even in ideal conditions. The fastest rate observed so far is a division every eighteen minutes. Many reproduce every half hour, which is a reasonable average rate. If this division could continue without interruption, a quick calculation shows that in about sixty-five hours, a mass as large as the Earth would be produced.
½ hour | = | 2 | ||
1 hour | = | 4 | ||
2 hours | = | 16 | ||
4 hours | = | 256 | ||
5 hours | = | 1024 | = | 103+ |
15 hours | = | 1,000,000,000 | = | 109 = 0.5 cc. |
35 hours | = | 1021+ | = | 500.0 cu.m. |
About 65 hours | = | 2 × 1042+ | = | 5 × 1020 cu.m. = a mass as large as the earth. |
Such a rate of increase evidently cannot be kept up long on account of many limiting factors, chief of which is the food supply.
Such a rate of increase clearly can't be maintained for long due to various limiting factors, the most important of which is the food supply.
The foregoing calculation is based on the assumption that the organism divides in one plane only. If it divides in 2 or 3 planes, the rate is much faster, as is shown by the following formulæ, which indicate the theoretical rate of division:
The calculation above assumes that the organism divides in only one plane. If it divides in 2 or 3 planes, the rate is much faster, as shown by the following formulas, which indicate the theoretical rate of division:
a = number at the beginning, and n = number of divisions.
1 plane division S = 2na
2 plane division S = 22na
3 plane division S = 23na
With two-plane or three-plane division, assuming that each organism attains full size, as was assumed in the first calculation, the “mass as large as the earth” would be attained in about thirty-two and twenty-two hours respectively.
With two-plane or three-plane division, assuming that each organism reaches full size, as was assumed in the first calculation, the “mass as large as the earth” would be achieved in about thirty-two and twenty-two hours respectively.
This extraordinary rate of increase explains in large measure why bacteria are able to bring about such great chemical changes in so short a time as is seen in the rapid “spoiling” of food materials, especially liquids. The reactions brought about by bacteria on substances which are soluble and diffusible are essentially “surface reactions.” The material diffuses into the cell over its entire surface with little hindrance. The bacteria are usually distributed throughout the medium, so that there is very intimate contact in all parts of the mass which favors rapid chemical action. The following calculation illustrates this:
This incredible rate of increase largely explains why bacteria can cause significant chemical changes in such a short time, as seen in the quick “spoiling” of food, especially liquids. The reactions that bacteria initiate on substances that are soluble and diffusible are primarily “surface reactions.” The material moves into the cell across its entire surface with minimal resistance. Bacteria are usually spread throughout the medium, creating very close contact in all areas of the mass, which encourages rapid chemical activity. The following calculation demonstrates this:
The surface of a coccus 1µ in diameter is π × 10-8 sq. cm.
It is not uncommon to find in milk on the point of souring 1,000,000,000 bacteria per cc.
It’s not unusual to find about 1,000,000,000 bacteria per cc in milk that’s about to go sour.
Assuming these to be cocci of 1µ diameter the volume of these bacteria in a liter is only 0.05 cc. or in the liter there would be 19999 parts of milk and only 1 part bacteria. The surface area of these bacteria is 3141.6 sq. cm. With this large surface exposed, it is not strange that the change from “on the point of souring” to “sour” occurs within an hour or less.
Assuming these are cocci with a diameter of 1µ, the volume of these bacteria in one liter is only 0.05 cc. This means there would be 19,999 parts of milk and only 1 part bacteria in the liter. The surface area of these bacteria is 3,141.6 sq. cm. With such a large surface area exposed, it’s not surprising that the transition from “on the point of souring” to “sour” happens in an hour or less.
Although large numbers of bacteria can and do cause great chemical changes the amount of material actually utilized for maintenance of the cell is very slight, infinitesimal almost, and yet is fairly comparable to that required for man, as is illustrated by the following computations:
Although a lot of bacteria can and do cause significant chemical changes, the amount of material actually used for maintaining the cell is very small, almost negligible, and yet is quite similar to what is needed for humans, as shown by the following calculations:
E. Kohn has shown that certain water bacteria grew well in water to which there was added per liter 0.000002 mg. dextrose, 0.00000007 mg. (NH4)2SO4 and 0.0000000007 mg. (NH4)2HPO4. The bacteria numbered about 1000 per cc. Taking the specific gravity at 1 (a little too low) the mass of the bacteria in the liter was about 0.001 mg. Hence the bacteria used 0.002 of their weight of carbohydrate and 0.00007 of ammonium sulphate. A 150-pound (75-kilo) man can live on 375 g. of sugar (0.005 of his weight) and 52.5 g. of protein (0.0007 of his weight). From these figures it can be calculated that the man utilizes about two and a half times as much carbohydrate and about seven times as much nitrogen as the bacterium, relatively speaking.
E. Kohn demonstrated that certain water bacteria thrived in water when 0.000002 mg. of dextrose, 0.00000007 mg. of (NH4)2SO4, and 0.0000000007 mg. of (NH4)2HPO4 were added per liter. The bacteria population was about 1000 per cc. Assuming a specific gravity of 1 (which is slightly low), the total mass of the bacteria in one liter was about 0.001 mg. Therefore, the bacteria used 0.002 of their weight in carbohydrates and 0.00007 of ammonium sulfate. A 150-pound (75-kilo) person can survive on 375 g. of sugar (0.005 of their weight) and 52.5 g. of protein (0.0007 of their weight). Based on these numbers, it can be calculated that the person utilizes about two and a half times more carbohydrates and about seven times more nitrogen than the bacteria, relatively speaking.
CHAPTER IX.
PHYSIOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES.
The physiological activities of motion, reproduction and metabolism within the cell have been discussed in previous chapters. The objects in view in the discussion of the “physiological activities” (sometimes spoken of as “biochemical” activities) of bacteria in this and subsequent chapters are to familiarize the student to some extent with the great range of chemical changes brought about by these minute organisms, to show their usefulness, even their necessity, and to impress the fact that it is chiefly by a careful study of these “activities” that individual kinds of bacteria are identified. It should always be borne in mind that the bacteria, in bringing about these changes which are so characteristic in many instances, are simply engaged in their own life struggle, in securing the elements which they need for growth, in liberating energy for vital processes, or occasionally in providing conditions which favor their own development and hinder that of their competitors.
The physiological activities of movement, reproduction, and metabolism in the cell have been discussed in earlier chapters. The focus of the discussion on the “physiological activities” (sometimes referred to as “biochemical” activities) of bacteria in this and the following chapters is to help students understand the wide range of chemical changes caused by these tiny organisms, to highlight their usefulness and even necessity, and to emphasize that it is primarily through a careful study of these “activities” that different types of bacteria are identified. It's important to remember that bacteria, in causing these distinct changes in many cases, are simply trying to survive, obtaining the elements they need for growth, releasing energy for vital processes, or sometimes creating conditions that promote their own growth while hindering that of their competitors.
FERMENTATION OF CARBOHYDRATES.
By this is meant the changes which different carbohydrates undergo when subjected to bacterial action.11
By this, it means the changes that various carbohydrates go through when exposed to bacterial action.11
These changes are marked chiefly by the production of gas or acid. The former is called “gaseous fermentation” the latter “acid fermentation.” The gases commonly produced are carbon dioxide (CO2) hydrogen and marsh gas (CH4). Other gases of the paraffin series may also be formed as ethane (C2H6), acetylene (C2H2), etc. CO2 and H are the ones usually formed from sugars by the few gas-forming bacteria which produce disease, though even here some CH4 is present. The common Bacterium coli forms all three, though the CH4 is in smallest quantity.
These changes are mainly characterized by the production of gas or acid. The former is known as “gaseous fermentation,” while the latter is referred to as “acid fermentation.” The gases typically produced are carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen, and marsh gas (CH4). Other gases from the paraffin series can also be created, such as ethane (C2H6) and acetylene (C2H2), among others. CO2 and hydrogen are usually produced from sugars by the few gas-forming bacteria that cause disease, although some CH4 is also present. The common Bacterium coli produces all three gases, but CH4 is made in the smallest amount.


In the fermentation of the polysaccharids—starch and especially cellulose and woody material—large amounts of CH4 occur, particularly when the changes are due to anaërobic bacteria. This phenomenon may be readily observed in sluggish streams, ponds and swamps where vegetable matter accumulates on the bottom. The bubbles of gas which arise when the mass is disturbed explode if a lighted match is applied to them.
In the fermentation of polysaccharides—like starch and especially cellulose and woody material—large amounts of CH4 are produced, especially when the changes are caused by anaerobic bacteria. This can easily be seen in slow-moving streams, ponds, and swamps where plant material builds up on the bottom. The gas bubbles that form when the material is disturbed will explode if a lit match is brought near them.
The author has conducted a number of experiments to demonstrate this action as follows: Material taken from the bottom of a pond in the fall after vegetation had died out was packed into a cylinder five feet long and six inches in diameter, water was added to within about 2 inches of the top. After leaving them open for a few days to permit all the dissolved oxygen to be used up by the aërobes, the cylinders were tightly capped and allowed to stand undisturbed. Pressure gauges reading to 500 lbs. were attached (Fig. 60). At the end of six months the gauge showed a pressure beyond the limits of the readings on it. Most of the gas was collected and measured 146 liters. An analysis of portions collected when about one-half had been allowed to escape showed the following composition, according to Prof. D. J. Demorest of the Department of Metallurgy:
The author has conducted several experiments to demonstrate this action as follows: Material taken from the bottom of a pond in the fall after the vegetation had died was packed into a cylinder five feet long and six inches in diameter. Water was added to within about 2 inches of the top. After leaving them open for a few days to allow all the dissolved oxygen to be used up by the aerobes, the cylinders were tightly capped and left undisturbed. Pressure gauges that read up to 500 lbs were attached (Fig. 60). At the end of six months, the gauge showed a pressure beyond its maximum reading. Most of the gas was collected and measured at 146 liters. An analysis of the portions collected when about half had been allowed to escape showed the following composition, according to Prof. D. J. Demorest of the Department of Metallurgy:
CO2 | 18.6 per cent. |
CH4 | 76.1 per cent. |
H | 1.0 per cent. |
N | 4.3 per cent. |

One of the very few practical uses of the gaseous fermentation of carbohydrates is in making “salt rising” bread. The “rising” of the material is due not to yeasts but to the formation of gas by certain bacteria which are present on the corn meal or flour used in the process (Fig. 63).
One of the rare practical uses of the gaseous fermentation of carbohydrates is in making "salt rising" bread. The "rising" of the dough happens not because of yeast but due to gas produced by certain bacteria found on the cornmeal or flour used in the process (Fig. 63).

Another is in the formation of the “holes” or “eyes” so characteristic of Swiss and other types of cheese (Fig. 64).
Another is in the creation of the “holes” or “eyes” that are so typical of Swiss and other types of cheese (Fig. 64).

A great many organic acids are formed during the “acid fermentation” of carbohydrates by bacteria. Each kind of bacterium, as a rule, forms several different acids as well as other substances, though usually one is produced in much larger amounts, and the kind of fermentation is named from this acid. One of the commonest of these acids is lactic. The “lactic acid bacteria” form a very large and important group and are indispensable in many commercial processes. In the making of butter the cream is first “ripened,” as is the milk from which many kinds of cheese are made (Fig. 65). The chief feature of this “ripening” is the formation of lactic acid from the milk-sugar by the action of bacteria. A similar change occurs in the popular “Bulgarian fermented milk.” The reaction is usually represented by the equation:
A lot of organic acids are produced during the "acid fermentation" of carbohydrates by bacteria. Generally, each type of bacterium produces several different acids along with other substances, although typically one is produced in much larger quantities, and the fermentation is named after that acid. One of the most common of these acids is lactic acid. The "lactic acid bacteria" make up a very large and important group and are essential in many commercial processes. In butter production, the cream is first "ripened," just like the milk used for various types of cheese (Fig. 65). The main aspect of this "ripening" is the production of lactic acid from the milk sugar by the action of bacteria. A similar process happens in the popular "Bulgarian fermented milk." The reaction is usually represented by the equation:
C12H22O11 + Water + (bacteria) = Lactic acid. C₃H₆O₃
It is not probable that the change occurs quantitatively as indicated, because a number of other substances are also formed. Some of these are acetic and succinic acids and alcohol. Another industrial use of this acid fermentation is in the preparation of “sauer kraut.” These bacteria are chiefly anaërobic and grow best in a relatively high salt concentration. They occur naturally on the cabbage leaves.
It’s unlikely that the change happens in the way described because several other substances are also produced. Some of these include acetic and succinic acids, as well as alcohol. Another industrial application of this acid fermentation is in making “sauerkraut.” These bacteria are mostly anaerobic and thrive in a relatively high salt concentration. They are found naturally on cabbage leaves.

In the formation of ensilage (Fig. 66) the lactic acid bacteria play a very important part, as they do also in “sour mash” distilling, and in many kinds of natural “pickling.” In fact, whenever green vegetable material “sours” spontaneously, lactic acid bacteria are always present and account for a large part of the acid. This property of lactic acid formation is also taken advantage of in the preparation of lactic acid on a commercial scale in at least one plant in this country.
In making silage (Fig. 66), lactic acid bacteria play a crucial role, just like they do in “sour mash” distilling and various types of natural pickling. Whenever green plant material ferments on its own, lactic acid bacteria are always present and contribute significantly to the acidity. This ability to produce lactic acid is also utilized in the commercial production of lactic acid in at least one facility in this country.

Acetic acid is another common product of acid fermentation. However, in vinegar making the acetic acid is not formed directly from the sugar in the fruit juice by bacteria. The sugar is first converted into alcohol by yeasts, then the alcohol is oxidized to acid by the bacteria (Fig. 67). The reaction may be represented as follows:
Acetic acid is another common result of acid fermentation. However, in vinegar production, the acetic acid doesn't come directly from the sugar in the fruit juice through bacteria. The sugar is initially turned into alcohol by yeasts, and then the alcohol is oxidized into acid by the bacteria (Fig. 67). The reaction can be expressed like this:
2C2H5OH + 2CO₂
CH3COOH + H₂O.
Butyric acid is generally produced where fermentation of carbohydrates occurs under anaërobic conditions. Some of the “strong” odor of certain kinds of cheese is due to this acid which is formed partly from the milk-sugar remaining in the cheese. Most of it under these conditions comes from the proteins of the cheese and especially from the fat (see page 101).
Butyric acid is usually produced when carbohydrates ferment in anaërobic conditions. Some of the “strong” smell of certain types of cheese comes from this acid, which is partly formed from the milk sugar left in the cheese. Most of it in these conditions is produced from the proteins in the cheese, particularly from the fat (see page 101).
As has been indicated alcohol is a common accompaniment of most acid fermentations, as are the esters of acids other than the chief product. Bacteria are not used in a commercial way to produce alcohol, however, as the yield is too small. There are some few bacteria in which the amount of alcohol is prominent enough to call the process an “alcoholic fermentation” rather than an acid one. In brewing and distilling industries, yeasts are used to make the alcohol, though molds replace them in some countries (“sake” and “arrak” from rice).
As mentioned, alcohol is commonly produced alongside most acid fermentations, just like the esters of other acids besides the main product. However, bacteria are not used commercially to produce alcohol because the yield is too low. There are a few types of bacteria where the amount of alcohol is significant enough to classify the process as “alcoholic fermentation” instead of just acid fermentation. In the brewing and distilling industries, yeasts are used to create alcohol, although molds are used in some countries (as seen with “sake” and “arrak” from rice).

Under ordinary conditions the carbohydrate is never completely fermented, since the accumulation of the product—acid—stops the reaction. If the acid is neutralized by the addition of an alkali—calcium or magnesium carbonate is best—then the sugar may all be split up. Where such fermentation occurs under natural conditions, the products are further split up, partly by molds and partly by acid-destroying bacteria into simpler acids and eventually to carbon dioxide and water, so that the end-products of the complete fermentation of carbohydrate material in nature are carbon dioxide, hydrogen, marsh gas, and water.
Under normal conditions, carbohydrates are never completely fermented because the buildup of acid halts the reaction. If you neutralize the acid by adding an alkali—calcium or magnesium carbonate works best—the sugar can be fully broken down. When fermentation happens naturally, these products are further processed, partly by molds and partly by bacteria that eliminate acid, turning them into simpler acids, and eventually into carbon dioxide and water. So, the final products of the complete fermentation of carbohydrate material in nature are carbon dioxide, hydrogen, marsh gas, and water.
In all of these fermentations the bacteria are utilizing the carbon both as building material and for oxidation and the fermentations are incidental to this use. As a rule, the acid-forming bacteria can withstand a higher concentration of acid than the other bacteria that would utilize the same material, and in a short time crowd out their competitors or inhibit their growth, and thus have better conditions for their own existence, though finally their growth is also checked by the acid.
In all of these fermentations, the bacteria are using carbon both as building material and for oxidation, and the fermentations happen alongside this use. Generally, the acid-forming bacteria can tolerate higher levels of acid than other bacteria competing for the same material, which allows them to quickly outcompete or inhibit the growth of their rivals, creating better conditions for their own survival. However, eventually, their growth is also limited by the acid.
SPLITTING OF FATS.
The splitting of fats into glycerin and the particular acid or acids involved may be brought about by bacteria. An illustration is the development of rancidity in butter at times and the “strong” odor of animal fats on long keeping and of many kinds of cheese—“limburger”—in this country. Generally speaking, however, fats are not vigorously attacked, as is illustrated by the difficulties due to accumulation of fats in certain types of sewage-disposal works. The chemical change is represented by the equation:
The breaking down of fats into glycerin and the specific acid or acids involved can be caused by bacteria. For example, rancidity can develop in butter sometimes, as well as the strong smell of animal fats after being stored for a while and various types of cheese—like “limburger”—in this country. However, in general, fats are not heavily affected, as seen in the challenges posed by fat buildup in certain sewage treatment facilities. The chemical change is represented by the equation:
C3H5(CnH2n-1O2)3 + 3 H2O = Glycerin.
C3H5(OH)3 + Fatty acid.
3 (CnH2nO2).
CHAPTER X.
PHYSIOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES (Continued).
PUTREFACTION OF PROTEINS.
The word “putrefaction” is now restricted to the action of bacteria on the complex nitrogen-containing substances, proteins, and their immediate derivatives. The process is usually accompanied by the development of foul odors.
The word “putrefaction” now refers specifically to the action of bacteria on complex nitrogen-containing substances, proteins, and their direct derivatives. This process is typically associated with the creation of unpleasant smells.
Bacteria make use of proteins chiefly as a source of nitrogen, but also as a source of carbon and other elements. Proteins contain nitrogen, carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, sulphur and frequently phosphorus. Some of the metals—potassium, sodium, calcium, magnesium, iron and manganese and the non-metal chlorine—are nearly always associated with them more or less intimately. Since these bodies are the most complex of natural chemical substances it follows that the breaking up of the molecule to secure a part of the nitrogen gives rise to a great variety of products.
Bacteria primarily use proteins as a nitrogen source, but they also serve as a source of carbon and other elements. Proteins are made up of nitrogen, carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, sulfur, and often phosphorus. Some metals—like potassium, sodium, calcium, magnesium, iron, and manganese—along with the non-metal chlorine, are usually found closely associated with them. Since these substances are the most complex natural chemical compounds, breaking down the molecule to obtain some nitrogen results in a wide variety of products.
There are marked differences among bacteria in their ability to attack this class of compounds. Some can break up the most complex natural proteins such as albumins, globulins, glyco-, chromo-, and nucleoproteins, nucleins and albuminoid derivatives like gelatin. The term saprogenic (σαπρος = rotten) is sometimes applied to bacteria which have this power. These proteins are large-moleculed and not diffusible, so that the first splitting up that they undergo must occur outside the bacterial cell. The products of this first splitting may diffuse into the cell and be utilized there. The bacteria of this class attack not only these proteins in the natural state or in solution, but also in the coagulated state. The coagulum becomes softened and finally changed into a liquid condition. The process when applied to the casein of milk is usually called “digestion,” also when coagulated blood serum is acted on. In the latter case the serum is more commonly said to be “liquefied” as is the case when gelatin is the substance changed. Most of these bacteria have also the property of coagulating or curdling milk in an alkaline medium, and then digesting the curd. A second class of bacteria has no effect on the complex proteins just mentioned but readily attacks the products of their first splitting, i.e., the proteoses, peptones, polypeptids and amino-acids. They are sometimes called saprophilic bacteria.
There are clear differences among bacteria in their ability to break down this group of compounds. Some can decompose the most complex natural proteins like albumins, globulins, glyco-, chromo-, and nucleoproteins, nucleins, and albuminoid derivatives like gelatin. The term saprogenic (rotten = rotten) is sometimes used for bacteria that have this capability. These proteins have large molecules and aren’t diffusible, so the initial breakdown must occur outside the bacterial cell. The products of this initial breakdown may diffuse into the cell and be used there. The bacteria in this group target not only these proteins in their natural state or in solution, but also in their coagulated form. The coagulated substance becomes softened and eventually turned into a liquid state. When this process is applied to milk casein, it is typically referred to as “digestion,” and it’s also used when coagulated blood serum is processed. In this latter case, the serum is more commonly said to be “liquefied,” similar to when gelatin is the substance being altered. Most of these bacteria also have the ability to coagulate or curdle milk in an alkaline environment and then digest the curd. A second group of bacteria does not affect the complex proteins just mentioned but easily attacks the products of their initial breakdown, such as proteoses, peptones, polypeptides, and amino acids. They are sometimes called saprophilic bacteria.
Other bacteria derive their nitrogen from some of the products of the first two groups, and still further break down the complex protein molecule. Under normal conditions these various kinds of bacteria all occur together and thus mutually assist one another in what is equivalent to a symbiosis or rather a metabiosis, a “successive existence,” one set living on the products of the other. The result is the complete splitting up of the complete protein molecule. A part of the nitrogen is built up into the bodies of the bacteria which are using it as food. A part is finally liberated as free nitrogen or as ammonia after having undergone a series of transformations many of which are still undetermined.
Other bacteria get their nitrogen from some products of the first two groups and further break down the complex protein molecule. Normally, these various types of bacteria coexist and help each other in a way that's similar to symbiosis or, more accurately, metabiosis, which means “successive existence,” where one group lives off the byproducts of the other. This leads to the complete breakdown of the entire protein molecule. Some of the nitrogen is incorporated into the bodies of the bacteria that are using it as food. Some is eventually released as free nitrogen or as ammonia after going through a series of transformations, many of which are still not fully understood.
One class of compounds formed received at one time
much attention because they were supposed to be responsible
for a great deal of illness. These are the “ptomaines,”
basic nitrogen compounds of definite composition—amines—some
few of which are poisonous, most of them not. The
basic character of ptomaines may be understood if they be
regarded as made up of one or more molecules of ammonia
in which the hydrogen has been replaced by alkyl or other
radicals. Thus ammonia (NH3) may be represented as
.
The simplest ptomaine is
,
in which one H is replaced by methyl, methylamine, a gaseous ptomaine.
With two hydrogens replaced by methyl,
,
dimethylamine, also a gas at ordinary temperature, is formed.
Trimethylamine,
,
a liquid, results when three hydrogens
are similarly replaced. All three of these occur in herring
brine and are responsible for the characteristic odor
of this material. Putrescin and cadaverin—tetramethylene—diamine,
and pentamethylenediamine respectively—occur
generally in decomposing flesh, hence the names.
They are only slightly poisonous. One of the highly poisonous
ptomaines is neurin C5H13NO or C2H3N(CH3)3OH = trimethyl-vinyl
ammonium hydroxide. This is a stronger
base than ammonia, liberating it from its salts. Numerous
other ptomaines have been isolated and described. These
bodies were considered for a long time to be the cause of
various kinds of “meat poisoning,” “ice cream poisoning,”
“cheese poisoning,” etc. It is true that they may
sometimes cause these conditions, but they are very much
rarer than the laity generally believe. Most of the “meat
poisonings” in America are due, not to ptomaines, but to
infections with certain bacilli of the Bacterium enteritidis
group. Occasionally a case of poisoning by the true toxin
(see Chapter XII) of Clostridium botulinum occurs, and in
recent years has become entirely too common due to insufficient
heating of canned goods. The boiling of such
material will destroy this toxin. The safest rule to follow is
not to eat any canned material that shows any departure from
the normal in flavor, taste or consistency.
One type of compounds that once attracted a lot of attention was thought to cause many illnesses. These are the “ptomaines,” which are basic nitrogen compounds with a specific composition—amines—of which a few are toxic, while most are not. The basic nature of ptomaines can be understood if we think of them as consisting of one or more ammonia molecules where the hydrogen has been substituted with alkyl or other groups. For example, ammonia (NH3) is represented as . The simplest ptomaine is
where one hydrogen is replaced by a methyl group, resulting in methylamine, a gas. When two hydrogens are replaced by methyl groups, we get
dimethylamine, which is also a gas at room temperature. When three hydrogens are replaced, we have trimethylamine,
, a liquid. All three of these are found in herring brine and are responsible for its distinctive smell. Putrescine and cadaverine—tetramethylene-diamine and pentamethylenediamine, respectively—are generally present in decaying flesh, which is how they got their names. They are only slightly toxic. One of the highly toxic ptomaines is neurin C5H13NO or C2H3N(CH3)3OH = trimethyl-vinyl ammonium hydroxide. This is a stronger base than ammonia and can release it from its salts. Many other ptomaines have been identified and described. For a long time, these substances were thought to be the cause of different types of “meat poisoning,” “ice cream poisoning,” “cheese poisoning,” and similar conditions. While it’s true they can sometimes cause these issues, they are actually much rarer than people usually think. Most of the “meat poisonings” in America are due not to ptomaines, but to infections from certain bacteria in the Bacterium enteritidis group. Occasionally, a case of poisoning from the actual toxin (see Chapter XII) of Clostridium botulinum occurs, which has become increasingly common in recent years due to inadequate heating of canned goods. Boiling such materials will eliminate this toxin. The best rule of thumb is not to consume any canned goods that have any unusual flavor, taste, or texture.
As ptomaines result from the putrefaction of proteins, so they are still further decomposed by bacteria and eventually the nitrogen is liberated either as free nitrogen or as ammonia.
As ptomaines come from the decay of proteins, they are further broken down by bacteria, which eventually releases the nitrogen either as free nitrogen or as ammonia.
Another series of products are the so-called aromatic compounds—phenol (carbolic acid), various cresols, also indol and skatol or methyl indol (these two are largely responsible for the characteristic odor of human feces). All of these nitrogen compounds are attacked by bacteria and the nitrogen is eventually liberated, so far as it is not locked up in the bodies of the bacteria, as free nitrogen or as ammonia.
Another group of products is the so-called aromatic compounds—phenol (carbolic acid), various cresols, as well as indole and skatole or methyl indole (these two are mainly responsible for the distinct smell of human feces). All of these nitrogen compounds are broken down by bacteria, and the nitrogen is eventually released, unless it's stored in the bacteria's bodies, either as free nitrogen or as ammonia.
The carbon which occurs in proteins accompanies the nitrogen in many of the above products, but also appears in nitrogen-free organic acids, aldehydes and alcohols which are all eventually split up, so that the carbon is changed to carbon dioxide or in the absence of oxygen partly to marsh gas.
The carbon found in proteins works alongside nitrogen in many of the products mentioned above, but it also shows up in nitrogen-free organic acids, aldehydes, and alcohols, which ultimately break down, resulting in carbon being converted into carbon dioxide or, when oxygen isn't present, partly into marsh gas.
The intermediate changes which the sulphur in proteins undergoes are not known, but it is liberated as sulphuretted hydrogen (H2S) or as various mercaptans (all foul-smelling), or is partially oxidized to sulphuric acid. Some of the H2S and the sulphur of the mercaptans are oxidized by the sulphur bacteria to free sulphur and finally to sulphuric acid.
The intermediate changes that sulfur in proteins goes through aren’t fully understood, but it’s released as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) or various foul-smelling mercaptans, or is partially oxidized to sulfuric acid. Some of the H2S and sulfur from the mercaptans are oxidized by sulfur bacteria to produce free sulfur and eventually sulfuric acid.
Phosphorus is present especially in the nucleoproteins and nucleins. Just what the intermediate stages are, on whether there are any, so far as the phosphorus is concerned, in the splitting up of nucleic acid by bacterial action is not determined. The phosphorus may occur as phosphoric acid in such decompositions, or when the conditions are anaërobic, as phosphine (PH3), which burns spontaneously in the air to phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), and water.13
Phosphorus is mainly found in nucleoproteins and nucleic acids. It's unclear what the intermediate stages are, if any, concerning phosphorus during the breakdown of nucleic acid by bacteria. In these decompositions, phosphorus may appear as phosphoric acid or, under anaerobic conditions, as phosphine (PH3), which ignites spontaneously in the air to form phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5) and water.13
The hydrogen in proteins appears in the forms above indicated: H4C, H3N, H3P, H2S, H2O and as free H. The oxygen as CO2 and H2O.
The hydrogen in proteins is found in the forms listed above: H4C, H3N, H3P, H2S, H2O, and as free H. The oxygen is present as CO2 and H2O.
In the breaking down of the complex protein molecule even by a single kind of bacterium there is not a perfect descending scale of complexity as might be supposed from the statement that there result proteoses, peptones, polypeptids, amino-acids. These substances do result, but at the time of their formation simpler ones are formed also, even CO2, NH3 and H2S. It appears that the entire molecule is shattered in such a way that less complex proteins are formed from the major part, while a minor portion breaks up completely to the simplest combinations possible. A more complete knowledge of these decompositions will aid in the further unravelling of the structure of proteins. The presence or absence of free oxygen makes a difference in the end-products, as has been indicated. There are bacteria which oxidize the ammonia to nitric acid and the H2S to sulphuric acid. (See Oxidation, Chapter XI.) Bacteria which directly oxidize phosphorus compounds to phosphoric acid have not been described. It does not seem that such are necessary since this is either split off from nucleic acid or results from the spontaneous oxidation of phosphine when this is formed under anaërobic conditions.
In the breakdown of complex protein molecules, even by a single type of bacterium, there isn’t a perfect step-by-step decline in complexity, as you might think from the idea that it results in proteoses, peptones, polypeptides, and amino acids. These substances do emerge, but along with them, simpler ones are also formed, including CO2, NH3, and H2S. It seems that the entire molecule is shattered in such a way that less complex proteins are produced from the majority, while a small portion breaks down completely into the simplest possible combinations. A better understanding of these breakdown processes will help in further unraveling the structure of proteins. The presence or absence of free oxygen affects the final products, as has been pointed out. There are bacteria that oxidize ammonia into nitric acid and H2S into sulfuric acid. (See Oxidation, Chapter XI.) Bacteria that directly oxidize phosphorus compounds into phosphoric acid haven’t been reported. It doesn’t seem necessary for such bacteria to exist since this is either split off from nucleic acid or results from the spontaneous oxidation of phosphine when it's formed under anaerobic conditions.
Not only are proteins decomposed as above outlined, but also their waste products, that is, the form in which their nitrogen leaves the animal body. This is largely urea in mammals, with much hippuric acid in herbivorous animals and uric acid in birds and reptiles. These substances yield NH3, CO2 and H2O with a variety of organic acids as intermediate products in some cases. The strong odor of ammonia in stables and about manure piles is the everyday evidence of this decomposition.
Not only are proteins broken down as described above, but so are their waste products, which is how nitrogen leaves the animal body. In mammals, this primarily takes the form of urea, while herbivorous animals have a lot of hippuric acid, and birds and reptiles excrete uric acid. These substances produce NH3, CO2, and H2O, along with various organic acids as byproducts in some cases. The strong smell of ammonia in stables and around manure piles is a daily reminder of this breakdown.
Where the putrefaction of proteins occurs in the soil with moderate amounts of moisture and free access of air a large part of the products is retained in the soil. Thus the ammonia and carbon dioxide in the presence of water form ammonium carbonate; the nitric, sulphuric and phosphoric acids unite with some of the metals which are always present to form salts. Some of the gases do escape and most where the oxygen supply is least, since they are not oxidized.
Where the breakdown of proteins happens in the soil with moderate moisture and access to air, a significant portion of the products stays in the soil. In this process, ammonia and carbon dioxide combine with water to create ammonium carbonate; nitric, sulfuric, and phosphoric acids bond with some of the metals that are always present to form salts. Some gases do escape, especially where there's less oxygen, since they aren't oxidized.
The protein-splitting reactions afford valuable tests in aiding in the recognition of bacteria. In the study of pathogenic bacteria the coagulation and digestion of milk, the digestion or liquefaction of blood serum, the liquefaction of gelatin and the production of indol and H2S are those usually tested for. In dairy bacteriology the coagulation of milk and the digestion of the casein are common phenomena. Most bacteria which liquefy gelatin also digest blood serum and coagulate and digest milk, though there are exceptions. In soil bacteriology the whole range of protein changes is of the greatest importance.
The protein-splitting reactions provide valuable tests that help identify bacteria. In studying pathogenic bacteria, the coagulation and digestion of milk, the digestion or liquefaction of blood serum, the liquefaction of gelatin, and the production of indole and H2S are commonly tested for. In dairy bacteriology, the coagulation of milk and the digestion of casein are regular occurrences. Most bacteria that liquefy gelatin also digest blood serum and coagulate and digest milk, although there are some exceptions. In soil bacteriology, the entire range of protein changes is extremely important.




The three physiological activities already discussed explain how bacteria break down the chief complex, energy-rich substances—carbohydrates, fats and proteins which constitute the bulk of the organic material in the bodies of plants and animals, as well as the waste products of the latter—into energy-free compounds like carbon dioxide, water, ammonia, nitric, sulphuric and phosphoric acids—mineralize them, as is frequently said. By so doing the bacteria act as the great scavengers of nature removing the dead animal and vegetable matter of all kinds which but for this action would accumulate to such an extent that all life, both on land and in the water, must cease. It is further to be noted that not only is all this dead organic matter removed; but it is converted into forms which are again available for plant growth. Carbon dioxide forms the source of the carbon in all green plants, hence in all animals; the sulphates and phosphates are likewise taken up by green plants and built up again into protein compounds; the ammonia is not directly available to green plants to any large extent but is converted by the nitrifying bacteria (Chapter XI) into nitrates which is the form in which nitrogen is assimilated by these higher types. Even the free nitrogen of the air is taken up by several kinds of bacteria, the symbiotic “root-tubercle bacteria” of leguminous and other plants, and some free-living forms, and made available. Hence bacteria are indispensable in nature, especially in keeping up the circulation of nitrogen. They are also of great service in the circulation of carbon, sulphur and phosphorus. Though some few kinds cause disease in man and animals, if it were not for the saprophytic bacteria above outlined, there could be no animals and higher plants to acquire these diseases.
The three physiological activities discussed earlier explain how bacteria break down the main complex, energy-rich substances—carbohydrates, fats, and proteins—which make up most of the organic material in plants and animals, as well as the waste they produce. They turn these substances into energy-free compounds like carbon dioxide, water, ammonia, and nitric, sulfuric, and phosphoric acids—essentially mineralizing them. In doing so, bacteria act as nature's great scavengers, removing dead animal and plant matter of all kinds. Without this process, this matter would pile up to such an extent that all life, both on land and in water, would come to an end. It's also important to note that not only is all this dead organic material removed, but it is transformed into forms that can be used again for plant growth. Carbon dioxide provides the carbon needed by all green plants, and therefore all animals; sulfates and phosphates are also absorbed by green plants and reassembled into protein compounds. Ammonia is not readily available to green plants in large amounts, but nitrifying bacteria (Chapter XI) convert it into nitrates, the form in which nitrogen is absorbed by these higher organisms. Even the free nitrogen in the air is utilized by various types of bacteria, particularly the symbiotic "root-tubercle bacteria" found in legumes and other plants, as well as some free-living forms, making it accessible. Thus, bacteria are essential in nature, particularly in maintaining the nitrogen cycle. They also play a significant role in the cycling of carbon, sulfur, and phosphorus. Although a few types can cause disease in humans and animals, without the saprophytic bacteria mentioned above, there would be no animals or higher plants to contract these diseases.
CHAPTER XI.
PHYSIOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES (Continued).
PRODUCTION OF ACIDS.
The production of organic acids has been sufficiently discussed in preceding chapters. It should be noted that not only these in great variety are produced by bacteria but that under certain conditions mineral acids, such as nitric, sulphuric and phosphoric may be formed (see Oxidation, p. 114). Acid production is of great value in the identification of bacteria in dairy and soil work and in connection with certain types of pathogenic bacteria.
The production of organic acids has been thoroughly covered in earlier chapters. It's important to point out that not only do bacteria produce a wide range of these acids, but under certain conditions, mineral acids like nitric, sulfuric, and phosphoric can also be formed (see Oxidation, p. 114). Acid production is very useful for identifying bacteria in dairy and soil research and in relation to certain types of disease-causing bacteria.
GAS PRODUCTION.
It will be sufficient merely to enumerate collectively the various gases mentioned in preceding paragraphs and to state that those commonly observed in the study of pathogenic bacteria are the first six mentioned. Most of them come in in dairy work either in the study of bacteria causing milk and cheese “failures” or as affecting the flavors of butter or cheese. In the study of soil organisms, any or all of them are liable to be of importance. The gases are: CO2, H, CH4, N, NH3, H2S, gaseous mercaptans, gaseous ptomaines, volatile fatty acids, ethereal salts or esters and others, both of pleasant and of foul odor, but of unknown composition.
It’s enough to simply list the different gases mentioned earlier and note that the first six are the ones typically found in the study of harmful bacteria. Most of these gases are involved in dairy production, either related to the bacteria that cause issues with milk and cheese or affecting the flavors of butter or cheese. In the analysis of soil organisms, any or all of these gases can be significant. The gases include: CO2, H, CH4, N, NH3, H2S, gaseous mercaptans, gaseous ptomaines, volatile fatty acids, ethereal salts or esters, and others, which may have pleasant or unpleasant odors, but their composition is unknown.
PRODUCTION OF ESTERS.
The production of esters, as mentioned in Chapters IX and X, of various alcohols and aldehydes are activities which are sometimes of value in the study of bacteria, but need not be further discussed.
The creation of esters, as noted in Chapters IX and X, from different alcohols and aldehydes can be useful in studying bacteria, but it doesn't need to be discussed further.
PRODUCTION OF “AROMATIC” COMPOUNDS.
These have been mentioned in discussing the putrefaction of proteins, as indol, skatol, phenol and various cresols. Of these only the first is ordinarily tested for in the study of bacteria, though others of the group become of value in certain special cases.
These have been mentioned when discussing the breakdown of proteins, such as indole, skatole, phenol, and various cresols. Of these, only the first is typically tested for in the study of bacteria, although the others in the group can be useful in certain specific cases.

PHOSPHORESCENCE OR PHOTOGENESIS.
This is a most interesting phenomenon associated with the growth of some bacteria. The “fox fire” frequently seen on decaying wood which is covered with a slimy deposit is most commonly due to bacteria, though also to other fungi. Phosphorescent bacteria are very common in sea water, hence they are frequently found on various sea foods, especially when these are allowed to decompose, such as fish, oysters, clams, etc. The light is due to the conversion of the energy of unknown easily oxidizable compounds directly into visible radiant energy through oxidation without appreciable quantities of heat. The light produced may be sufficient to tell the time on a watch in absolute darkness, and also to photograph the growths with their own light, but only after several hours’ exposure (Fig. 72). None of the phosphorescent bacteria so far discovered produce disease in the higher animals or man.
This is a really interesting phenomenon related to the growth of certain bacteria. The “fox fire” often seen on decaying wood covered with a slimy layer is mostly caused by bacteria, although other fungi can contribute as well. Phosphorescent bacteria are quite common in seawater, so they are often found on various seafood, especially when they start to decompose, like fish, oysters, clams, and so on. The light comes from the transformation of the energy of unknown, easily oxidizable compounds directly into visible radiant energy through oxidation without producing significant amounts of heat. The light generated can be bright enough to read the time on a watch in complete darkness and can even be used to photograph the growths using their own light, but only after several hours of exposure (Fig. 72). None of the phosphorescent bacteria discovered so far cause disease in higher animals or humans.
PRODUCTION OF PIGMENT OR CHROMOGENESIS.
One of the most striking results of bacterial activity is this phenomenon. The particular color which results may be almost any one throughout the range of the spectrum, though shades of yellow and of red are of more frequent occurrence.
One of the most noticeable results of bacterial activity is this phenomenon. The specific color that comes from it can be nearly any color in the spectrum, although shades of yellow and red tend to be more common.
In the red sulphur bacteria the “bacteriopurpurin” which they contain appears to serve as a true respiratory pigment in a manner similar to the chlorophyl in green plants, except that these bacteria oxidize H2S in the light as a source of energy instead of splitting up CO2. The red pigment produced by certain bacteria has been shown to have a capacity for combining with O resembling that of hemoglobin, and some investigators have believed that such bacteria do store O in this way for use when the supply is diminished. With these few exceptions the pigments seem to be merely by-products of cell activity which are colored and have no known function.
In red sulfur bacteria, the “bacteriopurpurin” they contain acts as a genuine respiratory pigment, similar to chlorophyll in green plants. However, these bacteria oxidize H2S in the light for energy instead of breaking down CO2. The red pigment produced by certain bacteria has been shown to have a capacity to bind with O that’s similar to hemoglobin, and some researchers believe these bacteria may store O this way for times when the supply runs low. With a few exceptions, the pigments appear to be just by-products of cell activity—colored substances with no known function.
The red sulphur bacteria above mentioned and one or two other kinds retain the pigments formed within the cell. Such bacteria are called chromophoric as distinguished from the chromoparic bacteria whose pigment lies outside the cell.
The red sulfur bacteria mentioned earlier and a couple of other types keep the pigments formed inside the cell. These bacteria are called chromophoric, unlike the chromoparic bacteria, which have their pigment located outside the cell.
The chemical composition of no bacterial pigment has been determined up to the present. Some are soluble in water, as shown by the discoloration of the substances on which they grow. Others are not soluble in water but are in alcohol, or in some of the fat solvents as ether, chloroform, benzol, etc. These latter are probably closely related to the lipochromes or “fat colors” of higher plants and animals. Attempts have been made to render the production of pigments a still more reliable means of identification of species of bacteria through a careful examination of the spectra of their solutions, but such study has not as yet led to any valuable practical results.
The chemical composition of no bacterial pigment has been determined so far. Some are soluble in water, as indicated by the discoloration of the surfaces they grow on. Others aren't soluble in water but can be dissolved in alcohol or some fat solvents like ether, chloroform, and benzol. These are probably closely related to the lipochromes or “fat colors” found in higher plants and animals. Efforts have been made to use pigment production as a more reliable way to identify bacterial species by carefully examining the spectra of their solutions, but this research hasn't yet produced any valuable practical results.
The production of pigment depends on the same general factors which determine the growth of the organism but does not necessarily run parallel with these. It is especially influenced by the oxygen supply (only a very few organisms are known which produce pigment anaërobically—Spirillum rubrum is one); by the presence of certain food substances (starch, as in potato, for many bacteria producing yellow and red colors; certain mineral salts, as phosphates and sulphates, for others); by the temperature (many bacteria cease to produce color at all if grown at body temperature, 37°—Erythrobacillus prodigiosus—or if grown for a longer time at temperatures a few degrees higher).
The production of pigment depends on the same general factors that determine the growth of the organism but does not necessarily occur simultaneously with these. It is particularly influenced by the availability of oxygen (only a very few organisms are known to produce pigment anaerobically—Spirillum rubrum is one); by the presence of certain nutrients (like starch, found in potatoes, for many bacteria that produce yellow and red colors; and specific mineral salts, such as phosphates and sulfates, for others); and by the temperature (many bacteria stop producing color entirely if grown at body temperature, 37°—Erythrobacillus prodigiosus—or if grown for an extended period at temperatures a few degrees higher).
REDUCING ACTIONS.
Reduction of nitrates to nitrites or to ammonia or even to free nitrogen is brought about by a great many different kinds of bacteria. In many instances this phenomenon is due to a lack of free oxygen, which is obtained by the bacteria from these easily reducible salts. In other cases a portion of the nitrogen is removed to be used as food material in the building up of new protein in the bacterial cell. This latter use of the nitrogen of nitrates by bacteria might theoretically result in considerable loss of “available nitrogen” in the soil as has actually been shown in a few experiments. The reduction of nitrates as above mentioned would also diminish this supply, but probably neither of these results has any very great practical effect on soil fertility. The building up of protein from these mineral salts by bacteria in the intestines of herbivorous animals has been suggested by Armsby as a considerable source of nitrogenous food, and this suggestion appears possible.
The reduction of nitrates to nitrites, ammonia, or even free nitrogen is carried out by various types of bacteria. Often, this process happens because there isn’t enough free oxygen, which the bacteria obtain from these easily reducible salts. In some cases, a portion of the nitrogen is absorbed to be used as a food source for creating new protein in the bacterial cells. This use of nitrate nitrogen by bacteria could theoretically lead to a significant loss of "available nitrogen" in the soil, as shown in some experiments. The reduction of nitrates, as mentioned, would also reduce this supply, but likely neither result has a major practical impact on soil fertility. Armsby has suggested that the creation of protein from these mineral salts by bacteria in the intestines of herbivorous animals could be a significant source of nitrogenous food, and this idea seems plausible.
Certain bacteria may also reduce sulphates and other sulphur compounds to H2S, a phenomenon frequently observed in sewage and likewise of importance in the soil. It is possible that phosphates may be similarly reduced.14 Further and more careful study of the reducing actions of bacteria is needed.
Certain bacteria can also convert sulfates and other sulfur compounds into H2S, a process often seen in sewage and also significant in the soil. It's possible that phosphates could be reduced in a similar way.14 More detailed and careful research on the reducing actions of bacteria is required.
OXIDATION.
As has been stated in discussing the respiration of bacteria (Chapter VIII) most of these organisms gain their energy through the oxidation of carbon in various forms, chiefly organic, so that CO2 is a product of the activity of nearly all bacteria. Some few oxidize CO to CO2, others CH4 and other paraffins to CO2 for this purpose. One class of bacteria even oxidizes H in small amounts for its energy and uses the carbon dioxide of the air or traces of organic carbon in the air as a source of carbon for “building” purposes.
As mentioned earlier about bacterial respiration (Chapter VIII), most of these organisms get their energy by oxidizing carbon in various forms, mainly organic, which means that CO2 is a byproduct of nearly all bacterial activity. A few oxidize CO to CO2, while others convert CH4 and other paraffins into CO2 for energy. One group of bacteria even oxidizes small amounts of H for energy and uses the carbon dioxide in the air or small traces of organic carbon from the air as a carbon source for growth.
One of the familiar oxidations of organic carbon is that of the acetic acid bacteria in the making of vinegar. These oxidize the alcohol which results from the action of yeast to acetic acid according to the formula CH3CH2OH + O2 = CH3COOH + H2O (see Fig. 67).
One of the common oxidations of organic carbon is that of acetic acid bacteria when producing vinegar. These bacteria convert the alcohol produced by yeast into acetic acid according to the formula CH3CH2OH + O2 = CH3COOH + H2O (see Fig. 67).
Of the various phenomena of oxidation due to bacteria, the formation of nitrites and nitrates has the greatest practical importance, since it is by this means that the ammonia which results from the decomposition of animal and vegetable tissue and waste products is again rendered available to green plants as food in the form of nitrates. Practically all the nitrates found in nature, sometimes in large quantities, are formed in this way. There are two distinct kinds of bacteria involved. One, the nitrous bacteria, oxidizes the ammonia to nitrous acid which forms nitrites with bases, and the other, the nitric bacteria, oxidizes the nitrous to nitric acid, giving nitrates with bases. A striking peculiarity of these two classes of organisms is that they may live entirely on inorganic food materials, are proto-autotrophic, prototrophic for oxygen (aërobic) and autotrophic for the other elements. Their carbon is derived from CO2 or carbonates. The importance of such organisms in keeping up the supply of nitrates in the soil can scarcely be overestimated.
Of the various processes of oxidation caused by bacteria, the creation of nitrites and nitrates is the most practically significant. This is because it allows ammonia, produced from the breakdown of animal and plant tissues and waste, to be transformed back into nitrates, which serve as food for green plants. Almost all natural nitrates, sometimes found in large amounts, are produced this way. There are two main types of bacteria involved. One type, nitrous bacteria, converts ammonia into nitrous acid, which then forms nitrites with bases. The other type, nitric bacteria, oxidizes nitrous acid into nitric acid, producing nitrates with bases. A notable feature of these two groups of organisms is that they can survive entirely on inorganic substances; they are proto-autotrophic, prototrophic for oxygen (aerobic), and autotrophic for other elements. Their carbon comes from CO2 or carbonates. The role of these organisms in maintaining the nitrate supply in the soil is incredibly important.

The oxidation of the H2S, which is formed in the putrefaction of proteins, to free S by the sulphur bacteria and the further oxidation of this free S to sulphuric acid, and of the phosphorus, so characteristic of the nucleins, to phosphoric acid have been referred to. These activities of bacteria are of great value in the soil. Doubtless the commercial “phosphate rock” owes its origin to similar bacterial action in ages past.
The oxidation of H2S, produced during protein breakdown, into free sulfur by sulfur bacteria, and the subsequent oxidation of this free sulfur into sulfuric acid, along with the transformation of phosphorus, which is typical of nucleic acids, into phosphoric acid have been noted. These bacterial processes are very beneficial for the soil. It's likely that commercial "phosphate rock" originated from similar bacterial activity in ancient times.
The oxidation of H2S to free S may be an explanation of the origin of the great deposits of sulphur which are found in Louisiana and along the Gulf coast. These deposits occur in the same general regions as natural gas and oil. The sulphur might have been derived from the same organic material carried down by the Mississippi which yielded the oil and gas.15
The process of oxidizing H2S to produce free sulfur could explain the large deposits of sulfur found in Louisiana and along the Gulf coast. These deposits are located in the same general areas as natural gas and oil. The sulfur may have come from the same organic material that the Mississippi River carried down, which also produced the oil and gas.15
A purposeful utilization of the oxidizing power of bacteria is in “contact beds,” “sprinkling filters” and “aërated sludge tanks” in sewage disposal works. In these instances the sewage is thoroughly mixed with air and brought in contact with large amounts of porous material so as to expose an extensive surface for oxidation (Fig. 73).
A targeted use of the oxidizing abilities of bacteria occurs in "contact beds," "sprinkling filters," and "aerated sludge tanks" in sewage treatment facilities. In these cases, the sewage is thoroughly mixed with air and brought into contact with large amounts of porous material to maximize the surface area for oxidation (Fig. 73).

PRODUCTION OF HEAT.
A direct result of the oxidizing action of bacteria is the production of heat. Under most conditions of bacterial growth this heat is not appreciable. It may become well marked. The “heating” of manure is one of the commonest illustrations. The temperature in such cases may reach 70°. The heating of hay and other green materials is due chiefly to bacterial action. This heating may lead to “spontaneous combustion.” The high temperatures (60° to 70°) favor the growth of thermophil bacteria which cause a still further rise. The heat dries out the material, portions of which are in a state of very fine division due to the disintegrating action of the organisms. The hot, dry, finely divided material oxidizes so rapidly on contact with the air that it ignites.
A direct result of the oxidizing action of bacteria is the production of heat. Under most conditions of bacterial growth, this heat is not significant. However, it can become quite noticeable. One of the most common examples is the "heating" of manure, where temperatures can reach 70°. The heating of hay and other green materials is primarily due to bacterial activity. This heating can lead to "spontaneous combustion." The high temperatures (60° to 70°) encourage the growth of thermophilic bacteria, which causes even further increases in temperature. The heat dries out the material, with some parts being in a very fine state of division because of the disintegrating action of the organisms. The hot, dry, finely divided material oxidizes so quickly when it comes into contact with air that it ignites.
A practical use of heat production by bacteria is in the making of “hot beds” for forcing vegetables (Fig. 74).
A practical use of heat generated by bacteria is in creating "hot beds" for growing vegetables (Fig. 74).
ABSORPTION OF FREE NITROGEN.

This is likewise one of the most important practical activities of certain types of bacteria present in the soil. The ability of plants of the legume family to enrich the soil has been known and taken advantage of for centuries, but it is only about thirty years since it was demonstrated that this property is due to bacteria. These plants, and several other kinds as well, have on their roots larger or smaller nodules (Fig. 75) spoken of as “root tubercles” which are at certain stages filled with bacteria. When conditions are favorable, these bacteria live in symbiotic relationship with the plant tissues, receiving carbonaceous and other food material from them and in return furnishing nitrogenous compounds to the plant. This nitrogenous material is built up from free nitrogen absorbed from the air by the bacteria. The utilization of this peculiar property through the proper cultivation of clover, alfalfa, soy beans and other legumes is one of the best ways of building up and maintaining soil fertility in so far as the nitrogen is concerned. The technical name of these bacteria is Rhizobium leguminosarum.
This is also one of the most important practical activities of certain types of bacteria found in the soil. The ability of plants in the legume family to improve the soil has been recognized and utilized for centuries, but it’s only been about thirty years since it was proven that this ability comes from bacteria. These plants, along with several others, have larger or smaller nodules (Fig. 75) on their roots referred to as “root tubercles,” which are filled with bacteria at certain stages. When conditions are right, these bacteria have a symbiotic relationship with the plant tissues, taking in carbon and other nutrients from them and, in return, supplying nitrogen compounds to the plant. This nitrogen is created from free nitrogen absorbed from the air by the bacteria. Using this unique characteristic through the proper cultivation of clover, alfalfa, soybeans, and other legumes is one of the best ways to enhance and maintain soil fertility, especially concerning nitrogen. The scientific name for these bacteria is Rhizobium leguminosarum.

There are also types of “free-living,” as distinguished from these symbiotic, bacteria which absorb the free nitrogen of the air and aid materially in keeping up this supply under natural conditions. One of the most important of these types is the aërobic “Azotobacter” (Fig. 76), while another is the anaërobic Clostridium pasteurianum. The nitrogen which is absorbed is built up into the protein material of the cell body and this latter must in all probability be “worked over” by various types of decomposition bacteria and by the nitrous and nitric organisms and be converted into utilizable nitrates just as other protein material is, as has been discussed in Chapter X. At any rate there is as yet no definite knowledge of any other method of transformation. Up to the present no intentional practical utilization of this valuable property of these free-living forms has been made.
There are also types of “free-living” bacteria that are different from the symbiotic ones. These bacteria absorb nitrogen from the air and play a significant role in maintaining this supply under natural conditions. One of the most important types is the aerobic “Azotobacter” (Fig. 76), while another is the anaerobic Clostridium pasteurianum. The nitrogen that gets absorbed is incorporated into the protein material of the cell, which likely needs to be processed by various types of decomposition bacteria and by the nitrous and nitric organisms, converting it into usable nitrates, just like other protein materials, as discussed in Chapter X. So far, there is no definite knowledge of any other transformation method. Up to now, there has been no intentional practical use of this valuable property of these free-living forms.
Nitrogen Nutrition of Green Plants.—It is the belief of botanists that green plants obtain their nitrogen chiefly in the form of nitrates, though ammonium salts may be utilized to some extent by certain plants at least. Exceptions to this general rule are those plants provided with root tubercles (and the bog plants and others which have mycorrhiza?). These plants obtain their nitrogen in the form of organic compounds made for them by the bacteria growing in the tubercles. That nitrogen circulates throughout the structure of plants in organic combination is certain. There does not appear to be any reason why similar compounds which are soluble and diffusible (amino-acids?) should not be taken up through the roots of plants and utilized as such. It seems to the author that this is very probably the case. Arguments in favor of this view are: (1) The nitrogen nutrition of leguminous and other plants with root nodules. (2) The close symbiosis between “Azotobacter” and similar nitrogen-absorbing bacteria and many species of algæ in sea water at least. (3) The vigorous growth of plants in soils very rich in organic matter, which inhibits the production of nitrates by the nitrous-nitric bacteria when grown in culture, and possibly (?) in the soil, so that nitrates may not account for the vigorous growth. (4) The effect of nitrate fertilizers is to add an amount of nitrogen to the crop much in excess of the amount added as nitrate. (5) The most fertile soils contain the largest numbers of bacteria. The doctrine that nitrates furnish the only nitrogen to plants was established before the activities of bacteria in the soil were suspected, and, so far as the author is aware, has not been supported by experiments under conditions rigidly controlled as to sterility.
Nitrogen Nutrition of Green Plants.—Botanists believe that green plants mainly get their nitrogen in the form of nitrates, although some plants might use ammonium salts to some extent. Exceptions to this rule include plants with root tubercles (as well as bog plants and others with mycorrhiza). These plants acquire their nitrogen in the form of organic compounds produced by the bacteria living in the tubercles. It's certain that nitrogen circulates throughout plant structures in organic combinations. There doesn't seem to be a reason why similar compounds that are soluble and diffusible (like amino acids) couldn't be absorbed through the roots of plants and used in that form. The author believes this is likely the case. Arguments supporting this view include: (1) The nitrogen nutrition of leguminous and other plants with root nodules. (2) The close symbiosis between “Azotobacter” and similar nitrogen-absorbing bacteria and many species of algae in seawater. (3) The strong growth of plants in soils rich in organic matter, which reduces the production of nitrates by nitrous-nitric bacteria when grown in culture, and possibly in the soil, suggesting that nitrates may not explain the vigorous growth. (4) The impact of nitrate fertilizers is to add a significantly larger amount of nitrogen to the crop than what is supplied as nitrate. (5) The most fertile soils contain the highest numbers of bacteria. The idea that nitrates are the only source of nitrogen for plants was established before the role of bacteria in the soil was acknowledged, and to the author's knowledge, it hasn't been supported by experiments conducted under strictly controlled sterile conditions.
It would seem that one of the chief functions of soil bacteria is to prepare soluble organic compounds of nitrogen for the use of green plants and thus to make a “short cut” in the nitrogen cycle (p. 107), as now believed in, direct from the “decomposition bacteria” to green plants.
It seems that one of the main roles of soil bacteria is to create soluble organic nitrogen compounds for green plants to use, effectively making a "shortcut" in the nitrogen cycle (p. 107), as is now understood, going directly from the “decomposition bacteria” to green plants.
Experiments have been made by different observers in growing seedling plants of various kinds in water culture with one or in some cases several of the amino-acids as sources of nitrogen. Most of these experiments were disappointing. Plant proteins are not so different from animal proteins, or plant protoplasm (apart from the chlorophyl portions of plants) from animal protoplasm as to lead one to suppose that it could be built up from one or two amino-acids any more than animal protoplasm can. The author is strongly convinced that this subject should be thoroughly investigated. It will require careful experimentation and perhaps rather large funds to provide the amounts of amino-acids that would probably be needed, but might result in a decided change in our ideas of soil fertility, and especially in the use of nitrogen fertilizers.
Experiments have been conducted by various researchers on growing seedling plants of different types in water culture using one or sometimes several amino acids as sources of nitrogen. Most of these experiments were not very successful. Plant proteins are not so different from animal proteins, nor is plant protoplasm (aside from the chlorophyll portions of plants) from animal protoplasm, to suggest that it could be built up from just one or two amino acids any more than animal protoplasm can. The author firmly believes that this topic should be thoroughly researched. It will require careful experimentation and possibly significant funding to provide the quantities of amino acids that would likely be needed, but it could lead to a major shift in our understanding of soil fertility, particularly in the use of nitrogen fertilizers.
CHAPTER XII.
PHYSIOLOGICAL ACTIVITIES (Continued).
PRODUCTION OF ENZYMES.
Most of the physiological activities of bacteria which have been discussed are due to the action of these peculiar substances, so that a knowledge of their properties is essential. This knowledge cannot as yet be exact because no enzyme has, up to the present, been obtained in a “pure state,” though it must be admitted that there are no certain criteria which will enable this “pure state” to be recognized. It was formerly thought that they were protein in nature, but very “pure” and active enzymes have been prepared which did not give the characteristic protein reactions, so this idea must be abandoned. That they are large moleculed colloidal substances closely related to the proteins in many respects must still be maintained. There are certain characteristics which belong to enzymes, though no one of them exclusively. These may be enumerated as follows:
Most of the biological activities of bacteria discussed here are due to the effects of these unique substances, so understanding their properties is crucial. This understanding isn’t completely accurate yet because no enzyme has been isolated in a “pure state” thus far, and it must be acknowledged that there are no definitive criteria to identify this “pure state.” It was previously believed that enzymes were inherently protein-based, but very “pure” and active enzymes have been created that do not exhibit the typical protein reactions, so this notion needs to be reconsidered. However, it is important to continue to view them as large-molecule colloidal substances that are closely related to proteins in many ways. There are certain characteristics that are associated with enzymes, though none of them are exclusive to enzymes. These can be listed as follows:
1. Enzymes are dead organic chemical substances.
Enzymes are non-living organic chemicals.
Dead is used in the sense of non-living, never having lived, not in the sense of “ceased to be alive.”
Dead means non-living, never having lived, not in the sense of “stopped being alive.”
2. They are always produced by living cells:
2. They are always created by living cells:
Sometimes as active enzymes, sometimes as pro-enzymes or zymogens which are converted into enzymes outside the cell by acids, other inorganic substances or other enzymes.
Sometimes they act as active enzymes, other times as pro-enzymes or zymogens that are turned into enzymes outside the cell by acids, other inorganic substances, or different enzymes.
3. They produce very great chemical changes without themselves being appreciably affected.
3. They create significant chemical changes without being noticeably affected themselves.
Enzymes will not continue to act indefinitely, but are used up in the process (combination with products?). The amount of change is so great in proportion to the amount of enzyme that the above statement is justified in the relative sense. Thus a milk-curdling enzyme has been prepared that would precipitate 100,000,000 times its own weight of caseinogen.
Enzymes won’t keep working forever; they get consumed during the process (do they combine with the products?). The change they bring about is so significant compared to the amount of enzyme used that this statement makes sense relatively. For example, a milk-curdling enzyme has been created that can cause 100,000,000 times its own weight of caseinogen to precipitate.
4. Their action is specific in that each enzyme acts on one kind of chemical substance only, and the products are always the same.
4. Their action is specific because each enzyme only works on one type of chemical substance, and the products are always the same.
The substance may be combined with a variety of other chemical substances so that the action appears to be on several, but in reality it is on a definite group of molecules in each instance. For example, emulsin attacks several different glucosides but always sets free dextrose from them.
The substance can be mixed with various other chemicals so that it seems to affect multiple types, but in reality, it targets a specific group of molecules each time. For instance, emulsin interacts with several different glucosides but always releases dextrose from them.
5. The action is inhibited and eventually stopped, and in some cases the enzyme is destroyed by an accumulation of the products of the action. If the products are removed, the action will continue, if the enzyme is not destroyed. This effect is explained partly because the enzyme probably combines with some of the products, since it does not act indefinitely, and partly because of the reversibility of the reaction.
5. The action is slowed down and eventually halted, and sometimes the enzyme is damaged by a buildup of the action's products. If the products are cleared away, the action will resume, as long as the enzyme isn't damaged. This happens partly because the enzyme likely binds to some of the products, since it doesn't work forever, and partly due to the reversibility of the reaction.
6. Like many chemical reactions those of enzymes are reversible, that is, the substance broken up may be reformed by it from the products produced in many instances. Thus:
6. Like many chemical reactions, enzyme reactions are reversible, meaning that the substance that was broken down can be reformed from the products created in many cases. Thus:
7. The presence of certain mineral salts seems to be essential for their action. These and other substances which are necessary are sometimes called co-enzymes. A salt of calcium is most favorable for a great many.
7. The presence of certain mineral salts seems to be essential for their action. These and other substances that are necessary are sometimes called co-enzymes. A calcium salt is most beneficial for many of them.
8. They may be adsorbed like other colloids by “shaking out” with finely divided suspensions like charcoal or kaolin, or by other colloids like aluminum hydroxide or proteins.
8. They can be adsorbed like other colloids by “shaking out” with finely divided suspensions like charcoal or kaolin, or by other colloids like aluminum hydroxide or proteins.
9. When properly introduced into the tissues or blood of an animal, they cause the body cells to form anti-enzymes which will prevent the action of the enzyme (see Chapter XXVII).
9. When correctly introduced into the tissues or blood of an animal, they cause the body's cells to produce anti-enzymes that will block the enzyme's action (see Chapter XXVII).
10. Though inert, they show many of the characteristics of living organisms, that is
10. Even though they’re inactive, they display many traits of living organisms, which means
(a) Each enzyme has an optimum, a maximum and a minimum temperature for its action.
(a) Each enzyme has an ideal, a highest, and a lowest temperature for its activity.
(b) High temperatures destroy enzymes. All in water are destroyed by boiling in time and most at temperatures considerably below the boiling-point. When dry, many will withstand a higher degree of heat than 100° before they are destroyed.
(b) High temperatures destroy enzymes. All enzymes in water are destroyed by boiling over time, and most at temperatures significantly below the boiling point. When dry, many can resist temperatures higher than 100° before they are destroyed.
(c) Temperatures below the minimum stop their action, though they are not destroyed by cold.
(c) Temperatures below the minimum halt their activity, but they aren’t destroyed by the cold.
(d) Many poisons and chemical disinfectants (Chapter XIV) which kill living organisms will also stop the action of enzymes, though generally more of the substance is required, so that it is possible to destroy the living cells by such means and yet the action of the enzyme will continue.
(d) Many poisons and chemical disinfectants (Chapter XIV) that kill living organisms will also inhibit the action of enzymes, although usually a larger quantity of the substance is needed. This means it’s possible to destroy the living cells using these agents while still allowing the enzyme activity to persist.
(e) Most enzymes have an optimum reaction of medium either acid, alkaline or neutral, depending on the particular enzyme, though some few seem to act equally well within a considerable range on either side of the neutral point.
(e) Most enzymes work best in a specific type of medium—acidic, alkaline, or neutral—depending on the enzyme itself, although a few appear to function effectively across a wide range on either side of the neutral point.
The final test for an enzyme is the chemical change it brings about in the specific substance acted on.
The ultimate test for an enzyme is the chemical change it causes in the specific substance it acts upon.
The most prominent characteristic of enzymes is that they bring about very great chemical changes without themselves being appreciably affected. This property is also shown by many inorganic substances which are spoken of as “catalytic agents” or “catalyzers” so that enzymes are sometimes called “organic catalyzers.” The function of catalytic agents seems to be to hasten the rate of a reaction which would occur spontaneously, though in a great many cases with extreme slowness.
The most notable feature of enzymes is that they cause significant chemical changes without being significantly altered themselves. This quality is also seen in many inorganic substances known as "catalytic agents" or "catalyzers," which is why enzymes are sometimes referred to as "organic catalyzers." The role of catalytic agents appears to be to speed up the rate of a reaction that would happen naturally, although often very slowly.
Just how enzymes act is not certain and probably will not be until their composition and constitution are known. Most probably they form a combination with the substance acted on (the substrate) as a result of which there is a rearrangement of the atoms in such a way that new compounds are formed, nearly always at least two, and the enzyme is at the same time set free. It is rather remarkable that chiefly optically active substances are split up by enzymes and where two modifications exist it is usually the dextro-rotatory one which is attacked. No single enzyme attacks both. This probably means that the structure of the enzyme corresponds to that of the substrate, “fits it as a key fits a lock,” as Emil Fischer says.
Just how enzymes work isn’t clear and probably won’t be until we understand their makeup and structure. Most likely, enzymes bind with the substance they act on (the substrate), leading to a rearrangement of the atoms that forms new compounds, usually at least two, while the enzyme is released at the same time. It’s pretty interesting that enzymes mainly break down optically active substances, and when there are two forms, it’s usually the dextro-rotatory one that gets attacked. No single enzyme targets both forms. This likely indicates that the structure of the enzyme matches that of the substrate, “fits it like a key fits a lock,” as Emil Fischer put it.
The production of enzymes is by no means restricted to bacteria since all kinds of living cells that have been investigated have been shown to produce them and presumably all living cells do. Hence the number of different kinds of enzymes and of substances acted upon is practically unlimited. Nevertheless they may be grouped into a comparatively few classes based on the general character of the change brought about by them.
The production of enzymes is not limited to bacteria; all types of living cells that have been studied have been shown to produce them, and it's likely that all living cells do. Therefore, the variety of different kinds of enzymes and substances they act on is practically limitless. However, they can be categorized into a few main classes based on the general type of change they cause.
I. Class I is the so-called “splitting” enzymes whose action is for the most part hydrolytic, that is, the substance takes up water and then splits into compounds that were apparently constituents of the original molecule. As examples may be mentioned diastase, the enzyme first discovered, which changes starch into a malt-sugar, hence is more commonly called amylase16 (starch-splitting enzyme); invertase,16 which splits cane-sugar into dextrose and levulose: C12H22O11 + H2O = C6H12O6 + C6H12O6. Lipase16 or a fat-splitting enzyme, which decomposes fat into glycerin and fatty acid:
I. Class I is known as “splitting” enzymes that primarily perform hydrolysis, meaning the substance absorbs water and then breaks down into compounds that were likely parts of the original molecule. Examples include diastase, the first enzyme discovered, which converts starch into malt sugar and is more commonly referred to as amylase16 (starch-splitting enzyme); invertase16, which breaks down cane sugar into dextrose and levulose: C12H22O11 + H2O = C6H12O6 + C6H12O6. Lipase16 or a fat-splitting enzyme, which breaks down fat into glycerin and fatty acids:
C3H5(OCnH2n-1O)3 + 3H2O = Glycerin C₃H₅(OH)₃ + Fatty acid
3CnH2nO2.
Proteases, which split up proteins into proteoses and peptones.
Proteases break down proteins into proteoses and peptones.
Other classes of “splitting enzymes” break up the products of complex protein decomposition, such as proteoses, peptones and amino-acids. A variety of the “splitting enzymes” is the group of
Other types of “splitting enzymes” break down the products of complex protein breakdown, like proteoses, peptones, and amino acids. One variety of the “splitting enzymes” is the group of
“Coagulases” or coagulating enzymes as the rennet (lab, chymosin) which curdles milk; fibrin ferment (thrombin, thrombase) which causes the coagulation of blood. These apparently act by splitting up a substance in the fluids mentioned, after which splitting one of the new products formed combines with other compounds present (usually a mineral salt, and in the cases mentioned a calcium salt) to form an insoluble compound, the curd or coagulum.
“Coagulases” or coagulating enzymes like rennet (lab, chymosin) that curdle milk; fibrin ferment (thrombin, thrombase) that causes blood to coagulate. They seem to work by breaking down a substance in the mentioned fluids, after which one of the new products formed combines with other compounds present (usually a mineral salt, and in these cases, a calcium salt) to create an insoluble compound, the curd or coagulum.
Another variety is the “activating” enzymes or “kinases” such as the enterokinase of the intestine. The action here is a splitting of the zymogen or mother substance or form in which the enzyme is built up by the cell so as to liberate the active enzyme.
Another type is the “activating” enzymes or “kinases” like the enterokinase found in the intestine. The process here involves breaking down the zymogen or the original form in which the enzyme is produced by the cell to release the active enzyme.
Of a character quite distinct, from the splitting enzymes are
Of a character quite distinct, from the splitting enzymes are
II. The zymases. Their action seems to be to cause a “shifting on rearrangement of the carbon atoms” so that new compounds are formed which are not assumed to have been constituents of the original molecule. Most commonly there is a closer combination of the carbon and oxygen atoms, frequently even the formation of CO2 so that considerable energy is thus liberated. Examples are the zymase or alcoholase of yeast which converts sugar into alcohol and carbon dioxide; C6H12O6 = 2C2H6O + 2CO2: also urease, which causes the change of urea into ammonia and carbon dioxide. Another common zymase is the lactacidase in lactic acid fermentation.
II. The zymases. Their role appears to be to trigger a “shifting or rearrangement of the carbon atoms” so that new compounds are formed that likely weren’t part of the original molecule. Most often, there is a tighter combination of carbon and oxygen atoms, often leading to the production of CO2, which releases a significant amount of energy. Examples include the zymase or alcoholase found in yeast, which converts sugar into alcohol and carbon dioxide; C6H12O6 = 2C2H6O + 2CO2: also urease, which transforms urea into ammonia and carbon dioxide. Another common zymase is the lactacidase involved in lactic acid fermentation.
III. Oxidizing enzymes also play an important part in many of the activities of higher plants and animals. Among the bacteria this action is illustrated by the formation of nitrites, nitrates and sulphates and the oxidation of alcohol to acetic acid as already described.
III. Oxidizing enzymes also play a crucial role in many functions of higher plants and animals. In bacteria, this process can be seen in the creation of nitrites, nitrates, and sulfates, as well as in the oxidation of alcohol to acetic acid, as previously mentioned.
IV. Reducing enzymes occur in many of the dentrifying bacteria and in those which liberate H2S from sulphates. A very widely distributed reducing enzyme is “catalase” which decomposes hydrogen peroxide.
IV. Reducing enzymes are found in many of the denitrifying bacteria and in those that release H2S from sulfates. A common reducing enzyme is “catalase,” which breaks down hydrogen peroxide.
As previously stated, most of the physiological activities of bacteria are due to the enzymes that they produce. It is evident that for action to occur on substances which do not diffuse into the bacterial cell—starches, cellulose, complex proteins, gelatin—the enzymes must pass out of the bacterium and consequently may be found in the surrounding medium. Substances like sugars, peptones, alcohol, which are readily diffusible, may be acted on by enzymes retained within the cell body. In the former case the enzymes are spoken of as extra-cellular or “exo-enzymes,” and in the latter as intra-cellular or “endo-enzymes.” The endo-enzymes and doubtless also the exo-enzymes may after the death of the cell digest the contents to a greater or less extent and thus furnish substances that are not otherwise obtainable. This process of “self-digestion” is known technically as “autolysis.”
As mentioned earlier, most of the physiological activities of bacteria result from the enzymes they produce. It’s clear that for these enzymes to act on substances that can’t diffuse into the bacterial cell—like starches, cellulose, complex proteins, and gelatin—they must pass out of the bacterium, so they can be found in the surrounding medium. Substances like sugars, peptones, and alcohol, which diffuse easily, can be acted on by enzymes retained within the cell body. In the first case, the enzymes are referred to as extra-cellular or “exo-enzymes,” while in the second, they are called intra-cellular or “endo-enzymes.” The endo-enzymes, and likely also the exo-enzymes, can digest the contents after the cell's death to some degree, providing substances that aren’t otherwise available. This process of “self-digestion” is technically known as “autolysis.”
A distinction was formerly made between “organized” and “unorganized ferments.” The former term was applied to the minute living organisms, bacteria, yeasts, molds, etc., which bring about characteristic fermentative changes, while the latter term was restricted to enzymes as just described. Since investigation has shown that the changes ascribed to the “organized ferments” are really due to their enzymes, and that enzymes are probably formed by all living cells, the distinction is scarcely necessary at present.
A distinction used to be made between “organized” and “unorganized ferments.” The former referred to tiny living organisms like bacteria, yeasts, molds, etc., that cause specific fermentation changes, while the latter was limited to enzymes as previously described. Since research has revealed that the changes attributed to “organized ferments” are actually due to their enzymes, and that enzymes are likely produced by all living cells, this distinction is no longer very necessary today.
PRODUCTION OF TOXINS.
The injurious effects of pathogenic bacteria are due in large part to the action of these substances, which in many respects bear a close relationship to enzymes. The chemical composition is unknown since no toxin has been prepared “pure” as yet. It was formerly thought that they were protein in character, but very pure toxins have been prepared which failed to show the characteristic protein reactions. It is well established that they are complex substances, of rather large molecule and are precipitated by many of the reagents which precipitate proteins. Toxins will be further discussed in Chapter XXVII. It will be sufficient at this point to enumerate their chief peculiarities in order to show their marked resemblance to enzymes.
The harmful effects of pathogenic bacteria are largely due to these substances, which are quite similar to enzymes in many ways. Their chemical makeup is still unknown since no toxin has been prepared in a "pure" form yet. It was previously believed that they were protein-based, but very pure toxins have been created that do not exhibit the typical protein reactions. It is well known that they are complex substances with relatively large molecules and can be precipitated by many of the reagents that precipitate proteins. Toxins will be discussed further in Chapter XXVII. For now, it is enough to list their main characteristics to demonstrate their strong resemblance to enzymes.
1. Toxins are dead organic chemical substances.
Toxins are deadly organic chemical substances.
2. They are always produced by living cells.
2. They are always made by living cells.
5. Toxins are very sensitive to the action of injurious agencies such as heat, light, etc., and in about the same measure that enzymes are, though as a rule they are somewhat more sensitive or “labile.”
5. Toxins are very sensitive to harmful factors like heat, light, and so on, and to a similar extent as enzymes, though generally they are a bit more sensitive or "unstable."
6. Toxins apparently have maxima, optima, and minima of temperature for their action, as shown by the destructive effect of heat and by the fact that a frog injected with tetanus toxin and kept at 20° shows no indication of poison, but if the temperature is raised to 37°, symptoms of poisoning are soon apparent. Cold, however, does not destroy a toxin.
6. Toxins apparently have maximum, optimum, and minimum temperatures for their effectiveness, as demonstrated by the harmful effects of heat and the fact that a frog injected with tetanus toxin and kept at 20° shows no signs of poisoning, but if the temperature is increased to 37°, symptoms of poisoning soon appear. However, cold does not destroy a toxin.
7. When properly introduced into the tissues of animals they cause the body cells to form antitoxins (Chapter XXVII) which are capable of preventing the action of the toxin in question.
7. When properly introduced into the tissues of animals, they cause the body cells to produce antitoxins (Chapter XXVII) that can prevent the action of the specific toxin.
8. The determining test for a toxin is its action on a living cell.
8. The key test for a toxin is how it affects a living cell.
It is true that enzymes are toxic, as are also various foreign proteins, when injected into an animal, but in much larger doses than are toxins.
It is true that enzymes are toxic, as are various foreign proteins, when injected into an animal, but in much larger doses than toxins.
A marked difference between enzymes and toxins is that the former may bring about a very great chemical change and still may be recovered from the mixture of substances acted on and produced, while the toxin seems to be permanently used up in its toxic action and cannot be so recovered. Toxins seem very much like enzymes whose action is restricted to living cells.
A significant difference between enzymes and toxins is that enzymes can cause a substantial chemical change and can still be recovered from the mixture of substances they acted on and produced, while toxins appear to be permanently consumed in their toxic effect and cannot be recovered. Toxins seem very similar to enzymes in that their action is limited to living cells.
Just as enzymes are probably produced by all kinds of cells and not by bacteria alone, so toxins are produced by other organisms. Among toxins which have been carefully studied are ricin, the poison of the castor oil plant (Ricinus communis); abrin of the jequirity bean (Abrus precatorius); robin of the common locust (Robinia pseudacacia); poisons of spiders, scorpions, bees, fish, snakes and salamanders.
Just like enzymes are likely produced by all types of cells and not just bacteria, toxins are also produced by other organisms. Some of the toxins that have been thoroughly studied include ricin, which comes from the castor oil plant (Ricinus communis); abrin from the jequirity bean (Abrus precatorius); robin from the common locust (Robinia pseudacacia); and poisons from spiders, scorpions, bees, fish, snakes, and salamanders.
It has been stated that some enzymes are thrown out from the cell and others are retained within the cell. The same is true of toxins, hence we speak of exo-toxins or toxins excreted from, and endo-toxins or toxins retained within the cell. Among the pathogenic bacteria there are very few which secrete toxins when growing outside the body. Clostridium tetani or lockjaw bacillus, Corynebacterium diphtheriæ or the diphtheria bacillus, Clostridium botulinum or a bacillus causing a type of food poisoning, Pseudomonas pyocyanea or the blue pus bacillus are the most important. Other pathogenic bacteria do not secrete their toxins under the above conditions, but only give them up when the cell is disintegrated either within or outside the body. For the reason that endotoxins are therefore difficult to obtain, their characteristics have not been much studied. The description of toxins as above given is intended to apply to the exo-toxins of bacteria, sometimes spoken of as true toxins, and to the vegetable toxins (phytotoxins) which resemble them.
It has been noted that some enzymes are expelled from the cell while others are kept inside. The same is true for toxins, which is why we talk about exo-toxins, or toxins released from the cell, and endo-toxins, or toxins that are kept within the cell. Among pathogenic bacteria, there are very few that produce toxins while growing outside the body. The most significant ones include Clostridium tetani, or lockjaw bacillus, Corynebacterium diphtheriæ, or the diphtheria bacillus, Clostridium botulinum, which causes a type of food poisoning, and Pseudomonas pyocyanea, or the blue pus bacillus. Other pathogenic bacteria do not release their toxins under the conditions mentioned above but only do so when the cell breaks down, either inside or outside the body. Because endotoxins are therefore hard to isolate, their characteristics haven't been extensively studied. The description of toxins provided above is meant to refer to the exo-toxins of bacteria, sometimes known as true toxins, and to plant toxins (phytotoxins) that are similar to them.
The snake venoms and probably most of the animal toxins (zoötoxins) are very different substances. (See Chapter XXIX.)
The snake venoms and likely most of the animal toxins (zoötoxins) are quite different substances. (See Chapter XXIX.)
CAUSATION OF DISEASE.
This subject belongs properly in special pathogenic bacteriology. It will be sufficient to indicate that bacteria may cause disease in one or more of the following ways: (a) blocking circulatory vessels, either blood or lymph, directly or indirectly; (b) destruction of tissue; (c) production of non-specific poisons (ptomaines, bases, nitrites, acids, gases, etc.); (d) production of specific poisons (toxins).
This topic fits within the field of specialized pathogenic bacteriology. It's enough to note that bacteria can cause disease in one or more of the following ways: (a) by blocking blood or lymph vessels, either directly or indirectly; (b) by destroying tissue; (c) by producing non-specific toxins (like ptomaines, bases, nitrites, acids, gases, etc.); and (d) by producing specific toxins (toxins).
ANTIBODY FORMATION.
Bacteria cause the formation of specific “antibodies” when properly introduced into animals. This must be considered as a physiological activity since it is by means of substances produced within the bacterial cell that the body cells of animals are stimulated to form antibodies. (See Chapters XXVI–XXIX.)
Bacteria trigger the production of specific “antibodies” when they're introduced correctly into animals. This should be seen as a physiological process because it's through substances produced inside the bacterial cell that animal body cells are encouraged to create antibodies. (See Chapters XXVI–XXIX.)
STAINING.
The reaction of bacteria to various stains is dependent on their physico-chemical structure and hence is a result of physiological processes, but is best discussed separately (Chapter XIX).
The way bacteria respond to different stains depends on their physical and chemical structure, which is a result of physiological processes, but it’s better to discuss this separately (Chapter XIX).
CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS.
The same is true of the appearance and growth on different culture media. (Chapter XX.)
The same applies to how things look and develop on various culture media. (Chapter XX.)
CHAPTER XIII.
DISINFECTION—STERILIZATION—DISINFECTANTS.
The discussion of the physiology of bacteria in the preceding chapters has shown that a number of environmental factors must be properly correlated in order that a given organism may thrive. Conversely, it can be stated that any one of these environmental factors may be so varied that the organism will be more or less injured, may even be destroyed by such variation. It has been the thorough study of the above-mentioned relationships which has led to practical methods for destroying bacteria, for removing them or preventing their growth when such procedures become necessary.
The discussion of bacteria physiology in the previous chapters has shown that several environmental factors need to be properly aligned for an organism to thrive. On the flip side, any one of these factors can change enough that the organism could be harmed or even destroyed by that change. A detailed study of these relationships has resulted in effective methods for eliminating bacteria, removing them, or preventing their growth when those actions become necessary.
The process of killing all the living organisms or of removing them completely is spoken of as disinfection or as sterilization, according to circumstances. Thus the latter term is applied largely in the laboratory, while the former more generally in practice outside the laboratory. So also disinfection is most commonly done with chemical agents and sterilization by physical means, though exceptions are numerous. The original idea of disinfection was the destruction of “infective” organisms, that is, organisms producing disease in man or animals. A wider knowledge of bacteriology has led to the application of the term to the destruction of other organisms as well. Thus the cheese-maker “disinfects” his curing rooms to prevent abnormal ripening of cheese, and the dairy-worker “disinfects” his premises to avoid bad flavors, abnormal changes in the butter or milk. Sterilization is more commonly applied to relatively small objects and disinfection to larger ones. Thus in the laboratory, instruments, glassware, apparatus, etc., are “sterilized” while desks, walls and floors are “disinfected.” The surgeon “sterilizes” his instruments, but “disinfects” his operating table and room. The dairy-workers mentioned above sterilize their apparatus, pails, milk bottles, etc. Evidently the object of the two processes is the same, removing or destroying living organisms, the name to be applied is largely a question of usage and circumstances. Any agent which is used to destroy microörganisms is called a “disinfectant.” Material freed from living organisms is “sterile.”
The process of eliminating all living organisms or completely removing them is called disinfection or sterilization, depending on the situation. The term "sterilization" is mostly used in laboratories, while "disinfection" is more commonly used outside of them. Disinfection is often carried out with chemical agents, while sterilization is typically done through physical methods, although there are many exceptions. Originally, disinfection referred to the destruction of "infective" organisms, meaning those that cause disease in humans or animals. A broader understanding of microbiology has led to the term being used for the elimination of other organisms as well. For example, a cheese-maker "disinfects" his curing rooms to prevent cheese from ripening incorrectly, while a dairy worker "disinfects" his facilities to avoid unpleasant flavors or unusual changes in butter or milk. Sterilization usually relates to smaller items, while disinfection applies to larger ones. In the lab, instruments, glassware, and equipment are "sterilized," while desks, walls, and floors are "disinfected." The surgeon "sterilizes" his instruments but "disinfects" his operating table and room. The dairy workers mentioned earlier sterilize their equipment, pails, milk bottles, etc. Clearly, the goal of both processes is the same—removing or destroying living organisms—while the terminology mostly depends on usage and context. Any substance used to kill microorganisms is called a “disinfectant.” Material that is free from living organisms is considered “sterile.”
The process of preventing the growth of organisms without reference to whether they are killed or removed is spoken of as “antisepsis,” and the agent as an antiseptic. Hence a mildly applied “disinfectant” becomes an “antiseptic,” though it does not necessarily follow that an “antiseptic” may become a disinfectant when used abundantly. Thus strong sugar solutions prevent the development of many organisms, though they do not necessarily kill them.
The process of preventing the growth of organisms, regardless of whether they are killed or removed, is referred to as “antisepsis,” and the agent is called an antiseptic. Therefore, a mildly applied “disinfectant” can be considered an “antiseptic,” but that doesn’t mean an “antiseptic” can become a disinfectant when used in larger amounts. For instance, strong sugar solutions stop many organisms from growing, even if they don’t actually kill them.
Asepsis is a term which is restricted almost entirely to surgical operations and implies the taking of such precautions that foreign organisms are kept out of the field of operation. Such an operation is an aseptic one, or performed aseptically.
Asepsis is a term that is mostly used in surgical procedures and means taking precautions to ensure that foreign organisms are kept out of the surgical area. This type of procedure is considered aseptic or done aseptically.
A “deodorant or deodorizer” is used to destroy or remove an odor and does not necessarily have either antiseptic or disinfectant properties.
A “deodorant or deodorizer” is used to eliminate or get rid of an odor and doesn’t necessarily have any antiseptic or disinfectant qualities.
The agents which are used for the above-described processes may be conveniently divided into physical agents and chemical agents.
The agents used in the processes described above can be easily classified into physical agents and chemical agents.
PHYSICAL AGENTS.
1. Drying.—This is doubtless the oldest method for preventing the growth of organisms, and the one which is used on the greatest amount of material at the present time. A very large percentage of commercial products is preserved and transported intact because the substances are kept free from moisture. In the laboratory many materials which are used as food for bacteria (see Chapter XVI) “keep” because they are dry. Nevertheless, drying should be considered as an antiseptic rather than as a disinfectant process. While it is true that the complete removal of water would result in the death of all organisms this necessitates a high temperature, in itself destructive, and does not occur in practice. Further, though many pathogenic bacteria are killed by drying, many more, including the spore formers, are not. Hence drying alone is not a practical method of disinfecting.
1. Drying.—This is definitely the oldest way to prevent the growth of organisms and is currently the method used for the largest amount of material. A significant percentage of commercial products is preserved and transported intact because they are kept dry. In the lab, many materials used as food for bacteria (see Chapter XVI) “keep” well because they are dry. However, drying should be regarded as an antiseptic process rather than a disinfectant one. While it’s true that completely removing water would kill all organisms, achieving this requires high temperatures that can be damaging and doesn’t happen in real practice. Additionally, although many harmful bacteria are killed by drying, many others, including spore-forming types, are not. Therefore, drying alone is not a practical method of disinfecting.

2. Heat.—The use of heat in some form is one of the very best means for destroying bacteria. It may be made use of by combustion, or burning, as direct exposure to the open flame, as dry heat (hot air), or as moist heat (boiling water or steam). Very frequently in veterinary practice, especially in the country, occasionally under other conditions, the infected material is best burned. This method is thoroughly effective and frequently the cheapest in the end. Wherever there are no valid objections it should be used. Exposure to the open flame is largely a laboratory procedure to sterilize small metallic instruments and even small pieces of glassware. It is an excellent procedure in postmortem examinations to burn off the surface of the body or of an organ when it is desired to obtain bacteria from the interior free from contamination with surface organisms.
2. Heat.—Using heat in some form is one of the best ways to kill bacteria. It can be applied through combustion, meaning burning, as in direct exposure to an open flame, dry heat (hot air), or moist heat (boiling water or steam). In veterinary practice, especially in rural areas, and sometimes in other situations, the best method for dealing with infected materials is to burn them. This method is very effective and often the most cost-efficient in the long run. It should be used wherever there are no strong objections. Exposing items to an open flame is mainly a laboratory technique to sterilize small metal instruments and glassware. It is also a great method during postmortem examinations to burn off the surface of the body or an organ when the goal is to collect bacteria from the interior without contamination from surface organisms.
Dry Heat.—Dry heat is not nearly so effective as moist heat as a sterilizing agent. The temperature must be higher and continued longer to accomplish the same result. Thus a dry heat of 150° for thirty minutes is no more efficient than steam under pressure at 115° for fifteen minutes. Various forms of hot-air sterilizers are made for laboratory purposes (Fig. 77). On account of the greater length of time required for sterilization their use is more and more restricted to objects which must be used dry, as in blood and serum work, for example. In practice the use of hot air in disinfecting plants is now largely restricted to objects which might be injured by steam, as leather goods, furs, and certain articles of furniture, but even here chemical agents are more frequently used.
Dry Heat.—Dry heat is not nearly as effective as moist heat for sterilization. The temperature needs to be higher and maintained for a longer time to achieve the same results. For example, dry heat at 150° for thirty minutes is no more effective than steam under pressure at 115° for fifteen minutes. Various types of hot-air sterilizers are available for laboratory use (Fig. 77). Because of the longer time needed for sterilization, their use is increasingly limited to items that must stay dry, such as in blood and serum work. In practice, the use of hot air for disinfecting items is now mainly reserved for objects that could be damaged by steam, like leather goods, furs, and certain pieces of furniture, but even in these cases, chemical agents are used more often.
Moist Heat.—Moist heat may be applied either by boiling in water or by the use of steam at air pressure, or, for rapid work and on substances that would not be injured, by steam under pressure. Boiling is perhaps the best household method for disinfecting all material which can be so treated. The method is simple, can always be made use of, and is universally understood. It must be remembered that all pathogenic organisms, even their spores, are destroyed by a few minutes’ boiling. The process may be applied to more resistant organisms, such as are met with in canning vegetables, though the boiling must be continued for several hours, or what is better, repeated on several different days. This latter process, known as “discontinuous sterilization,” or “tyndallization,” must also be applied to substances which would be injured or changed in composition by too long-continued heating, such as gelatin, milk, and certain sugars. In the laboratory such materials are boiled or subjected to steaming steam for half an hour on each of three successive days. In canning vegetables the boiling should be from one to two hours each day. The principle involved is that the first boiling destroys the growing cells, but not all spores. Some of the latter germinate by the next day and are then killed by the second boiling and the remainder develop and are killed on the third day. Occasionally a fourth boiling is necessary. It is also true that repeated heating and cooling is more destructive to bacteria than continuous heating for the same length of time, but the development of the spores is the more important factor. Discontinuous heating may also be used at temperatures below the boiling-point for the sterilization of fluids like blood serum which would be coagulated by boiling. In this case the material is heated at 55° to 56° for one hour, but on each of seven to ten successive days. The intermittent heating and cooling is of the same importance as the development of the spores in this case. (Better results are secured with such substances by collecting them aseptically in the first place.)
Moist Heat.—Moist heat can be applied by either boiling in water or using steam at air pressure, or for quick work on materials that won't be damaged, by steam under pressure. Boiling is probably the best household method for disinfecting all materials that can be treated this way. It's simple, can always be used, and is universally understood. It's important to remember that all harmful organisms, including their spores, are killed by just a few minutes of boiling. The method can be applied to more resistant organisms, like those found in canned vegetables, although boiling must continue for several hours or, preferably, be repeated on different days. This latter method, known as “discontinuous sterilization” or “tyndallization,” should also be used for substances that may be damaged or have their composition altered by prolonged heating, such as gelatin, milk, and certain sugars. In the laboratory, these materials are boiled or subjected to steaming for half an hour on each of three consecutive days. When canning vegetables, the boiling should be for one to two hours each day. The principle here is that the first boiling destroys the active cells, but not all spores. Some spores will germinate by the next day and are then killed by the second boiling, while the rest will develop and get killed on the third day. Sometimes, a fourth boiling is necessary. It’s also true that repeated heating and cooling are more effective at destroying bacteria than continuous heating for the same amount of time, but the growth of spores is the more critical factor. Discontinuous heating can also be used at temperatures below the boiling point to sterilize fluids like blood serum that would coagulate if boiled. In this case, the material is heated to 55° to 56° for one hour, but each of the seven to ten days must be consecutive. The intermittent heating and cooling are as important as the development of spores in this scenario. (Better results with these substances are achieved by collecting them aseptically in the first place.)



Steam.—Steam is one of the most commonly employed agents for sterilization and disinfection. It is used either as “streaming steam” at air pressure or confined under pressure so that the temperature is raised. For almost all purposes where boiling is applicable streaming steam may be substituted. It is just as efficient and frequently more easily applied. The principle of the numerous forms of “steam sterilizers” (Fig. 78) is essentially the same. There is a receptacle for a relatively small quantity of water and means for conducting the steam generated by boiling this water to the objects to be treated, which are usually placed immediately above the water. Surgical instruments may be most conveniently sterilized by boiling or by steaming in especially constructed instrument sterilizers. If boiled, the addition of carbonate of soda, about 1 per cent., usually prevents injury.
Steam.—Steam is one of the most commonly used agents for sterilization and disinfection. It can be used either as “streaming steam” at air pressure or confined under pressure to raise the temperature. For nearly all situations where boiling is applicable, streaming steam can be substituted. It is just as effective and often easier to apply. The principle behind the various types of “steam sterilizers” (Fig. 78) is essentially the same. There is a container for a relatively small amount of water and a way to direct the steam generated by boiling this water to the items being treated, which are usually placed right above the water. Surgical instruments can be conveniently sterilized by boiling or by steaming in specially designed instrument sterilizers. If boiled, adding about 1 percent of sodium carbonate typically prevents damage.

Steam under pressure affords a much more rapid and certain method of destroying organisms. Fifteen to twenty pounds pressure corresponding to temperatures of 121° to 125° is commonly used. Variations depend on the bulk and nature of the material. Apparatus for this purpose may now be obtained from sizes as small as one or two gallons up to huge structures which will take one or two truckloads of material (Figs. 79–91). The latter type is in common use in canning factories, dairy plants, hospitals, public institutions, municipal and governmental disinfecting stations. Very frequently there is an apparatus attached for producing a vacuum, both to exhaust the air before sterilizing, so that the steam penetrates much more quickly and thoroughly and for removing the vapor after sterilizing, thus hastening the drying out of the material disinfected.
Steam under pressure offers a much faster and more reliable way to kill organisms. Typically, a pressure of fifteen to twenty pounds, which corresponds to temperatures between 121° and 125°, is used. The specifics can vary based on the size and type of material. Equipment for this purpose is now available in sizes as small as one or two gallons up to large systems that can handle one or two truckloads of material (Figs. 79–91). The larger units are commonly found in canning factories, dairy facilities, hospitals, public institutions, and municipal or governmental disinfecting stations. Often, there is equipment attached to create a vacuum, which helps to remove air before sterilization so that the steam penetrates faster and more effectively, and to eliminate the vapor after sterilization, speeding up the drying process of the disinfected material.

The smaller types of pressure sterilizers are called “autoclaves” and have become indispensable in laboratory work. Fifteen pounds pressure maintained for fifteen minutes is commonly sufficient for a few small objects. For larger masses much longer time is needed. The author found that in an autoclave of the type shown in Fig. 81 it required ten minutes for 500 cc. of water at 15 pounds pressure to reach a temperature of 100°, starting at room temperatures, 20° to 25°. Autoclaves may be used as simple steam sterilizers by leaving the escape valves open so that the steam is not confined, hence they have largely replaced the latter.18
The smaller types of pressure sterilizers are called “autoclaves” and have become essential in lab work. Maintaining a pressure of fifteen pounds for fifteen minutes is usually enough for a few small items. For larger quantities, much more time is needed. The author found that in an autoclave of the type shown in Fig. 81, it took ten minutes for 500 cc. of water at 15 pounds pressure to reach a temperature of 100°, starting from room temperatures of 20° to 25°. Autoclaves can also be used as simple steam sterilizers by keeping the escape valves open so that the steam isn't confined, which is why they have largely replaced the latter. 18



A process closely akin to sterilization by heat is pasteurization. This means the heating of material at a temperature and for a time which will destroy the actively growing bacteria but not the spores. The methods for doing this vary but are essentially two in principle. 1. The material in small quantities in suitable containers (bottles) is placed in the apparatus; the temperature is raised to 60° to 65° and maintained for twenty to thirty minutes and then the whole is cooled (beer, wine, grape juice, bottled milk) (Figs. 92, 93 and 94).
A process similar to heat sterilization is pasteurization. This involves heating a substance to a temperature and for a duration that kills actively growing bacteria but leaves the spores intact. The methods for achieving this differ but fundamentally fall into two categories. 1. The substance in small amounts is put in appropriate containers (like bottles), heated to 60° to 65° for twenty to thirty minutes, and then the entire mixture is cooled (beer, wine, grape juice, bottled milk) (Figs. 92, 93 and 94).








2. Pasteurizing machines are used and the fluid flows through continuously. In one type the temperature is raised to 60° and by “retarders” is kept at this temperature for twenty to thirty minutes (Figs. 95 to 98). In another type the temperature is raised to as high as 85° for a few seconds only, “flash process” (Fig. 99), and then the material is rapidly cooled. It is certain that all pathogenic microörganisms, except the very few spore formers in that stage, are killed by proper pasteurization. The process is largely employed in the fermentation and dairy industries.
2. Pasteurizing machines are used, and the liquid flows through continuously. In one type, the temperature is raised to 60° and is maintained at this temperature for twenty to thirty minutes using "retarders" (Figs. 95 to 98). In another type, the temperature is raised as high as 85° for just a few seconds, known as the "flash process" (Fig. 99), and then the material is rapidly cooled. It's certain that all harmful microorganisms, except for a few spore-forming ones at that stage, are killed by proper pasteurization. This process is widely used in the fermentation and dairy industries.





3. Cold.—That cold is an excellent antiseptic is illustrated by the general use of refrigerators and “cold storage.” Numerous experiments have shown that although many pathogenic organisms of a given kind are killed by temperatures below freezing, not all of the same kind are, and many kinds are only slightly affected. Hence cold cannot be considered a practical means for disinfection.
3. Cold.—The fact that cold works as a great antiseptic is shown by the widespread use of refrigerators and “cold storage.” Numerous experiments have proven that while many harmful bacteria of a specific type are killed at temperatures below freezing, not all of them are, and many are only minimally impacted. Therefore, cold cannot be seen as a practical method for disinfection.

4. Light.—It has been stated (p. 75) that light is destructive to bacteria, and the advisability of having well-lighted habitations for men and animals has been mentioned. The practice of “sunning” bedclothing, hangings and other large articles which can scarcely be disinfected in a more convenient way is the usual method of employing this agent. Drying and the action of the oxygen of the air assist the process to some extent. Undoubtedly large numbers of pathogenic organisms are destroyed under natural conditions by the combined effects of drying, direct sunlight and oxidation, but it should not be forgotten that a very slight protection will prevent the action of light (Figs. 100 and 101).
4. Light.—It has been stated (p. 75) that light kills bacteria, and the importance of having well-lit living spaces for people and animals has been noted. The common practice of “sunning” bed linens, curtains, and other large items that are hard to disinfect in any other way is the typical method of using this resource. Drying and the oxygen in the air also help this process somewhat. It's clear that many harmful organisms are eliminated in natural conditions due to the combined effects of drying, direct sunlight, and oxidation, but remember that even a little bit of protection can block the effects of light (Figs. 100 and 101).

5. Osmotic Pressure.—Increase in the concentration of substances in solution is in practical use as an antiseptic procedure. Various kinds of “sugar preserves,” salt meats and condensed milk are illustrations. It must be remembered that a similar increase in concentration occurs when many substances are dried, and is probably as valuable in the preservative action as the loss of water. That the process cannot be depended on to kill even pathogenic organisms is shown by finding living tubercle bacilli in condensed milk. The placing of bacteria in water or in salt solution in order to have them die and disintegrate (greatly aided by vigorous shaking in a shaking machine) (“autolysis,” p. 126) is a laboratory procedure to obtain cell constituents. It is not a practical method of disinfection, however.
5. Osmotic Pressure.—Increasing the concentration of substances in a solution is practically used as an antiseptic method. Examples include various types of “sugar preserves,” salted meats, and condensed milk. It's important to note that a similar increase in concentration happens when many substances are dried, and this is likely just as effective in preserving as losing water. The fact that this process can’t be relied upon to kill even harmful organisms is evident from the discovery of live tubercle bacilli in condensed milk. Putting bacteria in water or salt solution to make them die and break down—greatly assisted by vigorous shaking in a shaking machine (“autolysis,” p. 126)—is a laboratory technique to extract cell components. However, it’s not a practical method for disinfection.

6. Electricity.—Electricity, though not in itself injurious to bacteria, is used as an indirect means for destroying bacteria in a practical way. This is done by electrical production of some substance which is destructive to bacteria as in ozone water purification (Petrograd, Florence, and elsewhere), or the use of ultra-violet rays for the same purpose (Marseilles, Paris) and for treatment of certain disease conditions. Electricity might be used as a source of heat for disinfecting purposes should its cheapness justify it. It has also been used in the preservation of meats to hasten the penetration of the salt and thus reduce the time of pickling. Electrolyzed sea water has been tried as a means of flushing and disinfecting streets, but it is very doubtful if the added expense is justified by any increased benefit. A number of electric devices have been put forth for various sterilizing and disinfecting purposes and doubtless will continue to be, but everyone should be carefully tested before money is invested in it.19
6. Electricity.—Electricity, while not harmful to bacteria itself, is used as an indirect method for effectively eliminating bacteria. This is achieved by electrically generating substances that kill bacteria, such as in ozone water purification (in places like Petrograd, Florence, and others), or using ultraviolet rays for the same purpose (in Marseilles, Paris) and for treating certain health conditions. Electricity could also be utilized as a heat source for disinfection if it becomes cost-effective. It's also been used to preserve meats by speeding up the penetration of the salt and thus reducing the pickling time. Electrolyzed seawater has been tested for cleaning and disinfecting streets, but it’s questionable whether the additional cost is worth any extra benefit. Numerous electric devices have been introduced for various sterilization and disinfection purposes, and they will likely keep coming, but each should be thoroughly evaluated before investing money in it.19




7. Filtration.—Filtration is a process for rendering fluids sterile by passing them through some material which will hold back the bacteria. It is used on a large scale in the purification of water for sanitary or manufacturing reasons (Fig. 103). Air is also rendered “germ free” in some surgical operating rooms, “serum laboratories” and breweries by filtration. In the laboratory it is a very common method of sterilizing liquids which would be injured by any other process. The apparatus consists of a porous cylinder with proper devices for causing the liquid to pass through either by suction (Fig. 104) where the pressure will be only one atmosphere (approximately 15 pounds per square inch), or by the use of compressed air at any desired pressure (Fig. 105). The two main types of porous cylinders (“filter candles,” “bougies”) are the Pasteur-Chamberland (Fig. 106) and the Berkefeld. The former are made of unglazed porcelain of different degrees of fineness, the latter of diatomaceous earth (Fig. 107) The Mandler filter of this same material is now manufactured in the United States and is equal if not superior to the Berkefeld. The designs of complete apparatus are numerous.
7. Filtration.—Filtration is a process that makes fluids sterile by passing them through a material that traps bacteria. It's widely used for purifying water for health or manufacturing purposes (Fig. 103). Air is also made “germ-free” in certain surgical operating rooms, “serum laboratories,” and breweries by filtration. In laboratories, it’s a common method for sterilizing liquids that could be damaged by other processes. The equipment consists of a porous cylinder with devices that allow the liquid to pass through either by suction (Fig. 104), where the pressure is about one atmosphere (approximately 15 pounds per square inch), or by using compressed air at any preferred pressure (Fig. 105). The two main types of porous cylinders (“filter candles,” “bougies”) are the Pasteur-Chamberland (Fig. 106) and the Berkefeld. The former is made of unglazed porcelain with different levels of fineness, while the latter is made of diatomaceous earth (Fig. 107). The Mandler filter, made from the same material, is now produced in the United States and matches or surpasses the Berkefeld in quality. There are many designs of complete filtration systems.

8. Burying.—This is a time-honored method of disposing of infected material of all kinds and at first thought might not be considered a means of disinfection. As a matter of fact, under favorable conditions it is an excellent method. The infected material is removed. Pathogenic organisms tend to die out in the soil owing to an unfavorable environment as to temperature and food supply, competition with natural soil organisms for what food there is, and the injurious effects of the products of these organisms. Care must be taken that the burial is done in such a way that the surface soil is not contaminated either directly or by material brought up from below by digging or burrowing animals, insects, worms, or movement of ground water to the surface. Also that the underground water supply which is drawn upon for use by men or animals is not contaminated. Frequently infected material, carcasses of animals, etc., are treated in some way so as to aid the natural process of destruction of the organisms present, especially by the use of certain chemical agents, as quicklime (see p. 158).
8. Burying.—This is a traditional method of disposing of infected materials of all kinds and might not initially seem like a way to achieve disinfection. However, it can actually be very effective under the right conditions. The infected material is removed. Pathogenic organisms usually die off in the soil because of unfavorable conditions relating to temperature and food supply, competition with natural soil organisms for available nutrients, and the harmful effects of byproducts from these organisms. It’s important to ensure that the burial is done in such a way that the surface soil isn’t contaminated either directly or by materials brought up from below by digging or burrowing animals, insects, worms, or the movement of groundwater to the surface. Additionally, care must be taken to avoid contaminating the underground water supply that people or animals may use. Often, infected materials, such as animal carcasses, are treated in some way to help with the natural breakdown of the organisms present, especially through the use of certain chemical agents, like quicklime (see p. 158).

CHAPTER XIV.
DISINFECTION AND STERILIZATION (Continued).
CHEMICAL AGENTS.
A very large number of chemical substances might be used for destroying bacteria or preventing their growth either through direct injurious action or by the effect of concentration. Those which are practically useful are relatively few, though this is one of the commonest methods of disinfecting and the word “disinfectant” is frequently wrongly restricted to chemical agents.
A large number of chemical substances can be used to kill bacteria or stop their growth, either through direct harm or by the impact of concentration. The ones that are truly effective are relatively few, even though this is one of the most common ways to disinfect, and the term "disinfectant" is often wrongly limited to chemical agents.
Chemical agents act on bacteria in a variety of ways. Most commonly there is direct union of the chemical with the protoplasm of the cell and consequent injury. Some times the chemical is first precipitated on the surface of the cell without penetrating at once. If removed soon enough, the organism is not destroyed. This is true of bichloride of mercury and formaldehyde. If bacteria treated with these agents in injurious strength be washed with ammonia or ammonium sulphate, even after a time which would otherwise result in their failure to grow, they will develop. Some chemicals change the reaction of the material in a direction unfavorable to growth, and if the change is enough, may even kill the bacteria. Some agents remove a chemical substance necessary to the growth of the organism and hence inhibit it. Such actions are mainly preventive (antiseptic) and become disinfectant only after a long time.
Chemical agents affect bacteria in various ways. Most commonly, they directly interact with the cell’s protoplasm, causing damage. Sometimes, the chemical initially adsorbs onto the cell’s surface without immediately penetrating it. If removed quickly enough, the organism isn’t destroyed. This applies to bichloride of mercury and formaldehyde. If bacteria treated with these agents at harmful levels are washed with ammonia or ammonium sulfate, even after a period that would typically hinder their growth, they can still thrive. Some chemicals alter the environment in a way that is harmful to growth, and if the change is significant enough, they may even kill the bacteria. Certain agents remove a substance that is essential for the organism's growth, thereby inhibiting it. These effects are mainly preventive (antiseptic) and only become disinfectant after an extended period.
ELEMENTS.
Oxygen.—Oxygen as it occurs in the air is probably not injurious to living bacteria but aids them with the exception of the anaërobes. In the nascent state especially as liberated from ozone (O3) hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and hypochlorites (Ca(ClO)2) it is strongly bactericidal.
Oxygen.—Oxygen in the air is likely not harmful to living bacteria, except for anaerobes, and actually helps them out. However, in its nascent state, especially when released from ozone (O3), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and hypochlorites (Ca(ClO)2), it is very effective at killing bacteria.
Chlorine.—Chlorine is actively disinfectant and is coming into use for sterilizing water on a large scale in municipal plants (Fig. 108).
Chlorine.—Chlorine is an effective disinfectant and is being widely used for sterilizing water in municipal plants (Fig. 108).

Iodine finds extended use in aseptic surgical operations and antiseptic dressings. Bromine, mercury, silver, gold, nickel, zinc and copper are markedly germicidal in the elemental state but are not practical.
Iodine is widely used in sterile surgical procedures and antiseptic dressings. Bromine, mercury, silver, gold, nickel, zinc, and copper are all highly effective at killing germs in their elemental form, but they aren't practical for use.
COMPOUNDS.
Calcium Oxide.—Calcium oxide (CaO), quick lime, is an excellent disinfectant for stables, yards, outhouses, etc., where it is used in the freshly slaked condition as “white wash;” also to disinfect carcasses to be buried. It is very efficient against the typhoid bacillus in water, where it is much used to assist in the softening.
Calcium Oxide.—Calcium oxide (CaO), quick lime, is a great disinfectant for stables, yards, outhouses, and other areas, where it is applied in its freshly slaked form as “whitewash.” It's also used to disinfect carcasses before burial. It works well against the typhoid bacteria in water, where it is commonly used to help with softening.
Chloride of Lime.—Chloride of lime, bleaching powder, which consists of calcium hypochlorite, the active agent, and chloride and some unchanged quicklime is one of the most useful disinfectants. It is employed to sterilize water for drinking purposes on a large scale and to disinfect sewage plant effluents. A 5 per cent. solution is the proper strength for ordinary disinfection. Only a supply which is fresh or has been kept in air-tight containers should be used, as it rapidly loses strength on exposure to the air. The active agent is nascent oxygen liberated from the decomposition of the hypochlorite.
Chloride of Lime.—Chloride of lime, bleaching powder, which is made up of calcium hypochlorite as the active ingredient, along with chloride and some unreacted quicklime, is one of the most effective disinfectants. It is used to sterilize drinking water on a large scale and to disinfect effluents from sewage treatment plants. A 5 percent solution is the recommended concentration for routine disinfection. Only fresh supplies or those kept in airtight containers should be used, as it quickly loses effectiveness when exposed to air. The active ingredient is nascent oxygen released from the breakdown of the hypochlorite.
Sodium Hypochlorite.—Sodium hypochlorite prepared by the electrolysis of common salt has been used to some extent.
Sodium Hypochlorite.—Sodium hypochlorite made through the electrolysis of regular salt has been used to a certain degree.
Bichloride of Mercury.—Bichloride of mercury, mercuric chloride, corrosive sublimate (HgCl2), is the strongest of all disinfectants under proper conditions. It is also extremely poisonous to men and animals and great care is necessary in its use. It is precipitated by albuminous substances and attacks metallic objects, hence should not be used in the presence of these classes of substances.
Bichloride of Mercury.—Bichloride of mercury, mercuric chloride, corrosive sublimate (HgCl2), is the most powerful disinfectant available when used correctly. However, it is also highly toxic to humans and animals, so extreme caution is required when using it. It reacts with protein-containing substances and damages metal items, so it should not be used around these types of materials.
It is used in a strength of one part HgCl2 to 1000 of water for general disinfection. Ammonium chloride or sodium chloride, common salt, in quantities equal to the bichloride, or citric acid in one-half of the amount should be added in making large quantities of solution or for use with albuminous fluids to prevent precipitation of the mercury (Fig. 109).
It is used in a strength of one part HgCl2 to 1000 parts of water for general disinfection. Ammonium chloride or sodium chloride, common salt, in amounts equal to the bichloride, or citric acid in half that amount should be added when making large quantities of the solution or when using it with protein-rich fluids to prevent the mercury from precipitating (Fig. 109).
None of the other metallic salts are of value as practical disinfectants aside from their use in surgical practice. In this latter class come boric acid, silver nitrate, potassium permanganate. The strong mineral acids and alkalies are, of course, destructive to bacteria, but their corrosive effect excludes them from practical use, except that “lye washes” are of value in cleaning floors and rough wood-work, but even here better disinfection can be done more easily and safely.
None of the other metal salts are useful as practical disinfectants except for their role in surgical practice. This includes boric acid, silver nitrate, and potassium permanganate. While strong mineral acids and alkalis can destroy bacteria, their corrosive effects keep them from being practically useful. However, "lye washes" can be valuable for cleaning floors and rough woodwork, but even then, better disinfection can be achieved more easily and safely.

ORGANIC COMPOUNDS.
Carbolic Acid or Phenol.—Carbolic acid or phenol (C6H5 OH) is one of the commonest agents in this class. It is used mostly in 5 per cent. solution as a disinfectant and in 0.5 per cent. solution as an antiseptic. For use in large quantities the crude is much cheaper and, according to some experimenters, even more active than the pure acid, owing to the cresols it contains. The crude acid is commonly mixed with an equal volume of commercial sulphuric acid and the mixture is added to enough water to make a 5 per cent. dilution, which is stronger than either of the ingredients alone in 5 per cent. solution.
Carbolic Acid or Phenol.—Carbolic acid or phenol (C6H5OH) is one of the most common agents in this category. It's typically used in a 5 percent solution as a disinfectant and in a 0.5 percent solution as an antiseptic. When using large amounts, the crude form is often much cheaper and, according to some researchers, even more effective than the pure acid because of the cresols it contains. The crude acid is usually mixed with an equal volume of commercial sulfuric acid, and this mixture is then diluted with enough water to create a 5 percent solution, which is stronger than either of the ingredients alone in a 5 percent solution.
Cresols.—The cresols (C6H4CH3OH, ortho, meta and para), coal-tar derivatives, as phenol, are apparently more powerful disinfectants. A great number of preparations containing them have been put on the market. Creolin is one which is very much used in veterinary practice and forms a milky fluid with water, while lysol forms a clear frothy liquid owing to the presence of soap. Both of these appear to be more active than carbolic acid and are less poisonous and more agreeable to use. They are used in 2 to 5 per cent. solution.
Cresols.—Cresols (C6H4CH3OH, ortho, meta, and para), which are derived from coal tar like phenol, seem to be more effective disinfectants. A wide range of products containing them are available on the market. Creolin is widely used in veterinary medicine and creates a milky solution when mixed with water, while Lysol produces a clear, frothy liquid due to the addition of soap. Both of these options appear to be more potent than carbolic acid and are less toxic and more pleasant to use. They are typically used in solutions of 2 to 5 percent.
Alcohol.—Ordinary (ethyl) alcohol (C2H5OH) is largely used as a preservative, also as a disinfectant for the body surface, hands, and arms. Experiments show that alcohol of 70 per cent. strength is most strongly bactericidal and that absolute alcohol is very slightly so.
Alcohol.—Regular (ethyl) alcohol (C2H5OH) is mainly used as a preservative and as a disinfectant for the skin, hands, and arms. Experiments indicate that 70 percent alcohol is the most effective at killing bacteria, while pure alcohol is only minimally effective.
Soap.—Experimenters have obtained many conflicting results with soaps when tested on different organisms, as is to be expected from the great variations in this article. Miss Vera McCoy in the author’s laboratory carried out experiments with nine commercial soaps—Ivory, Naphtha, Packer’s Tar, Grandpa’s Tar, Balsam Peru, A. D. S. Carbolic, German Green, Dutch Cleanser, Sapolio—and obtained abundant growth from spores of Bacillus anthracis, from Bacterium coli and from Staphylococcus pyogenes aureus in all cases even when the organisms had been exposed twenty-four hours in 5 per cent. solutions. From these results and from the wide variations reported in the literature it is clear that soap solutions alone cannot be depended on as disinfectants. Medicated soaps do not appear to offer any advantages in this respect. The amount of the disinfectant which goes into solution when the soap is dissolved is too small to have any effect.
Soap.—Experimenters have gotten a lot of conflicting results with soaps when tested on different organisms, which is expected given the wide variations in this product. Miss Vera McCoy in the author's lab conducted experiments with nine commercial soaps—Ivory, Naphtha, Packer’s Tar, Grandpa’s Tar, Balsam Peru, A. D. S. Carbolic, German Green, Dutch Cleanser, Sapolio—and found significant growth from spores of Bacillus anthracis, Bacterium coli, and Staphylococcus pyogenes aureus in all cases, even after the organisms were exposed for twenty-four hours in 5 percent solutions. From these results and the wide variations reported in the literature, it's clear that soap solutions alone cannot be relied upon as disinfectants. Medicated soaps don’t seem to provide any advantages in this regard. The amount of disinfectant that dissolves when the soap is mixed is too small to be effective.
Formaldehyde.—Formaldehyde (HCHO) is perhaps the most largely used chemical disinfectant at the present time. The substance is a gas but occurs most commonly in commerce as a watery solution containing approximately 40 per cent. of the gas. This solution is variously known as formalin, formol, and formaldehyde solution. The first two names are patented and the substance under these names usually costs more. It is used in the gaseous form for disinfecting closed spaces of all kinds to the exclusion of most other means today. A great many types of formalin generators have been devised. The gas has little power of penetration and all material to be reached should be exposed as much as possible. The dry gas is almost ineffective, so that the objects must be moistened or vapor generated along with the gas. A common method in use is to avoid expensive generators by pouring the formaldehyde solution on permanganate of potash crystals placed in a vessel removed from inflammable objects on account of the heat developed which occasionally sets the gas on fire. The formalin is used in amounts varying from 20 to 32 ounces to 8½ to 13 ounces of permanganate to each 1000 cubic feet of space. This method is expensive since one pint (16 ounces) of formalin is sufficient for each 1000 cubic feet, and since the permanganate is an added expense. Dr. Dixon, Commissioner of Health of Pennsylvania, recommends the following mixture to replace the permanganate, claiming that it works more rapidly and is less expensive and just as efficient:
Formaldehyde.—Formaldehyde (HCHO) is currently one of the most widely used chemical disinfectants. It's a gas but is most often sold as a liquid solution that contains about 40 percent of the gas. This solution is commonly referred to as formalin, formol, or formaldehyde solution. The first two names are patented, and products under these names usually cost more. It's used in gas form to disinfect various enclosed spaces, often more so than other methods available today. Many types of formalin generators have been created. The gas doesn’t penetrate well, so all materials need to be exposed as much as possible. The dry gas is nearly ineffective, which means that the objects have to be wet or vapor needs to be generated along with the gas. A common approach is to save on expensive generators by pouring formaldehyde solution onto potassium permanganate crystals in a container away from flammable materials because the heat can sometimes ignite the gas. The amount of formalin used ranges from 20 to 32 ounces with 8½ to 13 ounces of permanganate for every 1000 cubic feet of space. This method can get costly since one pint (16 ounces) of formalin is enough for every 1000 cubic feet, plus the permanganate adds to the cost. Dr. Dixon, the Pennsylvania Commissioner of Health, suggests the following mixture as a replacement for permanganate, claiming it's faster, cheaper, and just as effective:
- 1. Sodium bichromate, ten ounces.
- 2. Saturated solution of formaldehyde, sixteen ounces.
- 3. Common sulphuric acid, one and a half ounces.
Two and three are mixed together and when cool are poured on the bichromate which is placed in an earthenware jar of a volume about ten times the quantity of fluid used. The quantities given are for each 1000 cubic feet of space.
Two and three are combined and, once cooled, are poured over the bichromate placed in an earthenware jar that holds about ten times the amount of fluid used. The quantities listed are for every 1000 cubic feet of space.
A very simple method is to cause the formalin, diluted about twice with water to furnish moisture enough, to drop by means of a regulated “separator funnel” on a heated iron plate. The dropping should be so regulated that each drop is vaporized as it falls. The plate must have raised edges, pan-shaped, to prevent the drops rolling off when they first strike the plate. Formaldehyde has no corrosive (except on iron) or bleaching action, and is the most nearly ideal closed space disinfectant today. In disinfecting stations it is made use of in closed sterilizers such as were described under steam disinfection particularly in connection with vacuum apparatus. It is also used in solution as a preservative and as a disinfectant. The commonest strength is 2 or 3 per cent. of formalin or 0.8 to 1.2 per cent. of the formaldehyde gas. As an antiseptic it is efficient in dilutions as high as 1 to 2000 of the gas. It is very irritant to mucous membranes of most individuals.
A very simple method is to use formalin, diluted about twice with water to provide enough moisture, and let it drop through a controlled “separator funnel” onto a heated iron plate. The drops should be adjusted so that each one vaporizes as it falls. The plate needs to have raised edges, like a pan, to keep the drops from rolling off when they first hit the surface. Formaldehyde isn’t corrosive (except to iron) or bleaching, and it’s the closest thing we have to an ideal disinfectant for closed spaces today. In disinfecting stations, it’s used in closed sterilizers as previously described under steam disinfection, especially with vacuum equipment. It’s also used in a solution as a preservative and disinfectant. The most common concentration is 2 or 3 percent formalin or 0.8 to 1.2 percent formaldehyde gas. As an antiseptic, it works effectively in dilutions as high as 1 to 2000 of the gas. It can be very irritating to the mucous membranes of most people.
Anilin Dyes.—Some of the anilin dyes show remarkable selective disinfectant and antiseptic action on certain kinds of bacteria with little effect on others. This has been well shown by Churchman in his work on Gentian Violet. This dye inhibits the growth of Gram positive organisms up to a dilution of one part in 300,000 while for Gram negative organisms it is without effect even in saturated solution. This is nicely shown in the accompanying illustration. This inhibiting effect of anilin dyes is taken advantage of in several methods of isolating bacteria (Chapter XVIII).
Anilin Dyes.—Some anilin dyes have a strong selective disinfectant and antiseptic effect on certain types of bacteria while having minimal impact on others. Churchman's research on Gentian Violet has clearly demonstrated this. This dye prevents the growth of Gram positive organisms up to a dilution of one part in 300,000, whereas it has no effect on Gram negative organisms even in saturated solution. This is clearly illustrated in the accompanying image. The inhibitory effect of anilin dyes is utilized in several methods of isolating bacteria (Chapter XVIII).

In addition to the above-discussed disinfectants a large number of substances, particularly organic, are used in medicine, surgery, dentistry, etc., as more or less strong antiseptics, and the list is a constantly lengthening one.
In addition to the disinfectants mentioned above, many other substances, especially organic ones, are used in medicine, surgery, dentistry, and so on, as varying strengths of antiseptics, and the list keeps growing.
In the laboratory chloroform, H2O2, ether and other volatile or easily decomposable substances have been used to sterilize liquids which could not be treated by heat or by filtration. The agent is removed either by slow evaporation or by exhausting the fluid with an air pump. The method is not very satisfactory, nor is absolute sterilization easily accomplished. It is much better to secure such liquids aseptically where possible.
In the lab, chloroform, H2O2, ether, and other volatile or easily decomposable substances have been used to sterilize liquids that couldn’t be treated with heat or filtration. The agent is removed either through slow evaporation or by exhausting the fluid with a vacuum pump. This method isn’t very reliable, and achieving complete sterilization is tough. It’s much better to obtain such liquids aseptically whenever possible.
CHAPTER XV.
DISINFECTION AND STERILIZATION (Continued).
CHOICE OF AGENT.
The choice of the above-described agents depends on the conditions. Evidently a barn is not to be disinfected in the same way that a test-tube in the laboratory is sterilized. Among the factors to be considered in making a choice are the thing to be disinfected or sterilized, its size and nature, that is, whether it will be injured by the process proposed, cost of the agent, especially when a large amount of material is to be treated. Among the conditions which affect the action of all agents the following should be borne in mind particularly when testing the disinfecting power of chemical agents:
The choice of the agents mentioned above depends on the circumstances. Clearly, you wouldn’t disinfect a barn the same way you’d sterilize a test tube in a lab. Factors to consider when making a choice include what needs to be disinfected or sterilized, its size and type, meaning whether it could be damaged by the proposed method, and the cost of the agent, especially when dealing with a large amount of material. Among the conditions that influence the effectiveness of all agents, the following should be particularly noted when testing the disinfecting power of chemical agents:
1. The kind of bacterium to be destroyed, since some are more readily killed by a given disinfectant than others, even though no spores are present.
1. The type of bacteria that need to be eliminated, since some are more easily killed by a specific disinfectant than others, even if no spores are present.
2. The age of the culture. Young bacteria less than twenty-four hours old are usually more readily killed than older ones since the cell wall is more delicate and more easily penetrated, though old growths may be weakened by the accumulation of their products and be more easily destroyed.
2. The age of the culture. Young bacteria that are under twenty-four hours old are usually easier to kill than older ones because their cell walls are thinner and more easily penetrated, although older cultures may be weakened by the buildup of their own products and therefore be more susceptible to destruction.
3. Presence of spores, since they are much more resistant than the growing cells.
3. Presence of spores, because they are much more resistant than the active cells.
4. Whether the organism is a “good” or “bad” growth, i.e., whether it has grown in a favorable environment and hence is vigorous, or under unfavorable conditions and hence is weak.
4. Whether the organism is a "good" or "bad" growth, i.e. whether it has thrived in a positive environment and is therefore strong, or suffered in negative conditions and is consequently weak.
5. The number of bacteria present, since with chemical agents the action is one of relative masses.
5. The number of bacteria present, because the action with chemical agents depends on relative amounts.
7. State of the disinfectant, whether solid, liquid or gas, and whether it is ionized or not. Solutions penetrate best and are therefore more quickly active and more efficient.
7. State of the disinfectant, whether solid, liquid, or gas, and whether it is ionized or not. Solutions penetrate better and are therefore active more quickly and more efficiently.
8. The solvent. Water is the best solvent to use. Strong alcohol (90 per cent. +) diminishes the effect of carbolic acid, formaldehyde and bichloride of mercury. Oil has a similar effect. The action is probably to prevent the penetration of the disinfectant.
8. The solvent. Water is the best solvent to use. Strong alcohol (90 percent or more) reduces the effectiveness of carbolic acid, formaldehyde, and bichloride of mercury. Oil has a similar effect. This action likely prevents the disinfectant from penetrating.
9. Strength of solution. The stronger the solution, the more rapid and more certain the action, for the same reason as mentioned under 5. In fact, every disinfectant has a strength below the lethal at which it stimulates bacterial growth.
9. Strength of solution. The stronger the solution, the faster and more reliable the action, for the same reasons discussed in section 5. In fact, every disinfectant has a strength below the lethal level at which it promotes bacterial growth.
10. Addition of salts. Common salt favors the action of bichloride of mercury and also of carbolic acid. Other salts may hinder by precipitating the disinfectant.
10. Addition of salts. Table salt enhances the effectiveness of bichloride of mercury and carbolic acid. Other salts might interfere by causing the disinfectant to precipitate.
11. Temperature. Chemical disinfectants, as a rule, follow the general law that chemical action increases with the temperature, up to the point where the heat of itself is sufficient to kill.
11. Temperature. Chemical disinfectants generally adhere to the principle that chemical reactions speed up with rising temperatures, until the heat itself is enough to cause death.
12. Time of action. It is scarcely necessary to point out that a certain length of time is necessary for any disinfectant to act. One may touch a red hot stove and not be burned. All the above-mentioned conditions are influenced by the time of action.
12. Time of action. It's hardly worth mentioning that a specific amount of time is needed for any disinfectant to work. You can touch a red-hot stove and not get burned. All the conditions mentioned earlier are affected by the time it takes to act.
STANDARDIZATION OF DISINFECTANTS—“PHENOL COEFFICIENT.”
Many attempts have been made to devise standard methods for testing the relative strengths of disinfectants. The one most widely used in the United States is the so-called “Hygienic Laboratory” method of determining the “phenol coefficient” of the given substance and is a modification of the method originally proposed by Rideal and Walker in England. In this method as proposed by Anderson and McClintic, formerly of the above laboratory, the strengths of the dilution of the disinfectant to be tested which kills a culture of Bacterium typhosum in 2½ minutes is divided by the strength of the dilution of carbolic acid which does the same; and the dilution which kills in 15 minutes is likewise divided by the corresponding dilution of carbolic acid. The two ratios thus obtained are averaged and the result is the “phenol coefficient.” For example
Many attempts have been made to create standard methods for testing the effectiveness of disinfectants. The method most commonly used in the United States is the “Hygienic Laboratory” method for determining the “phenol coefficient” of a given substance, which is a modification of the method originally suggested by Rideal and Walker in England. In this method, as proposed by Anderson and McClintic, who previously worked at that laboratory, the strength of the dilution of the disinfectant being tested that kills a culture of Bacterium typhosum in 2½ minutes is divided by the strength of the dilution of carbolic acid that achieves the same result; the dilution that kills in 15 minutes is similarly divided by the corresponding dilution of carbolic acid. The two ratios obtained are averaged, and the result is the “phenol coefficient.” For example
Phenol | 1:80 | killed in 2½ minutes | ||||
Disinfectant “A” | 1:375 | killed in 2½ minutes | ||||
Phenol | 1:110 | killed in 15 minutes | ||||
Disinfectant “A” | 1:650 | killed in 15 minutes | ||||
375 | ÷ | 80 | = | 4.69 | ||
650 | ÷ | 110 | = | 5.91 | ||
2)10.60 | ||||||
Average | = | 5:30 | = “phenol coefficient.” |
Standard conditions of temperature, age of culture, medium, reaction, etc., and of making the dilutions and transfers are insisted on. Details may be found in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1911, 8, p. 1.
Standard conditions like temperature, culture age, medium, reaction, etc., as well as how to make the dilutions and transfers, are emphasized. You can find more details in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1911, 8, p. 1.
This is probably as good a method as any for arriving at the relative strengths of disinfectants and in the hands of any given worker concordant results in comparative tests can usually be attained. Experience has shown that the results obtained by different workers with the same disinfectant may be decidedly at variance. This is to be expected from a knowledge of the factors affecting the action of disinfectants above stated and from the known specific action of certain disinfectants on certain organisms (compare anilin dyes, p. 162).
This is probably as good a method as any for figuring out how effective different disinfectants are, and most workers can usually get consistent results in comparative tests. However, experience has shown that different workers using the same disinfectant can yield quite different results. This variation is expected based on the knowledge of the factors that influence how disinfectants work, as well as the specific effects some disinfectants have on particular organisms (see aniline dyes, p. 162).
It seems that the only sure way to test the action of such a substance is to try it out in the way it is to be used. It is scarcely wise to adopt the “phenol coefficient” method as a legal standard method as some states have done.
It looks like the only reliable way to test how this substance works is to use it as intended. It's not very smart to use the "phenol coefficient" method as an official standard, as some states have done.
PRACTICAL STERILIZATION AND DISINFECTION.
The methods for sterilizing in the laboratory have been discussed and will be referred to again in the next chapter.
The laboratory sterilization methods have been discussed and will be mentioned again in the next chapter.
In practical disinfection it is a good plan always to proceed as though spores were present even if the organism is known. Hence use an abundance of the agent and apply it as long as practicable. Also it is best to secure the chemical substances used as such and not depend on patented mixtures purporting to contain them. As a rule the latter are more expensive in proportion to the results secured.
When it comes to practical disinfection, it’s wise to act as if spores are present even if you know the organism involved. So, use an ample amount of the disinfectant and apply it for as long as you can. Additionally, it’s best to obtain the chemical substances directly and not rely on patented mixes claiming to include them. Generally, those mixes are more costly in relation to the results achieved.
Surgical instruments may be sterilized by boiling in water for fifteen minutes, provided they are clean, as they should be. If dried blood, pus, mucus, etc., are adherent, which should never be the case, they should be boiled one-half hour. The addition of sodium carbonate (0.5 to 1 per cent.) prevents rusting. Surgeons’ sterilizers are to be had at reasonable prices and are very convenient. Whether the instruments are boiled or subjected to streaming steam depends on whether the supporting tray is covered with water or not. The author finds it a good plan to keep the needles of hypodermic syringes in a small wire basket in an oil bath. The oil may be heated to 150° to 200° and the needles sterilized in a very few minutes. The oil also prevents rusting.
Surgical instruments can be sterilized by boiling them in water for fifteen minutes, as long as they are clean, which they should be. If there is any dried blood, pus, mucus, etc., sticking to them—which there shouldn’t be—they need to be boiled for half an hour. Adding sodium carbonate (0.5 to 1 percent) helps prevent rusting. Surgeons' sterilizers are available at reasonable prices and are very convenient. Whether the instruments are boiled or exposed to streaming steam depends on whether the supporting tray has water in it. The author suggests keeping the needles of hypodermic syringes in a small wire basket in an oil bath. The oil can be heated to between 150° and 200°, allowing the needles to be sterilized in just a few minutes. The oil also helps prevent rusting.
Stables and Barnyards (Mohler): “A preliminary cleaning up of all litter is advisable together with the scraping of the floor, mangers and walls of the stable with hoes and the removal of all dust and filth. All this material should be burned since it probably contains the infective agent. Heat may be applied to the surfaces, including barnyard, by means of a ‘cyclone oil burner.’ When such burning is impracticable, the walls may be disinfected with one of the following:
Stables and Barnyards (Mohler): “It's a good idea to start by cleaning up all the litter, scraping the floor, feeders, and walls of the stable with hoes, and getting rid of all the dust and grime. Everything collected should be burned because it likely holds the infectious agent. Heat can be applied to the surfaces, including the barnyard, using a ‘cyclone oil burner.’ If burning isn’t possible, the walls can be disinfected with one of the following:
- 1. Whitewash 1 gallon + chloride of lime 6 ounces.
- 2. Whitewash 1 gallon + crude carbolic acid 7 ounces.
- 3. Whitewash 1 gallon + formalin 4 ounces.
The same may be applied with brushes or, more rapidly, sprayed on with a pump; the surface soil of the yard and surroundings should be removed to a depth of 5 or 6 inches, placed in a heap and thoroughly mixed with quicklime. The fresh surface of soil thus exposed may be sprinkled with a solution of a chemical disinfectant as above described.
The same can be done with brushes or, more quickly, sprayed on with a pump; the topsoil of the yard and its surroundings should be removed to a depth of 5 or 6 inches, placed in a pile and thoroughly mixed with quicklime. The newly exposed surface of soil can then be sprinkled with a solution of a chemical disinfectant as described above.


“Portions of walls and ceiling not readily accessible may be disinfected by chlorine gas liberated from chloride of lime by crude carbolic acid. This is accomplished by making a cone of 5 or 6 pounds of chloride of lime in the top of which a deep crater is made for the placement of from 1 to 2 pints of crude carbolic acid. The edge of the crater is thereupon pushed into the fluid, when a lively reaction follows. Owing to the heat generated, it is advisable to place the chloride of lime in an iron crucible (pot), and to have nothing inflammable within a radius of two feet. The number and location of these cones of chloride of lime depend on the size and structure of the building to be disinfected. As a rule it may be stated that chlorine gas liberated from the above sized cone will be sufficient for disinfecting 5200 cubic feet of air space.”
“Parts of walls and ceilings that aren't easily accessible can be disinfected using chlorine gas released from lime chloride with crude carbolic acid. To do this, create a cone with 5 or 6 pounds of lime chloride and make a deep crater at the top to hold 1 to 2 pints of crude carbolic acid. Then, push the edge of the crater into the liquid, and a strong reaction will occur. Because of the heat produced, it's best to place the lime chloride in an iron crucible (pot) and keep anything flammable at least two feet away. The number and position of these lime chloride cones will depend on the size and structure of the building needing disinfection. Generally, it's safe to say that the chlorine gas released from this size cone will be enough to disinfect 5,200 cubic feet of air space.”
Liquid manure, leachings, etc., where collected are thoroughly disinfected by chloride of lime applied in the proportion of 2 parts to 1000 of fluid.
Liquid manure, leachings, etc., when collected, are thoroughly disinfected using chlorine lime at a ratio of 2 parts per 1000 of fluid.

Vehicles may be thoroughly washed with 2 per cent. formalin solution, or if closed space is available, subjected to formaldehyde gas disinfection, after cushions, hangings, etc., have been removed and washed with the disinfectant.
Vehicles can be completely cleaned with a 2 percent formalin solution, or if there's a closed space available, they can undergo disinfection with formaldehyde gas, after the cushions, hanging items, etc., have been taken out and cleaned with the disinfectant.
Harness, brushes, combs should be washed with a solution of formalin, carbolic acid, or creolin as given under these topics.
Harness, brushes, combs should be cleaned with a solution of formalin, carbolic acid, or creolin as mentioned under these topics.
Washable articles should be boiled, dropped into disinfectant, solutions as soon as soiled, and then boiled or steamed.
Washable items should be boiled, placed in disinfectant solutions as soon as they get dirty, and then boiled or steamed.
Unwashable articles—burn all possible. Use formaldehyde gas method in a closed receptacle (Fig. 113).
Items that cannot be washed—dispose of all possible ones by burning. Use the formaldehyde gas method in a sealed container (Fig. 113).
Animals, large and small, may have the coat and surface of the body disinfected by washing with 1 to 1000 bichloride or strong hot soapsuds to which carbolic acid has been added to make a 5 per cent. solution; they should then be given a good warm bath.
Animals, large and small, can have their coat and body surfaces cleaned by washing with a 1 to 1000 bichloride solution or strong hot soapy water mixed with carbolic acid to create a 5 percent solution; they should then receive a nice warm bath.
Frequently time and money are saved by a combination of steam and formaldehyde disinfection. This is a regular practice in municipal and quarantine disinfection (Fig. 114).
Frequently, both time and money are saved by combining steam and formaldehyde disinfection. This is a common practice in municipal and quarantine disinfection (Fig. 114).

Persons engaged in disinfection work should wear rubber boots, coats and caps which should be washed in a disinfectant solution and the change to ordinary clothing made in a special room so that no infective material will be taken away.
People involved in disinfection work should wear rubber boots, coats, and caps that are cleaned with a disinfectant solution, and they should change into regular clothing in a designated room to ensure that no infectious materials are carried away.
PART III.
THE STUDY OF BACTERIA.
CHAPTER XVI.
CULTURE MEDIA.
The study of bacteria may be taken up for the disciplinary and pedagogic value of the study of a science; with the idea of extending the limits of knowledge; or for the purpose of learning their beneficial or injurious actions with the object of taking advantage of the former and combating or preventing the latter.
The study of bacteria can be pursued for its educational and disciplinary value in science, to expand our knowledge, or to understand their helpful or harmful effects, aiming to utilize the beneficial aspects and fight against or prevent the harmful ones.
Since bacteria are classed as plants, their successful study implies their cultivation on a suitable soil. A growth of bacteria is called a “culture” and the “soil” or material on which they are grown is called a “culture medium.” In so far as the culture medium is made up in the laboratory it is an “artificial culture medium” as distinguished from a natural medium. A culture consisting of one kind of bacteria only is spoken of as a “pure culture,” and accurate knowledge of bacteria depends on obtaining them in “pure culture.” After getting a “pure culture” the special characteristics of the organism must be ascertained in order to distinguish it from others. The discussion of the morphology of bacteria in Chapters II, III, and IV shows that the morphological structures are too few to separate individual kinds. They serve at best to enable groups of similarly appearing forms to be arranged. Hence any further differentiation must be based on a study of the physiology of the organism as discussed in the chapters on Physiological Activities of Bacteria.
Since bacteria are classified as plants, studying them successfully means growing them in a suitable environment. A growth of bacteria is called a “culture” and the “soil” or material they grow on is called a “culture medium.” If the culture medium is created in the lab, it’s referred to as an “artificial culture medium,” as opposed to a natural one. A culture that consists of only one type of bacteria is known as a “pure culture,” and accurate knowledge of bacteria relies on obtaining them in “pure culture.” Once a “pure culture” is obtained, we need to identify the specific characteristics of the organism to differentiate it from others. The discussion of the morphology of bacteria in Chapters II, III, and IV shows that the morphological structures are too limited to distinguish individual types. They primarily help in grouping similarly looking forms together. Therefore, any further differentiation has to be based on studying the physiology of the organism, as discussed in the chapters on Physiological Activities of Bacteria.
The thorough study of a bacterium involves, therefore:
The detailed examination of a bacterium involves, therefore:
1. Its isolation in pure culture.
1. Its isolation in a pure culture.
2. Its study with the microscope to determine morphological features and staining reactions.
2. Studying it under the microscope to identify morphological features and staining reactions.
3. Growth on culture media for determining its physiological activities as well as morphological characteristics of the growths themselves.
3. Growing on culture media to determine its physiological activities and the morphological characteristics of the growths themselves.
4. Animal inoculations in certain instances.
4. Animal vaccinations in certain cases.
5. Special serum reactions in some cases.
5. Unique serum reactions in certain cases.
Since isolation in pure culture requires material for growing the organism, the first subject to be considered is culture media.
Since isolating an organism in pure culture requires materials for growth, the first thing to consider is culture media.
A culture medium for a given bacterium should show the following essentials:
A culture medium for a specific bacterium should include the following essentials:
1. It must contain all the elements necessary for the growth of the organism except those that may be obtained from the surrounding atmosphere.
1. It has to include all the elements needed for the organism's growth, except for those that can be sourced from the surrounding atmosphere.
2. These elements must be in a form available to the organism.
2. These elements need to be in a form that the organism can access.
3. The medium must not be too dry, in order to furnish sufficient moisture for growth and to prevent too great a concentration of the different ingredients.
3. The medium shouldn't be too dry, so it can provide enough moisture for growth and avoid too much concentration of the different ingredients.
4. The reaction must be adjusted to suit the particular organism dealt with.
4. The reaction needs to be adjusted to fit the specific organism being handled.
5. There must be no injurious substances present in concentration sufficient to inhibit the growth of the organism or to kill it.
5. There must be no harmful substances at a concentration high enough to stop the growth of the organism or to kill it.
Ordinarily, more attention must be paid to the sources of the two elements N and C than to the others, for in general the substances used to furnish these two and the water contain the other elements in sufficient amount. For very exact work on the products of bacteria, synthetic media containing definite amounts of chemicals of known composition have been prepared, but for most of the work with bacteria pathogenic to animals such media are not needed.
Ordinarily, more focus should be given to the sources of the two elements N and C than to the others, because typically the substances used to provide these two elements and the water contain the other elements in sufficient amounts. For precise work on bacterial products, synthetic media with specific amounts of well-defined chemicals have been created, but for most studies involving bacteria that cause disease in animals, such media aren't necessary.
Culture media may be either liquid or solid, or for certain purposes may be liquid at higher temperatures and solid at lower, as indicated later. Liquid media are of value for obtaining bacteria for the study of morphology and cell groupings and for ascertaining many of the physiological activities of the organisms. Solid media are useful for studying some few of the physiological activities and especially for determining characteristic appearances of the isolated growths of bacteria. These isolated growths of bacteria on solid media are technically spoken of as “colonies,” whether they are microscopic in size or visible to the unaided eye.
Culture media can be either liquid or solid, or in some cases, they may be liquid at higher temperatures and solid at lower temperatures, as explained later. Liquid media are useful for obtaining bacteria to study their morphology and cell groupings and to assess many of the physiological activities of the organisms. Solid media are valuable for examining certain physiological activities and particularly for identifying the characteristic appearances of isolated bacterial growths. These isolated bacterial growths on solid media are technically referred to as “colonies,” regardless of whether they are microscopic or visible to the naked eye.
It is clear that the kinds of culture media used for the study of bacteria may be unlimited but the undergraduate student will need to use a relatively small number, which will be discussed in this section.
It’s clear that the types of culture media used for studying bacteria can be endless, but the undergraduate student will only need to use a relatively small number, which will be covered in this section.
Meat Broth (Bouillon).20—This itself is used as a medium and as the basis for the preparation of other solid and liquid media.
Meat Broth (Bouillon).20—This is used as a base and as a medium for preparing other solid and liquid dishes.
Finely ground lean beef is selected because it contains the necessary food materials. Fat is not desired since it is a poor food for most bacteria and in the further processes of preparation would be melted and form an undesirable film on the surface of the medium. The meat is placed in a suitable container and mixed with about twice its weight of cold water (not distilled) and allowed to soak overnight or longer. The cold water extracts from the meat water-soluble proteins, blood, carbohydrates in the form of dextrose (occasionally some glycogen), nitrogenous extractives and some of the mineral salts. The fluid is strained or pressed free from the meat. This “meat juice” should now be thoroughly boiled, which results in a coagulation of a large part of the proteins and a precipitation of some of the mineral salts, particularly phosphates of calcium and magnesium, both of which must be filtered off and the water loss restored by adding the proper amount of distilled water. The boiling is done at this point because the medium must later be heated to sterilize it and it is best to get rid of the coagulable proteins at once. The proteins thus thrown out deprive the medium of valuable nitrogenous food material which is replaced by adding about 1 per cent. by weight of commercial peptone. It is usual also (though not always necessary) to add about 0.5 per cent. by weight of common salt which helps to restore the proper concentration of mineral ingredients lost by the boiling. The chlorine is also an essential element. The reaction is now determined and adjusted to the desired end point, “standardized,” as it is called. The medium is again thoroughly boiled and filtered boiling hot. The adjusting of the reaction and the boiling ordinarily cause a precipitate to form which is largely phosphates of the alkaline earths with some protein. The filtered medium is collected in suitable containers, flasks or tubes, which are plugged with well-fitting non-absorbent cotton plugs and sterilized, best in the autoclave for twenty minutes at 15 pounds pressure, or discontinuously in streaming steam at 100°. If careful attention is paid to titration and to sufficient boiling where indicated, the meat broth prepared as above should be clear, only faintly yellowish in color and show no precipitate on cooling.
Finely ground lean beef is chosen because it has the necessary nutrients. Fat is not wanted since it is not a good food for most bacteria and would melt during preparation, forming an unwanted film on the surface of the medium. The meat is put in a suitable container and mixed with about twice its weight of cold water (not distilled) and allowed to soak overnight or longer. The cold water extracts water-soluble proteins, blood, carbohydrates in the form of dextrose (sometimes a bit of glycogen), nitrogenous extractives, and some mineral salts from the meat. The liquid is strained or pressed away from the meat. This “meat juice” should then be thoroughly boiled, causing most of the proteins to coagulate and some mineral salts, particularly calcium and magnesium phosphates, to precipitate, both of which must be filtered out. The water loss is restored by adding the right amount of distilled water. The boiling happens at this stage because the medium needs to be sterilized later, and it's best to remove the coagulable proteins now. The proteins that are removed take away valuable nitrogenous nutrients from the medium, which is replaced by adding about 1 percent by weight of commercial peptone. It's also common (though not always necessary) to add about 0.5 percent by weight of table salt, which helps restore the proper concentration of minerals lost during boiling. Chlorine is also a necessary element. The reaction is then checked and adjusted to the desired level, called “standardized.” The medium is boiled again and filtered while it's still hot. The adjustments and boiling usually cause a precipitate to form, primarily phosphates of alkaline earths along with some protein. The filtered medium is collected in suitable containers, flasks or tubes, which are plugged with well-fitting non-absorbent cotton plugs and sterilized, ideally in an autoclave for twenty minutes at 15 pounds pressure, or intermittently in streaming steam at 100°. If careful attention is given to titration and sufficient boiling where necessary, the meat broth prepared should be clear, only slightly yellowish in color, and show no precipitate upon cooling.
The conventional method for standardizing an acid medium is as follows: Take 5 cc of the medium, add 45 cc of distilled water and 1 cc of phenolphthalein as indicator. Boil the solution and while still hot run in from a burette N/20 NaOH solution until a faint pink color appears. From the number of cc of N/20 NaOH used to “neutralize” the 5 cc of medium it is calculated how many cc of N/1 NaOH are necessary to give the desired end reaction to the volume of medium which is to be standardized. The resulting reaction is expressed as % acid or alkaline to phenolphthalein. If it is necessary to add to each 100 cc of the medium 1 cc of N/1 NaOH to make it neutral to phenolphthalein, the reaction is called 1% acid: if to each 100 cc of medium there is added 1 cc of N/1 alkali in addition to the quantity necessary to neutralize, the reaction is called 1% alkaline.
The standard way to standardize an acidic medium is as follows: Take 5 cc of the medium, add 45 cc of distilled water, and incorporate 1 cc of phenolphthalein as an indicator. Boil the solution, and while it’s still hot, slowly add N/20 NaOH solution from a burette until a faint pink color shows up. Based on the amount of N/20 NaOH used to “neutralize” the 5 cc of medium, you can calculate how many cc of N/1 NaOH are needed to achieve the desired reaction in the volume of medium being standardized. The resulting reaction is expressed as % acid or alkaline to phenolphthalein. If 1 cc of N/1 NaOH needs to be added to each 100 cc of the medium to make it neutral to phenolphthalein, the reaction is considered 1% acid; if you have to add 1 cc of N/1 alkali in addition to the amount required for neutralization, the reaction is termed 1% alkaline.
In order to obtain a pink color when titrating with this indicator not only must the “free acid” be neutralized by the alkali but also loosely combined acid and any other substances present which will combine with the alkali rather than with the indicator so that in many media more alkali is added than is necessary to neutralize the “free acid,” i.e., the free H ions present.
In order to get a pink color when titrating with this indicator, not only does the “free acid” need to be neutralized by the alkali, but also any loosely bound acid and other substances that will react with the alkali instead of the indicator. This often results in more alkali being added than what’s actually needed to neutralize the “free acid,” i.e. the free H ions present.
It is well established that the controlling factor in the growth of bacteria in so far as “reaction” is concerned is not the titratable substances present but only the “free acid,” i.e., the number of free H ions, consequently it is better to determine the concentration of H ions and to standardize to a definite H ion concentration. Phenolphthalein as shown above is not a good indicator for this purpose.
It is well understood that the main factor in bacterial growth regarding "reaction" is not the titratable substances present but just the “free acid,” i.e., the number of free H ions. Therefore, it’s more effective to measure the concentration of H ions and to standardize to a specific H ion concentration. Phenolphthalein, as mentioned above, isn't a suitable indicator for this purpose.
The H ions present can be determined accurately in all cases only by electrolytic methods. The apparatus necessary is usually relatively expensive and scarcely adapted to the use of large classes of students. There are a number of indicators each of which will show color changes within rather narrow ranges of H ion concentration. Standardization by the use of these indicators, the “colorimetric method,” is recommended by the Society of American Bacteriologists and is coming into general use.
The H ions can be accurately measured in all situations only through electrolytic methods. The required equipment is typically quite expensive and not well-suited for use with large groups of students. There are various indicators, each of which changes color within specific ranges of H ion concentration. Using these indicators for standardization, known as the “colorimetric method,” is recommended by the Society of American Bacteriologists and is becoming more widely adopted.
The H ion concentration is ordinarily indicated by the conventional symbol PH, e.g., the concentration in pure water which is regarded as neutral is expressed as PH 7; of normal HCl, PH 0; of normal NaOH, PH 14. The figure after PH does not in reality represent the concentration of H ions in the solution. This, like the concentration of acids, is expressed on the basis of normality, i.e., as compared with the concentration of a normal solution (1 g. equivalent) of H ions. Concentration of H ions in pure water is N/10,000,000, i.e., is 1/10,000,000 of the concentration in a normal solution of H ions. Expressed in other words, it is the concentration in a normal solution of H ions diluted ten million times. 10,000,000 = 10 to the 7th power = 107. Hence the figure after the PH indicates the logarithm of the number of times the solution is diluted. Therefore this number increases with the dilution, and the larger the figure after the PH, the less acid the solution is.
The H ion concentration is usually represented by the symbol PH. For example, the concentration in pure water, which is considered neutral, is expressed as PH 7; for normal HCl, it’s PH 0; and for normal NaOH, it’s PH 14. The number that follows PH doesn’t actually show the concentration of H ions in the solution. Instead, like the concentration of acids, it’s based on normality, which means it's compared to the concentration of a normal solution (1 gram equivalent) of H ions. The concentration of H ions in pure water is N/10,000,000, which is 1/10,000,000 of the concentration in a normal solution of H ions. In other words, it’s the concentration in a normal solution of H ions diluted ten million times. 10,000,000 equals 10 to the 7th power, or 107. Thus, the number after PH indicates the logarithm of how many times the solution is diluted. Therefore, this number increases with dilution, and the larger the number after PH, the less acidic the solution is.
Most saprophytic organisms and many parasitic ones grow within a wide range of H ion concentration so that titration with phenolphthalein gives sufficient accuracy for media for such organisms. On the other hand, many organisms grow within a very narrow range of H ion concentration, hence accurate standardization to a definite H ion concentration is necessary. It is also evident that for comparative work, such standardization is essential because this reaction can be reproduced in other media and by other workers.21
Most decomposer organisms and many parasites thrive in a broad range of hydrogen ion concentrations, so using phenolphthalein for titration provides sufficient accuracy for their media. However, many organisms only grow within a very narrow range of hydrogen ion concentration, which makes precise standardization to a specific hydrogen ion concentration necessary. It's also clear that for comparative studies, this standardization is crucial because this reaction can be replicated in different media and by other researchers. 21
Broth may be prepared from Liebig’s or Armour’s meat extract by adding 5 grams of either, 10 grams peptone and 5 grams NaCl to 1000 cc of water, boiling to dissolve, then titrating and filtering as above.
Broth can be made using Liebig’s or Armour’s meat extract by adding 5 grams of either one, 10 grams of peptone, and 5 grams of NaCl to 1000 cc of water. Boil to dissolve, then titrate and filter as mentioned above.
The author after much experience finds meat juice preferable to meat extract for broth and other media for pathogenic bacteria, and has abandoned the use of meat extracts for these organisms.
The author, after extensive experience, finds meat juice better than meat extract for broth and other media for pathogenic bacteria, and has stopped using meat extracts for these organisms.
Glycerin Broth.—Glycerin broth is made by adding 4 to 6 per cent. of glycerin to the broth just previous to the sterilization. The glycerin serves as a source of carbon to certain bacteria which will not grow on the ordinary broth—as Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
Glycerin Broth.—Glycerin broth is created by mixing 4 to 6 percent glycerin into the broth right before sterilization. The glycerin acts as a carbon source for certain bacteria that don't thrive in regular broth, like Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
Sugar Broths.—Sugar broths are used for determining the action of bacteria on these carbohydrates, since this is a valuable means of differentiating certain forms, especially those from the intestinal tract. Broth free from sugar must first be made. This is done by adding to broth prepared as already described, just previous to final filtering and sterilization, a culture of some sugar-destroying organism (Bacterium coli is ordinarily used), and then allowing the organism to grow in the raw broth at body temperature for twenty-four hours. Any carbohydrate in the broth is destroyed by the Bacterium coli. This mixture is then boiled to kill the Bacterium coli, restandardized and then 1 per cent. by weight of required sugar is added. Dextrose, saccharose and lactose are the most used, though many others are used for special purposes. After the sugar is added the medium must be sterilized by discontinuous heating at 100° for three or four successive days, because long boiling or heating in the autoclave splits up the di- and polysaccharids into simpler sugars and may even convert the simple sugars (dextrose) into acid.
Sugar Broths.—Sugar broths are used to study how bacteria interact with carbohydrates, as this is a useful way to distinguish certain types, especially those from the intestinal tract. First, you need to create a broth without sugar. This is done by adding a culture of a sugar-consuming organism (typically Bacterium coli) to the broth prepared as previously described, just before the final filtering and sterilization, and then letting the organism grow in the raw broth at body temperature for twenty-four hours. Any carbohydrates in the broth are broken down by the Bacterium coli. This mixture is then brought to a boil to kill the Bacterium coli, restandardized, and then 1 percent by weight of the necessary sugar is added. Dextrose, sucrose, and lactose are the most commonly used, although many others are utilized for specific purposes. After adding the sugar, the medium must be sterilized using discontinuous heating at 100° for three or four successive days because prolonged boiling or heating in an autoclave can break down di- and polysaccharides into simpler sugars and may even convert simple sugars (like dextrose) into acid.
Various other modified broths are frequently used for special purposes but need not be discussed here.
Various other modified broths are often used for specific purposes but don't need to be discussed here.
Dunham’s peptone solution, frequently used to determine indol production, is a solution of 1 per cent. of peptone and 0.5 per cent. of salt in tap water. It does not need to be titrated, but should be boiled and filtered into tubes or flasks and sterilized.
Dunham’s peptone solution, commonly used to measure indol production, is a mixture of 1 percent peptone and 0.5 percent salt in tap water. It doesn't require titration, but it should be boiled, filtered into tubes or flasks, and sterilized.
Nitrate Broth.—Nitrate broth for determining nitrate reduction is 1 per cent. of peptone, 0.2 per cent. of C. P. potassium nitrate dissolved in distilled water and sterilized.
Nitrate Broth.—Nitrate broth for checking nitrate reduction contains 1 percent peptone and 0.2 percent C. P. potassium nitrate dissolved in distilled water and sterilized.
Milk.—Milk is a natural culture medium much used. It should be fresh and thoroughly skimmed, best by a separator or centrifuge to get rid of the fat. If the milk is not fresh, it should be titrated as for broth and the reaction adjusted. The milk should be sterilized discontinuously to avoid splitting up the lactose as well as action on the casein and calcium phosphate.
Milk.—Milk is a commonly used natural culture medium. It should be fresh and completely skimmed, preferably using a separator or centrifuge to remove the fat. If the milk isn’t fresh, it should be titrated like broth and the reaction adjusted accordingly. The milk should be sterilized in parts to prevent breaking down the lactose as well as affecting the casein and calcium phosphate.
Litmus Milk.—Litmus milk is milk as above to which litmus has been added as an acid production indicator. The milk should show blue when the litmus is added or be made to by the addition of normal NaOH solution. It should be sterilized discontinuously. Frequently on heating litmus milk the blue color disappears due to a reduction of the litmus. This blue color will reappear on shaking with air or on standing several days, due to absorption of O and oxidation of the reduced litmus, provided the heating has produced no other change in the milk, as proper heating will not.
Litmus Milk.—Litmus milk is regular milk that has had litmus added to indicate acid production. The milk should appear blue when litmus is added or can be made to appear blue by adding normal NaOH solution. It should be sterilized using a discontinuous method. Often, when litmus milk is heated, the blue color fades because the litmus is reduced. This blue color will return when shaken with air or if left to stand for several days, due to the absorption of oxygen and oxidation of the reduced litmus, as long as the heating hasn’t caused any other changes in the milk, which proper heating should not.
Gelatin Culture Medium.—Gelatin to the extent of 10 to 15 per cent. is frequently added to broth and gives a culture medium of many advantages. It is solid at temperatures up to about 25° and fluid above this temperature, a property which is of great advantage in the isolation of bacteria. (See Chapter XVIII.) Further gelatin is liquefied (that is digested, converted into gelatin proteose and gelatin peptone, which are soluble in water and do not gelatinize) by many bacteria and not by others, a valuable diagnostic feature. The gelatin colonies of many bacteria are very characteristic in appearance, as is the growth of many on gelatin in culture tubes.
Gelatin Culture Medium.—Gelatin is often added to broth at a concentration of 10 to 15 percent, creating a culture medium with many benefits. It remains solid at temperatures up to about 25°C and becomes liquid above that, which is very helpful for isolating bacteria. (See Chapter XVIII.) Additionally, many bacteria can liquefy gelatin (meaning they digest it and convert it into gelatin proteose and gelatin peptone, which dissolve in water and do not solidify), while others cannot, making this a valuable diagnostic characteristic. The gelatin colonies of many bacteria have a very distinct appearance, as does the growth of many in gelatin culture tubes.
Gelatin medium may be prepared by adding the proper amount of gelatin (10 to 15 per cent. by weight) broken into small pieces (powdered gelatin in the same proportion may be used) to broth, gently warming until the gelatin is dissolved, standardizing as for broth, filtering and sterilizing. It is usually cleared before filtering by stirring into the gelatin solution, cooled to below 60°, the white of an egg for each 1000 cc., and then thoroughly boiling before filtering. The coagulation of the egg albumen entangles the suspended matter so that the gelatin filters perfectly clear, though with a slight yellowish color. The filtering may be done through filter paper if the gelatin is well boiled and filtered boiling hot, but is more conveniently done through absorbent cotton, wet with boiling water.
Gelatin medium can be made by mixing the right amount of gelatin (10 to 15 percent by weight), cut into small pieces (powdered gelatin can be used in the same proportion), into broth, and gently warming it until the gelatin dissolves. Then, standardize it like you would broth, filter, and sterilize it. Typically, it's cleared before filtering by adding the egg white of one egg for every 1000 cc to the gelatin solution, which should be cooled to below 60°, and then boiling it thoroughly before filtering. The coagulation of the egg white traps the suspended particles, resulting in a perfectly clear gelatin, though it may have a slight yellowish tint. You can filter it using filter paper if the gelatin has been boiled and filtered while hot, but it's easier to filter it through absorbent cotton that has been moistened with boiling water.
Or, the gelatin may be added to meat juice before it is boiled, then this is heated to about body temperature (not too hot, or the proteins will be coagulated too soon) until the gelatin is dissolved. Then the material is standardized and thoroughly boiled and filtered. The proteins of the meat juice coagulate and thus clear the medium without the addition of egg white. Commercial gelatin is markedly acid from the method of manufacture, hence the medium requires careful titration, even when made from a standardized broth.
Or, the gelatin can be added to meat juice before it's boiled, then it's heated to around body temperature (not too hot, or the proteins will clump together too quickly) until the gelatin dissolves. After that, the mixture is standardized, thoroughly boiled, and filtered. The proteins in the meat juice clump together, clearing the medium without the need for egg white. Commercial gelatin is quite acidic due to the way it's made, so the medium needs careful titration, even when prepared from a standardized broth.
Gelatin should be sterilized by discontinuous heating at 100° on three successive days, because long boiling or heating above 100° tends to hydrolyze the gelatin into gelatin proteose and peptone and it will not gelatinize on cooling. It may be heated in the autoclave for ten to fifteen minutes at 10 pounds’ pressure and sometimes not be hydrolyzed, but the procedure is uncertain and very resistant spores may not be killed. The medium should be put into the culture tubes in which it is to be used as soon as filtered, and sterilized in these, since, if put into flasks these must be sterilized, and then when transferred to tubes for use, it must be again sterilized unless great care is taken to have the tubes plugged and sterilized first, and in transferring aseptically to these tubes. These repeated heatings are very apt to decompose the gelatin, so it will not “set” on cooling. The prepared and sterilized tubes of gelatin should be kept in an ice-box or cool room, as they will melt in overheated laboratories in summer or winter.
Gelatin should be sterilized by heating it to 100° for short periods over three consecutive days, because prolonged boiling or heating above 100° can break it down into gelatin proteose and peptone, which prevents it from setting when cooled. You can also heat it in an autoclave for ten to fifteen minutes at 10 pounds of pressure, and it might not hydrolyze, but this method is unpredictable, and it may not kill very resistant spores. The medium should be placed into the culture tubes that you'll use right after filtering and sterilized in those tubes. If you put it into flasks instead, those need to be sterilized as well, and when you transfer it to tubes for use, it must be sterilized again unless you take great care to ensure the tubes are capped and sterilized first, and you aseptically transfer it to those tubes. These repeated heating processes often lead to the gelatin breaking down, preventing it from setting when cooled. The prepared and sterilized tubes of gelatin should be stored in a refrigerator or a cool room, as they can melt in overheated labs, whether in summer or winter.
Agar Medium.—Agar agar, usually called agar, is a complex carbohydrate substance of unknown composition obtained from certain seaweeds along the coast of Japan and Southeastern Asia. It occurs in commerce as thin translucent strips or as a powder. It resembles gelatin only in the property its solutions have of gelatinizing when cooled. Gelatin is an albuminoid closely related to the proteins, agar a carbohydrate. Agar is much less soluble in water, 1 or 1.5 per cent. of agar giving a jelly as dense as 10 to 15 per cent. of gelatin. It dissolves only in water heated to near the boiling-point (98° to 99°) and only after much longer heating. This hot solution “jells,” “sets” or gelatinizes at about 38° and remains solid until again heated to near boiling. Hence bacteria may be grown on agar at the body temperature (37°) and above, and the agar will remain solid, while gelatin media are fluid above about 25°. No pathogenic bacteria and none of the saprophytes liable to be met with in the laboratory are able to “liquefy” agar.
Agar Medium.—Agar agar, commonly known as agar, is a complex carbohydrate obtained from certain seaweeds along the coast of Japan and Southeast Asia, though its exact composition is unknown. It is available commercially as thin, translucent strips or as a powder. It only resembles gelatin in the way its solutions solidify when cooled. Gelatin is a protein closely related to albumins, while agar is a carbohydrate. Agar is significantly less soluble in water; a 1 or 1.5 percent agar solution creates a jelly as thick as a 10 to 15 percent gelatin solution. It dissolves only in water heated to almost boiling (98° to 99°) and requires a longer heating time. This hot solution “jells,” “sets,” or gelatinizes at about 38° and stays solid until it is heated close to boiling again. Therefore, bacteria can be grown on agar at body temperature (37°) and above, while the agar remains solid, whereas gelatin media become liquid above about 25°. No pathogenic bacteria and none of the saprophytic bacteria typically found in the laboratory can “liquefy” agar.
An agar medium is conveniently prepared from broth by adding 1 or 1.5 per cent. of the finely divided agar to the broth and boiling until dissolved, standardizing, clearing, filtering, and sterilizing. The agar must be thoroughly boiled, usually for ten to fifteen minutes, and the water loss made up by the addition of distilled water before titration. Agar is practically neutral so that there is little difference between the titration of the dissolved agar and the original broth. The agar solution should be kept hot from the beginning to the end except the cooling down to below 60°, when the egg white for clearing is added. Though filtration through paper is possible as with gelatin, if the agar solution is thoroughly boiled and filtered boiling hot, it is more satisfactory for beginners to use absorbent cotton wet with boiling water and to pour the hot agar through the same filter if not clear the first time. The solidified agar medium is never perfectly clear, but always more or less opalescent. The agar medium may be sterilized in the autoclave for fifteen minutes at 15 pounds pressure as the high temperature does not injure the agar.
An agar medium is easily prepared from broth by adding 1 or 1.5 percent of finely divided agar to the broth and boiling until it's dissolved, then standardizing, clearing, filtering, and sterilizing. The agar needs to be boiled thoroughly, usually for about ten to fifteen minutes, and any loss of water should be compensated with distilled water before titration. Agar is nearly neutral, so there's not much difference between the titration of the dissolved agar and the original broth. The agar solution should stay hot from start to finish, except when cooling down below 60°C to add the egg white for clearing. While filtration through paper is an option like with gelatin, it's often better for beginners to use absorbent cotton wet with boiling water and to pour the hot agar through it if it's not clear after the first filtration. The solidified agar medium is never perfectly clear but usually appears somewhat opalescent. The agar medium can be sterilized in the autoclave for fifteen minutes at 15 pounds of pressure since the high temperature doesn't damage the agar.
Potato Media.—Potatoes furnish a natural culture medium which is very useful for the study of many bacteria. The simplest, and for most purposes the best, way to use potatoes is in culture tubes as “potato tube cultures” (No. 8, Fig. 119). These are prepared as follows: Large tubes are used. Large healthy potatoes are selected. Each end of the potato is sliced off so as to have parallel surfaces. With a cork-borer of a size to fit the tubes used, cylinders about one and one-half inches long are made. Each cylinder is cut diagonally from base to base. This furnishes two pieces each with a circular base and an oval, sloping surface. The pieces are then washed clean and dropped for a minute into boiling water to destroy the oxidizing enzyme on the surface which would otherwise cause a darkening of the potato. (The darkening may also be prevented by keeping the freshly cut potatoes covered with clean water until ready to sterilize.) A bit of cotton one-fourth to one-half inch in depth is put into each of the test-tubes to retain moisture and a piece of potato dropped in, circular base down. The tubes are then plugged with cotton and sterilized in the autoclave at 15 pounds pressure for not less than twenty-five minutes, since potatoes usually harbor very resistant spores, and it is not unusual for a few tubes to spoil even after this thorough heating.
Potato Media.—Potatoes provide a natural culture medium that is very useful for studying many bacteria. The simplest and generally the best way to use potatoes is in culture tubes as “potato tube cultures” (No. 8, Fig. 119). They are prepared as follows: Use large tubes. Select large, healthy potatoes. Cut off each end of the potato so that you have parallel surfaces. Using a cork-borer the right size for the tubes, create cylinders that are about one and a half inches long. Cut each cylinder diagonally from base to base. This gives you two pieces, each with a circular base and an oval, sloping surface. Wash the pieces clean and then immerse them in boiling water for a minute to destroy the oxidizing enzyme on the surface, which would otherwise cause the potato to darken. (You can also prevent darkening by keeping the freshly cut potatoes submerged in clean water until you’re ready to sterilize them.) Place a piece of cotton one-fourth to one-half inch deep into each test tube to retain moisture, then drop in a piece of potato with the circular base facing down. Plug the tubes with cotton and sterilize them in the autoclave at 15 pounds of pressure for at least twenty-five minutes, since potatoes typically contain very resistant spores, and it's not uncommon for a few tubes to spoil even after this thorough heating.
Potatoes are sometimes used in “potato plate cultures.” The term “plate culture” is a relic of the time when flat glass plates were used for this and other “plate cultures.” Now glass dishes of the general form shown in Fig. 115, called “Petri dishes,” or plates are used for practically all plate culture work. For “potato plates” slices from potatoes are cut as large and as thick as the relative sizes of potato and dish permit (Fig. 116). The slices should be thin enough not to touch the lid and thick enough to be firm.
Potatoes are occasionally used in “potato plate cultures.” The term “plate culture” comes from the time when flat glass plates were used for this and other “plate cultures.” Now, glass dishes like the one shown in Fig. 115, known as “Petri dishes,” are used for almost all plate culture work. For “potato plates,” slices from potatoes are cut to be as large and thick as allowed by the sizes of the potato and the dish (Fig. 116). The slices should be thin enough not to touch the lid but thick enough to be firm.


It is a good plan to wrap each dish separately in paper to retain the lid securely, then sterilize as for potato tubes, and leave plates wrapped until wanted.
It's a good idea to wrap each dish separately in paper to keep the lid on tight, then sterilize it like you would for potato tubes, and leave the plates wrapped until you're ready to use them.
Glycerinized potato tubes are conveniently prepared by covering the potato in the tube with glycerin broth, sterilizing and pouring off the excess broth immediately after sterilizing, taking care that the tubes do not become contaminated which is not very probable if the work is quickly done while the tubes are still hot.
Glycerinized potato tubes are easily made by covering the potato in the tube with glycerin broth, sterilizing it, and then pouring off the extra broth right after sterilization. Make sure that the tubes don't get contaminated, which is unlikely if you work quickly while the tubes are still hot.
Blood Serum Media.—Blood serum, usually from the larger, domestic animals on account of convenience in securing it in quantity, is used in the study of the bacteria causing disease in man and animals. Most commonly the serum is collected from the clotted blood after it has well separated (usually about forty-eight hours is required for this). It is then run into tubes which are plugged with cotton and placed in an apparatus for coagulating the serum by heat. A copper water bath with a tightly closed air compartment or the horizontal autoclave (Fig. 81) is sufficient for this purpose, though special forms of apparatus are to be had. It is important that the temperature be raised slowly so that the blood gases escape gradually. Three to five hours or longer should be allowed for the temperature to reach the boiling-point. If the tubes are heated too rapidly, the serum is filled with bubbles and badly torn since the gases are driven off suddenly. Löffler’s serum is made by adding one part of dextrose broth to three parts of serum and then coagulating as above. The solidified serum in either case is best sterilized discontinuously, though with care the autoclave at 15 pounds pressure may be used for a single sterilization. This is very apt to cause a greater darkening of the serum and frequently also a laceration of the solid mass by escaping gases.
Blood Serum Media.—Blood serum, typically from larger domestic animals for convenience in obtaining it in larger amounts, is used to study the bacteria that cause diseases in humans and animals. Usually, the serum is collected from clotted blood after it has properly settled (which takes about forty-eight hours). It's then poured into tubes, which are sealed with cotton and placed in an apparatus to coagulate the serum using heat. A copper water bath with a sealed air compartment or a horizontal autoclave (Fig. 81) works well for this, although specialized equipment is available. It's crucial to gradually raise the temperature so that the blood gases can escape slowly. Allow three to five hours or more for the temperature to reach the boiling point. If the tubes are heated too quickly, the serum will become bubbly and torn because the gases are released abruptly. Löffler’s serum is created by mixing one part of dextrose broth with three parts of serum and then coagulating it as described above. The solidified serum in either case is best sterilized intermittently, though with care, the autoclave at 15 pounds of pressure can be used for single sterilization. This method can lead to more darkening of the serum and often causes the solid mass to rupture due to escaping gases.
Blood serum is also used in the liquid state. For this purpose it is best to collect it aseptically; or it may be sterilized discontinuously at a temperature of 55° or 56° on seven to ten consecutive days. Novy has recently suggested dialyzing the serum to free it from salts and thus prevent its coagulation when heated. Whether the removal of the various “extractives” which diffuse out with the salts deprives the serum of any of its advantageous properties remains to be ascertained.
Blood serum is also used in liquid form. For this, it's best to collect it aseptically, or it can be sterilized intermittently at a temperature of 55° or 56° for seven to ten consecutive days. Novy recently suggested dialyzing the serum to remove salts and prevent it from coagulating when heated. It's still unclear whether removing the various “extractives” that diffuse out with the salts affects the serum's beneficial properties.
From the discussion of the physiological activities of bacteria in Chapters IX–XII it is apparent that a very great variety of culture media other than those described is necessary for the study of special types of bacteria, but such media are beyond the scope of the present work.
From the discussion of the physiological activities of bacteria in Chapters IX–XII, it's clear that a wide range of culture media beyond what has been described is essential for studying specific types of bacteria, but such media are outside the scope of this work.
The ideal culture media are without a doubt the synthetic media, that is media of definite known chemical composition, so that the various changes due to the growth of bacteria can be accurately determined and thus a means of sharply differentiating closely related organisms be secured. Such media have been prepared and every bacteriologist believes strongly in their future usefulness when media of wider application shall have been devised. An example of this type of culture media is Uschinsky’s synthetic medium, of which the following is one of the modifications:
The best culture media are definitely the synthetic media, which have a specific and known chemical composition. This allows for precise measurement of the changes that occur as bacteria grow, making it easier to distinguish closely related organisms. These media have been developed, and every bacteriologist is confident in their potential future usefulness, especially when more versatile media are created. One example of this type of culture media is Uschinsky’s synthetic medium, of which the following is one of the modifications:
Distilled-water | 1000 parts |
Asparagin | 4 parts |
Ammonium lactate | 6 parts |
Disodium phosphate | 2 parts |
Sodium chloride | 5 parts |
A criticism of this medium is that the elements K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Mn, and S which have been shown to be essential are not present if chemically pure salts are used in the preparation.
A criticism of this medium is that the elements K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Mn, and S, which are essential, are not included when chemically pure salts are used in the preparation.
CHAPTER XVII.
METHODS OF USING CULTURE MEDIA.
The way in which culture media shall be used depends on the purpose in view. By far the larger part of bacteriological work is done with cultures in “bacteriological culture tubes.” Various laboratories have their own special types but all are more or less after the “Board of Health” form. They differ from ordinary chemical test-tubes in that they are usually longer, have no “lip” and have much thicker walls to prevent breakage and consequent loss of the culture as well as danger from pathogenic organisms. The author finds two sets of tubes most serviceable for student use—one size 15 cm. long by 19 mm. outside diameter (No. 9, Fig. 119), the other 15 cm. long by 13 mm. (Nos. 1 to 7, Fig. 119). Culture tubes are conveniently used in “wire baskets” circular or square in section and of a size to correspond with the length and number of tubes used. These baskets are light, do not break, and if made of good galvanized wire netting do not readily rust (Figs. 117 and 118).
The way culture media are used depends on the intended purpose. Most of the work in microbiology is done with cultures in “bacteriological culture tubes.” Different labs have their own types, but they are generally based on the “Board of Health” design. They differ from regular chemical test tubes by being longer, lacking a “lip,” and having thicker walls to prevent breakage and loss of the culture, as well as reduce the risk of exposure to harmful pathogens. The author finds two sizes of tubes most useful for student use—one is 15 cm long with a 19 mm outside diameter (No. 9, Fig. 119), and the other is 15 cm long with a 13 mm diameter (Nos. 1 to 7, Fig. 119). Culture tubes are easily stored in “wire baskets” that are either circular or square in shape, designed to match the length and quantity of tubes used. These baskets are lightweight, won't break, and, if made from good galvanized wire mesh, won’t rust easily (Figs. 117 and 118).
Liquid media such as broth, milk, litmus milk, indol and nitrate broths are used in the above-mentioned tubes when small quantities only are to be worked with. The tubes are filled approximately one-third full, then plugged with non-absorbent cotton and sterilized. Cotton plugs are used so much in bacteriological work because they permit a free circulation of air and gases and at the same time act as filters to keep out the bacteria of the air.
Liquid media like broth, milk, litmus milk, indole, and nitrate broths are used in the tubes mentioned above when only small amounts need to be handled. The tubes are filled about a third of the way full, then sealed with non-absorbent cotton and sterilized. Cotton plugs are commonly used in bacteriological work because they allow for free circulation of air and gases while also acting as filters to prevent airborne bacteria from entering.



One method of using gelatin and also agar is as “puncture” or “stab” cultures. The tubes (the narrower tubes are to be preferred for most “stab” cultures) are filled one-third full of the medium while it is still fluid, plugged, sterilized and allowed to cool in the vertical position. The medium is then “inoculated” with a straight platinum needle by plunging this into the center of the surface down to the bottom of the tube (Fig. 119, Nos. 4 and 5).
One way to use gelatin and agar is in “puncture” or “stab” cultures. The narrower tubes (recommended for most “stab” cultures) are filled one-third full with the medium while it's still liquid, plugged, sterilized, and allowed to cool in a vertical position. Then, the medium is “inoculated” with a straight platinum needle by inserting it into the center of the surface all the way down to the bottom of the tube (Fig. 119, Nos. 4 and 5).

Agar and blood serum are frequently used in the form of “slope” or “slant” cultures. That is, the medium solidifies with the tubes lying on their sides which gives a long, sloping surface on which the bacteria are inoculated (Fig. 119, Nos. 6 and 7).
Agar and blood serum are often used in “slope” or “slant” cultures. This means the medium solidifies with the tubes lying on their sides, creating a long, sloping surface for inoculating the bacteria (Fig. 119, Nos. 6 and 7).


Potato tubes are likewise used for “slant” or “slope” cultures (Fig. 119, No. 8). Potatoes as “plate cultures” have been referred to. Agar and gelatin are very largely used in the form of “plate cultures” also. For this purpose Petri dishes are first sterilized, then the melted agar or gelatin poured into them and allowed to “set” while the plates are kept horizontal. The melted media may be “inoculated” before they are poured, or a portion of the material to be “plated” may be placed in the dish, then the melted medium poured in and distributed over the dish by tilting in various directions, or the medium after solidifying may be inoculated by “strokes” or “streaks” over its surface, according to the purpose in view in using the plate. The larger sized tubes should be used for making plates in order to have sufficient medium in the plate (No. 9, Fig. 119).
Potato tubes are also used for "slant" or "slope" cultures (Fig. 119, No. 8). Potatoes have been referred to as "plate cultures." Agar and gelatin are often used in the form of "plate cultures" as well. For this purpose, Petri dishes are first sterilized, then the melted agar or gelatin is poured into them and allowed to "set" while the plates are kept horizontal. The melted media can be "inoculated" before pouring, or a part of the material to be "plated" can be placed in the dish, and then the melted medium is poured in and spread over the dish by tilting it in different directions. Alternatively, the medium can be inoculated by making "strokes" or "streaks" over its surface after it solidifies, depending on the intended use of the plate. Larger tubes should be used for making plates to ensure there’s enough medium in the plate (No. 9, Fig. 119).
For growing anaërobic organisms it is evident that some method for removing and excluding the oxygen of the air must be used. A very great variety of appliances have been devised for these purposes. Some are based on the principle of the vacuum, exhausting the air with an air pump; some on replacing the air with a stream of hydrogen; others on absorbing the oxygen by chemical means, as with an alkaline solution of pyrogallic acid, or even by growing a vigorous aërobe in the same culture or in the same container with the anaërobe, the aërobe exhausting the oxygen so that the anaërobe then develops, or finally by excluding the air through the use of deep culture tubes well filled with the medium, or in the closed arm of fermentation tubes. For many purposes a combination of two or more of the above methods gives good results.
To cultivate anaërobic organisms, it's clear that we need a way to remove and keep oxygen out of the air. A wide range of equipment has been created for this. Some methods use a vacuum to pump out the air; others replace the air with a flow of hydrogen; some involve chemically absorbing the oxygen with something like an alkaline solution of pyrogallic acid, or by growing a strong aërobe alongside the anaërobe in the same culture or container, where the aërobe uses up the oxygen, allowing the anaërobe to thrive. Lastly, air can be excluded using deep culture tubes filled with the medium or in sealed fermentation tubes. For many applications, combining two or more of these methods yields good results.
In any event the culture medium should have been freshly sterilized just before use, or should be boiled in order to drive out the dissolved oxygen. For most, anaërobes the presence in the medium of about 1 per cent. of a carbohydrate, as dextrose, is advisable.
In any case, the culture medium should be freshly sterilized right before use, or should be boiled to remove the dissolved oxygen. For most anaerobes, it’s recommended to have about 1 percent of a carbohydrate, like dextrose, in the medium.
A description of all the various devices is unnecessary in this work, but the following have answered most of the purposes of general work in the author’s laboratories.
A description of all the different devices isn't needed in this work, but the following have served most of the purposes for general work in the author's labs.


A. “Vignal tubes” of the style shown (Fig. 125) are made from glass tubes of about 6 to 8 mm. outside diameter, sealed at the small end, plugged with cotton above the constriction and sterilized. The medium, agar or gelatin, which has been previously inoculated with the anaërobic culture, is then drawn up into the tube, after breaking off the tip, as far as the constriction. The tube is then sealed in the flame at the small end and also at the constriction. Since it is full of the medium and sealed, access of air is prevented. This forms an excellent means for “isolation” (Chapter XVIII); the tube needs merely to be cut with a file at the point where colonies appear, then these may be readily transferred.
A. “Vignal tubes” of the style shown (Fig. 125) are made from glass tubes that are about 6 to 8 mm in outside diameter, sealed at the small end, filled with cotton above the constriction, and sterilized. The medium, which can be agar or gelatin, is pre-inoculated with the anaerobic culture and then drawn up into the tube after breaking off the tip, reaching up to the constriction. The tube is then sealed at the small end and at the constriction using a flame. Because it is filled with the medium and sealed, there’s no access to air. This creates an excellent method for “isolation” (Chapter XVIII); the tube just needs to be cut with a file at the point where colonies form, allowing for easy transfer.

B. “Fermentation tubes” form a simple means for growing liquid cultures of anaërobes, the growth occurring in the closed arm only, while with facultative anaërobes, growth occurs both in the closed arm and in the open bulb. A little “paraffin oil” (a clear, heavy petroleum derivative) may be poured on the fluid in the open bulb as a very efficient seal, though it is not usually necessary.
B. “Fermentation tubes” provide a straightforward way to cultivate liquid cultures of anaerobes, with growth happening only in the closed arm. In the case of facultative anaerobes, growth can occur in both the closed arm and the open bulb. A small amount of “paraffin oil” (a clear, thick petroleum byproduct) can be added to the liquid in the open bulb as a very effective seal, although it’s generally not required.
C. “Deep culture tubes.”—The medium, agar, gelatin or a liquid is poured into tubes until they are approximately one-half full, a little paraffin oil is poured on the surface (not essential always), then the tubes are plugged and sterilized. Inoculation is made to the bottom and anaërobes grow well (Fig. 126).
C. “Deep culture tubes.”—The medium, whether agar, gelatin, or a liquid, is poured into tubes until they are about half full. A small amount of paraffin oil is added to the surface (not always necessary), then the tubes are plugged and sterilized. Inoculation is done at the bottom, and anaerobes grow well (Fig. 126).

D. For slope or plate, or any type of surface cultures the Novy jar (Fig. 127) is the most practical device. It is good practice to combine the vacuum method, the hydrogen replacement method and the oxygen absorption method in using these jars. In operation a solution of 20 per cent. NaOH is poured on the bottom of the jar to a depth of 1 or 2 cm., the cultures are placed on glass supports above the alkali and a short wide tube of strong pyrogallol is set in on the bottom in such a way that it may be easily upset and mixed with the alkali when it is desired to do so. The cover is now clamped in position with all joints well vaselined. Then the outlet tube is connected with a suction pump and the air drawn out. Meanwhile the inlet tube has been connected with a hydrogen generator, and after the jar is exhausted hydrogen is allowed to flow in, and this process is repeated until one is satisfied that the air is replaced. The suction exhausts the air from the tubes or plates so that much less time is required to replace the air with hydrogen. Finally the stop-cock is closed, and the pyrogallol solution is gently shaken down and mixed with the alkali so that any remaining oxygen will be absorbed.
D. For slope or plate, or any type of surface cultures, the Novy jar (Fig. 127) is the most practical tool. It's good practice to combine the vacuum method, the hydrogen replacement method, and the oxygen absorption method when using these jars. In operation, a solution of 20 percent NaOH is poured into the bottom of the jar to a depth of 1 or 2 cm. The cultures are placed on glass supports above the alkali, and a short wide tube made of strong pyrogallol is positioned at the bottom so that it can be easily tipped over and mixed with the alkali when needed. The cover is then clamped in place with all joints well coated in Vaseline. Next, the outlet tube is connected to a suction pump, and the air is drawn out. Meanwhile, the inlet tube is connected to a hydrogen generator, and after the jar is emptied, hydrogen is allowed to flow in, repeating this process until you're satisfied that the air is replaced. The suction removes the air from the tubes or plates, significantly reducing the time needed to replace the air with hydrogen. Finally, the stop-cock is closed, and the pyrogallol solution is gently shaken down and mixed with the alkali so that any remaining oxygen can be absorbed.

It must be remembered that facultative anaërobes as well as anaërobes will grow under any of the above conditions, so that cultures of organisms so obtained must be further tested aërobically in order to determine to which group the organisms belong.
It’s important to remember that facultative anaerobes and anaerobes can grow under any of the conditions mentioned above, so cultures of these organisms need to be tested aerobically to find out which group they belong to.
Reference has been made above to the “inoculation” of culture media, which means introducing into the medium used the desired material in the proper way. For small quantities this is most conveniently done with platinum “needles,” that is, pieces of platinum wire inserted into the ends of glass rods. The “straight” needle is a piece of heavy platinum wire of about 0.022 inch in diameter (Fig. 128). It is used most frequently to inoculate all forms of solid media. The platinum loop is of lighter wire, 0.018 inch. The loop in the end is conveniently made by twisting the wire around the lead of an ordinary lead-pencil. The “loop needle” (Fig. 129) is most used in transferring liquid media. On account of the high price of platinum, the author has substituted “nichrome” wire for student use. This is stiffer, not so easily made into loops and breaks out of the rods more easily. The latter defect is remedied to some extent, by imbedding the wire only slightly for about one-fourth of an inch on the side of the end portion of the rod. The low cost, less than one-twentieth of platinum, justifies its use.
Reference has been made above to the “inoculation” of culture media, which means introducing the desired material into the medium in the correct way. For small quantities, this is most conveniently done with platinum “needles,” which are pieces of platinum wire attached to the ends of glass rods. The “straight” needle is a piece of heavy platinum wire about 0.022 inch in diameter (Fig. 128). It is most commonly used to inoculate all types of solid media. The platinum loop is made of lighter wire, 0.018 inch. The loop at the end is easily created by twisting the wire around the tip of a regular pencil. The “loop needle” (Fig. 129) is mostly used for transferring liquid media. Because platinum is expensive, the author has replaced it with “nichrome” wire for student use. This wire is stiffer, is harder to create into loops, and can break away from the rods more easily. This last issue is partially fixed by embedding the wire slightly for about one-fourth of an inch on the side of the end portion of the rod. The low cost, less than one-twentieth of platinum, justifies its use.



Sterile graduated pipettes varying in capacity from 1 cc graduated in hundredths, upward, permit the transfer of definite amounts of liquids. Large quantities are conveniently transferred by means of Pasteur flasks (Fig. 130). The details of inoculation are best derived from laboratory practice.
Sterile graduated pipettes with capacities ranging from 1 cc, marked in hundredths, allow for the transfer of specific amounts of liquids. Larger volumes can be easily transferred using Pasteur flasks (Fig. 130). You can learn the specifics of inoculation best through hands-on laboratory experience.
CHAPTER XVIII.
ISOLATION OF BACTERIA IN PURE CULTURE.
As has been stated, the thorough study of a bacterium depends on first getting it in pure culture. In the early days of bacteriology supposedly pure cultures were obtained by (1) dilution in liquid media. A series of tubes or flasks containing sterile liquid media was prepared. Number one was inoculated with the material to be examined and thoroughly mixed. A small portion of the mixture was transferred to number two, and mixed; from this to number three, and so on until a sufficient number were inoculated, the last three or four in the series receiving the same amounts of a very high dilution of the original material. If one or two of these latter showed a growth and the others not, it was assumed that the dilution had been carried so far that only a single organism was transferred and therefore the culture obtained was “pure.” The method in this crude form is too uncertain to be of value today and recourse is had to more exact means. The procedure most widely used is that of (2) “plating out” by means of gelatin or agar plates. The material to be plated out is diluted by transferring to three or more tubes of melted gelatin or agar as in the first method and then all the tubes are poured into Petri dishes and grown under suitable conditions. By proper mixing in the tubes the bacteria are well scattered through the medium which holds the individual organisms separate when it solidifies. On some of the plates a sufficient dilution will be reached so that the colonies developing from the bacteria will be so few that they are separate and pure cultures may be obtained by inoculating from one of these a tube of the appropriate medium (Figs. 131 to 134). The chief uncertainty with this method is that occasionally two kinds of bacteria stick together so closely that even the separate colonies contain both organisms. This is not common, however. The plate colonies frequently develop from groups of bacteria which were not separated, but as these are of the same kind the culture is essentially pure.
As mentioned, a thorough study of a bacterium depends on first obtaining a pure culture. In the early days of bacteriology, supposedly pure cultures were obtained by (1) dilution in liquid media. A series of tubes or flasks with sterile liquid media was prepared. The first tube was inoculated with the material to be examined and thoroughly mixed. A small portion of this mixture was transferred to the second tube, and mixed; this process continued to the third tube, and so on, until a sufficient number were inoculated, with the last three or four in the series receiving the same amounts of a very high dilution of the original material. If one or two of these last tubes showed growth while the others did not, it was assumed that the dilution had progressed enough that only a single organism was transferred, making the culture "pure." This method, in its crude form, is too uncertain to be useful today, so more precise techniques are used. The most common method now is (2) “plating out” using gelatin or agar plates. The material to be plated out is diluted by transferring it to three or more tubes of melted gelatin or agar like in the first method, and then all the tubes are poured into Petri dishes and grown under suitable conditions. With proper mixing in the tubes, the bacteria are well dispersed throughout the medium, which keeps the individual organisms separate as it solidifies. On some plates, sufficient dilution will be achieved so that the colonies developing from the bacteria are few and separate enough to allow pure cultures to be obtained by inoculating a tube of the appropriate medium (Figs. 131 to 134). The main uncertainty with this method is that sometimes two types of bacteria stick together so closely that even the separate colonies contain both organisms. However, this is not common. The plate colonies often arise from groups of bacteria that were not separated, but since these are of the same kind, the culture is essentially pure.


Another method which is frequently applicable with material from human or animal sources is to (3) rub the material over the surface of a slope tube or of medium solidified in a Petri dish with a sterile heavy platinum needle, glass rod, or cotton swab. If the bacteria are not too numerous, pure cultures may frequently be obtained. A modification of this method is to make a series of (4) parallel streaks on a slope tube or plate of medium with a needle inserted but once into the material to be plated. On the first streak most of the bacteria are rubbed off and a continuous growth results, but usually on the last of a series only isolated colonies appear, which are presumably pure. The ideal method for securing pure cultures is to be absolutely certain that the culture starts from a single organism. This may be accomplished by means of the (5) apparatus and pipettes devised by Professor Barber of the University of Kansas (Figs. 135 and 136). With this instrument a single organism is picked out under the microscope and isolated in a drop of culture medium and observed until it is seen to divide, thus proving its viability. Transfers are then made to the proper media. The method requires much practice to develop the necessary skill in the making of pipettes, determining the proper condition of the large cover-glasses used over the isolating box, and in manipulation, but the results fully compensate.
Another method that's often used with material from human or animal sources is to rub the material over the surface of a slope tube or medium solidified in a Petri dish using a sterile heavy platinum needle, glass rod, or cotton swab. If there aren't too many bacteria, pure cultures can often be obtained. A variation of this method involves making a series of (4) parallel streaks on a slope tube or plate of medium using a needle that has been inserted only once into the material to be plated. On the first streak, most of the bacteria are rubbed off and a continuous growth occurs, but usually on the last streak in the series, only isolated colonies appear, which are likely pure. The best way to ensure pure cultures is to make sure the culture starts from a single organism. This can be done using the (5) equipment and pipettes developed by Professor Barber from the University of Kansas (Figs. 135 and 136). With this tool, a single organism is picked out under the microscope and isolated in a drop of culture medium, then monitored until it divides, confirming its viability. Transfers are then made to the appropriate media. This method requires a lot of practice to develop the skills needed for making pipettes, determining the right condition for the large cover-glasses used over the isolating box, and manipulation, but the results are well worth it.


Professor W. A. Starin of the author’s department, a former student of Professor Barber, has done some excellent work with this apparatus.
Professor W. A. Starin from the author's department, a former student of Professor Barber, has done some outstanding work with this equipment.


A number of procedures may be used to greatly facilitate the above methods of isolation by taking advantage of the different physiological properties of different organisms in a mixture such as ability to form spores, different resistance to antiseptics, special food requirements, and pathogenic properties. (a) If material contains resistant spores, it may be heated to temperatures high enough to kill all of the organisms except the spores (80° for half an hour, for example) and then plated out. Or (b) an antiseptic which restrains the growth of some organisms and not others may be placed in the culture media (carbolic acid, various anilin dyes, (p. 162), excess acid, or alkali, ox bile, etc.), when the more resistant organisms grow on the final plates, the others not. (c) Special food substances (various carbohydrates) from which the organism desired forms special products (acids, aldehydes) that may be shown on the plates by various indicators, is one of the commonest means. Or media in which certain organisms thrive and others not, so that the former soon “crowd out” the latter (unsterilized milk for lactic acid bacteria, inorganic media in soil bacteriology) may be used. A combination of the general methods (b) and (c) is much used in the separation of the organisms of the “intestinal group” in human practice. (d) The inoculation of a susceptible animal with a mixture suspected to contain a given pathogenic bacterium frequently results in the development of the latter in pure culture in the body of an animal, from which it may be readily recovered. In all of the above methods (except Barber’s) the first “pure culture” obtained should be “purified” by replating in a series of dilution plates to make sure that it is pure.
A variety of techniques can be used to make the methods of isolation mentioned above much easier by leveraging the different physiological properties of various organisms in a mixture, such as their ability to form spores, varying resistance to antiseptics, specific nutrient needs, and pathogenic traits. (a) If the material contains resistant spores, it can be heated to high temperatures that kill all organisms except the spores (like 80° for half an hour) and then plated out. Or (b) an antiseptic that inhibits the growth of some organisms but not others can be added to the culture media (like carbolic acid, various anilin dyes, (p. 162), excess acid or alkali, ox bile, etc.). In this case, the more resistant organisms will grow on the final plates while the others won’t. (c) Specific food substances (various carbohydrates) from which the target organism produces specific products (acids, aldehydes) can be detected on the plates using different indicators, which is one of the most common methods. Alternatively, media that support the growth of certain organisms but not others can be used, allowing the former to quickly “crowd out” the latter (like unsterilized milk for lactic acid bacteria, inorganic media in soil bacteriology). A combination of the general methods (b) and (c) is frequently employed to separate organisms from the “intestinal group” in human practice. (d) Inoculating a susceptible animal with a mixture that is suspected to contain a particular pathogenic bacterium often leads to the growth of that bacterium in pure culture within the animal's body, from which it can be easily recovered. For all the above methods (except Barber’s), the first “pure culture” obtained should be “purified” by replating on a series of dilution plates to ensure its purity.
CHAPTER XIX.
STUDY OF INDIVIDUAL BACTERIA—STAINING.
When an organism has been obtained in pure culture by any of the methods described in the preceding chapter the next step is the study of its morphology as discussed in Chapters II–IV. This involves the use of the microscope, and since bacteria are so small, objectives of higher power than the student has presumably used will be needed. Doubtless only the two-thirds inch or 16 mm. and the one-sixth inch or 4 mm. objectives are all that have been used in previous microscopic work, while for examining bacteria a one-twelfth inch or 2 mm. is necessary. It will have been observed that the higher the power of the objective the smaller is the front lens or object glass and consequently the less is the amount of light which enters. With the use of the one-twelfth inch or 2 mm. objective it is necessary to employ two devices for increasing the amount of light entering it, with which the student is probably not familiar. One of these is to place a drop of cedar oil between the front lens and the object and to immerse the lens in this oil—hence the term “oil-immersion objective;” the other is the substage or Abbé condenser. The latter is a system of lenses placed below the stage and so constructed as to bring parallel rays of light—daylight—from an area much larger than the face of the front lens of the objective to a focus on the object to be examined, thus adding very greatly to the amount of light entering the objective. Since the condenser brings parallel rays to a focus on the object, the flat-mirror is always used with the condenser when working with daylight. With artificial light close to the microscope, the concave mirror may be used to make the divergent rays more nearly parallel and thus give better illumination.
When an organism has been obtained in pure culture by any of the methods described in the previous chapter, the next step is to study its morphology as discussed in Chapters II–IV. This involves using a microscope, and since bacteria are so small, higher power objectives than what the student has likely used will be needed. It’s likely that only the two-thirds inch or 16 mm and the one-sixth inch or 4 mm objectives have been used in past microscopic work, while examining bacteria requires a one-twelfth inch or 2 mm objective. You may have noticed that the higher the power of the objective, the smaller the front lens or object glass is, which means that less light enters. When using the one-twelfth inch or 2 mm objective, it’s necessary to employ two devices to increase the amount of light entering it, which the student might not be familiar with. One of these is to place a drop of cedar oil between the front lens and the object and to immerse the lens in this oil—hence the term “oil-immersion objective;” the other is the substage or Abbé condenser. This is a system of lenses placed below the stage, designed to focus parallel rays of light—daylight—from a much larger area than the surface of the front lens of the objective onto the object being examined, significantly increasing the amount of light entering the objective. Since the condenser focuses parallel rays onto the object, the flat-mirror is always used with the condenser when working with daylight. With artificial light close to the microscope, the concave mirror can be used to make the divergent rays more parallel and thus provide better illumination.
The function of immersion oil is to prevent the dispersion of considerable light that would otherwise occur owing to refraction as the light passes up through the slide and into the air. The accompanying diagram will help to make this clearer (Fig. 137). A ray of light (A B) coming through the slide will be refracted in the direction B C if the medium has a lower refractive index than the slide, as air has, and hence will not enter the objective O. If, however, there is interposed between the objective and the slide a medium which has the same refractive index as the slide, as immersion oil has, then the ray will continue in the same direction (B D) at the point B and hence enter the objective. Evidently the immersion oil causes much more light to enter the front lens and makes the field brighter and at the same time prevents considerable refraction and dispersion of light from the object seen and hence this appears more distinct and sharply defined. The Abbé condenser and the oil-immersion objective are practically always used in the microscopic study of bacteria (Fig. 138).
The purpose of immersion oil is to stop the loss of a significant amount of light that would otherwise happen due to refraction when light passes through the slide and into the air. The diagram provided will help clarify this (Fig. 137). A ray of light (A B) coming through the slide will bend toward B C if the medium has a lower refractive index than the slide, which is the case with air, and will therefore not enter the objective O. However, if there is a medium placed between the objective and the slide that has the same refractive index as the slide, like immersion oil, then the ray will continue in the same direction (B D) at point B and will enter the objective. Clearly, immersion oil allows much more light to reach the front lens, making the field brighter and reducing considerable refraction and light dispersion from the observed object, which makes it appear more distinct and sharply defined. The Abbé condenser and the oil-immersion objective are almost always used in studying bacteria microscopically (Fig. 138).

HANGING DROP SLIDE.
It is sometimes necessary to examine living bacteria and for this purpose the device known as the “hanging drop slide” is used (Fig. 139). The slide has a slight concave depression ground in the middle of one face. A ring of vaseline is placed around this depression with the loop needle. On a clean cover-glass, large enough to fit over the ring of vaseline, several drops of a broth culture, or of material from a solid culture suspended in broth or physiological normal salt solution are placed. The slide is inverted on the cover-glass in such a way that the ring of vaseline seals the latter to the slide. When the whole preparation is quickly turned cover side up, the drops are seen “hanging” to the under side of the cover over the depression in the slide. In examining such a preparation with the microscope great care is necessary in order to focus on the bacteria, without breaking the cover. To see the organisms distinctly the lower iris diaphragm of the condenser must be nearly closed, so that the light coming through consists mainly of parallel vertical rays, otherwise the transparent bacteria themselves refract and diffract the light and appear blurred and indistinct. By studying living bacteria with this device it can be determined whether they are motile or not. The motility should not be confounded with the familiar “Brownian movement” of all minute insoluble inert particles which non-motile living bacteria and also dead bacteria show. The hanging drop slide is of value in the measurement of bacteria, since this is properly done on the living organism. Measurement is done with a calibrated ocular micrometer as in other kinds of measurement with the microscope with which the student is presumably familiar. The direct effect of various agents on living bacteria as light, electricity, heat, etc., in the study of “tropisms” and “taxes” has been investigated on various modifications of the above-described hanging drop slide.
It’s sometimes necessary to look at live bacteria, and for this, we use a device called the "hanging drop slide." The slide has a slight concave dip in the middle of one side. A ring of Vaseline is placed around this dip with a loop needle. On a clean cover glass, large enough to cover the Vaseline ring, several drops of a broth culture or material from a solid culture suspended in broth or physiological normal salt solution are added. The slide is flipped over onto the cover glass so that the Vaseline ring seals the cover to the slide. When the entire setup is quickly turned cover side up, the drops appear to be "hanging" from the underside of the cover over the depression in the slide. When examining this preparation under a microscope, it’s important to focus on the bacteria without breaking the cover. To see the organisms clearly, the lower iris diaphragm of the condenser should be nearly closed, allowing mainly parallel vertical rays of light to pass through; otherwise, the transparent bacteria will bend and scatter the light, making them look blurry and indistinct. Using this device to study live bacteria helps determine whether they are moving. Motility should not be confused with the familiar “Brownian movement” shown by all tiny insoluble inert particles that non-motile living bacteria and dead bacteria also display. The hanging drop slide is useful for measuring bacteria, as this is best done on the living organism. Measurement is done with a calibrated ocular micrometer, just like other types of microscopic measurements that the student is likely familiar with. The direct effects of different agents like light, electricity, heat, etc., on live bacteria, in studies of “tropisms” and “taxes,” have been explored using various modifications of the hanging drop slide described above.

Cell forms and cell groupings may be studied in the same way but these features are best determined on stained preparations in many instances.
Cell shapes and cell clusters can be examined in a similar way, but these characteristics are often best identified on stained slides in many cases.
STAINING.
The main use of the microscope in bacteriology is in the study of stained preparations of the organisms. Staining makes bacteria opaque and hence more easily seen than the transparent unstained forms. Some methods of staining also show morphological structures which are either imperfectly recognized in the unstained cell, spores, or are not visible at all—capsules, metachromatic granules, flagella. Finally certain bacteria are colored by special methods of staining which do not affect others, so that under proper conditions these bacteria may be recognized by staining methods alone—tubercle bacilli in the organs of animals.
The primary use of the microscope in bacteriology is to study stained preparations of the organisms. Staining makes bacteria opaque, making them easier to see compared to the transparent unstained forms. Some staining techniques also reveal morphological structures that are either not clearly seen in unstained cells, spores, or are completely invisible—like capsules, metachromatic granules, and flagella. Lastly, certain bacteria can be colored by specific staining methods that don’t affect others, allowing these bacteria to be identified by staining alone under the right conditions—like tubercle bacilli in animal organs.
The phenomena of staining are essentially chemical, though sometimes the chemical union is a very weak one, even resembling an absorption of the dye rather than true chemical union—most watery stains. In other cases the chemical compounds formed are decidedly stable and are not decomposed even by strong mineral acids—staining of tubercle bacilli and other “acid-fast” organisms. In still other cases the principal action is a precipitation on the surface of the object stained—methods for staining flagella.
The process of staining is mainly chemical, although at times the chemical bond is quite weak, often appearing more like the dye being absorbed than an actual chemical bond—like most watery stains. In other situations, the formed chemical compounds are quite stable and withstand decomposition even by strong mineral acids—such as in the staining of tubercle bacilli and other “acid-fast” organisms. In yet other instances, the main action is a precipitation on the surface of the stained object—like methods used for staining flagella.
In many methods of staining in addition to the dyes used other substances are added to the solution which assist in fixing the dye in or on the organism stained. Such substances are called mordants. The principal mordants used are alkalies, anilin, carbolic acid, iodine, metallic salts, tannic acid.
In many staining methods, additional substances are included in the solution along with the dyes to help fix the dye in or on the stained organism. These substances are called mordants. The main mordants used are alkalies, anilin, carbolic acid, iodine, metallic salts, and tannic acid.
While it is true that some bacteria may be stained by that standard histological nuclear dye, hematoxylin, it is of little value for this purpose. Practically all bacteriological stains are solutions of the anilin dyes. These dyes, as is well known, are of nearly every conceivable color and shade but relatively very few are used in bacteriological work. The beginning student will rarely use solutions of other than the three dyes fuchsin (red), methylene blue and gentian violet for staining bacteria, with occasionally Bismarck brown, or eosin, or safranin as tissue contrast stains.
While it’s true that some bacteria can be stained with the standard histological nuclear dye, hematoxylin, it’s not very useful for that purpose. Almost all bacteriological stains are solutions of the aniline dyes. These dyes, as you probably know, come in almost every color and shade, but relatively very few are used in bacteriological work. Beginner students will mostly use solutions of just three dyes: fuchsin (red), methylene blue, and gentian violet for staining bacteria, with the occasional use of Bismarck brown, eosin, or safranin as tissue contrast stains.
The bacteriological dyes are kept “in stock” as saturated solutions in 95 per cent. alcohol which are never used as stains, but merely for convenience in making the various staining solutions.
The bacteriological dyes are stored as saturated solutions in 95 percent alcohol, which are never used as stains, but are simply for convenience in preparing the different staining solutions.
The approximate percentages of the three common dyes in such solutions are indicated in the following table adapted from Woods Chemical and Microscopical Diagnosis, Third Edition, 1917, Appendix:
The approximate percentages of the three common dyes in these solutions are shown in the following table adapted from Woods Chemical and Microscopical Diagnosis, Third Edition, 1917, Appendix:
Fuchsin | 3.0% |
Gentian Violet | 4.8% |
Methylene Blue | 2.0% |
The stains made from these dyes which are in most common use are the following:
The stains made from these dyes that are most commonly used are the following:
Saturated alcoholic solution of gentian violet | 1 part |
Distilled water | 20 parts |
Mix well and filter. |
Saturated alcoholic solution of gentian violet | 1 part |
Anilin water (see below) | 10 parts |
Mix well and filter. |
Saturated alcoholic solution of fuchsin | 1 part |
Anilin water (see below) | 10 parts |
Mix and filter. |
These stains rarely keep longer than ten days in the laboratory (unless kept in the ice-box) and must be made fresh on the first sign of a deposit on the glass of the container.
These stains usually don’t last more than ten days in the lab (unless stored in the fridge) and need to be made fresh at the first sign of a deposit on the container’s glass.
Saturated alcoholic solution of methylene blue | 3 parts |
Aqueous solution of NaOH (or KOH), 1 to 10,000 | 10 parts |
Mix and filter. |
Saturated alcoholic solution of fuchsin | 1 part |
5 per cent. aqueous solution of carbolic acid | 10 parts |
Mix and filter. |
Dry methylene blue | 4 parts |
Concentrated H2SO4 | 25 parts |
Distilled water | 75 parts |
Dissolve the dry dye in the acid and add the solution to the distilled water and filter. |

Staining solutions are conveniently kept in square dropping bottles inserted in a block as shown in Fig. 140. This form of holder necessitates the use of one hand only in securing the stain and dropping it on the preparation.
Staining solutions are conveniently stored in square dropper bottles placed in a block as shown in Fig. 140. This type of holder allows you to use one hand only to hold the stain and drip it onto the preparation.
Preparation of the “Film.”—The author learned to stain bacteria, on the “cover-glass” but does not recall having used this method in fifteen years and does not teach it to his students. All staining is done on the slide. To prepare a film from a solid culture medium the procedure is as follows:
Preparation of the “Film.”—The author learned how to stain bacteria on the “cover-glass” but doesn't remember using this method in the last fifteen years and doesn’t teach it to his students. All staining is done on the slide. To prepare a film from a solid culture medium, the procedure is as follows:
First, be sure the slide is clean and free from grease. This is accomplished most readily by scouring a few minutes with finely ground pumice stone and a little water, then washing and drying with a grease-free cloth, handkerchief, or piece of cheese-cloth. With the “loop” needle place in the middle of the slide a small loop of water. This is best done by filling the loop by dipping in water, then tapping it gently so that all that remains is the water that just fills the loop level full, and this amount is placed on the slide by touching the flat side of the loop to the glass. Then the straight needle is sterilized, dipped into the culture and just touched once into the small drop of water on the slide. The remainder of the culture on the straight needle is then burned off and the needle is used to spread the drop of water containing the bacteria into a thin even film, which will result, provided the slide is free from grease. This is dried and then “fixed” by passing three times through the Bunsen flame at intervals of about one second, passing through slowly for thick slides and a little more rapidly for thin ones. If the culture is in a liquid medium, the use of the loop of water is unnecessary; a loop of the fluid from the surface, middle or bottom as the culture indicates is spread out to a thin film, dried and fixed.
First, make sure the slide is clean and grease-free. You can easily do this by scrubbing it for a few minutes with finely ground pumice stone and a bit of water, then washing and drying it with a grease-free cloth, handkerchief, or a piece of cheesecloth. Using the “loop” needle, place a small loop of water in the middle of the slide. The best way to do this is by filling the loop by dipping it in water, then tapping it gently so that only enough water to fill the loop remains, and apply this amount to the slide by touching the flat side of the loop to the glass. Next, the straight needle should be sterilized, dipped into the culture, and then just touched once to the small drop of water on the slide. The extra culture on the straight needle is then burned off, and the needle is used to spread the drop of water containing the bacteria into a thin, even film, assuming the slide is free from grease. This is dried and then “fixed” by passing it through the Bunsen flame three times, with intervals of about one second, moving slowly for thicker slides and a bit more quickly for thinner ones. If the culture is in a liquid medium, you don’t need the loop of water; just take a loop of the fluid from the surface, middle, or bottom, as the culture indicates, spread it into a thin film, dry it, and fix it.
After the film is fixed the stain desired is dropped on, allowed to act for the proper time, which will depend on the stain and the preparation, washed in water, dried thoroughly and examined with the oil-immersion lens, without a cover. If it is desired to preserve the preparation it may then be mounted in balsam. This is not necessary, as they keep just as well, provided the immersion oil is removed. To do this, fold a piece of filter paper so that at least three thicknesses result. Lay this on the slide and press firmly several times, when the surplus oil will be taken up by the paper. Slides not mounted in balsam are more apt to become dusty than those that are. This is the only disadvantage.
After the film is processed, the desired stain is applied, allowed to work for the appropriate amount of time, which will vary based on the stain and the preparation. It is then washed in water, thoroughly dried, and examined using an oil-immersion lens, without a cover. If you want to keep the preparation, it can then be mounted in balsam. This step isn't necessary because they can be stored just as well, as long as the immersion oil is removed. To do this, fold a piece of filter paper so that there are at least three layers. Place this on the slide and press down firmly several times, which will soak up the excess oil. Slides not mounted in balsam are more likely to get dusty than those that are. This is the only downside.
Gram’s Method of Staining.—It has been ascertained that some bacteria contain a substance, possibly a protein, which forms a compound with gentian violet and iodine, which compound is insoluble in alcohol, and other bacteria do not contain this substance. Consequently when bacteria are stained by Gram’s method (given below), those that contain this chemical remain colored, while if it is not present the dye is washed out by the alcohol and the bacteria are colorless and may be stained by a contrast stain. The bacteria which stain by this method are said to “take Gram’s” or to be “Gram-positive,” while those that decolorize are called “Gram-negative.” The method is:
Gram’s Method of Staining.—It has been found that some bacteria have a substance, possibly a protein, that forms a compound with gentian violet and iodine. This compound is insoluble in alcohol, while other bacteria do not have this substance. As a result, when bacteria are stained using Gram’s method (described below), those that contain this chemical remain colored, while those that don’t have it lose the dye when exposed to alcohol and become colorless, allowing them to be stained with a contrasting dye. The bacteria that retain the stain through this method are referred to as “Gram-positive,” while those that lose the stain are called “Gram-negative.” The method is:
- 1. Prepare the film as above given.
- 2. Stain with fresh anilin gentian violet 1 minute.
- 3. Wash in tap water.
- 4. Cover with Gram’s solution 1 minute.
- 5. Wash in tap water.
- 6. Wash with 95 per cent. alcohol three times or until no more color comes out.
- 7. Dry and examine.
Gram’s solution is:
Gram's solution is:
I | 1 part |
KI | 2 parts |
H2O | 300 parts |
This method is excellent for differentiating Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms on the same slide. First stain by this method and after washing with alcohol stain with a counter-stain, carbol-fuchsin diluted ten to fifteen times with water is excellent. The Gram-positive bacteria are violet and the Gram-negative are red.
This method is great for distinguishing between Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms on the same slide. First, stain using this method, then wash with alcohol and apply a counter-stain. A carbol-fuchsin solution diluted ten to fifteen times with water works well. The Gram-positive bacteria appear violet, while the Gram-negative ones turn red.
It is also of great value in staining Gram-positive bacteria in tissues, but the sections should be stained about five minutes in the anilin gentian violet and be left about two minutes in the Gram’s solution. Sections are to be counter-stained in Bismarck brown, dilute eosin or safranin solutions and cleared in oil of bergamot, lavender or origanum and not in clove oil or carbol-xylol, as these latter dissolve out the dye from the bacteria.
It’s also really useful for staining Gram-positive bacteria in tissues, but the sections should be stained for about five minutes in aniline gentian violet and should sit for about two minutes in Gram’s solution. The sections need to be counter-stained in Bismarck brown, dilute eosin, or safranin solutions and cleared in bergamot oil, lavender oil, or oregano oil, and not in clove oil or carbol-xylol, as these will wash out the dye from the bacteria.
Staining of Spores in the Rod.—Prepare the films as usual. Cover with carbol-fuchsin, using plenty of stain so that it will not dry on the slide; heat until vapor arises, not to boiling; cool until the stain becomes cloudy and heat again until the stain clears, and repeat once more; wash in tap water and then wash in 1 per cent. H2SO4 three times, dropping on plenty of acid, tilting and running this over the slide three times and then pour off and use fresh acid and repeat this once. Wash thoroughly in distilled water, then stain with Löffler’s blue one to three minutes. Wash, dry and examine. The spores should be bright red in a blue rod.
Staining of Spores in the Rod.—Prepare the slides as usual. Cover with carbol-fuchsin, using enough stain so it doesn’t dry on the slide; heat until vapor starts to rise, but don’t let it boil; cool until the stain turns cloudy and heat again until it clears, and repeat this once more. Rinse in tap water and then wash with 1 percent H2SO4 three times, applying plenty of acid, tilting and allowing it to run over the slide three times, then pour off and use fresh acid and repeat this once. Rinse thoroughly in distilled water, then stain with Löffler’s blue for one to three minutes. Rinse, dry, and examine. The spores should appear bright red in a blue rod.
This method will give good results if care is taken to secure cultures of the right age. If the culture is too old the spores will all be free outside the rods, while if too young they will decolorize with the acid. For Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus anthracis, cultures on agar slants forty-eight hours in the 37° incubator are just right. For the spores of Clostridium tetani, the culture should be three days old, but may be as old as a week.
This method will yield good results if you ensure the cultures are at the right age. If the culture is too old, the spores will all be free outside the rods, while if it’s too young, they will lose their color with the acid. For Bacillus subtilis and Bacillus anthracis, cultures on agar slants that are forty-eight hours old in the 37° incubator are just right. For the spores of Clostridium tetani, the culture should be three days old, but it can be up to a week old.
Staining of “Acid-fast” Bacilli.—Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Mycobacterium of Johne’s disease, “grass” and “butter bacilli,” Mycobacterium lepræ, Mycobacterium smegmatis.
Staining of “Acid-fast” Bacilli.—Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Mycobacterium of Johne’s disease, “grass” and “butter bacilli,” Mycobacterium leprae, Mycobacterium smegmatis.
- 1. Prepare the film as usual.
- 2. Stain with carbol-fuchsin as given above for spores.
- 3. Wash with tap water.
- 4. Decolorize and stain at the same time with Gabbet’s blue, two or three minutes.
- 5. Wash, dry and examine.
The sulphuric acid in Gabbet’s blue removes the carbol-fuchsin from everything except the “acid-fast” bacteria, which remain red, and the blue stains the decolorized bacteria and nuclei of any tissue cells present.
The sulfuric acid in Gabbet’s blue takes the carbol-fuchsin out of everything except the “acid-fast” bacteria, which stay red, while the blue stains the decolorized bacteria and the nuclei of any tissue cells present.
- 1, 2, 3, as in Gabbet’s method.
- 4. Decolorize with 10 per cent. HCl until washing with water shows only a faint pink color left on slide.
- 5. Wash thoroughly.
- 6. Stain with Löffler’s blue one or two minutes.
- 7. Wash, dry and examine.
The results are the same as with Gabbet’s method.
The results are the same as with Gabbet's method.
Staining of Capsules.—Räbiger’s Method.—Films of the organism to show capsules should be freshly prepared, dried but not fixed. Material is usually obtained from milk or blood. A drop of the fluid is placed on the middle of a slide about one-fourth of the distance from one end. The narrow edge of another clean slide is placed in this drop and then drawn lengthwise across the slide with firm pressure. This gives a thin layer which is necessary if good results are to be expected. The preparation is covered with a freshly prepared saturated solution of gentian violet in formalin and this allowed to stain for 30 seconds. Then wash lightly, dry and examine. The organisms appear deeply violet and much larger than with ordinary stains and capsules are well stained and show well.
Staining of Capsules.—Räbiger’s Method.—Films of the organism to show capsules should be freshly prepared, dried but not fixed. Material is usually obtained from milk or blood. A drop of the fluid is placed in the center of a slide about one-fourth of the way from one end. The narrow edge of another clean slide is placed in this drop and then drawn lengthwise across the slide with firm pressure. This creates a thin layer, which is necessary for good results. The preparation is covered with a freshly prepared saturated solution of gentian violet in formalin and left to stain for 30 seconds. Then wash lightly, dry, and examine. The organisms appear deeply violet and much larger than with ordinary stains, and the capsules are well stained and clearly visible.
Welch’s Method.—Prepare films as in the above method. Cover with glacial acetic acid for 10 to 20 seconds. Wash off the acid with carbol-fuchsin. Wash the stain off with physiological normal salt solution (0.85 per cent.) until all surplus stain is removed. Dry and examine. Capsules and bacteria are red.
Welch’s Method.—Prepare films the same way as in the previous method. Cover with glacial acetic acid for 10 to 20 seconds. Rinse off the acid with carbol-fuchsin. Wash the stain away with physiological normal salt solution (0.85 percent) until all excess stain is removed. Dry and examine. Capsules and bacteria will appear red.
Staining of Flagella.—The rendering of flagella visible is considered one of the most difficult processes in staining. Experience of a number of years during which whole classes numbering from one hundred to three hundred students accomplish this result shows that it is no more difficult than many other staining processes. The essentials are: (1) clean slides, (2) young cultures on agar slopes, (3) freshly prepared mordant and stain which are kept free from precipitate, (4) gentle heating. The author’s students are furnished only stock materials and make their own cultures, mordants and stains.
Staining of Flagella.—Making flagella visible is considered one of the toughest processes in staining. Years of experience with large classes of one hundred to three hundred students achieving this result show that it’s no more difficult than many other staining processes. The essentials are: (1) clean slides, (2) young cultures on agar slopes, (3) freshly prepared mordant and stain that are free from precipitate, (4) gentle heating. The author’s students are provided only with stock materials and create their own cultures, mordants, and stains.
The slides are cleaned with pumice in the usual way. An agar slope culture of the organism to be stained from six to twenty-four hours old is selected. A bit of the culture is removed and placed in a watch-glass of water. The bacteria are allowed to diffuse of themselves without stirring. After several minutes a loop of this water is removed and three streaks are made across the slide, one in the middle and one on each side of this about one-quarter of an inch from it. This gives well scattered bacteria in one of the three streaks at least and very little other material on the slide to cause precipitates. The slide is carefully dried and fixed and then covered with an abundance of the mordant by filtering through a small filter onto the slide so that the mordant shows transparent on the slide. The preparation is then gently warmed and cooled three times, adding mordant if necessary. Do not heat to steaming. After mordanting for about five minutes the excess is washed off under the tap. It is a good plan to hold the slide level and allow the water to run into the center of the mordant and flow it off. Inclining the slide is apt to cause the film on the surface of the mordant to settle down on the slide and spoil the preparation. After the mordant is washed off and all traces of it removed with a clean cloth if necessary the stain is applied and gently heated and cooled the same way for from three to five minutes. The preparation is then washed, dried and examined.
The slides are cleaned with pumice as usual. A culture of the organism to be stained, aged between six and twenty-four hours, is selected. A small amount of the culture is taken and placed in a watch glass filled with water. The bacteria are allowed to diffuse on their own without stirring. After several minutes, a loop of this water is removed, and three streaks are made across the slide: one in the center and one on each side about a quarter of an inch away from it. This method ensures that at least one of the three streaks has well-scattered bacteria and minimal other material on the slide to avoid precipitation. The slide is then carefully dried and fixed, and a generous amount of mordant is applied by filtering it through a small filter paper onto the slide so that the mordant appears transparent. The preparation is then gently warmed and cooled three times, adding more mordant if needed. Do not heat to steaming. After about five minutes of mordanting, the excess is washed off under running water. It's best to hold the slide level and let the water flow into the center of the mordant and wash it away. Tilting the slide may cause the film of the mordant to settle onto the slide and ruin the preparation. Once the mordant is washed off, and any remnants are removed with a clean cloth if necessary, the stain is applied and gently heated and cooled in the same manner for three to five minutes. The preparation is then washed, dried, and examined.
The mordant used is a modification of Löffler’s which is somewhat simpler in preparation since the stock solution of FeCl3 is more permanent than FeSO4 solution.
The mordant used is a modified version of Löffler's that is a bit easier to prepare since the stock solution of FeCl3 lasts longer than the FeSO4 solution.
Mordant sufficient for one student:
Mordant enough for one student:
5 per cent. solution of FeCl3 | 20.0 cc |
25 per cent. solution of tannic acid | 20.0 cc |
Anilin fuchsin | 4.0 cc |
Normal NaOH | 1.5 cc |
The solution of FeCl3 is made up in the cold and must be perfectly clear. The tannic acid solution must be thoroughly boiled and filtered until clear. The iron and the acid are carefully mixed, boiled and filtered clear. The anilin fuchsin must be added slowly with constant stirring and the mixture boiled and filtered. The NaOH is added in the same way and this mixture boiled and filtered. The final mordant should not leave a film on a clean slide when poured on and allowed to run off. Unless the mordant is in this condition and perfectly clear, it should not be used, but a new one must be made up. Time and care in the preparation of the mordant are essential.
The solution of FeCl3 should be prepared cold and must be completely clear. The tannic acid solution must be boiled and filtered until it's clear. The iron and the acid need to be mixed carefully, boiled, and filtered until clear. Aniline fuchsin must be added slowly while constantly stirring, followed by boiling and filtering the mixture. NaOH should be added in the same way, with the mixture boiled and filtered again. The final mordant should not leave a film on a clean slide when poured and allowed to run off. If the mordant isn't in this condition and perfectly clear, it should not be used, and a new one must be prepared. Taking time and care in making the mordant is crucial.
The stain to follow this mordant is anilin fuchsin.
The stain that follows this mordant is aniline fuchsin.
Staining of Metachromatic Granules.—Neisser’s Method. Prepare the film in the usual way. Stain with Neisser’s stain a few seconds only. Wash and stain with Bismarck brown a few seconds only.
Staining of Metachromatic Granules.—Neisser’s Method. Prepare the film as you normally would. Stain it with Neisser’s stain for just a few seconds. Rinse and then stain with Bismarck brown for only a few seconds.
Sat. alcoholic solution of methylene blue | 1.0 part |
Glacial acetic acid | 2.5 parts |
Distilled water | 50.0 parts |
Bismarck brown (dry dye) | 2 parts |
Distilled Water | 1000 parts |
By the use of the hanging drop slide and the methods of staining just described all the various morphological features of the bacterial cell may be ascertained.
By using the hanging drop slide and the staining methods just mentioned, all the different morphological features of the bacterial cell can be determined.
It is necessary when cell groupings as characteristic of definite modes of division are to be determined to make slides from a liquid culture, as broth. Place a drop of the material, preferably from the bottom of the tube in most instances, from the top in case a pellicle or scum is formed on the surface, on the slide and allow this to dry without spreading it out, fix, wash gently with water, then stain lightly with Löffler’s blue. Such slides also show characteristic cell forms as well. Slides should be made from solid media to show variations in form and size and involution forms. These latter are especially apt to occur on potato media.
It’s necessary to create slides from a liquid culture, like broth, to identify the cell groupings that are typical of specific types of division. Place a drop of the material, preferably from the bottom of the tube in most cases, or from the top if a film or scum has formed on the surface, on the slide and let it dry without spreading it out, then fix it, gently wash with water, and lightly stain with Löffler’s blue. These slides will also display characteristic cell forms. Additionally, slides should be prepared from solid media to demonstrate variations in form and size, including involution forms, which are often seen on potato media.
CHAPTER XX.
STUDY OF THE PHYSIOLOGY OF BACTERIA.
Of the environmental conditions influencing the growth of bacteria the following are the chief ones ordinarily determined:
Of the environmental conditions affecting the growth of bacteria, the following are the main ones typically identified:
A. Temperature.—The optimum temperature for growth is usually about the temperature of the natural environment and ordinarily one determines merely whether the organism grows at body temperature (37°) and at room temperature (20°) or not. For exact work the maximum, minimum and optimum temperature must be ascertained by growing in “incubators” with varying temperatures.
A. Temperature.—The ideal temperature for growth is typically around the temperature of the natural environment. Usually, we just check if the organism grows at body temperature (37°) and at room temperature (20°) or not. For more precise work, we need to find out the maximum, minimum, and optimal temperatures by growing them in "incubators" set to different temperatures.
A bacteriological incubator is an apparatus for growing bacteria at a constant temperature. This may be any temperature within the limits for bacterial growth. If temperatures above that of an ordinary room are desired, some source of artificial heat is needed. Electricity, gas or oil may be used. A necessary adjunct is some device for maintaining the temperature constant, a “thermoregulator” or “thermostat.” For lower temperatures a cooling arrangement must be installed. For the great part of bacteriological work only two temperatures are used, 20° so-called “room temperature” (this applies to European “rooms” not to American) and 37° or body temperature. Incubators for 37° of almost any size and style desired may be secured from supply houses and need not be further described. Figs. 141 and 142 illustrate some of the types.
A bacteriological incubator is a device used to grow bacteria at a steady temperature. This can be any temperature within the range suitable for bacterial growth. If higher temperatures than a typical room are needed, a source of artificial heat is required. Electricity, gas, or oil can be used. An essential component is a device for keeping the temperature stable, known as a “thermoregulator” or “thermostat.” For lower temperatures, a cooling system must be set up. In most bacteriological work, only two temperatures are commonly used: 20°—referred to as “room temperature” (this applies to European “rooms,” not American)—and 37° or body temperature. Incubators for 37° in various sizes and styles can be purchased from supply stores and don’t need further description. Figs. 141 and 142 illustrate some of the types.
For use with large classes “incubator rooms” are to be preferred. The author has one such room for 37° work with 200 compartments for student use which did not cost over $60 to install.
For larger classes, "incubator rooms" are recommended. The author has one room set to 37° with 200 compartments for student use, and it cost no more than $60 to set up.


The styles of incubators for lower temperatures, 20° and below, are not so numerous nor so satisfactory. The author has constructed a device which answers every purpose for a small class. The diagram, Fig. 143, explains it.
The designs of incubators for cooler temperatures, 20° and below, are limited and not very effective. The author has created a device that meets all needs for a small group. The diagram, Fig. 143, illustrates this.

The thermal death-point is determined by exposing the organisms in thin tubes of broth at varying temperatures for ten-minute periods and then plating out to determine growth. The effect of heat may also be determined by exposing at a given temperature, e.g., 60°, for varying lengths of time and plating out.
The thermal death point is figured out by placing the organisms in thin tubes of broth at different temperatures for ten-minute intervals and then plating them to see if they grow. The impact of heat can also be assessed by exposing them to a specific temperature, like 60°, for different lengths of time and then plating.
B. Oxygen relations—whether the organism is aërobic, anaërobic, or facultative is determined by inoculation in gelatin or agar puncture or stab cultures and noting whether the most abundant growth is at the top, the bottom or all along the line of inoculation.
B. Oxygen relationships—whether the organism is aerobic, anaerobic, or facultative—are determined by inoculating gelatin or agar puncture or stab cultures and observing whether the most abundant growth is at the top, the bottom, or all along the line of inoculation.
C. Reaction of the medium—acid, alkaline or neutral as influencing the rate and amount of growth.
C. The reaction of the medium—acidic, alkaline, or neutral—affecting the rate and amount of growth.
D. The kind of medium on which the organism grows best.
D. The type of medium in which the organism thrives best.
E. The effect of injurious chemicals, as various disinfectants, on the growth.
E. The impact of harmful chemicals, like different disinfectants, on growth.
F. Osmotic pressure conditions, though modifying decidedly the growth of bacteria, are not usually studied as aids in their recognition, nor are the effects of various forms of energy, such as light, electricity, x-rays, etc.
F. Osmotic pressure conditions, while significantly affecting bacterial growth, aren't typically examined as tools for their identification, nor are the impacts of different energy forms like light, electricity, x-rays, and so on.
Among the “Physiological Activities” discussed in Chapters IX–XII those which, in addition to the staining reactions described, are of most use in the identification of non-pathogenic bacteria are the first ten listed below. For pathogenic bacteria the entire thirteen are needed.
Among the “Physiological Activities” discussed in Chapters IX–XII, the ones that are most helpful in identifying non-pathogenic bacteria, in addition to the staining reactions described, are the first ten listed below. For pathogenic bacteria, all thirteen are necessary.
1. Liquefaction of gelatin.
Melting of gelatin.
2. Digestion of blood serum.
Blood serum digestion.
3. Coagulation and digestion of milk.
3. Coagulation and digestion of milk.
4. Acid or gaseous fermentation in milk, or both.
4. Acid or gas fermentation in milk, or both.
5. Acid or gaseous fermentation of various carbohydrates in carbohydrate broth, or both.
5. Acid or gas fermentation of different carbohydrates in carbohydrate broth, or both.
6. Production of indol in “indol solution.”
6. Production of indole in "indole solution."
7. Production of pigments on various media.
7. Making pigments on different materials.
8. Reduction of nitrates to nitrites, ammonia, or free nitrogen.
8. Reducing nitrates to nitrites, ammonia, or free nitrogen.
9. Production of enzymes as illustrated in the above activities.
9. Production of enzymes as shown in the activities above.
10. Appearance of growth on different culture media.
10. Growth appearance on various culture media.
11. Production of free toxins as determined by injection of animals with broth cultures filtered free from bacteria.
11. Production of free toxins as determined by injecting animals with broth cultures that have been filtered to remove bacteria.
12. Causation of disease as ascertained by the injection of animals with the bacteria themselves, and recovery of the organism from the animals.
12. The cause of disease determined by injecting animals with the bacteria and recovering the organism from those animals.
13. Formation of specific antibodies as determined by the proper injection of animals with the organism or its products and the subsequent testing of the blood serum of the inoculated animals.
13. The creation of specific antibodies is determined by properly injecting animals with the organism or its products and then testing the blood serum of those inoculated animals.
The first nine activities are determined by inoculating the different culture media already described and observing the phenomena indicated, making chemical tests where necessary.
The first nine activities involve inoculating the various culture media mentioned earlier and observing the indicated phenomena, performing chemical tests as needed.
APPEARANCE OF GROWTH ON DIFFERENT CULTURE MEDIA.
In addition to those changes that are associated with the manifestation of different physiological activities, many bacteria, show characteristic appearances on the various culture media which are of value in their identification.
In addition to the changes that occur with different physiological activities, many bacteria display distinct appearances on various culture media, which are useful for their identification.
Too much stress should not be laid on these appearances alone, however, since slight variations, particularly in solid media due especially to the age of the medium, may change decidedly the appearance of a colony. This is true of variations in the amount of moisture on agar plates. Colonies which are ordinarily round and regular may assume very diverse shapes, if there chance to be an excess of moisture on the surface.
Too much emphasis shouldn't be placed on these appearances alone, as small changes, especially in solid media due to the medium's age, can significantly alter the appearance of a colony. This applies to variations in moisture levels on agar plates. Colonies that are usually round and uniform can take on very different shapes if there's an excess of moisture on the surface.
Also in slope and puncture cultures on the various solid media much variation results from the amount of material on the inoculation needle and just how the puncture is made, or the needle drawn over the slope. These variations are largely prevented by the use of standard media and by inoculating by standard methods. The Laboratory Committee of the American Public Health Association has proposed standard methods for all culture media and tests and for methods of inoculation, and these have been generally adopted in this country for comparative work.
Also, in slope and puncture cultures on different solid media, a lot of variation comes from the amount of material on the inoculation needle and the technique used to make the puncture or drag the needle across the slope. These variations are mostly avoided by using standard media and inoculating with standard methods. The Laboratory Committee of the American Public Health Association has suggested standard methods for all culture media and tests, as well as for inoculation techniques, and these have been widely adopted in this country for comparative work.
Likewise the Society of American Bacteriologists has at different times (1904, 1914, 1917) adopted “descriptive charts” for detailing all the characteristics of a given organism. A committee is at present working on a revision of the 1917 chart to be presented at the 1920 meeting. One of the earlier charts which includes a glossary of descriptive terms is inserted in this chapter.
Likewise, the Society of American Bacteriologists has, at different times (1904, 1914, 1917), adopted “descriptive charts” to detail all the characteristics of a specific organism. A committee is currently working on a revision of the 1917 chart to be presented at the 1920 meeting. One of the earlier charts that includes a glossary of descriptive terms is inserted in this chapter.




In broth cultures the presence or absence of growth on the surface and the amount of the same. Whether the broth is rendered cloudy or remains clear, and whether there is a deposit at the bottom or not (Fig. 144). An abundant surface growth with little or nothing below indicates a strict aërobe, while a growth or deposit at bottom and a clear or nearly clear medium above, an anaërobe. These appearances are for the first few days only of growth. If the broth is disturbed, or after the culture stands for several days many surface growths tend to sink to the bottom. So an actively motile organism causes in general a cloudiness, especially if the organism is a facultative anaërobe, which tends to clear up by precipitation after several days when the organisms lose their motility. Non-motile facultative anaërobes usually cloud the broth also, but settle out more rapidly than the motile ones.
In broth cultures, you look for the presence or absence of growth on the surface and how much there is. You check if the broth has become cloudy or stayed clear, and whether there's any sediment at the bottom or not (Fig. 144). A lot of surface growth with little or no growth below indicates a strict aerobe, while growth or sediment at the bottom with a clear or almost clear liquid above indicates an anaerobe. These observations are only relevant for the first few days of growth. If the broth is disturbed, or after the culture sits for several days, many surface growths will tend to sink to the bottom. Generally, an actively motile organism causes cloudiness, especially if it's a facultative anaerobe, which tends to clear up due to sedimentation after several days when the organisms lose their mobility. Non-motile facultative anaerobes usually also cloud the broth but settle out more quickly than the motile ones.
In gelatin and agar punctures the oxygen relationship is shown by surface growth for aërobes, growth near the bottom of the puncture for anaërobes, and a fairly uniform growth all along the line of inoculation for facultative anaërobes. In the case of these last organisms, a preference for more or less oxygen is indicated by the approach to the aërobic or anaërobic type of growth.
In gelatin and agar punctures, the oxygen relationship is demonstrated by surface growth for aerobes, growth near the bottom of the puncture for anaerobes, and fairly uniform growth along the inoculation line for facultative anaerobes. For these last organisms, a preference for more or less oxygen is shown by their tendency to grow more like aerobic or anaerobic types.




Fig. 149.—Funnelform liquefaction of gelatin. × ½.
Fig. 150.—Saccate liquefaction of gelatin. × ½.
Fig. 151.—Stratiform liquefaction of gelatin. × ½.
Along the line of puncture the commonest types are filiform (Fig. 145), which indicates a uniform growth; beaded (Fig. 146), or small separate colonies; villous (Fig. 147), delicate lateral outgrowths which do not branch; arborescent, tree-like growths branching laterally from the line. In agar these branchings are usually short and stubby, or technically, papillate.
Along the line of puncture, the most common types are filiform (Fig. 145), indicating a uniform growth; beaded (Fig. 146), or small separate colonies; villous (Fig. 147), delicate lateral outgrowths that do not branch; arborescent, tree-like growths that branch laterally from the line. In agar, these branchings are usually short and stubby, or technically, papillate.



Further, in the gelatin puncture the liquefaction which occurs is frequently characteristic. It may be crateriform (Fig. 148), a shallow saucer at the surface; or funnel-shaped (Fig. 149); or it may be of uniform width all along the puncture, i.e., saccate (Fig. 150); or it may be stratiform, (Fig. 151), i.e., the liquefaction extends to the sides of the tube and proceeds uniformly downward.
Furthermore, in the gelatin puncture, the liquefaction that occurs is often distinctive. It can be crater-shaped (Fig. 148), a shallow bowl at the surface; or funnel-shaped (Fig. 149); or it might be of consistent width throughout the puncture, i.e., saccate (Fig. 150); or it can be layered (Fig. 151), i.e., the liquefaction spreads to the sides of the tube and moves uniformly downward.




Fig. 156.—Rhizoid slope culture. × ½.
Fig. 157.—Rugose slope culture. × ½.
Fig. 158.—Verrucose slope culture. × ½.
On agar, potato and blood serum slope tubes the amount of growth, its form and elevation, the character of the surface, and the consistency should be carefully noted, and in some few cases the character of the edge. Figures 152 to 158 show some of the commoner types.
On agar, potato, and blood serum slope tubes, you should carefully observe the amount of growth, its shape and height, the texture of the surface, and the consistency, as well as, in a few cases, the characteristics of the edges. Figures 152 to 158 illustrate some of the more common types.









On agar and gelatin plates made so that the colonies are well isolated, the form of the latter, the rate of their growth, the character of the edge and of the surface, the elevation and the internal structure as determined by a low-power lens are often of almost diagnostic value. Also in the case of the gelatin plates, the character of the liquefaction is important. Figs. 159 to 167 show some of the commoner characteristics to be noted.
On agar and gelatin plates designed for clear separation of colonies, the shape of the colonies, their growth speed, the type of edges and surfaces, their height, and the internal structure observed with a low-power lens can often provide significant diagnostic information. Additionally, with gelatin plates, the nature of the liquefaction is crucial. Figs. 159 to 167 showcase some of the more common characteristics to be aware of.




Colonies of mold frequently appear on plates. These are readily differentiated from bacterial colonies after a little experience. With the naked eye usually the fine radiations of the edge of the colony are apparent. The surface appears duller and by reflected light more or less “fuzzy.” With the low-power objective the relatively large, branching threads of the mold (mycelia) show distinctly. Also the large fruiting bodies (sporangia) are easily distinguished. Figs. 168 to 171 illustrate a common black mold (Rhizopus nigricans).
Colonies of mold often show up on plates. With a bit of experience, they can be easily told apart from bacterial colonies. To the naked eye, you can usually see the fine, radiating edges of the colony. The surface looks duller and appears somewhat “fuzzy” when viewed with reflected light. Using the low-power objective, you can clearly see the relatively large, branching threads of the mold (mycelia). The large fruiting bodies (sporangia) are also easily identifiable. Figs. 168 to 171 illustrate a common black mold (Rhizopus nigricans).
CHAPTER XXI.
ANIMAL INOCULATION.
Animal inoculation has been referred to (1) as a method of assisting in the preparation of pure cultures of pathogenic organisms; (2) as a means of testing the poisonous properties of substances produced in bacterial cultures; (3) in order to test the ability of an organism to cause a disease; (4) for the production of various antibodies; it may be added (5) that some bacteria produce in the smaller experimental animals lesions which do not occur in animals naturally infected, but which nevertheless are characteristic for the given organism. The best illustration is the testicular reaction of young male guinea-pigs to intraperitoneal injections of glanders bacilli. Experimental animals are also inoculated (6) to test the potency of various bacterial and other biological products, as toxins, antitoxins, etc.
Animal inoculation has been described (1) as a method for helping to prepare pure cultures of disease-causing organisms; (2) as a way to test the toxic properties of substances produced in bacterial cultures; (3) to evaluate an organism's ability to cause disease; (4) for producing various antibodies; it can also be noted (5) that some bacteria create lesions in smaller lab animals that don’t appear in animals that are infected naturally, yet these lesions are still characteristic of the specific organism. A prime example is the testicular response of young male guinea pigs to intraperitoneal injections of glanders bacteria. Experimental animals are also inoculated (6) to assess the effectiveness of various bacterial and other biological products, like toxins and antitoxins.
Guinea-pigs are the most widely used experimental animals because they are easily kept and are susceptible to so many diseases on artificial inoculation. Rabbits are used very largely also, as are white mice. For special purposes white rats, pigeons, goats and swine are necessary. For commercial products horses (antitoxins) and cattle (smallpox vaccine) are employed. In the study of many human diseases the higher monkeys and even the anthropoid apes are necessary, since none of the lower animals are susceptible.
Guinea pigs are the most commonly used experimental animals because they are easy to care for and are vulnerable to many diseases when artificially inoculated. Rabbits are also widely used, along with white mice. For specific needs, white rats, pigeons, goats, and pigs are essential. In the production of certain commercial products, horses (for antitoxins) and cattle (for smallpox vaccine) are utilized. When studying many human diseases, the higher primates and even anthropoid apes are needed, as none of the lower animals are susceptible.
The commonest method of animal inoculation is undoubtedly the subcutaneous. This is accomplished most readily with the hypodermic needle. The skin at the point selected (usually in guinea-pigs the lateral posterior half of the abdominal surface, in mice the back near the root of the tail) is pinched up to avoid entering the muscles and the needle quickly inserted. Clipping the hairs and washing with an antiseptic solution should precede the inoculation as routine practice. Frequently a small “skin pocket” is all that is needed. The hair is clipped off, the skin pinched up with small forceps and a slight snip with sharp scissors is made. The material may be inserted into this pocket with a heavy platinum needle. Cutaneous inoculation is made by shaving the skin and rubbing the material onto the shaved surface or scratching with a scalpel or special scarifier, but without drawing blood, and then rubbing in the material to be inoculated.
The most common method of animal inoculation is definitely subcutaneous. This is easiest to do with a hypodermic needle. The skin at the chosen spot (usually the lateral posterior half of the abdominal surface in guinea pigs, and the back near the base of the tail in mice) is pinched up to avoid hitting the muscles, and the needle is quickly inserted. Clipping the fur and cleaning the area with an antiseptic solution should be standard procedure before inoculation. Often, a small “skin pocket” is all that’s necessary. The hair is clipped away, the skin is pinched up with small forceps, and a slight cut is made with sharp scissors _. The material can be inserted into this pocket using a heavy platinum needle. Cutaneous inoculation involves shaving the skin and rubbing the material onto the shaved area or lightly scratching with a scalpel or specialized scarifier, but without drawing blood, and then rubbing in the material to be inoculated.
Intravenous injections are made with larger animals. In rabbits the posterior external auricular is a convenient vein. In larger animals the external jugular is used.
Intravenous injections are done with larger animals. In rabbits, the back of the ear is a convenient vein. In larger animals, the external jugular vein is used.
Intraperitoneal, -thoracic, -cardiac, -ocular, -muscular injections, and injections into the parenchyma of internal organs are accomplished with the hypodermic needle. In the case of the first two, injury to contained organs should be carefully avoided. Intracardiac injection, or aspiration of the heart to secure blood, requires considerable practice to be successful without causing the death of the animal at once through internal hemorrhage. In subdural injections into the cranial cavity it is necessary to trephine the skull first, while such injections into the spinal canal may be accomplished between the vertebra with needles longer and stronger than the usual hypodermic needle. Occasionally animals are caused to inhale the organisms, or are fed cultures mixed with the feed.
Intraperitoneal, -thoracic, -cardiac, -ocular, -muscular injections, and injections into the tissue of internal organs are done with a hypodermic needle. With the first two types, it's crucial to avoid injuring any contained organs. Intracardiac injection, or drawing blood from the heart, requires a lot of practice to do successfully without instantly causing the animal to die from internal bleeding. For subdural injections into the skull, you need to drill a hole in the skull first, while such injections into the spinal canal can be done between the vertebrae using needles that are longer and stronger than a typical hypodermic needle. Sometimes, animals are made to inhale the organisms or are fed cultures mixed with their food.
SECURING AND TRANSPORTING MATERIAL FROM ANIMALS FOR BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION.
If the site of the lesion is readily accessible from the exterior, material from the living animal should be collected with sterile instruments and kept in sterile utensils until the necessary tests can be made. Testing should be done on material as soon after collection as possible, in all cases, to avoid the effects of “decomposition” bacteria.
If the location of the lesion is easy to reach from the outside, you should collect samples from the living animal using sterile tools and store them in sterile containers until the required tests can be performed. Testing should be conducted on the samples as soon as possible after collection to prevent the impact of “decomposition” bacteria.
If the blood is to be investigated it may be aspirated from a peripheral vein with a sterile hypodermic syringe of appropriate size or allowed to flow through a sterile canula into sterile receptacles. The site of the puncture should be shaved and disinfected before the instrument is introduced.
If blood needs to be tested, it can be drawn from a peripheral vein using a sterile syringe of the right size or allowed to flow through a sterile cannula into clean containers. The area where the puncture will be made should be shaved and disinfected before the needle is inserted.
Discharges of whatever kind should likewise be collected in sterile receptacles and examined as soon as may be.
Discharges of any kind should also be collected in sterile containers and examined as soon as possible.
If internal organs are to be examined it is best to kill a moribund animal than to wait for death, since after death, and in severe infections even sometimes before, the tissues are rapidly invaded by saprophytic bacteria from the alimentary and respiratory tracts which complicate greatly the isolation of the specific organism. Hence the search for specific bacteria in carcasses or organs several hours after death is frequently negative. Animal inoculation with such material is very often followed by sepsis or septicemia in a few hours, so that the specific organism has no opportunity to manifest itself.
If you need to examine internal organs, it's better to euthanize a dying animal than to wait for it to die naturally. After death, and sometimes even before it, severe infections can cause tissues to be quickly invaded by decay-causing bacteria from the digestive and respiratory systems, which makes it much harder to isolate the specific organism. As a result, searching for specific bacteria in carcasses or organs several hours post-mortem often yields negative results. Inoculating animals with such material frequently leads to sepsis or septicemia within a few hours, preventing the specific organism from having a chance to show itself.
In securing material for cultures from internal organs it is a good plan to burn the surface of the organ with a gas or alcohol flame, or to sear it with a hot instrument to kill surface organisms, then make the incision or puncture through the burned area and secure material from the interior of the organ. Such punctures made with a stiff platinum needle frequently give pure cultures of the organism sought. Slides may be made from such material and culture media inoculated at once.
In gathering samples for cultures from internal organs, it's a good idea to burn the surface of the organ with a gas or alcohol flame, or to sear it with a hot tool to eliminate surface organisms. After that, make the incision or puncture through the burned area and get samples from inside the organ. Using a stiff platinum needle for these punctures often results in pure cultures of the desired organism. You can prepare slides from this material and inoculate culture media right away.
Since a bacteriological diagnosis depends most commonly on growing the organisms, it is evident that material sent for examination must never be treated with an antiseptic or preservative. If decomposition is to be feared the only safe procedure is to pack the material in ice and forward in this way.
Since a bacterial diagnosis usually relies on growing the organisms, it's clear that any samples sent for examination must never be treated with an antiseptic or preservative. If there's a risk of spoilage, the best option is to pack the samples in ice and send them this way.
Tuberculous material from the parenchyma of internal organs may be forwarded in a preservative (not formalin, since this makes it very difficult to stain the bacteria) as in this special case a very positive diagnosis may be made by staining alone. Even here it is better to pack in ice in order that the diagnosis by staining may be confirmed by inoculating the living organisms into guinea-pigs.
Tuberculous material from the tissue of internal organs can be sent in a preservative (not formalin, since this makes it very difficult to stain the bacteria) as in this specific case, a definite diagnosis can be made by staining alone. Even here, it’s better to pack it in ice so that the diagnosis by staining can be confirmed by inoculating the living organisms into guinea pigs.
In the case of material from a rabid animal and many protozoal diseases the rule against preservatives is not absolute, since staining is a reliable diagnostic means. Even in these cases it is often desirable to inoculate animals, hence, as before stated, it is best to make it a uniform practice to pack material for examination in ice and use no preservatives.
In cases involving material from a rabid animal and various protozoal diseases, the rule against using preservatives isn't strict, as staining serves as an effective diagnostic tool. Even in these situations, it's often preferable to inoculate animals, so as mentioned earlier, it's best to consistently pack material for examination in ice and avoid preservatives.
PART IV.
GENERAL PATHOGENIC BACTERIOLOGY.
CHAPTER XXII.
INTRODUCTION.
Pathogenic Bacteriology treats of the unicellular microörganisms which are responsible for disease conditions, i.e., pathological changes in other organisms. Hence not only are bacteria considered, but also other low vegetable forms, as yeasts and molds, likewise protozoa in so far as they may be pathogenic. For this reason the term pathogenic “Microbiology” has been introduced to include all these organisms. It is largely for the reason that the methods devised for the study of bacteria have been applied to the investigation of other microörganisms that the term “bacteriology” was extended to cover the entire field. The general discussion in this chapter is intended to include, therefore, microörganisms of whatever kind pathogenic to animals.
Pathogenic Bacteriology deals with the single-celled microorganisms that cause diseases, i.e., harmful changes in other organisms. Therefore, the focus is not just on bacteria but also includes other simple forms of life like yeasts and molds, as well as protozoa, as long as they can cause disease. Because of this, the term pathogenic “Microbiology” has been introduced to encompass all these organisms. The reason the techniques developed for studying bacteria have also been applied to investigating other microorganisms is why the term “bacteriology” has come to represent the entire field. The general discussion in this chapter aims to include all microorganisms that are pathogenic to animals, regardless of their type.
The term pathogenic as applied to an organism must be understood in a purely relative sense, since there is no single organism that can cause disease in all of a certain class, but each is limited to a more or less narrow range. Some form of tuberculosis attacks nearly all vertebrates, but no other classes of animals and no plants. Lockjaw or tetanus attacks most mammals, but not any other vertebrates naturally. Typhoid fever affects human beings; hog cholera, swine, etc. This point is more fully discussed in Chapter XXIII but can not be too greatly insisted upon.
The term "pathogenic" when referring to an organism should be understood in a purely relative way, because no single organism can cause disease in every member of a certain class; instead, each organism is limited to a somewhat narrow range. For example, some forms of tuberculosis can affect nearly all vertebrates, but no other classes of animals or plants. Lockjaw, or tetanus, affects most mammals, but not any other vertebrates naturally. Typhoid fever impacts human beings, while hog cholera affects swine, and so on. This topic is discussed in more detail in Chapter XXIII, but it's important to emphasize this point.
“The greatest enemy to mankind is man.”
“Humanity's greatest enemy is humanity itself.”
Exceptions to this statement do occur and are important and must be considered in efforts to protect completely human beings from disease (tuberculosis from cattle, glanders from horses, poisoning from spoiled canned goods, anthrax from hair, hides, wool, of animals dead of the disease), but the most common human diseases are derived from other human beings directly or indirectly.
Exceptions to this statement do happen and are significant and must be taken into account in efforts to fully protect human beings from disease (like tuberculosis from cattle, glanders from horses, poisoning from spoiled canned goods, and anthrax from the hair, hides, or wool of animals that died from the disease), but the majority of common human diseases come from other human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Diseases which are due to unicellular pathogenic microörganisms are called infectious diseases, while if such diseases are transmitted under natural conditions from organism to organism they are spoken of as contagious diseases. Most infectious diseases are contagious but not all. Tetanus is a good illustration of a non-contagious infectious disease. There are very few such diseases.
Diseases caused by single-celled harmful microorganisms are called infectious diseases. If these diseases spread naturally from one organism to another, they're referred to as contagious diseases. Most infectious diseases are contagious, but not all of them are. Tetanus is a good example of a non-contagious infectious disease. There are very few such diseases.
When a unicellular microörganism gains entrance into the body and brings about any pathological changes there, the result is an infection. Undoubtedly many pathogenic organisms get into the body but never manifest their presence by causing disease conditions, hence do not cause an infection. It is the pathological conditions which result that constitute the infection, and not the mere invasion.
When a single-celled microorganism enters the body and causes any harmful changes, it leads to an infection. Many harmful organisms do enter the body but never show their presence by causing disease, so they do not result in an infection. It is the harmful conditions that arise that make up the infection, not just the simple invasion.
The time that elapses between the entrance of the organism and the appearance of symptoms is called the period of incubation and varies greatly in different diseases.
The time that passes between the entry of the organism and the onset of symptoms is called the period of incubation and varies significantly across different diseases.
The term infestation is used to denote pathological conditions due to multicellular parasites. Thus an animal is infested (not infected) with tapeworms, roundworms, lice, mites, etc. Many of these conditions, probably all, are contagious, i.e., transmissable naturally from animal to animal. The word contagious has been used in a variety of ways to mean communicated by direct contact, communicated by a living something (contagium) that might be carried to a distance and finally communicable in any manner, transmissable. The agency of transmission may be very roundabout—as through a special tick in Texas fever, a mosquito in malaria, etc.,—or by direct personal contact, as generally in venereal diseases. After all, though exactness is necessary, it is better to learn all possible about the means of transmission of diseases, than quibble as to the terms to be used.
The term infestation refers to health issues caused by multicellular parasites. So, an animal is infested (not infected) with tapeworms, roundworms, lice, mites, and so on. Many of these conditions, probably all, are contagious, i.e., naturally passed from one animal to another. The word contagious has been used in different ways to mean communicated by direct contact, communicated by a living organism (contagium) that might be transported over a distance, and finally communicable in any way, transmissible. The way transmission happens can be indirect—like through a special tick in Texas fever, a mosquito in malaria, etc.—or through direct personal contact, as is generally the case with venereal diseases. Ultimately, while precise language is important, it's better to understand everything possible about the means of transmission of diseases than to argue over terminology.
An infectious disease may be acute or chronic. An acute infection is one which runs for a relatively short time and is “self-limited,” so-called, i.e., the organisms cease to manifest their presence after a time. In some acute infections the time is very short—German measles usually runs five or six days. Typhoid fever may continue eight to ten weeks, sometimes longer, yet it is an acute infectious disease. It is not so much the time as the fact of self-limitation that characterizes acute infections.
An infectious disease can be acute or chronic. An acute infection lasts for a relatively short period of time and is considered “self-limited,” meaning that the organisms stop showing their presence after a while. In some acute infections, this duration is very brief—German measles typically lasts five to six days. Typhoid fever may persist for eight to ten weeks, sometimes even longer, yet it is still classified as an acute infectious disease. It’s not so much the duration but the characteristic of self-limitation that defines acute infections.
In chronic infections there is little or no evidence of limitation of the progress of the disease which may continue for years. Tuberculosis is usually chronic. Leprosy in man is practically always so. Glanders in horses is most commonly chronic; in mules and in man it is more apt to be acute.
In chronic infections, there's little to no sign of slowing down the disease's progress, which can continue for years. Tuberculosis is usually chronic. Leprosy in humans is almost always chronic. Glanders in horses is most commonly chronic; in mules and humans, it's more likely to be acute.
Many infections begin acutely and later change to the chronic type. Syphilis in man is a good illustration.
Many infections start suddenly and later develop into chronic forms. Syphilis in men is a good example.
The differences between acute and chronic infections are partly due to the nature of the organism, partly to the number of organisms introduced and the point of their introduction and partly to the resistance of the animal infected.
The differences between acute and chronic infections are partly due to the type of organism, partly to the number of organisms introduced and where they entered, and partly to the resistance of the infected animal.
An infectious disease is said to be specific when one kind of organism is responsible for its manifestations—as diphtheria due to the Corynebacterium diphtheriæ, lockjaw due to Clostridium tetani, Texas fever due to the Piroplasma bigeminum, etc. It is non-specific when it may be due to a variety of organisms, as enteritis (generally), bronchopneumonia, wound infections.
An infectious disease is called specific when a single type of organism causes its symptoms—like diphtheria caused by the Corynebacterium diphtheriæ, lockjaw caused by Clostridium tetani, and Texas fever caused by the Piroplasma bigeminum, and so on. It is non-specific when it can be caused by multiple organisms, such as enteritis (in general), bronchopneumonia, and wound infections.
Henle, as early as 1840, stated certain principles that must be established before a given organism can be accepted as the cause of a specific disease. These were afterward restated by Koch, and have come to be known as “Koch’s postulates.” They may be stated as follows:
Henle, as early as 1840, outlined certain principles that must be set before an organism can be recognized as the cause of a specific disease. These were later reiterated by Koch and have come to be known as “Koch’s postulates.” They can be summarized as follows:
1. The given organism must be found in all cases of the disease in question.
1. The organism in question must be present in every case of the disease.
2. No other organism must be found in all cases.
2. No other organism should be present in any situation.
3. The organism must, when obtained in pure culture, reproduce the disease in susceptible animals.
3. The organism must, when obtained in pure culture, recreate the disease in animals that are susceptible.
4. It must be recovered from such animals in pure culture and this culture likewise reproduce the disease.
4. It must be obtained from such animals in pure culture, and this culture must also reproduce the disease.
These postulates have not been fully met with reference to any disease, but the principles embodied have been applied as far as possible in all those infections which we recognize as specific, and whose causative agent is accepted. In many diseases recognized as infectious and contagious no organism has been found which is regarded as the specific cause. In some of these the organism appears to be too small to be seen with the highest powers of the microscope, hence they are called “ultramicroscopic” organisms. Because these agents pass through the finest bacterial filters, they are also frequently called “filterable.” The term “virus” or “filterable virus” is likewise applied to these “ultramicroscopic” and “filterable” agents.
These principles haven't been completely fulfilled regarding any disease, but they have been applied as much as possible in all the infections we identify as specific and whose causes are accepted. In many diseases considered infectious and contagious, no organism has been found that is seen as the specific cause. In some cases, the organism seems to be too small to be visible even under the strongest microscopes, which is why they are called “ultramicroscopic” organisms. Since these agents can pass through the finest bacterial filters, they are often referred to as “filterable.” The term “virus” or “filterable virus” is also used for these “ultramicroscopic” and “filterable” agents.
The term primary infection is sometimes applied to the first manifestation of a disease, either specific or non-specific, while secondary refers to later developments. For example, a secondary general infection may follow a primary wound infection, or primary lung tuberculosis be followed by secondary generalized tuberculosis, or primary typhoid fever by a secondary typhoid pneumonia. The terms primary and secondary are also used where the body is invaded by one kind of an organism and later on by another kind; thus a primary measles may be followed by secondary infection of the middle ear, or a primary influenza may be followed by a secondary pneumonia, or a primary scarlet fever by a secondary nephritis (inflammation of the kidney). Where several organisms seem to be associated simultaneously in causing the condition then the term mixed infection is used—in severe diphtheria, streptococci are commonly associated with the Corynebacterium diphtheriæ. In many cases of hog-cholera, mixed infections in the lungs and in the intestines are common. Wound infections are usually mixed. Auto-infection refers to those conditions in which an organism commonly present in or on the body in a latent or harmless condition gives rise to an infectious process. If the Bacterium coli normal to the intestine escapes into the peritoneal cavity, or passes into the bladder, a severe peritonitis or cystitis, respectively, is apt to result. “Boils” and “pimples” are frequently autoinfections. Such infections are also spoken of as endogenous to distinguish them from those due to the entrance of organisms from without—exogenous infections. Relapses are usually instances of autoinfection.
The term primary infection is sometimes used to describe the first appearance of a disease, whether it's specific or non-specific, while secondary refers to later developments. For example, a secondary general infection may occur after a primary wound infection, or primary lung tuberculosis may be followed by secondary generalized tuberculosis, or primary typhoid fever may lead to secondary typhoid pneumonia. The terms primary and secondary are also used when the body is invaded by one type of organism and later by another; for example, a primary measles infection may be followed by secondary infection of the middle ear, or a primary influenza may lead to a secondary pneumonia, or a primary scarlet fever may lead to a secondary nephritis (inflammation of the kidney). When several organisms seem to be involved at the same time in causing the condition, the term mixed infection is used—in severe diphtheria, streptococci are commonly found alongside the Corynebacterium diphtheriæ. In many cases of hog cholera, mixed infections in the lungs and intestines are common. Wound infections are usually mixed. Auto-infection refers to situations where an organism that is normally present in or on the body in a latent or harmless state leads to an infectious process. If the Bacterium coli that is normal in the intestine escapes into the peritoneal cavity or moves into the bladder, severe peritonitis or cystitis, respectively, is likely to occur. “Boils” and “pimples” are often examples of autoinfections. These infections are also referred to as endogenous to differentiate them from those caused by organisms entering from outside—exogenous infections. Relapses are typically instances of autoinfection.
Those types of secondary infection where the infecting agent is transferred from one disease focus to another or several other points and sets up the infection there are sometimes called metastases. Such are the transfer of tubercle bacilli from lung to intestine, spleen, etc., the formation of abscesses in internal organs following a primary surface abscess, the appearance of glanders nodules throughout various organs following pulmonary glanders, etc.
Those types of secondary infection where the infecting agent spreads from one site of disease to another or multiple other locations, establishing the infection there, are sometimes referred to as metastases. Examples include the transfer of tubercle bacilli from the lungs to the intestines, spleen, etc., the development of abscesses in internal organs after an initial surface abscess, and the emergence of glanders nodules in various organs following pulmonary glanders, etc.
The characteristic of a pathogenic microörganism which indicates its ability to cause disease is called its virulence. If slightly virulent, the effect is slight; if highly virulent, the effect is severe, and may be fatal.
The feature of a disease-causing microorganism that shows its ability to cause illness is known as its virulence. If it's only slightly virulent, the impact is mild; if it's highly virulent, the impact is serious and can potentially be deadly.
On the other hand, the characteristic of the host which indicates its capacity for infection is called susceptibility. If slightly susceptible, infection is slight, if highly susceptible, the infection is severe.
On the other hand, the feature of the host that shows its ability to be infected is called susceptibility. If it’s somewhat susceptible, the infection is mild; if it’s highly susceptible, the infection is severe.
Evidently the degree of infection is dependent in large measure on the relation between the virulence of the invading organism and the susceptibility of the host. High virulence and great susceptibility mean a severe infection; low virulence and little susceptibility a slight infection; while high virulence and little susceptibility or low virulence and great susceptibility might mean a moderate infection varying in either direction. Other factors influencing the degree of infection are the number of organisms introduced, the point where they are introduced and various conditions. These will be discussed in another connection (Chapter XXV).
Evidently, the level of infection largely depends on the relationship between the virulence of the invading organism and the susceptibility of the host. High virulence and high susceptibility result in a severe infection; low virulence and low susceptibility lead to a mild infection; while high virulence with low susceptibility or low virulence with high susceptibility could result in a moderate infection that varies in either direction. Other factors that affect the level of infection include the number of organisms introduced, the location of their introduction, and various conditions. These factors will be discussed further in another section (Chapter XXV).
The study of pathogenic bacteriology includes the thorough study of the individual organisms according to the methods already given (Chapters XVIII–XXI) as an aid to diagnosis and subsequent treatment, bacteriological or other, in a given disease. Of far greater importance than the treatment, which in most infectious diseases is not specific, is the prevention and ultimate eradication of all infectious diseases. To accomplish these objects involves further a study of the conditions under which pathogenic organisms exist outside the body, the paths of entrance into and elimination from the body and those agencies within the body itself which make it less susceptible to infection or overcome the infective agent after its introduction. That condition of the body itself which prevents any manifestation of a virulent pathogenic organism after it has been once introduced is spoken of as immunity in the modern sense. Immunity is thus the opposite of susceptibility and may exist in varying degrees.
The study of pathogenic bacteriology involves a detailed examination of individual organisms based on the methods already mentioned (Chapters XVIII–XXI) to help with diagnosis and subsequent treatment, whether bacteriological or otherwise, for a specific disease. More important than the treatment, which is usually not specific in most infectious diseases, is the prevention and ultimate elimination of all infectious diseases. Achieving these goals requires further research into the conditions under which pathogenic organisms survive outside the body, the ways they enter and leave the body, and those factors within the body itself that make it less vulnerable to infection or that combat the infectious agent after it has entered. The state of the body that prevents any signs of a harmful pathogenic organism after it has been introduced is referred to as immunity in modern terms. Immunity is thus the opposite of susceptibility and can exist in different levels.
That scientists are and have been for some years in possession of sufficient knowledge to permit of the prevention and eradication of most, if not all, of our infectious diseases can scarcely be questioned. The practical application of this knowledge presents many difficulties, the chief of which is the absence of a public sufficiently enlightened to permit the expenditure of the necessary funds. Time and educative effort alone can surmount this difficulty. It will probably be years yet, but it will certainly be accomplished.
That scientists have had enough knowledge for several years to prevent and eliminate most, if not all, of our infectious diseases is hardly in doubt. The real challenge in applying this knowledge is the lack of an informed public willing to support the necessary funding. Only time and educational efforts can overcome this hurdle. It will likely take years, but it will definitely happen.
CHAPTER XXIII.
PATHOGENIC BACTERIA OUTSIDE THE BODY.
Pathogenic bacteria may exist outside the body of the host under a variety of conditions as follows:
Pathogenic bacteria can survive outside the host's body under different conditions as follows:
- I. In or on inanimate objects or material.
- (a) As true saprophytes.
- (b) As facultative saprophytes.
- (c) Though obligate parasites, they exist in a latent state.
- II. In or on other animals, or products from them:
- A. Susceptible to the disease.
- (a) Sick themselves.
(As far as human beings are concerned these are
mainly:
- 1. Other human beings for most diseases.
- 2. Rats for plague.
- 3. Dogs for rabies.
- 4. Horses for glanders.
- 5. Cattle, swine, parrots for tuberculosis).
- (b) Recovered from illness.
- (c) Never sick but “carriers.”
- (a) Sick themselves.
(As far as human beings are concerned these are
mainly:
- B. Not susceptible.
- (d) Accidental carriers.
- (e) Serving as necessary intermediate hosts for certain stages of the parasite—this applies to protozoal diseases only, as yet.
- A. Susceptible to the disease.
I.
(a) The bacilli of tetanus, malignant edema and the organisms of “gas gangrene” are widely distributed. There is no evidence that their entrance into the body is at all necessary for the continuation of their life processes, or that one case of either of these diseases ever has any connection with any other case; they are true saprophytes. Manifestly it would be futile to attempt to prevent or eradicate such diseases by attacking the organism in its natural habitat. Clostridium botulinum, which causes a type of food poisoning in man, does not even multiply in the body, but the disease symptoms are due to a soluble toxin which is produced during its growth outside the body.
(a) The bacilli that cause tetanus, malignant edema, and the organisms responsible for “gas gangrene” are found everywhere. There’s no proof that their entry into the body is necessary for them to survive, nor is there any indication that one case of these diseases is connected to another; they are true saprophytes. Clearly, trying to prevent or eliminate such diseases by attacking the organisms in their natural environment would be pointless. Clostridium botulinum, which leads to a type of food poisoning in humans, doesn’t even reproduce in the body. The symptoms of the disease are caused by a soluble toxin produced during its growth outside the body.
(b) Organisms like the bacterium of anthrax and the bacillus of black-leg from their local occurrence seem to be distributed from animals infected, though capable of a saprophytic existence outside the body for years. These can no more be attacked during their saprophytic existence than those just mentioned. Doubtless in warm seasons of the year and in the tropics other organisms pathogenic to animals may live and multiply in water or in damp soil where conditions are favorable, just as the cholera organism in India, and occasionally the typhoid bacillus in temperate climates do.
(b) Organisms like the anthrax bacterium and the black-leg bacillus appear to spread from infected animals, but they can survive outside a host for years. They cannot be affected during this saprophytic phase any more than the previously mentioned organisms. Certainly, in warm seasons and tropical areas, other harmful organisms that affect animals can thrive and multiply in water or moist soil under suitable conditions, similar to how the cholera bacterium operates in India and sometimes the typhoid bacillus does in temperate climates.
(c) Most pathogenic organisms, however, when they are thrown off from the bodies of animals, remain quiescent, do not multiply, in fact always tend to die out from lack of all that is implied in a “favorable environment,” food, moisture, temperature, light, etc. Disinfection is sometimes effective in this class of diseases in preventing new cases.
(c) Most harmful organisms, however, when they are expelled from animals, stay inactive, don’t multiply, and actually tend to die off due to a lack of what constitutes a “favorable environment,” such as food, moisture, temperature, light, etc. Disinfection can sometimes be effective in this category of diseases in preventing new cases.
II. A.
(a) The most common infectious diseases of animals are transmitted more or less directly from other animals of the same species. Human beings get nearly all their diseases from other human beings who are sick; horses, from other horses; cattle, from other cattle; swine, from swine, etc. Occasionally transmission from one species to another occurs. Tuberculosis of swine most frequently results from feeding them milk of tuberculous cattle or from their eating the droppings of such cattle. Human beings occasionally contract anthrax from wool, hair and hides of animals dead of the disease or from postmortems on such animals; glanders from horses; tuberculosis (in children) from tuberculous milk; bubonic plague from rats; rabies practically always from the bites of dogs and other rabid animals, etc. The mode of limiting this class of diseases is evidently to isolate the sick, disinfect their discharges and their immediate surroundings, sterilize such products as must be handled or used, kill lower animals that are dangerous, and disinfect, bury properly, or destroy their carcasses.
(a) The most common infectious diseases in animals are transmitted directly from other animals of the same species. Humans get almost all their diseases from other sick humans; horses, from other horses; cattle, from other cattle; pigs, from pigs, etc. Occasionally, diseases can spread from one species to another. Swine tuberculosis usually results from feeding them milk from infected cattle or from them eating the droppings of such cattle. Humans can sometimes get anthrax from the wool, hair, and hides of animals that died from the disease or from performing autopsies on these animals; glanders from horses; tuberculosis (in children) from infected milk; bubonic plague from rats; rabies almost always from the bites of dogs and other rabid animals, etc. The way to control this type of disease is clearly to isolate the sick, disinfect their waste and immediate surroundings, sterilize any products that need to be handled or used, cull dangerous animals, and properly disinfect, bury, or destroy their carcasses.
Classes of the sick that are especially dangerous for the spread of disease are the mild cases and the undetected cases. These individuals do not come under observation and hence not under control.
Classes of sick individuals that pose a particular risk for spreading disease include mild cases and those that go undetected. These people aren’t monitored and, therefore, aren’t under control.
(b) This class of carriers offers a difficult problem in the prevention of infectious diseases since they may continue to give off the organisms indefinitely and thus infect others. Typhoid carriers have been known to do so for fifty-five years. Cholera, diphtheria, meningitis and other carriers are well known in human practice. Carriers among animals have not been so frequently demonstrated, but there is every reason for thinking that hog-cholera, distemper, roup, influenza and other carriers are common. Carriers furnish the explanation for many of the so-called “spontaneous” outbreaks of disease among men and animals.
(b) This group of carriers presents a challenging issue in preventing infectious diseases because they can continue to spread the organisms indefinitely, potentially infecting others. Typhoid carriers have been known to do so for fifty-five years. Carriers of cholera, diphtheria, meningitis, and other diseases are well recognized in human health. While carriers in animals haven't been as frequently identified, there’s every reason to believe that hog cholera, distemper, roup, influenza, and other carriers are common. Carriers provide the explanation for many of the so-called “spontaneous” outbreaks of disease in both humans and animals.
It is the general rule that those who are sick cease to carry the organisms on recovery and it is the occasional ones who do not that are the exceptions. In those diseases in which the organism is known it can be determined by examination of the patient or his discharges how long he continues to give off the causative agent. In those in which the cause is unknown (in human beings, the commonest and most easily transmitted diseases, scarlet fever, measles, German measles, mumps, chicken-pox, small-pox, influenza), no such check is possible. It is not known how long such individuals remain carriers. Hence isolation and quarantine of such convalescents is based partly on experience and partly on theory. It is highly probable that in the diseases just mentioned transmission occurs in the early stages only, except in small-pox and chicken-pox where the organism seems to be in the pustules and transmission by means of material from these is possible, though only by direct contact with it.
It’s generally understood that people who are sick stop being carriers of the germs once they recover, and it's the rare cases where this isn’t true that are the exceptions. For diseases where the germ is identified, we can find out through an examination of the patient or their bodily fluids how long they continue to spread the germ. However, for diseases where the cause is unknown (like common and easily spread illnesses such as scarlet fever, measles, German measles, mumps, chickenpox, smallpox, and influenza), we can't track this. We don’t know how long these individuals remain carriers. Therefore, the isolation and quarantine of such recovering patients are based partly on what we’ve learned from experience and partly on theories. It's very likely that for the diseases mentioned, transmission happens mostly in the early stages only, except for smallpox and chickenpox, where the germ appears to be present in the blisters, and transmission is possible through direct contact with these materials.
(c) Another class of carriers is those who have never had the disease. Such individuals are common and are very dangerous sources of infection. Many of them have associated with the sick or with convalescents and these should always be suspected of harboring the organisms. Their control differs in no way from that of class (b). Unfortunately a history of such association is too often not available. Modern transportation and modern social habits are largely responsible for the nearly universal distribution of this type of carrier. Their detection is probably the largest single problem in the prevention of infectious diseases. A partial solution would be universal bacteriological examination. In our present stage of progress this is impossible and would not detect carriers of diseases of unknown cause.
(c) Another type of carrier is those who have never had the disease. These individuals are common and pose a significant risk of infection. Many of them have been around the sick or those recovering, and they should always be suspected of carrying the organisms. Their control is no different from that of class (b). Unfortunately, a history of such contact is often unavailable. Modern transportation and social habits are largely responsible for the widespread presence of this type of carrier. Detecting them is probably the biggest challenge in preventing infectious diseases. A partial solution would be universal bacteriological testing. However, at our current level of progress, this is not feasible and would not identify carriers of diseases with unknown causes.
The various classes of carriers just discussed are in a large part responsible for the continued presence of the commoner diseases throughout the country. The difficulties in control have been mentioned. A complete solution of the problem is not yet obtained. The army experience of the past few years in the control of infectious diseases shows what may be done.
The different types of carriers we've talked about largely contribute to the ongoing presence of common diseases across the country. We've discussed the challenges in controlling them. A complete solution to the problem hasn't been achieved yet. The army's experience over the past few years in managing infectious diseases illustrates what can be accomplished.
There is another class of carriers which might be called the “universal carrier,” i.e., there are certain organisms which seem to be constantly or almost constantly present in or on the human body. These are micrococci, streptococci and pneumococci, all Gram positive organisms. They are ordinarily harmless parasites, but on occasion may give rise to serious, even fatal, infection. Infected wounds, pimples, boils, “common colds,” most “sore throats,” bronchitis, pneumonia are pathological conditions that come in this class. Such infections are usually autogenous. There is a constant interchange of these organisms among individuals closely associated, so that all of a group usually harbor the same type though no one individual can be called the carrier. Whenever, for any reason, the resistance of an individual (see Chaps. XXV et seq.) is lowered either locally or generally some of these organisms are liable to gain a foothold and cause infection. It sometimes happens that a strain of dangerous organisms may be developed in an individual in this way which is passed around to others with its virulence increased and thus cause an epidemic. Or, since all of the group are living under the same conditions the resistance of all or many of them may be lowered from the same general cause and an epidemic result from the organism common to all (pneumonia after measles, scarlet fever and influenza in camps). Protection of the individual is chiefly a personal question, i.e., by keeping up the “normal healthy tone” in all possible ways: The use of protective vaccines (Chap. XXX) appears to be advisable in such instances (colds, pneumonia after measles and influenza, inflammation of throat and middle ear following scarlet fever and measles). Results obtained in this country during the recent influenza epidemic have been conflicting but on the whole appear to show that preventive vaccination against pneumonia liable to follow should be practiced.
There is another group of carriers that could be called the “universal carrier,” meaning there are certain organisms that seem to be constantly or almost constantly found in or on the human body. These are micrococci, streptococci, and pneumococci, all Gram-positive organisms. They are usually harmless parasites, but sometimes they can lead to serious, even fatal, infections. Infected wounds, pimples, boils, common colds, most sore throats, bronchitis, and pneumonia are all conditions that fall into this category. Such infections usually originate from within the individual. There is a constant exchange of these organisms among people who are closely associated, so typically, everyone in a group carries the same type, even though no single person can be labeled the carrier. Whenever the resistance of an individual is lowered for any reason, either locally or generally, these organisms can take hold and cause an infection. Sometimes a strain of harmful organisms can develop in someone this way, which can then spread to others with greater virulence, leading to an epidemic. Additionally, since everyone in the group shares the same environment, the overall resistance of many of them may decrease due to the same underlying cause, resulting in an outbreak from the organism common to all (like pneumonia following measles, scarlet fever, and influenza in camps). Protecting the individual is primarily a personal matter, meaning it involves maintaining the “normal healthy tone” in all possible ways. The use of protective vaccines appears to be advisable in such cases (like colds, pneumonia after measles and influenza, and throat and middle ear inflammation after scarlet fever and measles). Results from this country during the recent influenza epidemic have been mixed but generally suggest that preventive vaccination against pneumonia that could follow should be encouraged.
It would seem that among groups of individuals where infection may be expected the proper procedure would be to prepare autogenous vaccines (Chapter XXX) from members of the group and vaccinate all with the object of protecting them.
It seems that in groups of people where infection is likely, the right approach would be to create autogenous vaccines (Chapter XXX) from members of that group and vaccinate everyone to protect them.
II. B.
(d) In this class come the “accidental carriers” like flies, fleas, lice, bed-bugs, ticks, and other biting and blood-sucking insects, vultures, buzzards, foxes, rats, and carrion-eating animals generally; pet animals in the household, etc. Here the animals are not susceptible to the given disease but become contaminated with the organisms and then through defilement of the food or drink or contact with individuals or with utensils pass the organisms on to the susceptible. Some biting and blood-sucking insects transmit the organisms through biting infected and non-infected animals successively. The spirilloses and trypanosomiases seem to be transmitted in this way, though there is evidence accumulating which may place these diseases in the next class. Anthrax is considered in some instances to be transmitted by flies and by vultures in the southern United States. Transmission of typhoid, dysentery, cholera and other diseases by flies is well established in man. Why not hog-cholera from farm to farm by flies, English sparrows, pigeons feeding, or by turkey buzzards? Though this would not be easy to prove, it seems reasonable.
(d) In this category are the "accidental carriers" like flies, fleas, lice, bedbugs, ticks, and other biting and blood-sucking insects, as well as vultures, buzzards, foxes, rats, and generally any scavenging animals; including pets in the household, etc. In this case, the animals don’t get the disease themselves but can carry the organisms. They can then spread these organisms by contaminating food or drinks or through contact with people or utensils, passing it on to those who are susceptible. Some biting and blood-sucking insects can transmit the organisms by biting both infected and non-infected animals in succession. Spirilloses and trypanosomiases are thought to be spread this way, although evidence is growing that might classify these diseases differently. Anthrax is sometimes thought to be spread by flies and vultures in the southern United States. The transmission of typhoid, dysentery, cholera, and other diseases by flies in humans is well documented. So why wouldn’t hog cholera be spread from farm to farm by flies, English sparrows, feeding pigeons, or turkey buzzards? While it wouldn’t be easy to prove, it does seem reasonable.
Preventing contact of such animals with the discharges or with the carcasses of those dead of the disease, destruction of insect carriers, screening and prevention of fly breeding are obvious protective measures.
Preventing contact between these animals and the waste or carcasses of those that have died from the disease, destroying insect carriers, and controlling fly breeding are clear protective measures.
(e) In this class come certain diseases for which particular insects are necessary for the parasite in question, so that certain stages in its life history may be passed therein. The surest means for eradicating such diseases is the destruction of the insects concerned. Up to the present no bacterial disease is known in which this condition exists, unless Rocky Mountain spotted fever and typhus fever shall prove to be due to bacteria. Such diseases are all due to protozoa. Among them are Texas fever, due to Piroplasma bigeminum in this country which has been eradicated in entire districts by destruction of the cattle tick (Margaropus annulatus).
(e) In this category, there are certain diseases that rely on specific insects for the parasite to thrive, allowing certain stages of its life cycle to be completed within them. The most effective way to eliminate these diseases is to get rid of the insects involved. So far, there’s no known bacterial disease that fits this description, unless Rocky Mountain spotted fever and typhus fever turn out to be caused by bacteria. All these diseases are caused by protozoa. For example, Texas fever, caused by Piroplasma bigeminum, has been completely eliminated in certain areas by destroying the cattle tick (Margaropus annulatus).
Piroplasmoses in South Africa among cattle and horses, and in other countries are transmitted in similar ways. Probably many of the diseases due to spirochetes and trypanosomes are likewise transmitted by necessary insect intermediaries. In human medicine the eradication of yellow fever from Panama and Cuba is due to successful warfare against, a certain mosquito (Stegomyia). So the freeing of large areas in different parts of the world from malaria follows the destruction of the mosquitoes. The prevention of typhus fever and of trench fever by “delousing” methods is familiar from recent army experience though for typhus this method has been practiced in Russia for more than ten years to the author’s personal knowledge. The campaign against disease in animals and man from insect sources must be considered as still in its infancy. The full utilization of tropical lands depends largely on the solution of this problem.
Piroplasmosis in South Africa among cattle and horses, as well as in other countries, is transmitted in similar ways. Many diseases caused by spirochetes and trypanosomes are likely also spread by necessary insect intermediaries. In human medicine, the eradication of yellow fever from Panama and Cuba is due to successful efforts against a specific mosquito (Stegomyia). Similarly, large areas around the world have been cleared of malaria by eliminating mosquitoes. The prevention of typhus and trench fever through "delousing" methods is well-known from recent military experience, although for typhus, this method has been used in Russia for over ten years, as far as the author knows. The fight against diseases in both animals and humans that come from insect sources must still be considered in its early stages. The full use of tropical lands largely depends on finding a solution to this issue.
CHAPTER XXIV.
PATHS OF ENTRANCE OF PATHOGENIC
ORGANISMS,
OR
CHANNELS OF INFECTION.
A. The Skin.—If the skin is healthy there is no opportunity for bacteria to penetrate it. It is protected not only by the stratified epithelium, but also in various animals, by coats of hair, wool, feathers, etc. The secretion pressure of the healthy sweat and oil glands acts as an effective bar even to motile bacteria. Nevertheless a very slight injury only is sufficient to give normal surface parasites and other pathogenics, accidentally or purposely brought in contact with it, an opportunity for more rapid growth and even entrance for general infection. Certain diseases due to higher fungi are characteristically “skin diseases” and rarely become general—various forms of favus, trichophyton infections, etc. A few disease organisms, tetanus, malignant edema, usually get in through the skin; others, black-leg, anthrax, quite commonly; and those diseases transmitted by biting and blood-sucking insects, piroplasmoses, trypanosomiases, spirilloses, scarcely in any other way. Defective secretion in the skin glands from other causes, may permit lodgment and growth of bacteria in them or in the hair follicles. “Pimples” and boils in man and local abscesses occasionally in animals are illustrations. Sharp-edged and freely bleeding wounds are less liable to be infected than contusions, ragged wounds, burns, etc. The flowing blood washes out the wound and the clotting seals it, while there is less material to be repaired by the leukocytes and they are free to care for invading organisms (phagocytosis). Pathogenic organisms, especially pus cocci, frequently gain lodgment in the milk glands and cause local (mastitis) or general infection.
A. The Skin.—When the skin is healthy, it prevents bacteria from getting through. It's protected not just by layers of skin cells, but also by hair, wool, feathers, and other coverings in different animals. The natural moisture from sweat and oil glands serves as an effective barrier even against moving bacteria. However, even a small injury can give normal surface germs and other pathogens, whether accidentally or intentionally introduced, a chance to multiply quickly and possibly cause widespread infection. Certain diseases caused by fungi are typically “skin diseases” and rarely spread throughout the body—like different forms of favus and trichophyton infections. Some pathogens, like those causing tetanus and malignant edema, commonly enter through the skin; others, like black-leg and anthrax, often do as well. Diseases spread by biting and blood-sucking insects, such as piroplasmosis, trypanosomiasis, and spirillosis, are usually transmitted this way. Problems with secretion from skin glands due to other issues can allow bacteria to settle and grow in them or in hair follicles. Examples include “pimples” and boils in humans and local abscesses in animals. Clean, deep cuts are less likely to get infected compared to bruises, jagged wounds, or burns. The flowing blood helps cleanse the wound, and the clot that forms seals it. This allows the leukocytes to focus on managing invading organisms (phagocytosis). Pathogenic organisms, especially pus-forming bacteria, often settle in the milk glands and can cause local (mastitis) or systemic infection.
B. Mucosæ directly continuous with the skin and lined with stratified epithelium are commonly well protected thereby and by the secretions.
B. Mucous membranes that are directly continuous with the skin and lined with layered epithelium are typically well protected by this and by their secretions.
(a) The external auditory meatus is rarely the seat even of local infection. The tympanic cavity is normally sterile, though it may become infected by extension through the Eustachian tube from the pharynx (otitis media).
(a) The external auditory canal is rarely the site of local infection. The tympanic cavity is usually sterile, although it can become infected through the Eustachian tube from the throat (otitis media).
(b) The conjunctiva is frequently the seat of localized, very rarely the point of entrance for a generalized infection, except after severe injury. Those diseases whose path of entrance is generally assumed to be the respiratory tract (see “Lungs” below) might also be admitted through the eye. Material containing such organisms might get on the conjunctiva and be washed down through the lachrymal canal into the nose. Experiment has shown that bacteria may pass in this way in a few minutes. In case masks are worn to avoid infection from patients suffering with these diseases, the eyes should therefore be protected as well as the nose and mouth.
(b) The conjunctiva often becomes the site of localized infections and, very rarely, serves as the entry point for a widespread infection, except after serious injury. Diseases that usually enter through the respiratory tract (see “Lungs” below) could also enter through the eye. Material that carries these organisms may come into contact with the conjunctiva and be drained through the tear duct into the nose. Experiments have demonstrated that bacteria can travel this way within a few minutes. If masks are worn to prevent infection from patients with these diseases, the eyes should also be protected, along with the nose and mouth.
(c) The nasal cavity on account of its anatomical structure retains pathogenic organisms which give rise to local infections more frequently than other mucosæ of its character. These may extend from here to middle ear, neighboring sinuses, or along the lymph spaces of the olfactory nerve into the cranial cavity (meningitis). Acute coryza (“colds” in man) is characteristic. Glanders, occasionally, is primary in the nose, as is probably roup in chickens, leprosy in man. The meningococcus and the virus of poliomyelitis pass from the nose into the cranial cavity without local lesions in the former.
(c) The nasal cavity, due to its anatomical structure, traps harmful organisms that often cause local infections more frequently than other similar mucous membranes. These infections can spread to the middle ear, nearby sinuses, or along the lymph channels of the olfactory nerve into the cranial cavity (leading to meningitis). Acute rhinitis (commonly known as "colds" in humans) is typical. Glanders can sometimes start in the nose, as can roup in chickens and leprosy in humans. The meningococcus and the poliovirus can travel from the nose into the cranial cavity without causing any local damage in the former.
(d) The mouth cavity is ordinarily protected by its epithelium and secretions, though the injured mucosa is a common source of actinomycosis infection, as well as thrush. In foot-and-mouth disease no visible lesions seem necessary to permit the localization of the unknown infective agent.
(d) The mouth cavity is usually protected by its skin and secretions, but damaged mucosa is a common source of actinomycosis infection, as well as thrush. In foot-and-mouth disease, no visible lesions appear to be necessary to allow the localization of the unknown infectious agent.
(e) The tonsils afford a ready point of entrance for ever-present micrococci and streptococci whenever occasion offers (follicular tonsillitis, “quinsy”), and articular rheumatism is not an uncommon sequel. The diphtheria bacillus characteristically seeks these structures for its development. Tubercle and anthrax organisms occasionally enter here.
(e) The tonsils provide an easy entry point for the always-present micrococci and streptococci whenever the opportunity arises (follicular tonsillitis, “quinsy”), and joint rheumatism is a common aftereffect. The diphtheria bacillus typically targets these structures for its growth. Tuberculosis and anthrax bacteria can occasionally enter through here.
(f) The pharynx is the seat of localized infection as in micrococcal, streptococcal and diphtherial “sore throat” in human beings, but both it and the esophagus are rarely infected in animals except as the result of injury.
(f) The pharynx is the site of localized infection, like in micrococcal, streptococcal and diphtherial "sore throat" in humans, but both it and the esophagus are seldom infected in animals unless there's been an injury.
(g) The external genitalia are the usual points of entrance for the venereal organisms in man (gonococcus, Treponema pallidum, and Ducrey’s bacillus). The bacillus of contagious abortion and probably the trypanosome of dourine are commonly introduced through these channels in animals.
(g) The external genitalia are the usual entry points for sexually transmitted organisms in humans (gonococcus, Treponema pallidum, and Ducrey’s bacillus). The bacillus that causes contagious abortion and likely the trypanosome responsible for dourine are typically introduced through these pathways in animals.
C. Lungs.—The varied types of pneumonia due to many different organisms (tubercle, glanders, influenza, plague bacilli, pneumococcus, streptococcus, micrococcus and many others) show how frequently these organs are the seat of a localized infection, which may or may not be general. Whether the lungs are the actual point of entrance in these cases is a question which is much discussed at the present time, particularly with reference to tuberculosis. The mucous secretion of the respiratory tract tends to catch incoming bacteria and other small particles and the ciliary movement along bronchial tubes and trachea tends to carry such material out. “Foreign body pneumonia” shows clinically, and many observers have shown experimentally that microörganisms may reach the alveoli even though the exchange of air between them and the bronchioles and larger bronchi takes place ordinarily only by diffusion. The presence of carbon particles in the walls of the alveoli in older animals and human beings and in those that breathe dusty air for long periods indicates strongly, though it does not prove absolutely, that these came in with inspired air. On the other hand, experiment has shown that tubercle bacilli introduced into the intestine may appear in the lungs and cause disease there and not in the intestine. It is probably safe to assume that in those diseases which are transmitted most readily through close association though not necessarily actual contact, the commonest path is through the respiratory tract, which may or may not show lesions (smallpox, scarlet fever, measles, chicken-pox, whooping-cough, pneumonic plague in man, lobar and bronchopneumonias and influenza in man and animals, some cases of glanders and tuberculosis). On the other hand, the fact that the Bacterium typhosum and Bacterium coli may cause pneumonia when they evidently have reached the lung from the intestinal tract, and the experimental evidence of lung tuberculosis above mentioned show that this route cannot be excluded in inflammations of the lung.
C. Lungs.—The various types of pneumonia caused by different organisms (like the bacteria that cause tuberculosis, glanders, influenza, plague, pneumococcus, streptococcus, micrococcus, and others) demonstrate how often these organs are the site of localized infections, which might or might not affect the whole body. Whether the lungs are the actual entrance point in these cases is a topic of ongoing discussion, especially regarding tuberculosis. The mucus in the respiratory tract tends to trap incoming bacteria and other small particles, while the ciliary movement in the bronchial tubes and trachea helps to expel such materials. “Foreign body pneumonia” clinically shows, and many researchers have experimentally confirmed, that microorganisms can reach the alveoli even though air exchange between them and the bronchioles and larger bronchi usually happens only through diffusion. The presence of carbon particles in the walls of the alveoli in older animals and humans, as well as in those who have inhaled dusty air for long periods, strongly suggests—though it doesn’t prove definitively—that these particles came in with the inhaled air. Conversely, experiments have shown that tubercle bacilli introduced into the intestine can end up in the lungs, causing disease there rather than in the intestines. It’s probably reasonable to assume that for diseases spread most easily through close association, but not necessarily through actual contact, the most common route is via the respiratory tract, which may or may not show visible damage (such as in smallpox, scarlet fever, measles, chickenpox, whooping cough, pneumonic plague in humans, lobar and bronchopneumonias, and influenza in both humans and animals, along with some instances of glanders and tuberculosis). On the flip side, the fact that Bacterium typhosum and Bacterium coli can cause pneumonia after clearly reaching the lungs from the intestinal tract, along with the experimental evidence regarding lung tuberculosis mentioned earlier, shows that this pathway can't be ignored in lung inflammation cases.
D. Alimentary Tract.—The alimentary tract affords the ordinary path of entrance for the causal microbes of many of the diseases of animals and man, since they are carried into the body most commonly and most abundantly in the food and drink.
D. Alimentary Tract.—The alimentary tract is the usual way for the harmful microbes that cause many diseases in animals and humans to enter the body, as they are most commonly and significantly ingested through food and drink.
(a) The stomach is rarely the seat of local infection, even in ruminants, except as the result of trauma. The character of the epithelium in the rumen, reticulum and omasum in ruminants, the hydrochloric acid in the abomasum and in the stomachs of animals generally are usually sufficient protection. Occasionally anthrax “pustules” develop in the gastric mucosa. (The author saw nine such pustules in a case of anthrax in a man.)
(a) The stomach is rarely the site of a local infection, even in ruminants, unless it’s due to trauma. The type of lining in the rumen, reticulum, and omasum of ruminants, along with the hydrochloric acid in the abomasum and in the stomachs of animals in general, usually provides enough protection. Occasionally, anthrax "pustules" can form in the stomach lining. (The author observed nine such pustules in a case of anthrax in a man.)
(b) The intestines are frequently the seat of localized infections, as various “choleras” and “dysenteries” in men and many animals, anthrax, tuberculosis, Johne’s disease. Here doubtless enter the organisms causing “hemorrhagic septicemias” in many classes of animals, and numerous others. These various organisms must have passed through the stomach and the question at once arises, why did the HCl not destroy them? It must be remembered that the acid is present only during stomach digestion, and that liquids taken on an “empty stomach” pass through rapidly and any organisms present are not subjected to the action of the acid. Also spores generally resist the acid. Other organisms may pass through the stomach within masses of undigested food. The fact that digestion is going on in the stomach of ruminants practically all the time may explain the relative freedom of adult animals of this class from “choleras” and “dysenteries.”
(b) The intestines often become the site of localized infections, such as various “choleras” and “dysenteries” in humans and many animals, as well as anthrax, tuberculosis, and Johne’s disease. It’s likely that the organisms causing “hemorrhagic septicemias” in many types of animals enter here, along with many others. These organisms must have passed through the stomach, raising the question of why the hydrochloric acid (HCl) didn’t destroy them. It’s important to remember that the acid is only present during stomach digestion and that liquids consumed on an “empty stomach” pass through quickly, meaning any organisms present aren’t exposed to the acid. Additionally, spores generally resist the acid. Other organisms may make it through the stomach inside clumps of undigested food. The fact that digestion is occurring in the stomach of ruminants almost continuously may explain why adult animals in this group are relatively free from “choleras” and “dysenteries.”
MECHANISM OF ENTRANCE OF ORGANISMS.
In the preceding chapters statements have been made that “bacteria enter” at various places or they “pass through” different mucous membranes, skin, etc. Strictly speaking such statements are incorrect—bacteria do not “enter” or “pass through” of themselves. It is true that some of the intestinal organisms are motile, but most of the bacteria which are pathogenic are non-motile. Even the motile ones can not make their way against fluids secreted or excreted on free surfaces. Bacteria cannot pass by diffusion through membranes since they are finite particles and not in solution.
In the earlier chapters, it's been stated that "bacteria enter" at various spots or "pass through" different mucous membranes, skin, etc. Technically, those statements are incorrect—bacteria do not "enter" or "pass through" on their own. It's true that some intestinal organisms are mobile, but most pathogenic bacteria are not. Even the mobile ones can't navigate against fluids secreted or excreted on surfaces. Bacteria can't pass through membranes by diffusion since they are solid particles and not dissolved.
In the case of penetrating wounds bacteria may be carried mechanically into the tissues, but this is exceptional in most infections. Also after gaining lodgment they may gradually grow through by destroying tissue as they grow, but this is a minor factor. Evidently, there must be some mechanism by which they are carried through. The known mechanisms for this in the body are ameboid cells, especially the phagocytes. It is most probable that these are the chief agents in getting bacteria into the tissues through various free surfaces. The phagocytes engulf bacteria, carry them into the tissues and either destroy them, are destroyed by them, or may disgorge or excrete them free in the tissues or in the blood.
In the case of penetrating wounds, bacteria can be carried into the tissues mechanically, but this is rare in most infections. Once inside, they can gradually spread by destroying tissue as they grow, but this is a minor factor. Clearly, there must be some way they are carried through. The known mechanisms for this in the body are ameboid cells, especially phagocytes. It is likely that these are the main agents that help bacteria enter the tissues through various exposed surfaces. Phagocytes engulf bacteria, transport them into the tissues, and either destroy them, get destroyed by them, or may release or excrete them back into the tissues or the blood.
DISSEMINATION OF ORGANISMS.
Dissemination of organisms within the tissues occurs either through the lymph channels or the bloodvessels or both. If through the lymph vessels only it is usually much more restricted in extent, or much more slowly disseminated, while blood dissemination is characterized by the number of organs involved simultaneously.
Dissemination of organisms within the tissues happens either through the lymph channels or the blood vessels, or both. If it's only through the lymph vessels, it usually has a much more limited range, or is spread more slowly, while blood dissemination is marked by the number of organs affected at the same time.
PATHS OF ELIMINATION OF PATHOGENIC MICROÖRGANISMS.
I. Directly from the point, of injury. This is true in infected wounds open to the surface, skin glanders (farcy), black-leg, surface anthrax, exanthemata in man and animals (scarlet fever (?), measles (?), smallpox; hog erysipelas, foot-and-mouth disease): also in case of disease of mucous membranes continuous with the skin—from nasal discharges (glanders), saliva (foot-and-mouth disease), material coughed or sneezed out (tuberculosis, influenza, pneumonias), urethral and vaginal discharges (gonorrhea and syphilis in man, contagious abortion and dourine in animals), intestinal discharges (typhoid fever, “choleras,” “dysenteries,” anthrax, tuberculosis, Johne’s disease). Material from nose, mouth and lungs may be swallowed and the organisms passed out through the intestines.
I. Directly from the point of injury. This applies to infected wounds that are exposed, skin glanders (farcy), black-leg, surface anthrax, and exanthemata in humans and animals (scarlet fever, measles, smallpox; hog erysipelas, foot-and-mouth disease). It also applies to diseases of the mucous membranes that connect with the skin—from nasal discharges (glanders), saliva (foot-and-mouth disease), material coughed or sneezed out (tuberculosis, influenza, pneumonias), urethral and vaginal discharges (gonorrhea and syphilis in men, contagious abortion and dourine in animals), intestinal discharges (typhoid fever, cholera, dysentery, anthrax, tuberculosis, Johne’s disease). Material from the nose, mouth, and lungs can be swallowed, and the organisms can be passed out through the intestines.
II. Indirectly through the secretions and the excretions where the internal organs are involved. The saliva of rabid animals contains the ultramicroscopic virus of rabies (the sympathetic ganglia within the salivary glands, and pancreas also, are affected in this disease as well as the cells of the central nervous system). The gall-bladder in man is known to harbor colon and typhoid bacilli, as that of hog-cholera hogs does the virus of this disease. It may harbor analogous organisms in other animals, though such knowledge is scanty. The kidneys have been shown experimentally to excrete certain organisms introduced into the circulation within a few minutes (micrococci, colon and typhoid bacilli, anthrax). Typhoid bacilli occur in the urine of typhoid-fever patients in about 25 per cent. of all cases and the urine of hogs with hog cholera is highly virulent. Most observers are of the opinion, however, that under natural conditions the kidneys do not excrete bacteria unless they themselves are infected.
II. Indirectly through the secretions and excretions involving the internal organs. The saliva of rabid animals contains the tiny virus that causes rabies (the sympathetic ganglia in the salivary glands and pancreas are also affected by this disease, along with the cells of the central nervous system). The gallbladder in humans is known to contain colon and typhoid bacteria, just as the gallbladder of hogs with cholera contains the virus of that disease. It may also harbor similar organisms in other animals, although there's limited information on that. The kidneys have been shown through experiments to excrete certain organisms introduced into the bloodstream within a few minutes (micrococci, colon and typhoid bacteria, anthrax). Typhoid bacteria can be found in the urine of about 25 percent of typhoid fever patients, and the urine of hogs with hog cholera is very infectious. Most experts believe, however, that under normal conditions, the kidneys do not excrete bacteria unless they are infected themselves.
The milk both of tuberculous cattle and tuberculous women has been shown to contain tubercle bacilli even when the mammary glands are not involved. Doubtless such bacteria are carried through the walls of the secreting tubules or of the smaller ducts by phagocytes and are then set free in the milk.
The milk from cows and women with tuberculosis has been found to contain tubercle bacilli even when the mammary glands aren’t affected. It’s likely that these bacteria are transported through the walls of the secreting tubules or smaller ducts by phagocytes and then released into the milk.
SPECIFICITY OF LOCATION OF INFECTIVE ORGANISMS.
It is readily apparent that certain disease organisms tend to locate themselves in definite regions and the question arises, Is this due to any specific relationship between organism and tissue or not? Diphtheria in man usually attacks the tonsils first, gonorrhea and syphilis the external genitals, tuberculosis the lung, “choleras” the small intestine, “dysenteries” the large intestine, influenza the lungs. In these cases the explanation is probably that the points attacked are the places where the organism is most commonly carried, with no specific relationship, since all of these organisms (Asiatic cholera excepted) also produce lesions in other parts of the body when they reach them. On the other hand, the virus of hydrophobia attacks nerve cells, leprosy frequently singles out nerves, glanders bacilli introduced into the abdominal cavity of a young male guinea-pig cause an inflammation of the testicle, malarial parasites and piroplasms attack the red blood corpuscles, etc. In fact, most pathogenic protozoa are specific in their localization either in certain tissue cells or in the blood or lymph. In these cases there is apparently a real chemical relationship, as there is also between the toxins of bacteria and certain tissue cells (tetanus toxin and nerve cells). Whether “chemotherapy” will ever profit from a knowledge of such chemical relationships remains to be developed. It appears that a search for these specific chemical substances with the object of combining poisons with them so that the organisms might in this way be destroyed, would be a profitable line of research.
It’s clear that certain disease-causing organisms tend to settle in specific areas, leading to the question: Is there a special relationship between the organism and the tissue? Diphtheria usually targets the tonsils first in humans, while gonorrhea and syphilis affect the external genitals, tuberculosis attacks the lungs, cholera impacts the small intestine, dysentery targets the large intestine, and influenza also affects the lungs. In these cases, the reason seems to be that the areas affected are where the organism is most commonly found, without a specific relationship since all of these organisms (except for Asiatic cholera) can cause damage in other body parts when they reach them. Conversely, the rabies virus attacks nerve cells, leprosy often affects nerves, glanders bacteria introduced into the abdomen of a young male guinea pig cause inflammation of the testicle, and malaria parasites and piroplasms attack red blood cells, etc. In fact, most pathogenic protozoa are specific in where they localize, either in certain tissue cells or in the blood or lymph. In these cases, there seems to be a genuine chemical relationship, similar to that between bacterial toxins and specific tissue cells (such as tetanus toxin and nerve cells). Whether “chemotherapy” will ever benefit from understanding these chemical relationships is yet to be seen. It seems that searching for these specific chemical substances to combine them with poisons for the purpose of destroying the organisms could lead to fruitful research.
CHAPTER XXV.
IMMUNITY.
Immunity, as has already been stated, implies such a condition of the body that pathogenic organisms after they have been introduced are incapable of manifesting themselves, and are unable to cause disease. The word has come to have a more specific meaning than resistance in many instances, in other cases the terms are used synonymously. It is the opposite of susceptibility. The term must be understood always in a relative sense, since no animal is immune to all pathogenic organisms, and conceivably not entirely so to anyone, because there is no question that a sufficient number of bacteria of any kind might be injected into the circulation to kill an animal, even though it did it purely mechanically.
Immunity, as previously mentioned, refers to a state of the body where harmful organisms, once introduced, cannot express their effects and are unable to cause illness. The term has become more specific than just resistance in many cases, although in other situations, the two terms are used interchangeably. It is the opposite of susceptibility. The term should always be understood in a relative context, as no animal is immune to all harmful organisms, and realistically, no one is completely immune, because it's clear that if enough bacteria of any kind were injected into the bloodstream, they could potentially kill an animal, even if that happens purely through mechanical means.
Immunity may be considered with reference to a single individual or to entire divisions of the organic world, with all grades between. Thus plants are immune to the diseases affecting animals; invertebrates to vertebrate diseases; cold-blooded animals to those of warm blood; man is immune to most of the diseases affecting other mammals; the rat to anthrax, which affects other rodents and most mammals; the well-known race of Algerian sheep is likewise immune to anthrax while other sheep are susceptible; the negro appears more resistant to yellow fever than the white; some few individuals in a herd of hogs always escape an epizoötic of hog cholera, etc.
Immunity can be looked at in terms of an individual or entire groups within the living world, with all kinds of variations in between. For example, plants are immune to diseases that affect animals; invertebrates are not affected by diseases that impact vertebrates; cold-blooded animals are generally unaffected by diseases that affect warm-blooded ones; humans are immune to most diseases that impact other mammals; rats are immune to anthrax, which affects other rodents and most mammals; the well-known breed of Algerian sheep is also immune to anthrax while other sheep can get it; black individuals seem to be more resistant to yellow fever compared to white individuals; and a few animals in a herd of pigs typically manage to avoid an outbreak of hog cholera, and so on.
Immunity within a given species is modified by a number of factors—age, state of nutrition, extremes of heat or cold, fatigue, excesses of any kind, in fact, anything which tends to lower the “normal healthy tone” of an animal also tends to lower its resistance. Children appear more susceptible to scarlet fever, measles, whooping-cough, etc., than adults; young cattle more frequently have black-leg than older ones (these apparently greater susceptibilities may be due in part to the fact that most of the older individuals have had the diseases when young and are immune for this reason). Animals weakened by hunger or thirst succumb to infection more readily. Frogs and chickens are immune to tetanus, but if the former be put in water and warmed up to and kept, at about 37°, and the latter be chilled for several hours in ice-water, then each may be infected. Pneumonia frequently follows exposure to cold. The immune rat may be given anthrax if first he is made to run in a “squirrel cage” until exhausted. Alcoholics are far less resistant to infection than temperate individuals. “Worry,” mental anguish, tend to predispose to infection.
Immunity within a species is influenced by several factors—age, nutrition, extreme temperatures, fatigue, and any kind of excess. In fact, anything that lowers the "normal healthy tone" of an animal also reduces its resistance. Children seem to be more vulnerable to scarlet fever, measles, whooping cough, and similar illnesses than adults; young cattle are more prone to black leg than older ones. This apparent increased vulnerability may partly be because many older individuals have had these diseases when they were young and are immune as a result. Animals that are weakened by hunger or thirst are more likely to succumb to infections. Frogs and chickens are immune to tetanus, but if frogs are placed in water and warmed to around 37°, and chickens are chilled in ice water for several hours, both can become infected. Pneumonia often occurs after exposure to cold. An immune rat can contract anthrax if it is made to run in a “squirrel cage” until exhausted. Alcoholics have significantly lower resistance to infections compared to people who are moderate drinkers. "Worry" and mental distress can also make individuals more susceptible to infection.
The following outlines summarize the different, classifications of immunity so far as mammals are concerned for the purposes of discussion.
The following outlines summarize the different classifications of immunity as they relate to mammals for the sake of discussion.
- I. Natural
- A. Congenital
- 1. Inherited through the germ cell or cells.
- 2. Acquired in utero.
- (a) By having the disease in utero.
- (b) By absorption of immune substances from the mother.
- B. Acquired by having the disease.
- A. Congenital
- II. Artificial—acquired through human agency by:
- 1. Introduction of the organism or its products.
- 2. Introduction of the blood serum of an immune animal.
- I. Active—due to the introduction of the organism or due to the introduction
of the products of the organism.
- A. Naturally by having the disease.
- B. Artificially.
- 1. By introducing the organism:
- (a) Alive and virulent.
- (b) Alive and virulence reduced by
- 1. Passage through another animal.
- 2. Drying.
- 3. Growing at a higher temperature.
- 4. Heating the cultures.
- 5. Treating with chemicals.
- 6. Sensitizing.
- 7. Cultivation on artificial media.
- (c) Dead.
- 2. By introducing the products of the organism.
- 1. By introducing the organism:
- II. Passive—due to the introduction of the blood serum of an actively immunized animal.
Immunity present in an animal and not due to human interference is to be regarded as natural immunity, while if brought about by man’s effort it is considered artificial. Those cases of natural immunity mentioned above which are common to divisions, classes, orders, families, species or races of organisms and to those few individuals where no special cause is discoverable, must be regarded as instances of true inheritance through the germ cell as other characteristics are. All other kinds of immunity are acquired. Occasionally young are born with every evidence that they have had a disease in utero and are thereafter as immune as though the attack had occurred after birth (“small-pox babies,” “hog-cholera pigs”). Experiment has shown that immune substances may pass from the blood of the mother to the fetus in utero and the young be immune for a time after birth (tetanus). This is of no practical value as yet. It is a familiar fact that with most infectious diseases recovery from one attack confers a more or less lasting immunity, though there are marked exceptions.
Immunity that exists in an animal without human intervention is called natural immunity, while immunity resulting from human efforts is termed artificial. The instances of natural immunity mentioned earlier, which are common across divisions, classes, orders, families, species, or races of organisms, as well as in those few individuals where no specific cause can be identified, should be considered true inheritance through the germ cell, just like other traits. All other forms of immunity are acquired. Occasionally, young are born showing clear signs of having had a disease in utero and are as immune as if the infection had occurred after birth (“small-pox babies,” “hog-cholera pigs”). Experiments have demonstrated that immune substances can transfer from the mother’s blood to the fetus in utero, allowing the young to remain immune for some time after birth (tetanus). However, this is not of practical use at present. It’s well known that for most infectious diseases, recovering from one attack often provides a relatively lasting immunity, though there are notable exceptions.
Active Immunity.—By active immunity is meant that which is due to the actual introduction of the organism, or in some cases of its products. The term active is used because the body cells of the animal immunized perform the real work of bringing about the immunity as will be discussed later. In passive immunity the blood serum of an actively immunized animal is introduced into a second animal, which thereupon becomes immune, though its cells are not concerned in the process. The animal is passive, just as a test-tube, in which a reaction takes place, plays no other part than that of a passive container for the reagents.
Active Immunity.—Active immunity refers to the protection that comes from the actual introduction of an organism or, in some cases, its products. The term "active" is used because the cells in the immunized animal's body do the work to create this immunity, as will be explained later. In passive immunity, the blood serum from an actively immunized animal is injected into a second animal, making it immune, even though the second animal's cells are not involved in the process. The second animal is passive, similar to a test tube that simply holds the reagents while a reaction occurs.
In active immunity the organism may be introduced in what is to be considered a natural manner, as when an animal becomes infected, has a disease, without human interference. Or the organism may be purposely introduced to bring about the immunity. For certain purposes the introduction of the products of the organism (toxins) is used to bring about active immunity (preparation of diphtheria and tetanus antitoxin from the horse). The method of producing active immunity by the artificial introduction of the organism is called vaccination, and a vaccine must therefore contain the organism. Vaccines for bacterial diseases are frequently called bacterins. The use of the blood serum of an immunized animal to confer passive immunity on a second animal is properly called serum therapy, and the serum so used is spoken of as an antiserum, though the latter word is also used to denote any serum containing any kind of an antibody (Chapters XXVII–XXXI). In a few instances both the organism and an antiserum are used to cause both active and passive immunity (serum-simultaneous method in immunizing against hog cholera).
In active immunity, the organism can enter in a way that is considered natural, such as when an animal gets infected and develops a disease without any human intervention. Alternatively, the organism can be deliberately introduced to create immunity. For specific purposes, the introduction of the organism's products (toxins) helps establish active immunity (like preparing diphtheria and tetanus antitoxin from horses). The process of creating active immunity through the artificial introduction of the organism is called vaccination, and a vaccine must therefore include the organism. Vaccines for bacterial diseases are often referred to as bacterins. Utilizing the blood serum from an immunized animal to provide passive immunity to another animal is referred to as serum therapy, and the serum used is known as an antiserum, although that term can also refer to any serum containing any kind of antibody (Chapters XXVII–XXXI). In a few cases, both the organism and an antiserum are used to create both active and passive immunity (the serum-simultaneous method for immunizing against hog cholera).
In producing active immunity the organism may be introduced (a) alive and virulent, but in very small doses, or in combination with an immune serum, as just mentioned for hog cholera. The introduction of the live virulent organism alone is done only experimentally as yet, as it is obviously too dangerous to do in practice, except under the strictest control (introduction of a single tubercle bacillus, followed by gradually increasing numbers—Barber and Webb). More commonly the organisms are introduced (b) alive but with their virulence reduced (“attenuated”) in one of several ways: (1) By passing the organism through another animal as is the case with smallpox vaccine derived from a calf or heifer. This method was first introduced by Jenner in 1795 and was the first practical means of preventing disease by vaccination. This word was used because material was derived from a cow—Latin vacca. (2) By drying the organism, as is done in the preparation of the vaccine for the Pasteur treatment of rabies, where the spinal cords of rabbits are dried for varying lengths of time—one to four days, Russian method, one to three days, German method, longer in this country. (It is probable that the passage of the “fixed virus” through the rabbit is as important in this procedure as the drying, since it is doubtful if the “fixed virus” is pathogenic for man.) It would be more correct to speak of this as a preventive vaccination against rabies, since the latter is one of the few diseases which is not amenable to treatment. The patient always dies if the disease develops. (3) The organism may be attenuated by growing at a temperature above the normal. This is the method used in preparing anthrax vaccine as done by Pasteur originally. (4) Instead of growing at a higher temperature the culture may be heated in such a way that it is not killed but merely weakened. Black-leg vaccines are made by this method. (5) Chemicals are sometimes added to attenuate the organisms, as was formerly done in the preparation of black-leg vaccine by Kruse’s method in Germany. The use of toxin-antitoxin mixtures in immunizing against diphtheria and in the preparation of diphtheria antitoxin from horses is an application of the same principle, though here it is the product of the organism and not the organism whose action is weakened. (6) Within the past few years the workers in the Pasteur Institute in Paris have been experimenting with vaccines prepared by treating living virulent bacteria with antisera (“sensitizing them”) so that they are no longer capable of causing the disease when introduced, but do cause the production of an active immunity. The method has been used with typhoid fever bacilli in man and seems to be successful. It remains to be tried out further before its worth is demonstrated (the procedure is more complicated and the chance for infection apparently much greater than by the use of killed cultures). The term sero-bacterins is used by manufacturers in this country to designate such bacterial vaccines. (7) Growing on artificial culture media reduces the virulence of most organisms after a longer or shorter time. This method has been tried with many organisms in the laboratory, but is not now used in practice. The difficulties are that the attenuation is very uncertain and that the organisms tend to regain their virulence when introduced into the body.
In creating active immunity, the organism can be introduced (a) live and virulent, but in very small amounts, or alongside an immune serum, as previously mentioned for hog cholera. The introduction of the live virulent organism alone is currently done only in experiments because, obviously, it's too risky to do in practice, except under the strictest control (introducing a single tubercle bacillus and then gradually increasing the numbers—Barber and Webb). More commonly, the organisms are introduced (b) alive but with their virulence reduced (“attenuated”) in several ways: (1) By passing the organism through another animal, as occurs with the smallpox vaccine derived from a calf or heifer. This method was first introduced by Jenner in 1795 and was the first practical way to prevent disease through vaccination. The term was used because the material came from a cow—Latin vacca. (2) By drying the organism, as done in preparing the vaccine for the Pasteur treatment of rabies, where the spinal cords of rabbits are dried for varying lengths of time—one to four days for the Russian method, one to three days for the German method, and longer in this country. (It’s likely that the passage of the “fixed virus” through the rabbit is as crucial in this process as the drying, since it’s uncertain if the “fixed virus” is pathogenic for humans.) It would be more accurate to refer to this as a preventive vaccination against rabies, since it is one of the few diseases that doesn’t respond to treatment. The patient always dies if the disease develops. (3) The organism may be weakened by growing it at a temperature above normal. This is the method used in preparing the anthrax vaccine, originally developed by Pasteur. (4) Instead of growing at a higher temperature, the culture can be heated enough to weaken it without killing it. Black-leg vaccines are made using this method. (5) Chemicals are sometimes added to weaken the organisms, as was previously done in the preparation of black-leg vaccine using Kruse’s method in Germany. The application of toxin-antitoxin mixtures for immunization against diphtheria and in producing diphtheria antitoxin from horses is based on the same principle, though here it’s the product of the organism, not the organism itself, that is weakened. (6) In recent years, researchers at the Pasteur Institute in Paris have been experimenting with vaccines made by treating live virulent bacteria with antisera (“sensitizing them”) so they can no longer cause the disease when introduced, but still prompt the production of active immunity. This method has been used with typhoid fever bacilli in humans and appears to be effective. It still needs more testing before its value is confirmed (the procedure is more complicated and the risk of infection seems much higher compared to using killed cultures). The term sero-bacterins is used by manufacturers in this country to refer to these bacterial vaccines. (7) Growing on artificial culture media often reduces the virulence of most organisms over varying periods. This method has been tested with many organisms in the lab, but isn’t currently applied in practice. The challenges are that the level of attenuation is very unpredictable, and the organisms often regain their virulence once introduced into the body.
In producing active immunity against many bacterial diseases the organisms are introduced (c) dead. They are killed by heat or by chemicals, or by using both methods (Chapter XXX).
In creating active immunity against various bacterial diseases, the organisms are introduced (c) in a dead state. They are killed either by heat, by chemicals, or by using a combination of both methods (Chapter XXX).
When the products of an organism are introduced the resulting immunity is against the products only and not against the organism. If the organism itself is introduced there results an immunity against it and in some cases also against the products, though the latter does not necessarily follow. Hence the immunity may be antibacterial or antitoxic or both.
When an organism's products are introduced, the immunity generated is only against those products and not the organism itself. If the organism is introduced directly, immunity develops against it, and in some instances also against the products, but the latter doesn't always occur. Therefore, the immunity can be antibacterial, antitoxic, or both.
Investigation as to the causes of immunity and the various methods by which it is produced has not resulted in the discovery of specific methods of treatment for as many diseases as was hoped for at one time. Just at present progress in serum therapy appears to be at a standstill, though vaccines are giving good results in many instances not believed possible a few years ago. As a consequence workers in all parts of the world are giving more and more attention to the search for specific chemical substances, which will destroy invading parasites and not injure the host (chemotherapy). Nevertheless, in the study of immunity very much of value in the treatment and prevention of disease has been learned. Also much knowledge which is of the greatest use in other lines has been accumulated. Methods of diagnosis of great exactness have resulted, applicable in numerous diseases. Ways of detecting adulteration in foods, particularly foods from animal sources, and of differentiating proteins of varied origin, as well as means of establishing biological relationships and differences among groups of animals through “immunity reactions” of blood serums have followed from knowledge gained by application of the facts or the methods of immunity research. Hence the study of “immunity problems” has come to include much more than merely the study of those factors which prevent the development of disease in an animal or result in its spontaneous recovery. A proper understanding of the principles of immunity necessitates a study of these various features and they will be considered in the discussion to follow.
Investigation into the causes of immunity and the various ways it can be produced hasn't led to the discovery of specific treatment methods for as many diseases as previously hoped. Right now, progress in serum therapy seems to have stalled, although vaccines are showing promising results in many cases that seemed unlikely a few years ago. As a result, researchers around the world are increasingly focusing on finding specific chemical substances that can destroy invading parasites without harming the host (chemotherapy). Nonetheless, valuable insights have been gained in the study of immunity that are important for treating and preventing diseases. Additionally, a lot of useful knowledge has been acquired in other areas. Highly accurate diagnostic methods have been developed, applicable to numerous diseases. There are also ways to detect adulteration in foods, especially those from animal sources, as well as methods for differentiating proteins from various origins, and tools for establishing biological relationships and differences among animal groups through “immunity reactions” of blood serums, all of which stem from the knowledge gained through immunity research. Thus, the study of “immunity problems” now encompasses much more than just examining the factors that prevent disease development in animals or lead to spontaneous recovery. A proper understanding of immunity principles requires examining these various aspects, which will be addressed in the upcoming discussion.
CHAPTER XXVI.
THEORIES OF IMMUNITY.
Pasteur and the bacteriologists of his time discovered that bacteria cease to grow in artificial culture media after a time, because of the exhaustion of the food material in some cases and because of the injurious action of their own products in other instances. These facts were brought forward to explain immunity shortly after bacteria were shown to be the cause of certain diseases. Theories based on these observations were called (1) “Exhaustion Theory” of Pasteur, and (2) “Noxious Retention Theory” of Chauveau respectively. The fact, soon discovered, that virulent pathogenic bacteria are not uncommonly present in perfectly healthy animals, and the later discovery that immunity may be conferred by the injection of dead bacteria have led to the abandonment of both these older ideas. The (3) “Unfavorable Environment” theory of Baumgartner, i.e., bacteria do not grow in the body and produce disease because their surroundings are not suitable, in a sense covers the whole ground, though it is not true as to the first part, as was pointed out above, and is of no value as a working basis, since it offers no explanation as to what the factors are that constitute the “unfavorable environment.” Metchnikoff brought forward a rational explanation of immunity with his (4) “Cellular or Phagocytosis Theory.” As first propounded it based immunity on the observed fact that certain white blood corpuscles, phagocytes, engulf and destroy bacteria. Metchnikoff has since elaborated the original theory to explain facts of later discovery. Ehrlich soon after published his (5) “Chemical or Side-chain Theory” which seeks to explain immunity on the basis of chemical substances in the body which may in part destroy pathogenic organisms or in part neutralize their products; or in some instances there may be an absence of certain chemical substances in the body cells so that bacteria or their products cannot unite with the cells and hence can do no damage.
Pasteur and the bacteriologists of his time discovered that bacteria stop growing in artificial culture media after a while, either due to the depletion of nutrients in some cases or because their own waste products become harmful in other cases. These findings were used to explain immunity shortly after bacteria were identified as causes of certain diseases. The theories based on these observations were called (1) “Exhaustion Theory” of Pasteur, and (2) “Noxious Retention Theory” of Chauveau respectively. The fact, which was later discovered, that harmful pathogenic bacteria can often be found in completely healthy animals, along with the later finding that immunity can be provided by injecting dead bacteria, led to the rejection of both of these earlier theories. The (3) “Unfavorable Environment” theory of Baumgartner, which suggests that bacteria do not grow in the body and cause disease because their environment is unsuitable, covers many aspects, but it is inaccurate regarding the first part, as mentioned above. It is also not helpful as a working framework since it doesn’t explain what the factors are that create the “unfavorable environment.” Metchnikoff proposed a logical explanation for immunity with his (4) “Cellular or Phagocytosis Theory.” Initially, it linked immunity to the observed fact that certain white blood cells, called phagocytes, engulf and destroy bacteria. Metchnikoff has since expanded the original theory to incorporate later discoveries. Shortly after, Ehrlich published his (5) “Chemical or Side-chain Theory,” which explains immunity based on chemical substances in the body that can either partially destroy harmful organisms or neutralize their toxins; or, in some cases, there may be a lack of certain chemical substances in the body cells so that bacteria or their products cannot unite with the cells and, therefore, cause no harm.

At the present time it is generally accepted, in this country at least, that Ehrlich’s theory explains immunity in many diseases as well as many of the phenomena related to immunity, and in other diseases the phagocytes, frequently assisted by chemical substances, are the chief factors. Specific instances are discussed in Pathogenic Bacteriologies which should be consulted. It is essential that the student should be familiar with the basic ideas of the chemical theory, not only from the standpoint of immunity, but also in order to understand the principles of a number of valuable methods of diagnosis.
At this point, it's widely accepted, at least in this country, that Ehrlich’s theory accounts for immunity in many diseases as well as many related phenomena. In other diseases, phagocytes, often aided by chemical substances, play a key role. Specific examples can be found in Pathogenic Bacteriologies, which should be referenced. It's crucial for students to understand the fundamental concepts of the chemical theory, not only to grasp immunity but also to comprehend the principles behind several useful diagnostic methods.
The chemical theory rests on three fundamental physiological principles: (1) the response of cells to stimuli, in this connection specific chemical stimuli, (2) the presence within cells of specific chemical groups which combine with chemical stimuli and thus enable them to act on the cell, which groups Ehrlich has named receptors, and (3) the “over-production” activity of cells as announced by Weigert.
The chemical theory is based on three key physiological principles: (1) how cells respond to stimuli, specifically chemical stimuli, (2) the existence of specific chemical groups within cells that interact with chemical stimuli, allowing them to influence the cell. These groups are referred to as receptors by Ehrlich, and (3) the “over-production” activity of cells as stated by Weigert.
1. That cells respond to stimuli is fundamental in physiology. These stimuli may be of many kinds as mechanical, electrical, light, thermal, chemical, etc. The body possesses groups of cells specially developed to receive some of these stimuli—touch cells for mechanical stimuli, retinal cells for light, temperature nerve endings for thermal, olfactory and gustatory cells for certain chemical stimuli. Response to chemical stimuli is well illustrated along the digestive tract. That the chemical stimuli in digestion may be more or less specific is shown by the observed differences in the enzymes of the pancreatic juice dependent on the relative amounts of carbohydrates, fats, or proteins in the food, the specific enzyme in each case being increased in the juice with the increase of its corresponding foodstuff. The cells of the body, or certain of them at least, seem to respond in a specific way when substances are brought into direct contact with them, that is, without having been subjected to digestion in the alimentary tract, but injected directly into the blood or lymph stream. Cells may be affected by stimuli in one of three ways: if the stimulus is too weak, there is no effect (in reality there is no “stimulus” acting); if the stimulus is too strong, the cell is injured, or may be destroyed; if the stimulus is of proper amount then it excites the cell to increased activity, and in the case of specific chemical stimuli the increased activity, as mentioned for the pancreas, shows itself in an increased production of whatever is called forth by the chemical stimulus. In the case of many organic chemicals, the substances produced by the cells under their direct stimulation are markedly specific for the particular substance introduced.
1. Cells responding to stimuli is key in physiology. These stimuli can be of various types including mechanical, electrical, light, thermal, chemical, and so on. The body has clusters of cells specifically designed to receive some of these stimuli—touch cells for mechanical stimuli, retinal cells for light, temperature nerve endings for thermal, and olfactory and taste cells for certain chemical stimuli. Response to chemical stimuli is clearly shown along the digestive tract. The fact that the chemical stimuli in digestion can be more or less specific is demonstrated by the differences observed in the enzymes of pancreatic juice, which depend on the amounts of carbohydrates, fats, or proteins in the food; the enzyme specific to each case increases in the juice as its corresponding foodstuff increases. The cells in the body, or at least some of them, seem to react in a specific way when substances come into direct contact with them, without going through digestion in the digestive tract, but instead injected directly into the blood or lymph. Cells can be affected by stimuli in one of three ways: if the stimulus is too weak, there is no effect (in reality, there is no “stimulus” acting); if the stimulus is too strong, the cell gets damaged or may even die; if the stimulus is at the right level, it activates the cell to work harder, and in the case of specific chemical stimuli, the increased activity, as noted for the pancreas, results in an increased production of whatever is triggered by the chemical stimulus. In many organic chemicals, the substances generated by the cells in response to their direct stimulation are distinctly specific for the particular substance introduced.
2. Since chemical action always implies at least two bodies to react, Ehrlich assumes that in every cell which is affected by a chemical stimulus there must therefore be a chemical group to unite with this stimulus. He further states that there must be as many different kinds of these groups as there are different kinds of chemicals which stimulate the cell. Since these groups are present in the body cells to take up different kinds of chemical substances, Ehrlich calls them receptors. Since these groups must be small as compared with the cell as a whole, and must be more or less on the surface and unite readily with chemical substances he further speaks of them as “side-chains” after the analogy of compounds of the aromatic series especially. The term receptors is now generally used. As was stated above, the effect of specific chemical stimuli is to cause the production of more of the particular substance for which it is specific and in the class of bodies under discussion, the particular product is these cell receptors with which the chemical may unite.
2. Since chemical reactions always involve at least two entities, Ehrlich assumes that in every cell affected by a chemical stimulus, there must be a chemical group that can connect with this stimulus. He further asserts that there must be as many different types of these groups as there are different chemicals that stimulate the cell. Because these groups are present in the body cells to absorb various chemical substances, Ehrlich refers to them as receptors. Since these groups must be relatively small compared to the entire cell and should be positioned more or less on the surface to easily bond with chemical substances, he also describes them as “side-chains,” drawing an analogy to compounds in the aromatic series. The term receptors is now widely accepted. As mentioned earlier, the effect of specific chemical stimuli is to trigger the production of more of the specific substance for which it is designed, and in this context, the specific product is these cell receptors that the chemical may connect with.
3. Weigert first called attention to the practically constant phenomenon that cells ordinarily respond by doing more of a particular response than is actually called for by the stimulus, that there is always an “overproduction” of activity. In the case of chemical stimuli this means an increased production of the specific substance over and above the amount actually needed.
3. Weigert first pointed out the nearly constant phenomenon that cells typically react by doing more of a specific response than what is actually necessary for the stimulus; there's always an “overproduction” of activity. In the case of chemical stimuli, this means an increased production of the specific substance beyond what is actually required.
The student will better understand this theory if he recalls his fundamental physiology. Living substance is characterized, among other things, by irritability which is instability. It is in a constant, state of unstable equilibrium. Whenever the equilibrium becomes permanently stable the substance is dead. It is also continually attempting to restore disturbances in its equilibrium. Whenever a chemical substance unites with a chemical substance in the cell, a receptor, the latter is, so far as the cell is concerned, thrown out of function for that cell. The chemical equilibrium of the latter is upset. It attempts to restore this and does so by making a new receptor to take the place of the one thrown out of function. If this process is continued, i.e., if the new receptor is similarly “used up” and others similarly formed are also, then the cell will prepare a supply of these and even an excess, according to Weigert’s theory. Whenever a cell accumulates an excess of products the normal result is that it excretes them from its own substance into the surrounding lymph, whence they reach the blood stream to be either carried to the true excretory organs, utilized by other cells or remain for a longer or shorter time in the blood. Hence the excess of receptors is excreted from the cell that forms them and they become free in the blood. These free receptors are termed antibodies. They are receptors but instead of being retained in the cell are free in solution in the blood. One function of the free receptor, the antibody, is always to unite with the chemical substance which caused it to be formed. It may have additional functions. The chemical substance which caused the excess formation of receptors, antibodies, is termed an antigen for that particular kind of antibody.
The student will have a better grasp of this theory if he remembers his basic physiology. Living matter is marked, among other things, by irritability, which is instability. It is in a constant state of unstable balance. Whenever this balance becomes permanently stable, the substance is dead. It also continually strives to correct disturbances in its balance. When a chemical substance combines with another chemical substance in the cell, a receptor, the latter is, as far as the cell is concerned, thrown out of function for that cell. The chemical balance of the latter is disturbed. It tries to restore this and does so by creating a new receptor to replace the one that has been thrown out of function. If this process continues, i.e., if the new receptor is similarly “used up” and others are also formed in the same way, then the cell will produce a supply of these and even an excess, according to Weigert’s theory. Whenever a cell accumulates an excess of products, the usual result is that it excretes them from its own substance into the surrounding lymph, from where they enter the bloodstream to be either carried to the true excretory organs, used by other cells, or remain in the blood for a shorter or longer time. Thus, the excess of receptors is excreted from the cell that forms them and they become free in the blood. These free receptors are called antibodies. They are receptors, but instead of being kept in the cell, they are free in solution in the blood. One function of the free receptor, the antibody, is always to unite with the chemical substance that caused it to be formed. It may have additional functions. The chemical substance that prompted the excess formation of receptors, or antibodies, is called an antigen for that particular type of antibody.
To recapitulate, Ehrlich’s theory postulates specific chemical stimuli, which react with specific chemical substances in the body cells, named receptors, and that these receptors, according to Weigert, are produced in excess and hence are excreted from the cell and become free receptors in the blood and lymph. These free receptors are the various kinds of antibodies, the kind depending on the nature of the stimulus, antigen, the substance introduced. Any substance which when introduced into the body causes the formation of an antibody of any kind whatsoever is called an antigen,23 i.e., anti (body) former.
To sum up, Ehrlich’s theory suggests specific chemical stimuli that interact with specific chemical substances in body cells, called receptors, and according to Weigert, these receptors are produced in excess and are then excreted from the cell, becoming free receptors in the blood and lymph. These free receptors are the different types of antibodies, which vary depending on the type of stimulus, or antigen, that was introduced. Any substance that when introduced into the body triggers the creation of any kind of antibody is called an antigen,23 i.e. anti (body) former.
The foregoing discussion explains Ehrlich’s theory of immunity. According to this theory the manner of formation of all antibodies is the same. The kind of antibody and the manner of its action will differ with the different kinds of antigens used.
The previous discussion outlines Ehrlich’s theory of immunity. According to this theory, the way all antibodies are formed is the same. The type of antibody and the way it acts will vary with the different types of antigens used.
The succeeding chapters discuss some of the kinds of antibodies, the theory of their action and some practical applications. It must be borne in mind throughout the study of these, as has been stated, that every antibody has the property of uniting with its antigen whether it has any property in addition or not.
The following chapters explore different types of antibodies, how they work, and some real-world uses. It's important to remember throughout this study, as mentioned, that every antibody has the ability to bind with its antigen, regardless of any additional properties.
Just what antibodies are chemically has not been determined because no one has as yet succeeded in isolating them chemically pure. To the author they appear to be enzymes.
Just what antibodies are made of chemically hasn't been figured out yet because no one has successfully isolated them in a pure chemical form. To the author, they seem to be enzymes.
Antigens were considered by Ehrlich to be proteins or to be related to proteins. Most workers since Ehrlich have held similar views. Dr. Carl Warden of the University of Michigan has been doing much work in recent years in which he is attempting to show that the antigens are not proteins but are fats or fatty acids. Mr. E. E. H. Boyer, in his work (not yet published) in the author’s laboratory for the degree of Ph.D., received in June, 1920, succeeded in producing various antibodies from Bacterium coli antigens. In these antigens he could detect only fatty acids or salts of fatty acids. If the work of these men is confirmed, it will open up a most interesting and extremely important field in immunity and in preventive medicine. It is not apparent that the nature of the antigen would affect Ehrlich’s theory of the formation of antibodies.
Antigens were seen by Ehrlich as either proteins or related to proteins. Most researchers since Ehrlich have shared similar beliefs. Dr. Carl Warden from the University of Michigan has been working hard in recent years to demonstrate that antigens are not proteins but are actually fats or fatty acids. Mr. E. E. H. Boyer, in his unpublished research in the author’s lab for his Ph.D., which he received in June 1920, succeeded in producing various antibodies from Bacterium coli antigens. In these antigens, he could only find fatty acids or salts of fatty acids. If the findings of these researchers are validated, it will open up a very interesting and crucial area in immunity and preventive medicine. It doesn't seem that the characteristics of the antigen would impact Ehrlich’s theory on the formation of antibodies.
The author has no doubt that eventually the formation of antibodies and the reactions between them and their antigens will be explained on the basis of physical-chemical laws, but this probably awaits the discovery of their nature.
The author is confident that eventually, the creation of antibodies and the interactions between them and their antigens will be explained based on physical and chemical laws, but this likely depends on discovering their true nature.
CHAPTER XXVII.
RECEPTORS OF THE FIRST ORDER.
ANTITOXINS—ANTIENZYMES.
The general characteristics of toxins have been described (Chapter XII). It has been stated that they are more or less specific in their action on cells. In order to affect a cell it is evident that a toxin must enter into chemical combination with it. This implies that the toxin molecule possesses a chemical group which can combine with a receptor of the cell. This group is called the haptophore or combining group. The toxic or injurious portion of the toxin molecule is likewise spoken of as the toxophore group. When a toxin is introduced into the body its haptophore group combines with suitable receptors in different cells of the body. If not too much of the toxin is given, instead of injuring, it acts as a chemical stimulus to the cell in the manner already described. The cell in response produces more of the specific thing, which in this instance is more receptors which can combine with the toxin, i.e., with its haptophore group. If the stimulus is kept up, more and more of these receptors are produced until an excess for the cell accumulates, which excess is excreted from the individual cell and becomes free in the blood. These free receptors have, of course, the capacity to combine with toxin through its haptophore group. When the toxin is combined with these free receptors, it cannot combine with any other receptors, e.g., those in another cell and hence cannot injure another cell. These free receptors constitute, in this case, antitoxin, so-called because they can combine with toxin and hence neutralize it. Antitoxins are specific—that is, an antitoxin which will combine with the toxin of Clostridium tetani will not combine with that of Corynebacterium diphtheriæ or of Clostridium botulinum, or of any other toxin, vegetable or animal.
The general characteristics of toxins have been described (Chapter XII). They are somewhat specific in how they affect cells. To impact a cell, a toxin has to chemically interact with it. This means the toxin molecule has a chemical group that can bind to a receptor on the cell. This group is known as the haptophore or combining group. The harmful part of the toxin molecule is also referred to as the toxophore group. When a toxin is introduced into the body, its haptophore group attaches to appropriate receptors in various cells of the body. If the amount of toxin isn’t excessive, instead of causing harm, it serves as a chemical stimulus for the cell, as previously mentioned. In response, the cell produces more of the specific element, which in this case is more receptors that can bind with the toxin, i.e., with its haptophore group. If the stimulation continues, an increasing number of these receptors are generated until an excess accumulates, which is expelled from the individual cell and enters the bloodstream. These free receptors can indeed bind with the toxin via its haptophore group. Once the toxin binds to these free receptors, it cannot connect with any other receptors, e.g., those in different cells, and therefore cannot harm another cell. These free receptors act as antitoxin, called so because they can bind with toxins and neutralize them. Antitoxins are specific—meaning an antitoxin for Clostridium tetani will not interact with the toxins of Corynebacterium diphtheriæ, Clostridium botulinum, or any other toxin, whether plant or animal.
When a toxin is kept in solution for some time or when it is heated above a certain temperature (different for each toxin) it loses its poisonous character. It may be shown, however, that it is still capable of uniting with antitoxin, and preventing the latter from uniting with a fresh toxin. This confirms the hypothesis that a toxin molecule has at least two groups: a combining or haptophore, and a poisoning or toxophore group. A toxin which has lost its poisonous property, its toxophore group, is spoken of as a toxoid. The theory of antitoxin formation is further supported by the fact that the proper introduction of toxoid, the haptophore group, and hence the real stimulus, can cause the production of antitoxin to a certain extent at least.
When a toxin is kept in solution for a while or heated above a specific temperature (which varies for each toxin), it loses its poisonous properties. However, it can still combine with antitoxin, preventing the antitoxin from reacting with a new toxin. This supports the idea that a toxin molecule has at least two parts: a combining or haptophore group, and a poisoning or toxophore group. A toxin that has lost its harmful property, its toxophore group, is referred to as a toxoid. The theory of antitoxin formation is further backed by the fact that the proper introduction of toxoid, which contains the haptophore group, and thus the actual stimulus, can lead to some degree of antitoxin production.
The close relationship between toxins and enzymes has already been pointed out. This is still further illustrated by the fact that when enzymes are properly introduced into the tissues of an animal there is formed in the animal an antienzyme specific for the enzyme in question which can prevent its action. The structure of enzymes, as composed of a haptophore, or uniting, and a zymophore or digesting (or other activity) group, is similar to that of toxins, and enzymoids or enzymes which can combine with the substance acted on but not affect it further, have been demonstrated.
The close connection between toxins and enzymes has already been noted. This is further illustrated by the fact that when enzymes are introduced into the tissues of an animal, the animal produces a specific antienzyme that can block the enzyme's action. The structure of enzymes, which consists of a haptophore, or binding part, and a zymophore, or digesting (or other functional) group, is similar to that of toxins. Additionally, enzymoids or enzymes that can interact with the substance being acted upon but do not further affect it, have been shown to exist.
These free cell receptors, antitoxins or antienzymes, which are produced in the body by the proper introduction of toxins or enzymes, respectively, have the function of combining with these bodies but no other action. As was pointed out above, this is sufficient to neutralize the toxin or enzyme and prevent any injurious effect since they can unite with nothing else. Since these receptors are the simplest type which has been studied as yet, they are spoken of by Ehrlich as receptors of the first order. Other antibodies which are likewise free receptors of the first, order and have the function of combining only have been prepared and will be referred to in their proper connection. They are mainly of theoretical interest.
These free cell receptors, antitoxins or antienzymes, created in the body by introducing toxins or enzymes, respectively, serve to combine with these substances but do nothing else. As mentioned earlier, this is enough to neutralize the toxin or enzyme and prevent any harmful effects since they can bind to nothing else. Because these receptors are the simplest type studied so far, they are referred to by Ehrlich as receptors of the first order. Other antibodies that are also free receptors of the first order and have the sole function of combining have been developed and will be discussed in their relevant context. They are primarily of theoretical interest.
Ehrlich did a large part of his work on toxins and antitoxins with ricin, the toxin of the castor-oil bean, abrin, from the jequirity bean, robin from the locust tree, and with the toxins and antitoxins for diphtheria and tetanus. Antitoxins have been prepared experimentally for a large number of both animal and vegetable poisons, including a number for bacterial toxins. The only ones which, as yet, are of much practical importance are antivenin for snake poison, (not a true toxin, however, see p. 275), antipollenin (supposed to be for the toxin of hay fever) and the antitoxins for the true bacterial toxins of Corynebacterium diphtheriæ and Clostridium tetani.
Ehrlich conducted a significant portion of his research on toxins and antitoxins using ricin, the toxin from castor beans, abrin, from the jequirity bean, robin from the locust tree, and the toxins and antitoxins related to diphtheria and tetanus. Antitoxins have been experimentally developed for a wide range of both animal and plant poisons, as well as for various bacterial toxins. However, the only ones that are currently of substantial practical importance are antivenin for snake venom (though it’s not a true toxin, see p. 275), antipollenin (thought to be for hay fever toxin), and the antitoxins for the actual bacterial toxins of Corynebacterium diphtheriæ and Clostridium tetani.
The method of preparing antitoxins is essentially the same in all cases, though differing in minor details. For commercial purposes large animals are selected, usually horses, so that the yield of serum may be large. The animals must, of course, be vigorous, free from all infectious disease. The first injection given is either a relatively small amount of a solution of toxin or of a mixture of toxin and antitoxin. The animal shows more or less reaction, increased temperature, pulse and respiration and frequently an edema at the point of injection, unless this is made intravenously. After several days to a week or more, when the animal has recovered from the first injection, a second stronger dose is given, usually with less reaction. Increasingly large doses are given at proper intervals until the animal may take several hundred times the amount which would have been fatal if given at first. The process of immunizing a horse for diphtheria or tetanus toxin usually takes several months. Variations in time and in yield of antitoxin are individual and not predictable in any given case.
The method for preparing antitoxins is basically the same in all cases, though there are minor differences. For commercial purposes, large animals are chosen, usually horses, to ensure a high serum yield. The animals must be healthy and free from any infectious diseases. The first injection given is either a relatively small amount of a toxin solution or a mix of toxin and antitoxin. The animal typically reacts with increased temperature, pulse, and respiration, and often has swelling at the injection site, unless it’s given intravenously. After several days to a week or more, when the animal has recovered from the first injection, a second, stronger dose is given, usually with less reaction. Increasingly larger doses are administered at appropriate intervals until the animal can tolerate several hundred times the amount that would have been fatal if given initially. The process of immunizing a horse against diphtheria or tetanus toxin generally takes several months. Variations in time and yield of antitoxin are individual and cannot be predicted in any specific case.
After several injections a few hundred cubic centimeters of blood are withdrawn from the jugular vein and serum from this is tested for the amount of antitoxin it contains. When the amount is found sufficiently large (250 “units” at least for diphtheria per cc.)24 then the maximum amount of blood is collected from the jugular with sterile trocar and cannula. The serum from this blood with the addition of an antiseptic (0.5 per cent. phenol, tricresol, etc.) constitutes “antidiphtheritic serum” or “antitetanic serum,” etc. All sera which are put on the market must conform to definite standards of strength expressed in “units” as determined by the U. S. Hygienic Laboratory. In reality a “unit” of diphtheria antitoxin in the United States is an amount equivalent to 1 cc. of a given solution of a standard diphtheria antitoxin which is kept at the above-mentioned laboratory. This statement, of course, gives no definite idea as to the amount of antitoxin actually in a “unit.” Specifically stated, a “unit” of antitoxin contains approximately the amount which would protect a 250 gram guinea-pig from 100 minimum lethal doses of diphtheria toxin, or protect 100 guinea-pigs weighing 250 grams each from one minimum lethal dose each. The minimum lethal dose (M. L. D.) of diphtheria toxin is the least amount that will kill a guinea-pig of the size mentioned within four days. Since toxins on standing change into toxoids to a great extent, the amount, of antitoxin in a “unit,” though protecting against 100 M. L. D., in reality would protect against about 200 M. L. D. of toxin containing no toxoid.
After several injections, a few hundred cubic centimeters of blood are taken from the jugular vein, and the serum is tested for the amount of antitoxin it contains. When the amount is found to be large enough (at least 250 “units” of diphtheria per cc.), then the maximum amount of blood is collected from the jugular with a sterile trocar and cannula. The serum from this blood, along with an antiseptic (0.5 percent phenol, tricresol, etc.), makes up “antidiphtheritic serum” or “antitetanic serum,” etc. All sera that are sold must meet specific strength standards expressed in “units” as determined by the U.S. Hygienic Laboratory. In practice, a “unit” of diphtheria antitoxin in the United States is equivalent to 1 cc. of a specific solution of a standard diphtheria antitoxin stored at the aforementioned laboratory. This description doesn’t really indicate the actual amount of antitoxin in a “unit.” Specifically, a “unit” of antitoxin contains roughly the amount needed to protect a 250 gram guinea pig from 100 minimum lethal doses of diphtheria toxin, or to protect 100 guinea pigs weighing 250 grams each from one minimum lethal dose each. The minimum lethal dose (M.L.D.) of diphtheria toxin is the smallest amount that will kill a guinea pig of that size within four days. Since toxins can change into toxoids over time, the amount of antitoxin in a “unit,” which is effective against 100 M.L.D., would actually protect against about 200 M.L.D. of toxin that contains no toxoid.
The official unit for tetanus antitoxin is somewhat different, since it is standardized against a standard toxin which is likewise kept at the Hygienic Laboratory. The unit is defined as “ten times the amount of antitoxin necessary to protect a 350 g. guinea-pig for 96 hours against the standard test dose” of the standard toxin. The standard test dose is 100 M. L. D. of toxin for a 350 g. guinea-pig. To express it another way, one could say that a “unit” of tetanus antitoxin would protect one thousand 350 g. guinea-pigs from 1 M. L. D. each of standard tetanus toxin.
The official unit for tetanus antitoxin is slightly different because it’s standardized against a standard toxin that’s also kept at the Hygienic Laboratory. The unit is defined as “ten times the amount of antitoxin needed to protect a 350 g guinea pig for 96 hours from the standard test dose” of the standard toxin. The standard test dose is 100 M. L. D. of toxin for a 350 g guinea pig. In other words, one could say that a “unit” of tetanus antitoxin would protect one thousand 350 g guinea pigs from 1 M. L. D. each of standard tetanus toxin.
Various methods have been devised for increasing the amount of antitoxin in 1 cc. of solution by precipitating out portions of the blood-serum proteins and at the same time concentrating the antitoxin in smaller volume. It is not considered necessary in a work of this character to enter into these details nor to discuss the process of standardizing antitoxin so that the exact amount of “units” per cc. may be known.
Various methods have been developed to increase the amount of antitoxin in 1 cc of solution by precipitating parts of the blood-serum proteins while concentrating the antitoxin in a smaller volume. It's not necessary in a work like this to dive into these details or discuss the process of standardizing antitoxin to determine the exact amount of "units" per cc.
CHAPTER XXVIII.
RECEPTORS OF THE SECOND ORDER.
AGGLUTININS.
Charrin and Rogers appear to have been the first (1889) to observe the clumping together of bacteria (Pseudomonas pyocyanea) when mixed with the blood serum of an animal immunized against them. Gruber and Durham (1896) first used the term “agglutination” in this connection and called the substance in the blood-serum “agglutinin.” Widal (1896) showed the importance of the reaction for diagnosis by testing the blood serum of an infected person against a known culture (typhoid fever).
Charrin and Rogers seem to be the first (1889) to notice the clumping of bacteria (Pseudomonas pyocyanea) when mixed with the blood serum of an animal that had been immunized against them. Gruber and Durham (1896) were the first to use the term “agglutination” in this context and referred to the substance in the blood serum as “agglutinin.” Widal (1896) demonstrated the significance of this reaction for diagnosis by testing the blood serum of an infected person against a known culture (typhoid fever).
It is now a well-known phenomenon that the proper injection of cells of any kind foreign to a given animal will lead to the accumulation in the animal’s blood of substances which will cause a clumping together of the cells used when suspended in a suitable liquid. The cells settle out of such suspension much more rapidly than they would otherwise do. This clumping is spoken of as “agglutination” and the substances produced in the animal are called “agglutinins.” If blood cells are injected then “hemagglutinins” result: if bacterial cells “bacterial agglutinins” for the particular organism used as “glanders agglutinin” for Pfeifferella mallei, “abortion agglutinin” for Bacterium abortus, “typhoid agglutinin” for Bacterium typhosum, etc.
It’s now a well-known fact that injecting any type of foreign cells into an animal leads to the buildup in the animal’s blood of substances that cause the cells to clump together when suspended in a suitable liquid. The cells settle out of this suspension much faster than they normally would. This clumping is referred to as “agglutination,” and the substances produced in the animal are called “agglutinins.” If blood cells are injected, the result is “hemagglutinins”; if bacterial cells are injected, they produce “bacterial agglutinins” specific to the organism used, such as “glanders agglutinin” for Pfeifferella mallei, “abortion agglutinin” for Bacterium abortus, “typhoid agglutinin” for Bacterium typhosum, and so on.
The phenomenon may be observed either under the microscope or in small test-tubes, that is, either microscopically or macroscopically.
The phenomenon can be seen either under a microscope or in small test tubes, that is, either microscopically or macroscopically.
In this case the cells introduced, or more properly, some substances within the cells, act as stimuli to the body cells of the animal injected to cause them to produce more of the specific cell receptors which respond to the stimulus. The substance within the introduced cell which acts as a stimulus (antigen) to the body cells is called an “agglutinogen.” That “agglutinogen” is present in the cell has been shown by injecting animals experimentally with extracts of cells (bacterial and other cells) and the blood serum of the animal injected showed the presence of agglutinin for the given cell. It will be noticed that the receptors which become the free agglutinins have at least two functions, hence at least two chemical groups. They must combine with the foreign cells and also bring about their clumping together, their agglutination. Hence it can be stated technically that an agglutinin possesses a haptophore group and an agglutinating group.
In this case, the cells introduced, or more accurately, some substances within those cells, act as triggers for the body cells of the injected animal, prompting them to produce more of the specific cell receptors that respond to the stimulus. The substance within the introduced cell that serves as a trigger (antigen) for the body cells is called an “agglutinogen.” It has been demonstrated that the “agglutinogen” is present in the cell by experimentally injecting animals with extracts of cells (such as bacterial and other cells), where the blood serum of the injected animal showed the presence of agglutinin specific to the given cell. It should be noted that the receptors that become the free agglutinins have at least two functions, meaning at least two chemical groups. They must interact with the foreign cells and also cause them to clump together, a process known as agglutination. Therefore, it can be technically stated that an agglutinin has a haptophore group and an agglutinating group.
It is probable that the agglutination, the clumping, is a secondary phenomenon depending on the presence of certain salts and that the agglutinin acts on its antigen as an enzyme, possibly a “splitting” enzyme. This is analogous to what occurs in the curdling of milk by rennet and in the coagulation of blood. This probability is substantiated by the fact that suspensions of bacteria may be “agglutinated” by appropriate strengths of various acids.
It’s likely that agglutination, or clumping, is a secondary effect caused by the presence of certain salts and that the agglutinin works on its antigen like an enzyme, possibly a “splitting” enzyme. This is similar to what happens when rennet curdles milk and when blood coagulates. This likelihood is supported by the fact that suspensions of bacteria can be “agglutinated” by specific concentrations of various acids.
The formation of agglutinin in the body for different bacteria does not as yet appear to be of any special significance in protecting the animal from the organism, since the bacteria are not killed, even though they are rendered non-motile, if of the class provided with flagella, and are clumped together. The fact that such bodies are formed, however, is of decided value in the diagnosis of disease, and also in the identification of unknown bacteria.
The development of agglutinin in the body for different bacteria doesn't seem to play any significant role in protecting the animal from the pathogens, as the bacteria aren't killed, even though they're made immobile, if they have flagella, and are grouped together. However, the presence of these antibodies is quite valuable for diagnosing diseases and identifying unknown bacteria.
In many bacterial diseases, agglutinins for the particular organism are present in the blood serum of the affected animal. Consequently if the blood serum of the animal be mixed with a suspension of the organism supposed to be the cause of the disease and the latter be agglutinated, one is justified in considering it the causative agent, provided certain necessary conditions are fulfilled. In the first place it must be remembered that the blood of normal animals frequently contains agglutinins (“normal agglutinins”) for many different bacteria when mixed with them in full strength. Hence the serum must always be diluted with physiological salt solution (0.85 per cent.). Further, closely related bacteria may be agglutinated to some extent by the same serum. It is evident that if they are closely related, their protoplasm must contain some substances of the same kind to account for this relationship. Since some of these substances may be agglutinogens, their introduction into the animal body will give rise to agglutinins for the related cells, as well as for the cell introduced. The agglutinins for the cell introduced “chief agglutinins,” will be formed in larger quantity, since a given bacterial cell must contain more of its own agglutinogen than that of any other cell. By diluting the blood serum from the animal to be tested the agglutinins for the related organisms (so-called “coagglutinins” or “partial agglutinins”) will become so much diminished as to show no action, while the agglutinin for the specific organism is still present in an amount sufficient to cause its clumping. Agglutinins are specific for their particular agglutinogens, but since a given blood serum may contain many agglutinins, the serum’s specificity for a given bacterium can be determined only by diluting it until this bacterium alone is agglutinated. Hence the necessity of diluting the unknown serum in varying amounts when testing against several known bacteria to determine for which it is specific, i.e., which is the cause of the disease in the animal.
In many bacterial diseases, agglutinins for the specific bacteria are found in the blood serum of the affected animal. Therefore, if the blood serum of the animal is mixed with a suspension of the suspected disease-causing organism and there is agglutination, it can be considered the cause of the disease, as long as certain conditions are met. First, it's important to note that the blood of healthy animals often contains agglutinins ("normal agglutinins") for many different bacteria when mixed with them at full strength. This is why the serum should always be diluted with a physiological salt solution (0.85 percent). Additionally, closely related bacteria may also be agglutinated to some degree by the same serum. It’s clear that if they are closely related, their protoplasm must contain some similar substances to explain this connection. Since some of these substances could be agglutinogens, their introduction into the animal's body will lead to the formation of agglutinins for both the related cells and the introduced cell. The agglutinins for the introduced cell, referred to as "chief agglutinins," will be produced in greater quantities because a specific bacterial cell is likely to contain more of its own agglutinogen than that of any other cell. By diluting the blood serum from the animal being tested, the agglutinins for the related organisms (called "coagglutinins" or "partial agglutinins") will decrease enough to show no reaction, while the agglutinin for the specific organism remains in a sufficient amount to cause clumping. Agglutinins are specific for their particular agglutinogens, but since a given blood serum might have many agglutinins, the serum’s specificity for a certain bacterium can only be determined by diluting it until only that bacterium is agglutinated. This highlights the need to dilute the unknown serum in various amounts when testing against several known bacteria to determine which one it is specific to, i.e., which one causes the disease in the animal.
The agglutinins in the serum may be removed from it by treating it with a suspension of the cells for which agglutinins are present. If the “chief” cell is used all the agglutinins will be absorbed. If related cells are used, only the agglutinins for this particular kind are removed. These “absorption tests” furnish another means of determining specificity of serum, or rather of determining the “chief agglutinin” present.
The agglutinins in the serum can be eliminated by treating it with a suspension of the cells for which those agglutinins exist. If the "main" cell is used, all the agglutinins will be absorbed. If related cells are used, only the agglutinins for that specific type will be removed. These "absorption tests" provide another way to determine the specificity of serum, or more accurately, to identify the "main agglutinin" present.
Just as an unidentified disease in an animal may be determined by testing its serum as above described against known kinds of bacteria, so unknown bacteria isolated from an animal, from water, etc., may be identified by testing them against the blood sera of different animals, each of which has been properly inoculated with a different kind of known bacteria. If the unknown organism is agglutinated by the blood of one of the animals in high dilution, and not by the others, evidently the bacterium is the same as that with which the animal has been inoculated, or immunized, as is usually stated. This method of identifying cultures of bacteria is of wide application, but is used practically only in those cases where other methods of identification are not readily applied, and especially where other methods are not sufficient as in the “intestinal group” of organisms in human practice.
Just like you can figure out an unknown disease in an animal by testing its serum against known types of bacteria, you can identify unknown bacteria isolated from an animal or water by testing them against the blood sera of different animals, each of which has been properly inoculated with a unique type of known bacteria. If the unknown organism clumps together when mixed with the blood of one animal at a high dilution, and doesn't react with the others, it’s clear that the bacterium is the same one the animal was inoculated with, or immunized, as it's typically described. This method of identifying bacterial cultures is widely applicable but is mainly used when other identification methods are impractical, especially in cases where other methods are not sufficient, like with the “intestinal group” of organisms in human medicine.
The diagnosis of disease in an animal by testing its serum is also a valuable and much used procedure. This is the method of the “Widal” or “Gruber-Widal” test for typhoid fever in man and is used in veterinary practice in testing for glanders, contagious abortion, etc. In some cases a dilution of the serum of from 20 to 50 times is sufficient for diagnosis (Malta fever), in most cases, however, 50 times is the lowest limit. Evidently the greater the dilution, that is, the higher the “titer,” the more specific is the reaction.
The diagnosis of disease in an animal by testing its serum is a valuable and widely used procedure. This is the method of the “Widal” or “Gruber-Widal” test for typhoid fever in humans and is used in veterinary practice to test for glanders, contagious abortion, and so on. In some cases, a dilution of the serum by 20 to 50 times is enough for diagnosis (like in Malta fever), but in most cases, a 50 times dilution is the minimum. Clearly, the greater the dilution, or the higher the “titer,” the more specific the reaction.
PRECIPITINS.
Since agglutinins act on bacteria, probably through the presence of substances within the bacterial cell, it is reasonable to expect that if these substances be dissolved out of the cell, there would be some reaction between their (colloidal) solution and the same serum. As a matter of fact Kraus (1897) showed that broth cultures freed from bacteria by porcelain filters do show a precipitate when mixed with the serum of an animal immunized against the particular bacterium and that the reaction is specific under proper conditions of dilution. It was not long after Kraus’s work until the experiments were tried of “immunizing” an animal not against a bacterium or its filtered culture, but against (colloidal) solutions of proteins, such as white of egg, casein of milk, proteins of meat and of blood serum, vegetable proteins, etc. It was ascertained that in all these cases the animal’s serum contains a substance which causes a precipitate with solutions of the protein used for immunization. The number of such precipitating serums that have been made experimentally is very large and it appears that protein from any source when properly introduced into the blood or tissues of an animal will cause the formation of a precipitating substance for its solutions. This substance is known, technically as a “precipitin.” The protein used as antigen to stimulate its formation, or some part of the protein molecule (haptophore group), which acts as stimulus to the cell is spoken of as a “precipitinogen,” both terms after the analogy of “agglutinin” and “agglutinogen.” In fact the specific precipitation and agglutination are strictly analogous phenomena. Precipitins act on proteins in (colloidal) solution and cause them to settle out, agglutinins act on substances within cells which cells are in suspension in a fluid and cause the cells to settle out. Ehrlich’s theory of the formation of precipitins is similar to that of agglutinins, and need not be repeated. Substitute the corresponding words in the theory of formation of agglutinins as above given and the theory applies.
Since agglutinins target bacteria, likely through the presence of substances inside the bacterial cell, it makes sense to think that if these substances were removed from the cell, there would be some interaction between their (colloidal) solution and the same serum. In fact, Kraus (1897) demonstrated that broth cultures, freed from bacteria by porcelain filters, do show a precipitate when mixed with the serum of an animal immunized against the specific bacterium, and that the reaction is specific under the right dilution conditions. Not long after Kraus’s work, experiments were conducted to “immunize” an animal not against a bacterium or its filtered culture, but against (colloidal) solutions of proteins like egg white, milk casein, meat proteins, blood serum proteins, vegetable proteins, etc. It was found that in all these cases, the animal’s serum contains a substance that causes a precipitate with solutions of the protein used for immunization. The number of such precipitating serums that have been created experimentally is quite large, and it seems that protein from any source, when properly introduced into the blood or tissues of an animal, will cause the formation of a precipitating substance for its solutions. This substance is technically known as a “precipitin.” The protein used as the antigen to stimulate its formation, or some part of the protein molecule (haptophore group), which acts as a stimulus to the cell, is referred to as a “precipitinogen,” both terms following the analogy of “agglutinin” and “agglutinogen.” In fact, specific precipitation and agglutination are closely related phenomena. Precipitins act on proteins in (colloidal) solution and cause them to settle out, while agglutinins act on substances within cells that are suspended in a fluid and cause the cells to settle out. Ehrlich’s theory of precipitin formation is similar to that of agglutins and doesn't need to be repeated. One can substitute the corresponding words in the theory of agglutinin formation as described above, and the theory will apply.
The precipitin reaction has not found much practical use in bacteriology largely because the “agglutination test” takes its place as simpler of performance and just as accurate. The reaction is, however, generally applicable to filtrates of bacterial cultures and could be used if needed. The so-called “mallease” reaction in glanders is an instance.
The precipitin reaction hasn't found much practical use in bacteriology mainly because the “agglutination test” is easier to perform and equally accurate. However, the reaction is generally applicable to filtrates of bacterial cultures and could be used if necessary. The so-called “mallease” reaction in glanders is one example.
Precipitins find their greatest usefulness in legal medicine and in food adulteration work. As was noted above, if animals, rabbits for example, are immunized with the blood of another animal (human beings) precipitins are developed which are specific for the injected blood with proper dilution. This forms an extremely valuable means of determining the kind of blood present in a given spot shown by chemical and spectroscopic tests to be blood and has been adopted as a legal test in countries where such rules of procedure are applied. Similarly the test has been used to identify the different kinds of meat in sausage, and different kinds of milk in a mixture. An extract of the sausage is made and tested against the serum of an animal previously treated with extract of horse meat, or hog meat, or beef, etc., the specific precipitate occurring with the specific serum. Such reactions have been obtained where the protein to be tested was diluted 100,000 times and more. Biological relationships and differences have been detected by the reaction. Human immune serum shows no reaction with the blood of any animals except to a slight extent with that of various monkeys, most with the higher, very slight with the lower Old World and scarcely any with New World monkeys.
Precipitins are most useful in legal medicine and in testing for food adulteration. As mentioned earlier, if animals, like rabbits, are immunized with the blood of another animal (such as humans), they produce precipitins that are specific to the injected blood when properly diluted. This provides an extremely valuable method for determining the kind of blood present in a sample that has been shown by chemical and spectroscopic tests to be blood, and it has been adopted as a legal test in countries where such procedures are followed. Similarly, this test has been used to identify the different types of meat in sausages and different types of milk in a mixture. An extract of the sausage is made and tested against the serum of an animal that was previously treated with extracts of horse meat, hog meat, or beef, with a specific precipitate forming in the presence of the specific serum. Such reactions have been observed even when the protein being tested was diluted 100,000 times or more. Biological relationships and differences have been detected through these reactions. Human immune serum shows no reaction with the blood of any animals, except to a slight extent with various monkeys—most notably with the higher primates, slightly with the lower Old World monkeys, and hardly at all with New World monkeys.
It is a fact of theoretical interest mainly that if agglutinins and precipitins themselves be injected into an animal they will act as antigens and cause the formation of antiagglutinins or antiprecipitins, which are therefore receptors of the first order since they simply combine with these immune bodies to neutralize their action, have only a combining or haptophore group. Also if agglutinins or precipitins be heated to the proper temperature they may retain their combining power but cause no agglutination or precipitation, i.e., they are converted into agglutinoid or precipitinoid respectively after the analogy of toxin and toxoid.
It’s mainly a theoretical interest that if agglutinins and precipitins are injected into an animal, they will act as antigens and trigger the production of antiagglutinins or antiprecipitins. These are considered first-order receptors since they simply bind to these immune bodies to neutralize their effects and have only a combining or haptophore group. Additionally, if agglutinins or precipitins are heated to the right temperature, they may keep their ability to bind but won’t cause agglutination or precipitation, i.e., they transform into agglutinoid or precipitinoid, similar to the relationship between toxin and toxoid.
Precipitins like agglutinins possess at least two groups—a combining or haptophore group and a precipitating (sometimes called zymophore) group. Hence they are somewhat more complex than antitoxins or antienzymes which have a combining group only. For this reason Ehrlich classes agglutinins and precipitins as receptors of the second order.
Precipitins, like agglutinins, have at least two groups—a combining or haptophore group and a precipitating (sometimes referred to as zymophore) group. Because of this, they are a bit more complex than antitoxins or antienzymes, which only have a combining group. For this reason, Ehrlich categorizes agglutinins and precipitins as receptors of the second order.
CHAPTER XXIX.
RECEPTORS OF THE THIRD ORDER.
CYTOLYSINS.
Before Koch definitely proved bacteria capable of causing disease several physiologists had noted that the red corpuscles of certain animals were destroyed by the blood of other animals (Creite, 1869, Landois, 1875), and Traube and Gescheidel had shown that freshly drawn blood destroys bacteria (1874). It was not until about ten years afterward that this action of the blood began to be investigated in connection with the subject of immunity. Von Fodor (1885) showed that saprophytic bacteria injected into the blood are rapidly destroyed. Flügge and his pupils, especially Nuttall in combating Metchnikoff’s theory of phagocytosis, announced in 1883, studied the action of the blood on bacteria and showed its destructive effect (1885–57). Nuttall also showed that the blood lost this power if heated to 56°. Buchner (1889) gave the name “alexin” (from the Greek “to ward off”) to the destroying substance and showed that the substance was present in the blood serum as well as in the whole blood, and that when the serum lost its power to dissolve, this could be restored by adding fresh blood. Pfeiffer (1894) showed that the destructive power of the blood of animals immunized against bacteria (cholera and typhoid) was markedly specific for the bacteria used. He introduced a mixture of the blood and the bacteria into the abdominal cavity of the immunized animal or of a normal one of the same species and noted the rapid solution of the bacteria by withdrawing portions of the peritoneal fluid and examining them (“Pfeiffer’s phenomenon”). Belfanti and Carbone and especially Bordet (1898) showed the specific dissolving action of the serum of one animal on the blood corpuscles of another animal with which it had been injected. Since this time the phenomenon has been observed with a great variety of cells other than red blood corpuscles and bacteria—leukocytes, spermatozoa, cells from liver, kidney, brain, epithelia, etc., protozoa, and many vegetable cells.
Before Koch definitively proved that bacteria could cause disease, several physiologists had observed that the red blood cells of certain animals were destroyed by the blood of other animals (Creite, 1869, Landois, 1875), and Traube and Gescheidel demonstrated that freshly drawn blood kills bacteria (1874). It wasn't until about ten years later that this effect of blood started to be studied in relation to immunity. Von Fodor (1885) showed that saprophytic bacteria injected into the bloodstream are quickly eliminated. Flügge and his students, especially Nuttall, while challenging Metchnikoff’s theory of phagocytosis, announced in 1883 that they examined the effect of blood on bacteria and demonstrated its destructive capacity (1885–57). Nuttall also showed that blood loses this ability if heated to 56°. Buchner (1889) named the destroying substance “alexin” (from the Greek “to ward off”) and showed that this substance was found in both blood serum and whole blood, and that when the serum lost its ability to dissolve, this could be restored by adding fresh blood. Pfeiffer (1894) demonstrated that the destructive capability of the blood from animals immunized against bacteria (cholera and typhoid) was significantly specific to the bacteria used. He introduced a mixture of blood and bacteria into the abdominal cavity of the immunized animal or a normal one of the same species and noted the rapid breakdown of the bacteria by taking samples of the peritoneal fluid and examining them (“Pfeiffer’s phenomenon”). Belfanti and Carbone, especially Bordet (1898), showed the specific dissolving action of one animal's serum on the blood cells of another animal into which it had been injected. Since then, this phenomenon has been observed with a wide variety of cells besides red blood cells and bacteria—leukocytes, sperm cells, liver cells, kidney cells, brain cells, epithelia, protozoa, and many plant cells.
It is therefore a well-established fact that the proper injection of an animal with almost any cell foreign to it will lead to the blood of the animal injected acquiring the power to injure or destroy cells of the same kind as those introduced. The destroying power of the blood has been variously called its “cytotoxic” or “cytolytic” power, though the terms are not strictly synonymous since “cytotoxic” means “cell poisoning” or “injuring,” while “cytolytic” means “cell dissolving.” The latter term is the one generally used and there is said to be present in the blood a specific “cytolysin.” The term is a general one and a given cytolysin is named from the cell which is dissolved, as a bacteriolysin, a hemolysin (red-corpuscle-lysin), epitheliolysin, nephrolysin (for kidney cells), etc. If the cell is killed but not dissolved the suffix “cidin” or “toxin” is frequently used as “bacteriocidin,” “spermotoxin,” “neurotoxin,” etc.
It is therefore a well-established fact that properly injecting an animal with almost any foreign cell will cause the blood of the injected animal to gain the ability to harm or destroy cells of the same type as those introduced. The harmful capability of the blood has been referred to as its “cytotoxic” or “cytolytic” power, although these terms aren’t exactly the same since “cytotoxic” means “cell poisoning” or “injuring,” while “cytolytic” means “cell dissolving.” The latter term is more commonly used, and it’s said that there is a specific “cytolysin” present in the blood. This term is general, and a specific cytolysin is named after the type of cell it dissolves, such as a bacteriolysin, a hemolysin (which is a lyosin for red blood cells), epitheliolysin, nephrolysin (for kidney cells), and so on. If the cell is killed but not dissolved, the suffix “cidin” or “toxin” is often used, as in “bacteriocidin,” “spermotoxin,” “neurotoxin,” etc.
The use of the term “cytolysin” is also not strictly correct, though convenient, for the process is more complex than if one substance only were employed. As was stated above, the immune serum loses its power to dissolve the cell if it is heated to 55° to 56° for half an hour, it is inactivated. But if there be added to the heated or inactivated serum a small amount of normal serum (which contains only a very little cytolytic substance, so that it has no dissolving power when so diluted) the mixture again becomes cytolytic. It is evident then that in cytolysis there are two distinct substances involved, one which is present in all serum, normal or immune, and the other present only in the immune cytolytic serum. This may be more apparent if the facts are arranged in the following form:
The term “cytolysin” isn't entirely accurate, although it’s handy, because the process is more complicated than using just one substance. As mentioned earlier, the immune serum loses its ability to dissolve cells when heated to 55° to 56° for half an hour; it becomes inactivated. However, if a small amount of normal serum (which contains only a tiny bit of cytolytic substance, so it has no dissolving power when diluted) is added to the heated or inactivated serum, the mixture becomes cytolytic again. It’s clear that cytolysis involves two distinct substances: one that’s present in all serum, whether normal or immune, and the other only found in immune cytolytic serum. This can be illustrated more clearly if we lay out the facts like this:
- I. Immune serum dissolves cells in high dilution.
- II. Heated immune serum does not dissolve cells.
- III. Normal serum in high dilution does not dissolve cells.
- II. + III., i.e., Heated immune serum plus diluted normal serum dissolves cells.
Therefore, there is something in heated immune serum necessary for cell dissolving and something different in diluted normal serum which is necessary. This latter something is present in unheated immune serum also, and is destroyed by heat. Experiment has shown that it is the substance present in all serum both normal and immune that is the true dissolving body, while the immune substance serves to unite this body to the cell to be destroyed, i.e., to the antigen. Since the immune body has therefore two uniting groups, one for the dissolving substance and one for the cell to be dissolved, Ehrlich calls it the “amboceptor.” He also uses the word “complement” to denote the dissolving substance, giving the idea that it completes the action of dissolving after it has been united to the cell by the amboceptor, thus replacing Buchner’s older term “alexin” for the same dissolving body.
So, there's something in heated immune serum that's necessary for breaking down cells, and something different in diluted normal serum that is also required. This latter component is found in unheated immune serum too, but it's destroyed by heat. Experiments have shown that the substance present in all serum, both normal and immune, is the actual dissolving agent, while the immune component helps connect this agent to the cell that needs to be destroyed, i.e., the antigen. Since the immune component essentially has two binding sites, one for the dissolving substance and one for the cell being dissolved, Ehrlich refers to it as the “amboceptor.” He also uses the term “complement” to describe the dissolving substance, suggesting that it completes the dissolving process after being linked to the cell by the amboceptor, thereby replacing Buchner’s earlier term “alexin” for the same dissolving agent.
AMBOCEPTORS.
The theory of formation of amboceptors is similar to that for the formation of the other types of antibodies. The cell introduced contains some substance, which acts as a chemical stimulus to some of the body cells provided with proper receptors so that more of these special receptors are produced, and eventually in excess so that they become free in the blood and constitute the free amboceptors. It will be noticed that these free receptors differ from either of the two kinds already described in that they have two uniting groups, one for the antigen (cell introduced) named cytophil-haptophore, the other for the complement, complementophil haptophore. Hence amboceptors are spoken of as receptors of the third order. They have no other function than that of this double combining power. The action which results is due to the third body—the complement. It will be readily seen that complement must possess at least two groups, a combining or haptophore group which unites with the amboceptor, and an active group which is usually called the zymophore or toxophore group. Complements thus resemble either toxins, where the specific cell (antigen) is injured or killed, or enzymes, in case the cell is likewise dissolved. This action again shows the close relation between toxins and enzymes. Complement may lose its active group in the same way that toxin does and becomes then complementoid. Complement is readily destroyed in blood or serum by heating it to 55° to 56° for half an hour, and is also destroyed spontaneously when serum stands for a day or two, less rapidly at low temperature than at room temperature.
The theory behind the formation of amboceptors is similar to how other types of antibodies are formed. The introduced cell contains a substance that acts as a chemical trigger for certain body cells that have the right receptors, leading to the production of more of these special receptors, eventually in excess, so that they become free in the blood and form the free amboceptors. It's important to note that these free receptors differ from the two types already described because they have two bonding groups: one for the antigen (the introduced cell), called cytophil-haptophore, and the other for the complement, known as complementophil haptophore. Therefore, amboceptors are referred to as receptors of the third order. Their only function is this dual combining ability. The resulting action is due to a third component—the complement. It is clear that complement must have at least two groups: one combining or haptophore group that connects with the amboceptor, and an active group typically referred to as the zymophore or toxophore group. Complements are similar to either toxins, where the specific cell (antigen) is harmed or killed, or to enzymes, if the cell is also dissolved. This once again illustrates the close relationship between toxins and enzymes. Complement can lose its active group in the same way a toxin does, becoming complementoid. Complement is easily destroyed in blood or serum by heating it to 55° to 56° for half an hour, and it also spontaneously degrades when serum is left standing for a day or two, with a slower rate of deterioration at lower temperatures than at room temperature.
Amboceptors appear to be specific in the same sense that agglutinins are. That is, if a given cell is used to immunize an animal, the animal’s blood will contain amboceptors for the cell used and also for others closely related to it. Immunization with spermatozoa or with epithelial or liver cells gives rise to amboceptors for these cells and also for red blood corpuscles and other body cells. A typhoid bactericidal serum has also some dissolving effect on colon bacilli, etc. Hence a given serum may contain a chief amboceptor and a variety of “coamboceptors,” or one amboceptor made up of a number of “partial amboceptors” each specific for its own antigen (“amboceptorogen”). Amboceptors may combine with other substances than antigen and complement, as is shown by their union with lecithin and other “lipoids,” though these substances seem capable of acting as complement in causing solution of blood corpuscles.
Amboceptors seem to be specific in the same way that agglutinins are. In other words, if a particular cell is used to immunize an animal, the animal’s blood will have amboceptors for that cell and also for other closely related cells. Immunizing with sperm cells or with epithelial or liver cells leads to the development of amboceptors for these cells as well as for red blood cells and other body cells. A serum that combats typhoid also has some dissolving effect on colon bacteria and so on. Therefore, a specific serum may have a main amboceptor and several other "coamboceptors," or one amboceptor that consists of several "partial amboceptors," each one specific to its own antigen ("amboceptorogen"). Amboceptors can interact with substances other than antigen and complement, as demonstrated by their binding with lecithin and other "lipoids," although these substances appear to act as complements when it comes to dissolving blood cells.
COMPLEMENTS.
As to whether complements are numerous, as Ehrlich claims, or there is only one complement, according to Buchner and others, need not be discussed here. In the practical applications given later as means of diagnosis it is apparent that all the complement or complements are capable of uniting with at least two kinds of amboceptors.
As for whether there are many complements, as Ehrlich suggests, or just one complement, according to Buchner and others, we don't need to dive into that here. In the practical applications mentioned later for diagnosis, it's clear that all the complement or complements can combine with at least two types of amboceptors.
If complement be injected into an animal it may act as an antigen and give rise to the formation of anticomplement which may combine with it and prevent its action and is consequently analogous to antitoxin. If amboceptors as antigen are injected into an animal there will be formed by the animal’s cells antiamboceptors. As one would expect, there are two kinds of antiamboceptors, one for each of its combining groups, since it has been stated that it is always the combining group of any given antigen that acts as the cell stimulus. Hence we may have an “anticytophil amboceptor” or an “anticomplementophil amboceptor.” These antiamboceptors and the anticomplements are analogous to antitoxin, antiagglutinin, etc., and hence are receptors of the first order.
If complement is injected into an animal, it can act as an antigen and lead to the formation of anticomplement, which can bind to it and block its action, making it similar to antitoxin. If amboceptors are injected into an animal as an antigen, the animal’s cells will produce antiamboceptors. As expected, there are two types of antiamboceptors, one for each of its binding groups, since it's been noted that it's always the binding group of a specific antigen that stimulates the cells. Therefore, we can have an “anticytophil amboceptor” or an “anticomplementophil amboceptor.” These antiamboceptors and the anticomplements are similar to antitoxin, antiagglutinin, etc., and are therefore first-order receptors.
ANTISNAKE VENOMS.
A practical use of antiamboceptors is in antisnake venoms. Snake poisons appear to contain only amboceptors for different cells of the body. In the most deadly the amboceptor is specific for nerve cells (cobra), in others for red corpuscles, or for endothelial cells of the bloodvessels (rattlesnake). The complement is furnished by the blood of the individual bitten, that is, in a sense the individual poisons himself, since he furnishes the destroying element. The antisera contain antiamboceptors which unite with the amboceptor introduced and prevent it joining to cells and thus binding the complement to the cells and destroying them. With this exception these antibodies are chiefly of theoretical interest.
A practical use of antiamboceptors is in antisnake venoms. Snake venoms seem to have only amboceptors for different cells in the body. In the most deadly types, the amboceptor targets nerve cells (like in cobras), while in others, it targets red blood cells or the endothelial cells of blood vessels (like in rattlesnakes). The complement comes from the blood of the person who was bitten; in a way, the person is poisoning themselves because they provide the destructive element. The antisera contain antiamboceptors that bind with the introduced amboceptor, preventing it from attaching to cells and stopping the complement from binding to those cells and destroying them. Aside from this exception, these antibodies are mostly of theoretical interest.
FAILURE OF CYTOLYTIC SERUMS.
The discovery of the possibility of producing a strongly bactericidal serum in the manner above described aroused the hope that such sera would prove of great value in passive immunization and serum treatment of bacterial diseases. Unfortunately such expectations have not been realized and no serum of this character of much practical importance has been developed as yet (with the possible exception of Flexner’s antimeningococcus serum in human practice. What hog cholera serum is remains to be discovered).
The discovery of the possibility of creating a highly effective bactericidal serum as described above raised hopes that these sera would be very valuable for passive immunization and serum treatment of bacterial diseases. Unfortunately, those expectations have not been met, and no serum of significant practical importance has been developed so far (with the possible exception of Flexner’s antimeningococcus serum in human practice. The nature of hog cholera serum is still to be determined).
The reasons for the failure of such sera are not entirely clear. The following are some that have been offered: (1) Amboceptors do not appear to be present in very large amount so that relatively large injections of blood are necessary, which is not without risk in itself. (2) Since the complement is furnished by the blood of the animal to be treated, there may not be enough of this to unite with a sufficient quantity of amboceptor to destroy all the bacteria present, hence the disease is continued by those that escape. (3) Or the complement may not be of the right kind to unite with the amboceptor introduced, since this is derived from the blood of a heterologous (“other kind”) species. In hog-cholera serum, if it is bactericidal, this difficulty is removed by using blood of a homologous (“same kind”) animal. Hence Ehrlich suggested the use of apes for preparing bactericidal sera for human beings. The good results which have been reported in the treatment of human beings with the serum of persons convalescing from the same disease indicate that this lack of proper complement for the given amboceptor is probably a chief factor in the failure of sera from lower animals. (4) The bacteria may be localized in tissues (lymph glands), within cavities (cranial, peritoneal), in hollow organs (alimentary tract), etc., so that it is not possible to get at them with sufficient serum to destroy all. This difficulty is obviated by injecting directly into the spinal canal when Flexner’s antimeningococcus serum is used. (5) Even if the bacteria are dissolved it does not necessarily follow that their endotoxins are destroyed. These may be merely liberated and add to the danger of the patient, though this does not appear to be a valid objection. (6) Complement which is present in such a large excess of amboceptor may just as well unite with amboceptor which is not united to the bacteria to be destroyed as with that which is, and hence be actually prevented from dissolving the bacteria. Therefore it is difficult to standardize the serum to get a proper amount of amboceptor for the complement present.
The reasons for the failure of these sera aren't completely clear. Here are some possible explanations: (1) Amboceptors don't seem to exist in very large amounts, so relatively large blood injections are necessary, which carries its own risks. (2) Since the complement comes from the blood of the animal being treated, there might not be enough to combine with a sufficient quantity of amboceptor to eliminate all the bacteria present, allowing the disease to persist. (3) Alternatively, the complement may not be the right type to combine with the introduced amboceptor since it's derived from the blood of a heterologous (“other kind”) species. In hog-cholera serum, if it's bactericidal, this issue is resolved by using blood from a homologous (“same kind”) animal. That's why Ehrlich suggested using apes to prepare bactericidal sera for humans. The positive results reported in treating humans with serum from individuals recovering from the same illness suggest that the lack of proper complement for the specific amboceptor is likely a major reason for the failure of sera from lower animals. (4) The bacteria might be localized in tissues (like lymph glands), within cavities (like cranial or peritoneal), or in hollow organs (like the digestive tract), making it impossible to administer enough serum to destroy all of them. This problem can be addressed by injecting directly into the spinal canal when using Flexner’s antimeningococcus serum. (5) Even if the bacteria are dissolved, it doesn't mean their endotoxins are destroyed. These may simply be released and add to the patient's danger, although this doesn’t seem to be a strong counterargument. (6) Complement, which is present in such a large excess of amboceptor, may bond with amboceptor that isn’t connected to the bacteria meant to be destroyed, preventing the bacteria from being dissolved. Therefore, it's challenging to standardize the serum to achieve the right amount of amboceptor for the available complement.
COMPLEMENT-FIXATION TEST.
Although little practical use has been made of bactericidal sera, the discovery of receptors of this class and the peculiar relations between the antigen, amboceptor and complement have resulted in developing one of the most delicate and accurate methods for the diagnosis of disease and for the recognition of small amounts of specific protein that is in use today.
Although there hasn't been much practical use of bactericidal sera, the discovery of receptors in this class and the unique relationships between the antigen, amboceptor, and complement have led to the development of one of the most precise and sensitive methods for diagnosing diseases and identifying small quantities of specific proteins that are currently in use.
This method is usually spoken of as the “complement-fixation” or the “complement-deviation test” (“Wassermann test” in syphilis) and is applicable in a great variety of microbial diseases, but it is of practical importance in those diseases only where other methods are uncertain—syphilis in man, concealed glanders in horses, contagious abortion in cattle, etc. A better name would be the “Unknown Amboceptor Test” since it is the amboceptor that is searched for in the test by making use of its power to “fix” complement.
This method is often referred to as the “complement-fixation” or the “complement-deviation test” (known as the “Wassermann test” for syphilis) and can be used for a wide range of microbial diseases. However, it is particularly important in cases where other methods are unreliable—such as syphilis in humans, hidden glanders in horses, and contagious abortion in cattle, among others. A more fitting name would be the “Unknown Amboceptor Test” because it is the amboceptor that the test looks for, utilizing its ability to “fix” complement.
The principle is the same in all cases. The method depends, as indicated above, on the ability of complement to combine with at least two amboceptor-antigen systems, and on the further fact that if the combination with one amboceptor-antigen system is once formed, it does not dissociate so as to liberate the complement for union with the second amboceptor-antigen system. If an animal is infected with a microörganism and a part of its defensive action consists in destroying the organisms in its blood or lymph, then it follows from the above discussion of cytolysins that there will be developed in the blood of the animal amboceptor specific for the organism in question. If the presence of this specific amboceptor can be detected, the conclusion is warranted that the organism for which it is specific is the cause of the disease. Consequently what is sought in the “complement-fixation test” is a specific amboceptor. In carrying out the test, blood serum from the suspected animal is collected, heated at 56° for half an hour to destroy any complement it contains and mixed in definite proportions with the specific antigen and with complement. The antigen is an extract of a diseased organ (syphilitic fetal liver, in syphilis), a suspension of the known bacteria, or an extract of these bacteria. Complement is usually derived from a guinea-pig, since the serum of this animal is higher in complement than that of most animals. The blood of the gray rat contains practically as much. If the specific amboceptor is present, that is, if the animal is infected with the suspected disease, the complement will unite with the antigen-amboceptor system and be “fixed,” that is, be no longer capable of uniting with any other amboceptor-antigen system. No chemical or physical means of telling whether this union has occurred or not, except as given below, has been discovered as yet, though doubtless will be by physico-chemical tests, nor can the combination be seen. Hence an “indicator,” as is so frequently used in chemistry, is put into the mixture of antigen-amboceptor-complement after it has been allowed to stand in the incubator for one-half to one hour to permit the union to become complete. The “indicator” used is a mixture of sheep’s corpuscles and the heated (“inactivated”) blood serum of a rabbit which has been injected with sheep’s blood corpuscles and therefore contains a hemolytic amboceptor specific for the corpuscles which is capable also of uniting with complement. The indicator is put into the first mixture and the whole is again incubated and examined. If the mixture is clear and colorless with a deposit of red corpuscles at the bottom, that would mean that the complement had been bound to the first complex, since it was not free to unite with the second sheep’s corpuscles (antigen)—rabbit serum (hemolytic amboceptor) complex—and destroy the corpuscles. Hence if the complement is bound in the first instance, the specific amboceptor for the first antigen must have been present in the blood, that is, the animal was infected with the organism in question. Such a reaction is called a “positive” test.
The principle is the same in all cases. The method depends, as mentioned earlier, on the ability of complement to combine with at least two amboceptor-antigen systems, and on the fact that once a combination with one amboceptor-antigen system is formed, it does not dissociate to free the complement for binding with the second amboceptor-antigen system. If an animal is infected with a microorganism and part of its defense against it involves destroying the organisms in its blood or lymph, it follows from the earlier discussion of cytolysins that specific amboceptors for the organism in question will develop in the animal's blood. If the presence of this specific amboceptor can be detected, it can be concluded that the organism for which it is specific is the cause of the disease. Therefore, what is sought in the “complement-fixation test” is a specific amboceptor. In the test, blood serum from the suspected animal is collected, heated at 56° for half an hour to destroy any complement it contains, and mixed in specific proportions with the specific antigen and with complement. The antigen may be an extract from a diseased organ (like syphilitic fetal liver in syphilis), a suspension of known bacteria, or an extract of those bacteria. Complement usually comes from a guinea pig, as its serum has a higher complement level than most animals. The blood of the gray rat contains nearly as much. If the specific amboceptor is present, meaning the animal has the suspected disease, the complement will combine with the antigen-amboceptor system and become “fixed,” meaning it cannot unite with any other amboceptor-antigen system. No chemical or physical means has yet been found to determine whether this union has occurred, except as mentioned below, although it's likely that further physico-chemical tests will reveal methods, and the combination itself is not visible. Thus, an “indicator,” commonly used in chemistry, is added to the mixture of antigen-amboceptor-complement after it has been allowed to stand in the incubator for half an hour to one hour to allow the union to complete. The “indicator” is a mixture of sheep’s red blood cells and the heated (“inactivated”) blood serum of a rabbit that has been injected with sheep’s red blood cells, so it contains a hemolytic amboceptor specific for those cells, which can also bind with complement. The indicator is added to the first mixture, which is incubated again and then examined. If the mixture is clear and colorless with a deposit of red blood cells at the bottom, it indicates that the complement has been bound to the first complex, as it was not free to combine with the second sheep’s red blood cells (antigen) and rabbit serum (hemolytic amboceptor) complex to destroy the red blood cells. Therefore, if the complement is bound in the first case, the specific amboceptor for the first antigen must have been present in the blood, meaning the animal was infected with the organism in question. Such a reaction is called a “positive” test.
On the other hand, if the final solution is clear but of a red color, that would mean that complement must have united with the corpuscles—hemolytic amboceptor system—and destroyed the corpuscles in order to cause the clear red solution of hemoglobin. If complement united with this system it could not have united with the first system, hence there was no specific amboceptor there to bind it; no specific amboceptor in the animal’s blood, means no infection. Hence a red solution is a “negative test.”
On the other hand, if the final solution is clear but red, that would indicate that the complement must have combined with the corpuscles—hemolytic amboceptor system—and destroyed the corpuscles to create the clear red solution of hemoglobin. If the complement combined with this system, it couldn’t have connected with the first system, which means there was no specific amboceptor there to bind it; no specific amboceptor in the animal's blood means no infection. Therefore, a red solution is a “negative test.”
Antigen (specific for the amboceptor sought) | + | Patient’s Serum, heated (unknown amboceptor) | + | Complement (derived from guinea pig’s serum) |
Incubate one-half hour in a water bath or one hour in an incubator.
Incubate for 30 minutes in a water bath or for an hour in an incubator.
Then add the indicator which is
Then add the indicator, which is
Antigen (red blood corpuscles) | + | Amboceptor (for corpuscles, serum of a rabbit immunized against the red corpuscles) |
Incubate as above.
Incubate as mentioned above.
In practice all the different ingredients must be accurately tested, standardized and used in exact quantities, and tests must also be run as controls with a known normal blood of an animal of the same species as the one examined and with a known positive blood.
In practice, all the different ingredients need to be accurately tested, standardized, and used in precise quantities. Additionally, tests must also be conducted as controls using a known normal blood sample from an animal of the same species being examined, as well as a known positive blood sample.
It should be stated that in one variety of the Complement Fixation Test, namely, the “Wassermann Test for Syphilis” in human beings, an antigen is used which is not derived from the specific organism (Treponema pallidum) which causes the disease nor even from syphilitic tissue. It has been determined that alcohol will extract from certain tissues, human or animal, substances which act specifically in combining with the syphilitic amboceptor present in the blood. Alcoholic extracts of beef heart are most commonly used. Details of this test may be learned in the advanced course in Immunity and Serum Therapy.
It's important to point out that in one version of the Complement Fixation Test, known as the “Wassermann Test for Syphilis” in humans, an antigen is used that doesn't come from the specific organism (Treponema pallidum) responsible for the disease, nor from any syphilitic tissue. Studies have shown that alcohol can extract certain substances from tissues, human or animal, that specifically interact with
The complement-fixation test might be applied to the determination of unknown bacteria, using the unknown culture as antigen and trying it with the sera of different animals immunized against a variety of organisms, some one of which might prove to furnish specific amboceptor for the unknown organism and hence indicate what it is. The test used in this way has not been shown to be a practical necessity and hence is rarely employed. It has been used, however, to detect traces of unknown proteins, particularly blood-serum proteins, in medico-legal cases in exactly the above outlined manner and is very delicate and accurate.
The complement-fixation test can be used to identify unknown bacteria by taking the unknown culture as the antigen and testing it with the sera from various animals immunized against different organisms. One of these sera might provide a specific amboceptor for the unknown organism, indicating its identity. However, this method hasn’t been shown to be practically necessary, so it’s rarely used. That said, it has been employed to detect traces of unknown proteins, especially blood serum proteins, in medical-legal cases in the way described above, and it is very sensitive and accurate.
CHAPTER XXX.
PHAGOCYTOSIS—OPSONINS.
It has been mentioned that Metchnikoff, in a publication in 1883, attempted to explain immunity on a purely cellular basis. It has been known since Haeckel’s first observation in 1858 that certain of the white corpuscles do engulf solid particles that may get into the body, and among them bacteria. Metchnikoff at first thought that this engulfing and subsequent intracellular digestion of the microörganisms were sufficient to protect the body from infection. The later discoveries (discussed in considering Ehrlich’s theory of immunity) of substances present in the blood serum and even in the blood plasma which either destroy the bacteria or neutralize their action have caused Metchnikoff to modify his theory to a great extent. He admitted the presence of these substances, though giving them other names, but ascribed their formation to the phagocytes or to the same organs which form the leukocytes—lymphoid tissue generally, bone marrow. It is not within the province of this work to attempt to reconcile these theories, but it may be well to point out that Ehrlich’s theory is one of chemical substances and that the origin of these substances is not an essential part of the theory, so that the two theories, except in some minor details, are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
It has been noted that Metchnikoff, in a publication from 1883, tried to explain immunity based solely on cellular processes. Since Haeckel’s initial observation in 1858, it has been recognized that certain white blood cells engulf solid particles that enter the body, including bacteria. Initially, Metchnikoff believed that this engulfment and the subsequent digestion of microorganisms within the cells were enough to protect the body from infection. However, later discoveries (discussed in relation to Ehrlich’s theory of immunity) revealed substances in the blood serum and plasma that either kill bacteria or neutralize their effects, leading Metchnikoff to significantly revise his theory. He acknowledged the existence of these substances, albeit under different names, and attributed their formation to phagocytes or the same organs that produce leukocytes—generally lymphoid tissue and bone marrow. This work does not aim to reconcile these theories, but it's important to point out that Ehrlich’s theory focuses on chemical substances and that the origin of these substances is not a crucial part of the theory, meaning the two theories are not necessarily incompatible, aside from some minor details.

Sir A. E. Wright and Douglas, in 1903, showed that even in those instances where immunity depends on phagocytosis, as it certainly does in many cases, the phagocytes are more or less inactive unless they are aided by chemical substances present in the blood. These substances act on the bacteria, not on the leukocytes, and change them in such a way that they are more readily taken up by the phagocytes. Wright proposed for these bodies the name opsonin, derived from a Greek word signifying “to prepare a meal for.” Neufeld and Rimpau at about the same time (1904), in studying immune sera, observed substances of similar action in these sera and proposed the name bacteriotropins, or bacteriotropic substances. There is scarcely a doubt that the two names are applied to identical substances and that Wright’s name opsonin should have preference.
Sir A. E. Wright and Douglas, in 1903, demonstrated that even in cases where immunity relies on phagocytosis, which it certainly does in many instances, the phagocytes are somewhat inactive unless supported by chemical substances found in the blood. These substances act on the bacteria, not on the leukocytes, altering them in a way that makes it easier for the phagocytes to engulf them. Wright proposed the term opsonin, which comes from a Greek word meaning “to prepare a meal for.” Around the same time (1904), Neufeld and Rimpau, while investigating immune sera, noted similar substances in these sera and suggested the name bacteriotropins, or bacteriotropic substances. There is little doubt that the two names refer to the same substances, and Wright’s term opsonin should be preferred.
The chemical nature of opsonins is not certainly determined, but they appear to be a distinct class of antibodies and to possess two groups, a combining or haptophore and a preparing or opsonic group and hence are similar to antibodies of Ehrlich’s second order—agglutinins and precipitins. Wright also showed that opsonins are just as specific as agglutinins are—that is, a micrococcus opsonin prepares micrococci only for phagocytosis and not streptococci or any other bacteria.
The exact chemical makeup of opsonins isn't clear, but they seem to be a unique type of antibody with two parts: a combining or haptophore group and a preparing or opsonic group. This makes them similar to the second-order antibodies described by Ehrlich—agglutinins and precipitins. Wright also demonstrated that opsonins are as specific as agglutinins; for example, a micrococcus opsonin only prepares micrococci for phagocytosis, not streptococci or any other bacteria.
Wright showed that opsonins for many bacteria are present in normal serum and that in the serum of an animal which has been immunized against such bacteria the opsonins are increased in amount. Also that in a person infected with certain bacteria the opsonins are either increased or diminished, depending on whether the progress of the infection is favorable or unfavorable. The opsonic power of a serum normal or otherwise is determined by mixing an emulsion of fresh leukocytes in normal saline solution with a suspension of the bacteria and with the serum to be tested. The leukocytes must first be washed in several changes of normal salt solution to free them from any adherent plasma or serum. The mixture is incubated for about fifteen minutes and then slides are made, stained with a good differential blood stain, Wright’s or other, and the average number of bacteria taken up by at least fifty phagocytes taken in order in a field is determined by counting under the microscope. The number so obtained Wright calls the phagocytic index of the serum tested. The phagocytic index of a given serum divided by the phagocytic index of a normal serum gives the opsonic index of the serum tested. Assuming the normal opsonic index to be 1, Wright asserts that in healthy individuals the range should be not more than from 0.8 to 1.2, and that an index below 0.8 may show a great susceptibility for the organism tested, infection with the given organism if derived from the individual, or improper dosage in case attempts have been made to immunize by using killed cultures, vaccines, of the organism.
Wright demonstrated that opsonins for many bacteria are found in normal serum, and that in the serum of an animal that has been immunized against these bacteria, the opsonins are increased in quantity. Additionally, in a person infected with certain bacteria, the opsonins can either be increased or decreased, depending on whether the infection is progressing positively or negatively. The opsonic power of a serum, whether normal or not, is assessed by mixing an emulsion of fresh leukocytes in normal saline solution with a suspension of the bacteria and the serum being tested. The leukocytes must first be washed in multiple changes of normal saline to remove any lingering plasma or serum. The mixture is incubated for about fifteen minutes, after which slides are prepared, stained with a reliable differential blood stain such as Wright’s or another, and the average number of bacteria engulfed by at least fifty phagocytes sequentially examined in a field is counted under the microscope. The resulting count is referred to by Wright as the phagocytic index of the tested serum. The phagocytic index of a specific serum divided by the phagocytic index of a normal serum provides the opsonic index of the tested serum. Assuming the normal opsonic index is 1, Wright states that in healthy individuals, the range should be between 0.8 and 1.2, and that an index below 0.8 may indicate a high susceptibility to the tested organism, an infection with that organism if it originated from the individual, or incorrect dosage if attempts were made to immunize using killed cultures or vaccines of the organism.
On the occasion of the author’s visit to Wright’s clinic (1911) he stated that he used the determination of the opsonic index chiefly as a guide to the dosage in the use of vaccines.
On the author's visit to Wright's clinic (1911), he mentioned that he mainly used the determination of the opsonic index as a guide to the dosage for vaccine use.
Most workers outside the Wright school have failed to recognize any essential value of determinations of the opsonic index in the use of vaccines. Some of the reasons for this are as follows: The limit of error in phagocytic counts may be as great as 50 per cent. in different series of fifty, hence several hundred must be counted, which adds greatly to the tediousness and time involved; the variation in apparently healthy individuals is frequently great, hence the “normal” is too uncertain; finally the opsonic index and the clinical course of the disease do not by any means run parallel. Undoubtedly the method has decided value in the hands of an individual who makes opsonic determinations his chief work, as Wright’s assistants do, but it can scarcely be maintained at the present time that such determinations are necessary in vaccine therapy. Nevertheless that opsonins actually exist and that they play an essential part in phagocytosis, and hence in immunity, is now generally recognized.
Most workers outside the Wright school haven't recognized the essential value of determining the opsonic index in vaccine use. Some reasons for this include: the error margin in phagocytic counts can be as high as 50 percent in different sets of fifty, meaning several hundred counts must be done, which adds to the tediousness and time required; the variation among apparently healthy individuals is often significant, making the “normal” too uncertain; and finally, the opsonic index does not consistently correlate with the clinical progression of the disease. While the method is definitely valuable for someone whose primary focus is opsonic determinations, as is the case with Wright’s assistants, it's hard to argue that these determinations are essential in vaccine therapy at this time. Nevertheless, it is now generally accepted that opsonins do exist and play a crucial role in phagocytosis and, thus, immunity.
BACTERIAL VACCINES.
Whether determinations of opsonic index are useful or not is largely a matter of individual opinion, but there is scarcely room to doubt that Wright has conferred a lasting benefit by his revival of the use of dead cultures of bacteria, bacterial vaccines, both for protective inoculation and for treatment. It is perhaps better to use the older terms “vaccination” and “vaccine” (though the cow, vacca, is not concerned) than to use Wright’s term “opsonic method” in this connection, bearing in mind that the idea of a vaccine is that it contains the causative organism of the infection as indicated on p. 253.
Whether the determination of opsonic index is useful or not is mostly a matter of personal opinion, but it’s hard to deny that Wright has made a lasting impact by reviving the use of dead cultures of bacteria and bacterial vaccines for both protective inoculation and treatment. It might be better to stick with the older terms “vaccination” and “vaccine” (even though the cow, vacca, isn’t involved) rather than use Wright’s term “opsonic method” in this context, keeping in mind that the concept of a vaccine is that it contains the causative organism of the infection as indicated on p. 253.
As early as 1880 Touissant proposed the use of dead cultures of bacteria to produce immunity. But because injections of such cultures were so frequently followed by abscess formation, doubtless due to the high temperatures used to kill the bacteria, the method was abandoned. Further, Pasteur and the French school persistently denied the possibility of success with such a procedure, and some of them even maintain this attitude at the present time. The successes of Wright and the English school which are being repeated so generally wherever properly attempted, leave no doubt in the unprejudiced of the very great value of the method and have unquestionably opened a most promising field both for preventive inoculation and for treatment in many infectious diseases. That the practice is no more universally applicable than are immune serums and that it has been and is still being grossly overexploited is undoubted.
As early as 1880, Touissant suggested using dead cultures of bacteria to create immunity. However, since injections of these cultures often led to abscess formation, likely due to the high temperatures used to kill the bacteria, the method was set aside. Additionally, Pasteur and the French school consistently denied the possibility of success with this approach, and some still hold this view today. The successes of Wright and the English school, which are being replicated widely wherever attempted correctly, clearly demonstrate the significant value of the method and have undoubtedly opened up a very promising area for both preventive inoculation and treatment of many infectious diseases. It's clear that this practice is not as universally applicable as immune serums and that it has been, and continues to be, excessively overused.
The use of a vaccine is based on two fundamental principles. The first of these is that the cell introduced must not be in a condition to cause serious injury to the animal by its multiplication and consequent elaboration of injurious substances. The second is that, on the other hand, it must contain antigens in such condition that they will act as stimuli to the body cells to produce the necessary antibodies, whether these be opsonins, bactericidal substances, or anti-endotoxins. In the introduction of living organisms there is always more or less risk of the organism not being sufficiently attenuated and hence of the possibility of its producing too severe an infection. In using killed cultures, great care must be exercised in destroying the organisms, so that the antigens are not at the same time rendered inactive. Hence in the preparation of bacterial vaccines by Wright’s method the temperature and the length of time used to kill the bacteria are most important factors. This method is in general to grow the organisms on an agar medium, rub off the culture and emulsify in sterile normal salt solution (0.85 per cent. NaCl). The number of bacteria per cc. is determined by staining a slide made from a small volume of the emulsion mixed with an equal volume of human blood drawn from the finger and counting the relative number of bacteria and of red blood corpuscles. Since the corpuscles are normally 5,000,000 per c.mm., a simple calculation gives the number of bacteria. The emulsion of bacteria is then diluted so that a certain number of millions shall be contained in each cc., “standardized” as it is called, then heated to the proper temperature for the necessary time and it is ready for use. A preservative, as 0.5 per cent. phenol, tricresol, etc., is added unless the vaccine is to be used up at once. The amounts of culture, salt solution, etc., vary with the purpose for which the vaccine is to be used, from one or two agar slant cultures and a few cc. of solution, when a single animal is to be treated, to bulk agar cultures and liters of solution as in preparing antityphoid vaccine on a large scale.
The use of a vaccine is based on two main principles. First, the cell that is introduced must not be in a condition that can seriously harm the animal through its growth and the resulting harmful substances it produces. Secondly, it must include antigens that are in a state to stimulate the body's cells to produce the necessary antibodies, whether they are opsonins, bactericidal substances, or anti-endotoxins. There is always some risk when introducing living organisms, as they may not be sufficiently weakened, which could lead to a severe infection. When using killed cultures, it’s crucial to ensure that the organisms are fully destroyed without also deactivating the antigens. Therefore, in preparing bacterial vaccines using Wright’s method, the temperature and duration used to kill the bacteria are key factors. Generally, this method involves growing the organisms on an agar medium, scraping off the culture, and mixing it in a sterile normal salt solution (0.85 per cent. NaCl). The number of bacteria per cc. is figured out by staining a slide made from a small volume of the emulsion mixed with an equal volume of blood drawn from the finger and counting the relative amount of bacteria compared to red blood cells. Since red blood cells usually number around 5,000,000 per c.mm., a simple calculation will give the number of bacteria. The bacteria emulsion is then diluted to ensure a certain number of millions are in each cc., known as “standardizing,” followed by heating to the appropriate temperature for the required time, making it ready for use. A preservative, like 0.5 per cent. phenol or tricresol, is added unless the vaccine will be used immediately. The quantities of culture, salt solution, and so on vary depending on the vaccine's purpose, ranging from one or two agar slant cultures and a few cc. of solution for treating a single animal, to bulk agar cultures and liters of solution for producing an antityphoid vaccine on a large scale.
Agar surface cultures are used so that there will be as little admixture of foreign protein as possible (see Anaphylaxis, p. 289 et seq.). Normal saline solution is isotonic with the body cells and hence is employed as the vehicle.
Agar surface cultures are used to minimize the mixture of foreign proteins (see Anaphylaxis, p. 289 et seq.). Normal saline solution is isotonic with body cells, so it's used as the carrier.
Lipovaccines.—The suspension of bacteria in neutral oil was first used by Le Moignac and Pinoy who gave the name “lipovaccines” (λιπος = fat) to them. It was claimed that the reaction following injection of these vaccines was less severe than with saline vaccines in many instances; also, that the bacteria were much more slowly absorbed. For these two reasons it was hoped that much larger numbers of bacteria could be injected at one dose and one injection would suffice instead of three or more as ordinarily used. The technique of preparation, standardization and killing of the organisms has not as yet been sufficiently well established to warrant the general substitution of lipovaccines for ordinary saline suspensions.
Lipovaccines.—The mixture of bacteria in neutral oil was first used by Le Moignac and Pinoy, who named them “lipovaccines” (lipos = fat). It was said that the reaction after injecting these vaccines was less severe than with saline vaccines in many cases; also, that the bacteria were absorbed much more slowly. For these two reasons, it was hoped that a much larger number of bacteria could be injected in one dose, making it possible to give just one injection instead of three or more, as is usually done. However, the methods for preparing, standardizing, and killing the organisms have not yet been well established enough to justify the widespread use of lipovaccines in place of standard saline suspensions.
Vaccines are either “autogenous” or “stock.” An “autogenous” vaccine is a vaccine that is made from bacteria derived from the individual or animal which it is desired to vaccinate and contains not only the particular organism but the particular strain of that organism which is responsible for the lesion. Stock vaccines are made up from organisms like the infective agent in a given case but derived from some other person or animal or from laboratory cultures. Commercial vaccines are “stock” vaccines and are usually “polyvalent” or even “mixed.” A “polyvalent” vaccine contains several strains of the infective agent and a “mixed” contains several different organisms.
Vaccines are either “autogenous” or “stock.” An “autogenous” vaccine is made from bacteria taken from the individual or animal that needs to be vaccinated and includes not only the specific organism but also the exact strain of that organism causing the issue. Stock vaccines consist of organisms similar to the infectious agent in a particular case but come from a different person or animal, or from lab cultures. Commercial vaccines are “stock” vaccines and are typically “polyvalent” or even “mixed.” A “polyvalent” vaccine includes several strains of the infectious agent, while a “mixed” vaccine contains multiple different organisms.
Stock vaccines have shown their value when used as preventive inoculations, notably so in typhoid fever in man, anthrax and black-leg in cattle. The author is strongly of the opinion, not only from the extended literature on the subject, but also from his own experience in animal, and especially in human cases, that stock vaccines are much inferior and much more uncertain in their action when used in the treatment of an infection, than are autogenous vaccines. This applies particularly to those instances in which pneumococci, streptococci, micrococci, and colon bacilli are the causative agents but to others as well. The following are some of the reasons for this opinion: The above organisms are notoriously extremely variable in their virulence. While there is no necessarily close connection between virulence and antigenic property, yet since virulence is so variable, it is rational to assume that antigenic property is also extremely variable. Individuals vary just as much in susceptibility and hence in reactive power, and generally speaking, an individual will react better in the production of antibodies to a stimulus to which he has been more or less subjected, i.e., to organisms derived from his own body.
Stock vaccines have proven their worth when used as preventive shots, especially in typhoid fever in humans, anthrax, and black-leg in cattle. The author firmly believes, based not only on extensive literature on the topic but also on personal experience with animals and especially humans, that stock vaccines are much less effective and more unpredictable when used in the treatment of infections compared to autogenous vaccines. This is particularly true for cases where pneumococci, streptococci, micrococci, and colon bacilli are the causative agents, but it applies to others as well. Here are some reasons for this belief: These organisms are known to be extremely variable in their virulence. While there isn't a necessary close link between virulence and antigenic property, it's reasonable to assume that, since virulence is so variable, antigenic properties are also very inconsistent. People vary in their susceptibility and, therefore, in their reactive ability, and generally, an individual will respond better in producing antibodies to a stimulus they have been exposed to, i.e., to organisms that come from their own body.
In the preparation of a vaccine great care must be used in heating so that the organisms are killed, but the antigens are not destroyed. Many of the enzymes present in bacteria, especially the proteolytic ones, are not any more sensitive to heat than are the antigens, hence are not destroyed entirely. Therefore a vaccine kept in stock for a long time gradually has some of its antigens destroyed by the uninjured enzymes present with them, and so loses in potency. Therefore in treating a given infection it is well to make up a vaccine from the lesion, use three or four doses and if more are necessary make up a new vaccine.
In making a vaccine, it's crucial to heat it carefully so that the organisms are killed while the antigens remain intact. Many enzymes found in bacteria, particularly proteolytic ones, are just as heat-resistant as the antigens and aren't completely destroyed. As a result, a vaccine that has been stored for a long time gradually loses some of its antigens due to the undamaged enzymes still present, which reduces its effectiveness. Therefore, when treating a specific infection, it's best to create a vaccine from the affected area, administer three or four doses, and if more are needed, prepare a new vaccine.
In accordance with the theory on which the use of vaccines is based, i.e., that they stimulate the body cells to produce immunizing antibodies, it is clear that they are especially suitable in those infections in which the process is localized and should not be of much value in general infections. In the latter case the cells of the body are stimulated to produce antibodies by the circulating organisms, probably nearly to their limit, hence the introduction of more of the same organisms, capable of stimulating though dead, is apt to overtax the cells and do more harm than good. It is not possible to tell accurately when this limit is reached, but the clinical symptoms are a guide. If vaccines are used at all in general infections they should be given in the early stages and in small doses at first with close watch as to the effect. In localized infections only the cells in the immediate neighborhood are much stimulated, hence the introduction of a vaccine calls to their aid cells in the body generally, and much more of the resulting antibodies are carried to the lesion in question. Manifestly surgical procedures such as incision, drainage, washing away of dead and necrotic tissue with normal saline solution, not necessarily antiseptics, will aid the antibodies in their action and are to be recommended where indicated.
According to the theory that underpins the use of vaccines, i.e., that they encourage the body's cells to produce immunizing antibodies, it's clear that they are particularly effective in infections that are localized and may not be very useful in general infections. In the case of general infections, the body's cells are already being stimulated to produce antibodies by the circulating pathogens, likely pushing them close to their limits. Therefore, introducing more of the same pathogens, even if they're dead, can overload the cells and potentially cause more harm than good. It's hard to determine exactly when this limit is reached, but clinical symptoms can serve as a guide. If vaccines are used at all for general infections, they should be administered early on and started with small doses, with careful monitoring of their effects. In localized infections, only the nearby cells are significantly stimulated, so introducing a vaccine helps mobilize more cells in the body, resulting in a greater supply of antibodies directed toward the affected area. Clearly, surgical procedures like incision, drainage, and washing away dead or necrotic tissue with normal saline solution—not necessarily antiseptics—will support the antibodies in their work and are recommended when appropriate.
In the practical application of any remedy the dosage is most important. Unfortunately there is no accurate method of determining this with a vaccine. Wright recommended determining the number of the organisms per cc. as before mentioned, and his method or some modification of it is still in general use. From what was said with regard to variation, both in organisms and in individuals, it can be seen that the number of organisms is at least only a very rough guide. This is further illustrated by the doses of micrococcus (staphylococcus) vaccines recommended by different writers, which vary from 50,000,000 to 2,000,000,000 per cc. The author is decidedly of the opinion that there is no way of determining the dosage of a vaccine in the treatment of any given case except by the result of the first dose. Hence it is his practice to make vaccines of a particular organism of the same approximate strength, and to give a dose of a measured portion of a cubic centimeter, judging the amount by what the individual or animal can apparently withstand, without too violent a reaction. If there is no local or general reaction or if it is very slight and there is no effect on the lesion, the dose is too small. If there is a violent local reaction with severe constitutional symptoms clinically, and the lesion appears worse, the dose is too large. There should be some local reaction and some general, but not enough to cause more than a slight disturbance, easy to judge in human subjects, more difficult in animals. In cases suitable for vaccine treatment no serious results should follow from a properly prepared vaccine, though the process of healing may be delayed temporarily. Wright claimed, and many have substantiated him, that always following a vaccination there is a period when the resistance of the animal is diminished. This is called the “negative phase,” and Wright considered this to last as long as the opsonic index remained low, and when this latter began to increase the stage of the “positive” or favorable phase was reached. As has been stated the opsonic index is pretty generally regarded as of doubtful value, though the existence of a period of lowered resistance is theoretically probable from the fact that antibodies already present in the blood will be partially used up in uniting with the vaccine introduced and that the body cells are called upon suddenly to do an extra amount of work and it takes them some time to adapt themselves. This time, the “negative phase,” is much better determined by the clinical symptoms, general and especially local. It is good practice to begin with a dose relatively small. The result of this is an indication of the proper dosage and also prepares the patient for a larger one. The second dose should follow the first not sooner than three or four days, and should be five to seven days if the first reaction is severe. These directions are not very definite, but clinical experience to date justifies them. It is worth the time and money to one who wishes to use vaccines to learn from one who has had experience both in making and administering them, and then to remember that each patient is an individual case, for the use of vaccines as well as for any other kind of treatment.
In the practical application of any treatment, the dosage is extremely important. Unfortunately, there's no precise way to determine this for a vaccine. Wright suggested measuring the number of organisms per cc, as mentioned earlier, and his method or a variation of it is still commonly used. Given the variations in organisms and individuals, it's clear that the number of organisms is only a very rough guideline at best. This is further highlighted by the recommended doses of micrococcus (staphylococcus) vaccines from different authors, which range from 50,000,000 to 2,000,000,000 per cc. The author firmly believes that the only reliable way to determine a vaccine's dosage for any specific case is by observing the result of the first dose. Therefore, he tends to create vaccines with a similar strength of the specific organism and administer a dose of a measured cubic centimeter, judging the amount based on how well the individual or animal can tolerate it, ensuring there isn’t too strong a reaction. If there’s no local or general reaction, or if it’s very minimal and has no effect on the lesion, the dose is too small. If there’s a severe local reaction with serious constitutional symptoms, and the lesion seems worse, the dose is too large. There should be some local and general reaction, but not enough to cause more than a slight disturbance, which is easy to gauge in humans, though more challenging in animals. In suitable cases for vaccine treatment, no serious issues should arise from a properly prepared vaccine, although the healing process may be temporarily delayed. Wright asserted, and many have supported him, that there’s always a period after vaccination when the animal's resistance is decreased. This is referred to as the “negative phase,” which Wright believed lasted as long as the opsonic index was low; when it began to rise, the “positive” or favorable phase began. As stated, the opsonic index is generally considered to be of questionable value, though a period of lowered resistance is theoretically likely, since antibodies already present in the bloodstream may be partially used up in bonding with the introduced vaccine, and the body cells are suddenly required to do extra work, which takes time to adjust to. This time, the “negative phase,” is much better indicated by clinical symptoms, both general and especially local. It’s best practice to start with a relatively small dose. The outcome of this first dose provides guidance for the correct dosage and prepares the patient for a larger one. The second dose should be administered no sooner than three or four days after the first, and ideally five to seven days if the initial reaction is severe. These guidelines are somewhat vague, but clinical experience to date supports them. It’s worth the time and money for anyone wanting to use vaccines to learn from someone experienced in both creating and administering them, and to remember that each patient is a unique case, just like with any other treatment.
AGGRESSIN.
Opsonins have been shown to be specific substances which act on bacteria in such a way as to render them more readily taken up by the leukocytes. By analogy one might expect to find bacteria secreting specific substances which would tend to counteract the destructive action of the phagocytes and bactericidal substances. Bail and his co-workers claim to have demonstrated such substances in exudates in certain diseases and have given the distinctive name “aggressins” to them. By injecting an animal with “aggressins,” antiaggressins are produced which counteract their effects and thus enable the bacteria to be destroyed. The existence of such specific bodies is not generally accepted as proved. The prevailing idea is that bacteria protect themselves in any given case by the various toxic substances that they produce, and that “aggressins” as a special class of substances are not formed.
Opsonins are specific substances that interact with bacteria, making it easier for leukocytes to absorb them. Similarly, one might expect that bacteria could produce specific substances to counteract the harmful effects of phagocytes and bactericidal agents. Bail and his team claim to have identified such substances in exudates from certain diseases, which they have named “aggressins.” When an animal is injected with “aggressins,” the body produces antiaggressins that neutralize their effects, allowing the bacteria to be eliminated. However, the existence of these specific substances is not widely accepted as proven. The common belief is that bacteria defend themselves by producing various toxic substances, and that “aggressins” do not exist as a distinct class of substances.
CHAPTER XXXI.
ANAPHYLAXIS.
Dallera, in 1874, and a number of physiologists of that period, observed peculiar skin eruptions following the transfusion of blood, that is, the introduction of foreign proteins. In the years subsequent to the introduction of diphtheria antitoxin (1890) characteristic “serum rashes” were not infrequently reported, sometimes accompanied by more or less severe general symptoms and occasionally death—a train of phenomena to which the name “serum sickness” was later applied, since it was shown that it was the horse serum (foreign protein) that was the cause, and not the antitoxin itself. In 1898 Richet and Hericourt noticed that some of the dogs which they were attempting to immunize against toxic eel serum not only were not immunized but suffered even more severely after the second injection. They obtained similar results with an extract of mussels which contain a toxin. Richet gave the name “anaphylaxis” (“no protection”) to this phenomenon to distinguish it from immunity or prophylaxis (protection).
Dallera, in 1874, and several physiologists of that time, noticed unusual skin rashes following blood transfusions, which is the introduction of foreign proteins. In the years after diphtheria antitoxin was introduced in 1890, characteristic “serum rashes” were often reported, sometimes accompanied by varying degrees of general symptoms and occasionally resulting in death—a series of events that came to be known as “serum sickness.” It was later determined that it was the horse serum (foreign protein) causing this reaction, not the antitoxin itself. In 1898, Richet and Hericourt observed that some dogs they were trying to immunize against toxic eel serum not only failed to become immunized but actually suffered more severely after the second injection. They found similar outcomes with an extract from mussels that contain a toxin. Richet called this phenomenon “anaphylaxis” (“no protection”) to differentiate it from immunity or prophylaxis (protection).
All the above-mentioned observations led to no special investigations as to their cause. In 1903, Arthus noticed abscess formation, necrosis and sloughing following several injections of horse serum in immediately adjacent parts of the skin in rabbits (“Arthus’ phenomenon”). Theobald Smith, in 1904, observed the death of guinea-pigs following properly spaced injections of horse serum. This subject was investigated by Otto and by Rosenau and Anderson in this country and about the same time von Pirquet and Schick were making a study of serum rashes mentioned above. The publications of these men led to a widespread study of the subject of injections of foreign proteins. It is now a well-established fact that the injection into an animal of a foreign protein—vegetable, animal or bacterial, simple or complex—followed by a second injection after a proper length of time leads to a series of symptoms indicating poisoning, which may be so severe as to cause the death of the animal. Richet’s term “anaphylaxis” has been applied to the condition of the animal following the first injection and indicates that it is in a condition of supersensitiveness for the protein in question. The animal is said to be “sensitized” for that protein.25 The sensitization is specific since an animal injected with white of chicken’s egg reacts to a second injection of chicken’s egg only and not pigeon’s egg or blood serum or any other protein. The specific poisonous substance causing the symptoms has been called “anaphylotoxin” though what it is, is still a matter of investigation. It is evident that some sort of an antibody results from the first protein injected and that it is specific for its own antigen.
All the observations mentioned earlier didn’t lead to any special investigations into their cause. In 1903, Arthus identified abscess formation, tissue death, and tissue sloughing after several injections of horse serum in nearby areas of the skin in rabbits (“Arthus’ phenomenon”). In 1904, Theobald Smith noticed that guinea pigs died after properly spaced injections of horse serum. This issue was explored by Otto and by Rosenau and Anderson in the U.S., while around the same time, von Pirquet and Schick were studying the serum rashes mentioned earlier. The publications from these researchers sparked a widespread investigation into the topic of injecting foreign proteins. It’s now well-established that injecting an animal with a foreign protein—whether plant-based, animal-based, or bacterial, simple or complex—followed by a second injection after an appropriate period leads to a series of symptoms indicating poisoning, which can be severe enough to cause the animal’s death. Richet coined the term “anaphylaxis” for the condition observed in the animal after the first injection, indicating that it becomes supersensitive to the specific protein. The animal is considered “sensitized” to that protein. The sensitization is specific since an animal injected with chicken egg white only reacts to a second injection of chicken egg and not to pigeon egg, blood serum, or any other protein. The specific toxic substance causing the symptoms is referred to as “anaphylotoxin,” though its exact nature is still under investigation. Clearly, some type of antibody results from the first protein injection, and it is specific to its own antigen.
A period of ten days is usually the minimum time that must elapse between the first and second injections in guinea-pigs in order that a reaction may result, though a large primary dose requires much longer. If the second injection is made within less time no effect follows, and after three or more injections at intervals of about one week the animal fails to react at all, it has become “immune” to the protein. Furthermore, after an animal has been sensitized by one injection and has reacted to a second, then, if it does not die from the reaction, it fails to react to subsequent injections. In this latter case it is said to be “antianaphylactic.”
A period of ten days is usually the minimum time that must pass between the first and second injections in guinea pigs for a reaction to occur, although a large initial dose takes much longer. If the second injection is given in less time, there’s no effect, and after three or more injections spaced about a week apart, the animal doesn’t react at all; it has become “immune” to the protein. Additionally, after an animal has been sensitized by one injection and has reacted to a second, if it doesn’t die from the reaction, it won’t respond to any further injections. In this last case, it is termed “antianaphylactic.”
It must be remembered that proteins do not normally get into the circulation except by way of the alimentary tract. Here all proteins that are absorbed are first broken down to their constituent amino-acids, absorbed as such and these are built up into the proteins characteristic of the animal’s blood. Hence when protein as such gets into the blood it is a foreign substance to be disposed of. The blood contains proteolytic enzymes for certain proteins normally. It is also true that the body cells possess the property of digesting the proteins of the blood and building them up again into those which are characteristic of the cell. Hence it appears rational to assume that the foreign proteins act as stimuli to certain cells to produce more of the enzymes necessary to decompose them, so that they may be either built up into cell structure or eliminated as waste. If in this process of splitting up of protein a poison were produced, then the phenomena of “anaphylaxis” could be better understood. As a matter of fact Vaughan and his co-workers have shown that by artificially splitting up proteins from many different sources—animal, vegetable, pathogenic and saprophytic bacteria—a poison is produced which appears to be the same in all cases and which causes the symptoms characteristic of anaphylaxis. On the basis of these facts it is seen that anaphylaxis is simply another variety of immunity. The specific antibody in this case is an enzyme which decomposes the protein instead of precipitating it. The enzyme must be specific for the protein since these differ in constitution. Vaughan even goes so far as to say that the poison is really the central ring common to all proteins and that they differ only in the lateral groups or side chains attached to this central nucleus. The action of the enzyme in this connection would be to split off the side chains, and since these are the specific parts of the protein, the enzyme must be specific for each protein. The pepsin of the gastric juice and the trypsin of the pancreas split the native proteins only to peptones. As is well known, these when injected in sufficient quantity give rise to poisonous symptoms, and will also give rise to anaphylaxis under properly spaced injections. They do not poison normally because they are split by the intestinal erepsin to amino-acids and absorbed as such. Whether Vaughan’s theory of protein structure is the true one or not remains to be demonstrated. It is not essential to the theory of anaphylaxis above outlined, i.e., a phenomenon due to the action of specific antibodies which are enzymes. On physiological grounds this appears the most rational of the few explanations of anaphylaxis that have been offered and was taught by the author before he had read Vaughan’s theory along the same lines.
It should be noted that proteins typically don't enter the bloodstream except through the digestive system. Here, all proteins that get absorbed are first broken down into their individual amino acids, which are then absorbed and rebuilt into the proteins found in the animal's blood. Therefore, when a protein directly enters the blood, it is considered a foreign substance that needs to be eliminated. The blood contains proteolytic enzymes for certain proteins as a norm. Additionally, it’s true that the body’s cells can digest the proteins in the blood and then reform them into those that are typical for the cell. Thus, it makes sense to think that foreign proteins stimulate certain cells to produce more of the enzymes needed to break them down, so they can be either integrated into cell structure or removed as waste. If a toxin were produced during the breakdown of protein, it would help explain the phenomenon of “anaphylaxis.” In fact, Vaughan and his colleagues have demonstrated that by artificially breaking down proteins from various sources—animal, plant, pathogenic, and saprophytic bacteria—a toxin is produced that seems to be the same across all cases and causes the symptoms typical of anaphylaxis. From these findings, we can see that anaphylaxis is merely another type of immunity. The specific antibody in this case is an enzyme that breaks down the protein instead of causing it to precipitate. This enzyme must be specific to the protein since they vary in structure. Vaughan even suggests that the toxin is essentially the central ring common to all proteins, differing only in the lateral groups or side chains attached to this central core. In this context, the enzyme would act to remove the side chains, and since these are the specific elements of the protein, the enzyme must be tailored to each protein. Pepsin in gastric juice and trypsin in the pancreas split native proteins only into peptones. As is well known, these can cause toxic symptoms when injected in large amounts and can also trigger anaphylaxis with appropriately spaced injections. They don’t normally cause poisoning because they are broken down by intestinal erepsin into amino acids, which are then absorbed. Whether Vaughan’s theory of protein structure is correct is still to be proven. However, this is not essential to the previously mentioned theory of anaphylaxis, i.e., a phenomenon caused by the action of specific antibodies that are enzymes. On physiological grounds, this appears to be the most logical among the few explanations of anaphylaxis that have been proposed and was taught by the author before he encountered Vaughan’s theory along similar lines.
On the basis of the author’s theory the phenomena of protein immunity and antianaphylaxis may be explained in the following way which the author has not seen presented. The enzymes necessary to decompose the injected protein are present in certain cells and are formed in larger amount by those cells to meet the increased demand due to injection of an excess of protein. They are retained in the cell for a time at least. If a second dose of protein is given before the enzymes are excreted from the cells as waste, this is digested within the cells in the normal manner. If a third dose is given, the cells adapt themselves to this increased intracellular digestion and it thus becomes normal to them. Hence the immunity is due to this increased intracellular digestion.
Based on the author’s theory, the phenomena of protein immunity and antianaphylaxis can be explained in a way that the author hasn't seen presented before. The enzymes needed to break down the injected protein are found in certain cells, and those cells produce more of them to handle the increased demand from the excess protein injection. These enzymes are held in the cell for a time. If a second dose of protein is given before the enzymes are expelled from the cells as waste, the protein is digested within the cells in the usual way. If a third dose is given, the cells adjust to this increased intracellular digestion, making it a normal process for them. Therefore, this immunity results from the heightened intracellular digestion.
On the other hand, if the second injection is delayed long enough, then the excess enzyme, but not all, is excreted from the cells and meets the second dose of protein in the blood stream and rapidly decomposes it there, so that more or less intoxication from the split products results. This uses up excess enzyme, hence subsequent injections are not digested in the blood stream but within the cells as before. So that “antianaphylaxis” is dependent on the exhaustion of the excess enzyme in the blood, and the condition is fundamentally the same as protein immunity, i.e., due to intracellular digestion in each case.
On the other hand, if the second injection is postponed long enough, then the excess enzyme, though not all of it, gets excreted from the cells and encounters the second dose of protein in the bloodstream, quickly breaking it down there, which can lead to more or less intoxication from the byproducts. This depletes the excess enzyme, so later injections aren't digested in the bloodstream as they were before, but instead within the cells. Thus, “antianaphylaxis” relies on the depletion of the excess enzyme in the blood, and the situation is fundamentally the same as protein immunity, i.e., due to intracellular digestion in both cases.
As has been indicated “serum sickness” and sudden death following serum injections are probably due to a sensitization of the individual to the proteins of the horse in some unknown way. Probably hay fever urticarial rashes and idiosyncrasies following the ingestion of certain foods—strawberries, eggs, oysters, etc., are anaphylactic phenomena.
As mentioned, "serum sickness" and sudden death after serum injections are likely caused by the individual's sensitivity to horse proteins in some unclear way. Allergies like hay fever, skin rashes, and unusual reactions to certain foods—strawberries, eggs, oysters, and so on—are probably anaphylactic reactions.
In medical practice the reaction is used as a means of diagnosis in certain diseases, such as the tuberculin test in tuberculosis, the mallein test in glanders. The individual or animal with tuberculosis becomes sensitized to certain proteins of the tubercle bacillus and when these proteins in the form of tuberculin are introduced into the body a reaction results, local or general, according to the method of introduction. The practical facts in connection with the tuberculin test are also in harmony with the author’s theory of anaphylaxis as above outlined. Milder cases of tuberculosis give more vigorous reactions because the intracellular enzymes are not used up rapidly enough since the products of the bacillus are secreted slowly in such cases. Hence excess of enzyme is free in the blood and the injection of the tuberculin meets it there and a vigorous reaction results. In old, far-advanced cases, no reaction occurs, because the enzymes are all used in decomposing the large amount of tuberculous protein constantly present in the blood. The fact that an animal which has once reacted fails to do so until several months afterward likewise depends on the fact that the excess enzyme is used in the reaction and time must elapse for a further excess to accumulate.
In medical practice, reactions are used as a way to diagnose certain diseases, like the tuberculin test for tuberculosis and the mallein test for glanders. An individual or animal with tuberculosis becomes sensitized to specific proteins from the tubercle bacillus. When these proteins, in the form of tuberculin, are introduced into the body, a reaction occurs, either local or general, depending on how they are administered. The practical facts related to the tuberculin test also align with the author’s theory of anaphylaxis outlined above. Milder cases of tuberculosis produce stronger reactions because the intracellular enzymes aren’t depleted quickly enough due to the slow secretion of bacillus products. Therefore, excess enzymes remain in the blood, and when tuberculin is injected, a vigorous reaction takes place. In chronic, advanced cases, no reaction happens because all the enzymes are used up to break down the large amounts of tuberculous protein constantly present in the blood. The fact that an animal that has previously reacted does not do so again for several months also relates to the idea that the excess enzymes are used in the reaction, and time is needed for a new excess to build up.
The anaphylactic reaction has been made use of in the identification of various types of proteins and is of very great value since the reaction is so delicate, particularly when guinea-pigs are used as test animals. Wells has detected the 0.000,001 g. of protein by this test. It is evident that the test is applicable in medico-legal cases and in food examination and has been so used.
The anaphylactic reaction has been used to identify different types of proteins and is extremely valuable since the reaction is very sensitive, especially when guinea pigs are used as test subjects. Wells has detected 0.000001 grams of protein with this test. It is clear that the test is useful in medical-legal cases and in food testing, and has been utilized for these purposes.
Antigen | Antibody | Action of Antibody | Class of Receptor |
---|---|---|---|
Toxin | Antitoxin | Combines with toxin and hence prevents toxin from uniting with a cell and injuring it, i.e., neutralizes toxin. | I. |
Enzyme | Antienzyme | Combines with enzyme and thus prevents enzyme from uniting with anything else and showing its action, i.e., neutralizes enzyme. | I. |
Solution of protein | Precipitin | Unites with its antigen and causes its precipitation from solution. | II. |
Solution of protein | ? | Causes phenomenon of anaphylaxis(?) | (?) |
Suspension of cells | Agglutinin | Unites with its antigen causes its clumping together and settling out of suspension. | II. |
Suspension of cells | Opsonin | Unites with its antigen and makes the cells more easily taken up by phagocytes. | II. (?) |
Suspension of cells | Amboceptor | Unites with its antigen and also with complement which latter then dissolves the antigen. | III. |
Precipitin | Antiprecipitin | Neutralizes precipitin. | I. |
Agglutinin | Antiagglutinin | Neutralizes agglutinin. | I. |
Opsonin | Antiopsonin | Neutralizes opsonin. | I. |
Amboceptor | Antiamboceptor (two kinds) | Neutralizes amboceptor. | I. |
Complement | Anticomplement | Neutralizes complement. | I. |
Summary of Immunity as Applied to Protection from Disease.
The discussion of “immunity problems” in the preceding chapters serves to show that protection from disease either as a condition natural to the animal or as an acquired state is dependent on certain properties of its body cells or fluids, or both. The actual factors so far as at present known may be summarized as follows:
The discussion of “immunity problems” in the previous chapters shows that protection from disease, whether it’s a natural condition for the animal or something acquired, relies on specific properties of its body cells or fluids, or both. The current known factors can be summarized as follows:
1. Antitoxins which neutralize true toxins; shown to exist for very few diseases.
1. Antitoxins that neutralize real toxins; proven to exist for only a handful of diseases.
2. Cytolytic substances which destroy the invading organism: in reality two substances; amboceptor, which is specific, and complement, the real dissolving enzyme.
2. Cytolytic substances that eliminate the invading organism: actually two substances; amboceptor, which is specific, and complement, the actual dissolving enzyme.
3. Phagocytosis or the destruction of the invading organisms within the leukocytes.
3. Phagocytosis is the process where leukocytes destroy invading organisms.
4. Opsonins which render the bacteria more readily taken up by the phagocytes.
4. Opsonins that make it easier for phagocytes to take up the bacteria.
5. Enzymes other than complement possibly play a part in the destruction of some pathogenic organisms or their products. This remains to be more definitely established.
5. Enzymes besides complement may also be involved in breaking down certain harmful organisms or their byproducts. This still needs to be confirmed more definitively.
6. It is possible that in natural immunity there might be no receptors in the body cells to take up the organisms or their products, or the receptors might be present in certain cells but of a very low chemical affinity, so that combination does not occur. It is even highly probable that many substances formed by invading organisms which might injure specialized cells, such as those of glandular, nervous or muscle tissue, have a more rapid rate of reaction with, or a stronger affinity for, lower unspecialized cells, such as connective and lymphoid tissue, and unite with these so that their effects are not noticed.
6. It's possible that in natural immunity, there may be no receptors in body cells to pick up the organisms or their products, or the receptors might be present in some cells but have a very low chemical affinity, meaning that combination doesn’t happen. It’s even quite likely that many substances produced by invading organisms, which could harm specialized cells like those in glandular, nervous, or muscle tissue, react more quickly with, or have a stronger affinity for, less specialized cells like connective and lymphoid tissue, and combine with these so that their effects go unnoticed.
The importance of these different, factors varies in different diseases and need not be considered in this connection.
The significance of these various factors differs across diseases and doesn't need to be addressed in this context.
The question “which of the body cells are engaged in the production of antibodies” is not uncommonly asked. On physiological grounds it would not seem reasonable that the highly specialized tissues above mentioned could take up this work, even though they are the ones which suffer the greatest injury in disease. Hence it is to be expected that the lower or unspecialized cells are the source, and it has been shown that the antibodies are produced by the phagocytes (though not entirely as Metchnikoff maintained), by lymphoid tissue generally, by the bone marrow and also by connective-tissue cells, though in varying degrees.
The question "which body cells produce antibodies" is frequently asked. From a physiological perspective, it doesn't seem reasonable that the highly specialized tissues mentioned earlier could handle this task, even though they are the ones that get hit hardest in disease. Therefore, it's expected that the less specialized cells are the source, and research has shown that antibodies are produced by phagocytes (although not entirely as Metchnikoff suggested), by lymphoid tissue, by bone marrow, and also by connective tissue cells, though in different amounts.
Since immunity depends on the activity of the body cells it is evident that one of the very best methods for avoiding infectious diseases is to keep these cells up to their highest state of efficiency, to keep in “good health.” Hence good health means not only freedom from disease but also protection against disease.
Since immunity relies on the activity of the body's cells, it's clear that one of the best ways to avoid infectious diseases is to keep these cells functioning at their highest level of efficiency, to stay in “good health.” So, good health means not just freedom from disease but also protection against disease.
List of Laboratory Exercises Given in Connection with the Class Work Included in this Text-book.
- Exercise 1. Cleaning glassware.
- Exercise 2. Preparation of broth medium from meat juice.
- Exercise 3. Preparation of gelatin medium from broth.
- Exercise 4. Preparation of agar medium from broth.
- Exercise 5. Potato tubes.
- Exercise 6. Potato plates.
- Exercise 7. Plain milk tubes.
- Exercise 8. Litmus milk tubes.
- Exercise 9. Sugar broth media.
- Exercise 10. Blood-serum tubes.
- Exercise 11. Inoculation of tubes. Action on complex proteins.
- Exercise 12. Production of gas from carbohydrates.
- Exercise 13. Production of indol.
- Exercise 14. Reduction of nitrates.
- Exercise 15. Chromogenesis: Illustrates nicely the variation with environment.
- Exercise 16. Enzyme production.
- Exercise 17. Making of plate cultures; isolation in pure culture.
- Exercise 18. Stain making and staining.
- Exercise 19. Cell forms and cell groupings.
- Exercise 20. Hanging drop slides.
- Exercise 21. Staining of spores.
- Exercise 22. Staining of acid-fast bacteria.
- Exercise 23. Staining of capsules.
- Exercise 24. Staining of metachromatic granules.
- Exercise 25. Staining of flagella.
- Exercise 26. Study of individual species.
- Exercise 27. Determination of thermal death-point.
- Exercise 28. Action of disinfectants on bacteria.
- Exercise 29. Action of sunlight on bacteria.
DESCRIPTIVE CHART—SOCIETY OF AMERICAN BACTERIOLOGISTS.
Prepared by Committee on Methods of Identification of Bacterial Species.—F. D. Chester, F. P. Gorham, Erwin F. Smith.
Prepared by the Committee on Methods of Identifying Bacterial Species.—F. D. Chester, F. P. Gorham, Erwin F. Smith.
Endorsed by the Society for general use at the Annual Meeting, December, 1907.
Approved by the Society for general use at the Annual Meeting, December 1907.
GLOSSARY OF TERMS.
- AGAR HANGING BLOCK,
- a small block of nutrient agar cut from a pour plate, and placed on a cover-glass, the surface next the glass having been first touched with a loop from a young fluid culture or with a dilution from the same. It is examined upside down, the same as a hanging drop.
- AMEBOID,
- assuming various shapes like an ameba.
- AMORPHOUS,
- without visible differentiation in structure.
- ARBORESCENT,
- a branched, tree-like growth.
- BEADED,
- in stab or stroke, disjointed or semiconfluent colonies along the lines of inoculation.
- BRIEF,
- a few days, a week.
- BRITTLE,
- growth dry, friable under the platinum needle.
- BULLATE,
- growth rising in convex prominences, like a blistered surface.
- BUTYROUS,
- growth of a butter-like consistency.
- CHAINS,
- Short chains, composed of 2 to 8 elements.
- Long chains, composed of more than 8 elements.
- CILIATE,
- having fine, hair-like extensions, like cilia.
- CLOUDY,
- said of fluid cultures which do not contain pseudozoogleæ.
- COAGULATION,22
- the separation of casein from whey in milk. This may take place quickly or slowly, and as the result either of the formation of an acid or of a lab ferment.
- CONTOURED,
- an irregular, smoothly undulating surface, like that of a relief map.
- CONVEX surface,
- the segment of a circle, but flattened.
- COPROPHYL,
- dung bacteria.
- CORIACEOUS,
- growth tough, leathery, not yielding to the platinum needle.
- CRATERIFORM,
- round, depressed, due to the liquefaction of the medium.
- CRETACEOUS,
- growth opaque and white, chalky.
- CURLED,
- composed of parallel chains in wavy strands, as in anthrax colonies.
- DIASTASIC ACTION,
- same as DIASTATIC, conversion of starch into water-soluble substances by diastase.
- ECHINULATE,
- in agar stroke a growth along line of inoculation, with toothed or pointed margins; in stab cultures growth beset with pointed outgrowths.
- EFFUSE,
- growth thin, veily, unusually spreading.
- ENTIRE,
- smooth, having a margin destitute of teeth or notches.
- EROSE,
- border irregularly toothed.
- FILAMENTOUS,
- growth composed of long, irregularly placed or interwoven filaments.
- FILIFORM,
- in stroke or stab cultures a uniform growth along line of inoculation.
- FIMBRIATE,
- border fringed with slender processes, larger than filaments.
- FLOCCOSE,
- growth composed of short curved chains, variously oriented.
- FLOCCULENT,
- said of fluids which contain pseudozoogleæ, i.e., small adherent masses of bacteria of various shapes and floating in the culture fluid.
- FLUORESCENT,
- having one color by transmitted light and another by reflected light.
- GRAM’S STAIN,
- a method of differential bleaching after gentian violet, methyl violet, etc. The + mark is to be given only when the bacteria are deep blue or remain blue after counter-staining with Bismarck brown.
- GRUMOSE,
- clotted.
- INFUNDIBULIFORM,
- form of a funnel or inverted cone.
- IRIDESCENT,
- like mother-of-pearl. The effect of very thin films.
- LACERATE,
- having the margin cut into irregular segments as if torn.
- LOBATE,
- border deeply undulate, producing lobes (see Undulate).
- LONG,
- many weeks, or months.
- MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE,
- temperature above which growth does not take place.
- MEDIUM,
- nutrient substance upon which bacteria are grown.
- MEMBRANOUS,
- growth thin, coherent, like a membrane.
- MINIMUM TEMPERATURE,
- temperature below which growth does not take place.
- MYCELIOID,
- colonies having the radiately filamentous appearance of mold colonies.
- NAPIFORM,
- liquefaction with the form of a turnip.
- NITROGEN REQUIREMENTS,
- the necessary nitrogenous food. This is determined by adding to nitrogen-free media the nitrogen compound to be tested.
- OPALESCENT,
- resembling the color of an opal.
- OPTIMUM TEMPERATURE,
- temperature at which growth is most rapid.
- PELLICLE,
- in fluid bacterial growth forming either a continuous or an interrupted sheet over the fluid.
- PEPTONIZED,
- said of curds dissolved by trypsin.
- PERSISTENT,
- many weeks, or months.
- PLUMOSE,
- a fleecy or feathery growth.
- PSEUDOZOOGLEÆ,
- clumps of bacteria, not dissolving readily in water, arising from imperfect separation, or more or less fusion of the components, but not having the degree of compactness and gelatinization seen in zoogleæ.
- PULVINATE,
- in the form of a cushion, decidedly convex.
- PUNCTIFORM,
- very minute colonies, at the limit of natural vision.
- RAPID,
- developing in twenty-four to forty-eight hours.
- RAISED,
- growth thick, with abrupt or terraced edges.
- RHIZOID,
- growth of an irregular branched or root-like character, as in B. mycoides.
- RING,
- same as RIM, growth at the upper margin of a liquid culture, adhering more or less closely to the glass.
- REPAND,
- wrinkled.
- SACCATE,
- liquefaction the shape of an elongated sac, tubular, cylindrical.
- SCUM,
- floating islands of bacteria, an interrupted pellicle or bacteria membrane.
- SLOW,
- requiring five or six days or more for development.
- SHORT,
- applied to time, a few days, a week.
- SPORANGIA,
- cells containing endospores.
- SPREADING,
- growth extending much beyond the line of inoculation, i.e., several millimetres or more.
- STRATIFORM,
- liquefying to the walls of the tube at the top and then proceeding downward horizontally.
- THERMAL DEATH-POINT,
- the degree of heat required to kill young fluid cultures of an organism exposed for ten minutes (in thin-walled test-tubes of a diameter not exceeding 20 mm.) in the thermal water-bath. The water must be kept agitated so that the temperature shall be uniform during the exposure.
- TRANSIENT,
- a few days.
- TURBID,
- cloudy with flocculent particles; cloudy plus flocculence.
- UMBONATE,
- having a button-like, raised centre.
- UNDULATE,
- border wavy, with shallow sinuses.
- VERRUCOSE,
- growth wart-like, with wart-like prominences.
- VERMIFORM-CONTOURED,
- growth like a mass of worms or intestinal coils.
- VILLOUS,
- growth beset with hair-like extensions.
- VISCID,
- growth follows the needle when touched and withdrawn, sediment on shaking rises as a coherent swirl.
- ZOOGLEÆ,
- firm gelatinous masses of bacteria, one of the most typical examples of which is the Streptococcus mesenterioides of sugar vats. (Leuconostoc mesenterioides), the bacterial chains being surrounded by an enormously thickened, firm covering inside of which there may be one or many groups of the bacteria.
NOTES.
(2) The morphological characters shall be determined and described from growths obtained upon at least one solid medium (nutrient agar) and in at least one liquid medium (nutrient broth). Growths at 37° C. shall be in general not older than twenty-four to forty-eight hours, and growths at 20° C. not older than forty-eight to seventy-two hours. To secure uniformity in cultures, in all cases preliminary cultivation shall be practised as described in the revised Report of the Committee on Standard Methods of the Laboratory Section of the American Public Health Association, 1905.
(2) The morphological traits will be identified and described based on cultures grown on at least one solid medium (nutrient agar) and one liquid medium (nutrient broth). Cultures at 37°C should generally be no older than twenty-four to forty-eight hours, and those at 20°C no older than forty-eight to seventy-two hours. To ensure uniformity in cultures, preliminary cultivation must be conducted as outlined in the revised Report of the Committee on Standard Methods of the Laboratory Section of the American Public Health Association, 1905.
(3) The observation of cultural and biochemical features shall cover a period of at least fifteen days and frequently longer, and shall be made according to the revised Standard Methods above referred to. All media shall be made according to the same Standard Methods.
(3) The observation of cultural and biochemical features will last for at least fifteen days and often longer, and will be conducted according to the updated Standard Methods mentioned earlier. All media will be prepared following the same Standard Methods.
(4) Gelatin stab cultures shall be held for six weeks to determine liquefaction.
(4) Gelatin stab cultures should be kept for six weeks to check for liquefaction.
(5) Ammonia and indol tests shall be made at end of tenth day, nitrite tests at end of fifth day.
(5) Ammonia and indole tests will be done at the end of the tenth day, and nitrite tests at the end of the fifth day.
(6) Titrate with N/20 NaOH, using phenolphthalein as an indicator; make titrations at same time from blank. The difference gives the amount of acid produced.
(6) Titrate with N/20 NaOH, using phenolphthalein as an indicator; perform titrations simultaneously with a blank. The difference indicates the amount of acid produced.
The titration should be done after boiling to drive off any CO2 present in the culture.
The titration should be done after boiling to remove any CO2 present in the culture.
(7) Generic nomenclature shall begin with the year 1872 (Cohn’s first important paper).
(7) Generic naming will start with the year 1872 (Cohn’s first significant paper).
Species nomenclature shall begin with the year 1880 (Koch’s discovery of the pour plate method for the separation of organisms).
Species naming will start with the year 1880 (Koch’s discovery of the pour plate method for separating organisms).
(8) Chromogenesis shall be recorded in standard color terms.
(8) Chromogenesis will be documented using standard color terms.
TABLE I.
100.0000000 | Endospores produced |
200.0000000 | Endospores not produced |
10.0000000 | Aërobic (strict) |
20.0000000 | Facultative anaërobic |
30.0000000 | Anaërobic (strict) |
1.0000000 | Gelatin liquefied |
2.0000000 | Gelatin not liquefied |
0.1000000 | Acid and gas from dextrose |
0.2000000 | Acid without gas from dextrose |
0.3000000 | No acid from dextrose |
0.4000000 | No growth with dextrose |
0.0100000 | Acid and gas from lactose |
0.0200000 | Acid without gas from lactose |
0.0300000 | No acid from lactose |
0.0400000 | No growth with lactose |
0.0010000 | Acid and gas from saccharose |
0.0020000 | Acid without gas from saccharose |
0.0030000 | No acid from saccharose |
0.0040000 | No growth with saccharose |
0.0001000 | Nitrates reduced with evolution of gas |
0.0002000 | Nitrates not reduced |
0.0003000 | Nitrates reduced without gas formation |
0.0000100 | Fluorescent |
0.0000200 | Violet chromogens |
0.0000300 | Blue chromogens |
0.0000400 | Green chromogens |
0.0000500 | Yellow chromogens |
0.0000600 | Orange chromogens |
0.0000700 | Red chromogens |
0.0000800 | Brown chromogens |
0.0000900 | Pink chromogens |
0.0000000 | Non-chromogenics |
0.0000010 | Diastasic action on potato starch, strong |
0.0000020 | Diastasic action on potato starch, feeble |
0.0000030 | Diastasic action on potato starch, absent |
0.0000001 | Acid and gas from glycerin |
0.0000002 | Acid without gas from glycerin |
0.0000003 | No acid from glycerin |
0.0000004 | No growth with glycerin |
The genus according to the system of Migula is given its proper symbol which precedes the number thus:(7)
The genus, according to Migula's system, is assigned its appropriate symbol, which comes before the number like this: (7)
Escherichia coli (Esch.) Mig. | becomes B. | 222.111102 |
Bacillus alcaligenes Petr. | becomes B. | 212.333102 |
Pseudomonas campestris (Pam.) Sm. | becomes Ps. | 211.333151 |
Suicidal bacteria Mig. | becomes Bact. | 222.232103 |
Source..................................... Date of Isolation.................... Name..................................... Group No.(1)...............
Source..................................... Date of Isolation.................... Name..................................... Group No.(1)...............
DETAILED FEATURES.
NOTE—Underscore required terms. Observe notes and glossary of terms on opposite side of card.
NOTE—Underscore required terms. Observe notes and glossary of terms on the opposite side of the card.
- I. MORPHOLOGY(2)
- 1. Vegetative Cells,
- Medium used............................. temp....................age.................days
- Form, round, short rods, long rods, short chains, long chains, filaments, commas, short spirals, long spirals, clostridium, cuneate, clavate, curved.
- Limits of Size.............................
- Size of Majority.............................
- Ends, rounded, truncate, concave.
-
Agar Hanging-block Orientation (grouping)............... Chains (No. of elements)............... Short chains, long chains Orientation of chains, parallel, irregular.
- 2. Sporangia,
- medium used............................. temp....................age....................days
- Form, elliptical, short rods, spindled, clavate, drumsticks.
- Limits of Size.............................
- Size of Majority.............................
-
Agar Hanging-block Orientation (grouping)............... Chains (No. of elements)............... Orientation of chains, parallel, irregular. - Location of Endospores, central, polar.
- 3. Endospores.
- Form, round, elliptical, elongated.
- Limits of Size.............................
- Size of Majority.............................
- Wall, thick, thin.
- Sporangium wall, adherent, not adherent.
- Germination, equatorial, oblique, polar, bipolar, by stretching.
- 4. Flagella, No...............Attachment polar, bipolar, peritrichiate. How Stained...............
- 5. Capsules, present on...............
- 6. Zooglea, Pseudozooglea.
- 7. Involution Forms, on............in............days at............° C.
- 8. Staining Reactions.
- 1:10 watery fuchsin, gentian violet, carbol-fuchsin, Loeffler’s alkaline methylene blue.
- Special Stains.
- Gram........................
- Glycogen........................
- Fat........................
- Acid-fast........................
- Neisser........................
- 1. Vegetative Cells,
- II. CULTURAL FEATURES(3)
- 1. Agar Stroke.
- Growth, invisible, scanty, moderate, abundant.
- Form of growth, filiform, echinulate, beaded, spreading, plumose, arborescent, rhizoid.
- Elevation of growth, flat, effuse, raised, convex.
- Lustre, glistening, dull, cretaceous.
- Topography, smooth, contoured, rugose, verrucose.
- Optical characters, opaque, translucent, opalescent, iridescent.
- Chromogenesis(3)........................
- Odor, absent, decided, resembling........................
- Consistency, slimy, butyrous, viscid, membranous, coriaceous, brittle.
- Medium grayed, browned, reddened, blued, greened.
- 2. Potato.
- Growth scanty, moderate, abundant, transient, persistent.
- Form of growth, filiform, echinulate, beaded, spreading, plumose, arborescent, rhizoid.
- Elevation of growth, flat, effuse, raised, convex.
- Lustre, glistening, dull, cretaceous.
- Topography, smooth, contoured, rugose, verrucose.
- Chromogenesis(3)........................Pigment in water insoluble, soluble: other solvents................................................
- Odor, absent, decided, resembling........................
- Consistency, slimy, butyrous, viscid, membranous, coriaceous, brittle.
- Medium, grayed, browned, reddened, blued, greened.
- 3. Loeffler’s Blood-serum.
- Stroke invisible, scanty, moderate, abundant.
- Form of growth, filiform, echinulate, beaded, spreading, plumose, arborescent, rhizoid.
- Elevation of growth, flat, effuse, raised, convex.
- Lustre, glistening, dull, cretaceous.
- Topography, smooth, contoured, rugose, verrucose.
- Chromogenesis(3)..........................
- Medium grayed, browned, reddened, blued, greened.
- Liquefaction begins in...............d, complete in...............d,
- 4. Agar Stab.
- Growth uniform, best at top, best at bottom: surface growth scanty, abundant: restricted, wide-spread.
- Line of puncture, filiform, beaded, papillate, villous, plumose, arborescent: liquefaction.
- 5. Gelatin Stab.
- Growth uniform, best at top, best at bottom.
- Line of puncture, filiform, beaded, papillate, villous, plumose, arborescent.
- Liquefaction crateriform, napiform, infundibuliform, saccate, stratiform: begins in...............d. complete in...............d
- Medium fluorescent, browned...............
- 6. Nutrient Broth.
- Surface growth, ring, pellicle, flocculent, membranous, none.
- Clouding slight, moderate, strong: transient, persistent: none: fluid turbid.
- Odor, absent, decided, resembling..................
- Sediment, compact, flocculent, granular, flaky, viscid on agitation, abundant, scant.
- 7. Milk.
- Clearing without coagulation.
- Coagulation prompt, delayed, absent.
- Extrusion of whey begins in................days.
- Coagulum slowly peptonized, rapidly peptonized.
- Peptonization begins on...............d, complete on...............d.
- Reaction, 1d......, 2d......, 4d......, 10d......, 20d......
- Consistency, slimy, viscid, unchanged.
- Medium browned, reddened, blued, greened.
- Lab ferment, present, absent.
- 8. Litmus Milk.
- Acid, alkaline, acid then alkaline, no change.
- Prompt reduction, no reduction, partial slow reduction.
- 9. Gelatin Colonies.
- Growth slow, rapid.
- Form, punctiform, round, irregular, ameboid, mycelioid, filamentous, rhizoid.
- Elevation, flat, effuse, raised, convex, pulvinate, crateriform (liquefying).
- Edge, entire, undulate, lobate, erose, lacerate, fimbriate, filamentous, floccose, curled.
- Liquefaction, cup, saucer, spreading.
- 10. Agar Colonies.
- Growth slow, rapid (temperature................)
- Form, punctiform, round, irregular, ameboid, mycelioid, filamentous, rhizoid.
- Surface smooth, rough, concentrically ringed, radiate, striate.
- Elevation, flat, effuse, raised, convex, pulvinate, umbonate.
- Edge, entire, undulate, lobate, erose, lacerate, fimbriate, floccose, curled.
- Internal structure, amorphous, finely, coarsely granular, grumose, filamentous, floccose, curled.
- 11. Starch Jelly.
- Growth, scanty, copious.
- Diastatic action, absent, feeble, profound.
- Medium stained.......................
- 12. Silicate Jelly (Fermi’s Solution).
- Growth copious, scanty, absent.
- Medium stained.......................
- 13. Cohn’s Solution.
- Growth copious, scanty, absent.
- Medium fluorescent, non-fluorescent.
- 14. Uschinsky’s Solution.
- Growth copious, scanty, absent.
- Fluid viscid, not viscid.
- 15. Sodium Chloride in Bouillon.
- Per cent. inhibiting growth........................
- 16. Growth in Bouillon over Chloroform, unrestrained, feeble, absent.
- 17. Nitrogen. Obtained from peptone, asparagin, glycocoll, urea, ammonia salts, nitrogen.
- 18. Best media for long-continued growth
..............................................................................................
- 19. Quick tests for differential purposes
..............................................................................................
..........................................................................................
- 1. Agar Stroke.
- III. PHYSICAL AND BIOCHEMICAL FEATURES.
-
1. Fermentation-tubes containing peptone-water or sugar-tree bouillon and Dextrose Saccharose Lactose Maltose Glycerin Mannit Gas production, in per cent. (H/CO2) Growth in closed arm Amount of acid produced 1d. Amount of acid produced 2d. Amount of acid produced 3d. - 2. Ammonia production, feeble, moderate, strong, absent, masked by acids.
- 3. Nitrates in nitrate broth.
- Reduced, not reduced.
- Presence of nitrites..................ammonia..................
- Presence of nitrates..................free nitrogen..................
- 4. Indol production, feeble, moderate, strong.
- 5. Toleration of Acids, great, medium, slight.
- Acids tested..................
- 6. Toleration of NaOH, great, medium, slight.
- 7. Optimum reaction for growth in bouillon, stated in terms of Fuller’s scale..........................
- 8. Vitality on culture media, brief, moderate, long.
- 9. Temperature relations.
- Thermal death-point (10 minutes’ exposure in nutrient broth when this is adapted to growth of organism)..........C.
- Optimum temperature for growth..........° C.; or best growth at 16° C., 20° C., 25° C., 30° C., 37° C., 40° C., 50° C., 60° C.
- Maximum temperature for growth..........° C.
- Minimum temperature for growth..........° C.
- 10. Killed readily by drying: resistant to drying.
- 11. Per cent. killed by freezing (salt and crushed ice or liquid air)................
- 12. Sunlight: Exposure on ice in thinly sown agar plates;
one-half plate covered (time 15 minutes), sensitive,
not sensitive.
- Per cent. killed................
- 13. Acids produced................
- 14. Alkalies produced................
- 15. Alcohols................
- 16. Ferments, pepsin, trypsin, diastase, invertase, pectase, cytase, tyrosinase, oxidase, peroxidase, lipase, catalase, glucase, galactase, lab, etc.........................
- 17. Crystals formed:.........
- 18. Effect of germicides:
Substance Method used Minutes Temperature Killing quantity Amt. required to restrain growth
-
- IV. PATHOGENICITY.
- 1. Pathogenic to Animals.
- Insects, crustaceans, fishes, reptiles, birds, mice, rats, guinea-pigs, rabbits, dogs, cats, sheep, goats, cattle, horses, monkeys, man..........................
- 2. Pathogenic to Plants:
.............................................................
.........................................................
......................................................... - 3. Toxins, soluble, endotoxins.
- 4. Non-toxin forming.
- 5. Immunity bactericidal.
- 6. Immunity non-bactericidal.
- 7. Loss of virulence on culture-media: prompt, gradual, not observed in.....................months.
- 1. Pathogenic to Animals.
BRIEF CHARACTERIZATION. Mark + or 0, and when two terms occur on a line erase the one which does not apply unless both apply. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
MORPHOLOGY(2) | Diameter over 1µ | ||
Chains, filaments | |||
Endospores | |||
Capsules | |||
Zooglea, Pseudozooglea | |||
Motile | |||
Involution forms | |||
Gram’s stain | |||
CULTURAL FEATURES(3) | Broth | Cloudy, turbid | |
Ring | |||
Pellicle | |||
Sediment | |||
Agar | Shining | ||
Dull | |||
Wrinkled | |||
Chromogenic | |||
Gel. Plate | Round | ||
Proteus-like | |||
Rhizoid | |||
Filamentous | |||
Curled | |||
Gel. Stab. | Surface growth | ||
Needle growth | |||
Potato | Moderate, absent | ||
Abundant | |||
Discolored | |||
Starch destroyed | |||
Grows at 37° C. | |||
Grows in Cohn’s sol. | |||
Grows in Uschinsky’s sol. | |||
BIOCHEMICAL FEATURES | Liquifaction | Gelatin(4) | |
Blood-serum | |||
Casein | |||
Milk | Acid curd | ||
Rennet curd | |||
Casein peptonized | |||
Indol(3) | |||
Hydrogen sulphide | |||
Ammonia(3) | |||
Nitrates reduced(3) | |||
Fluorescent | |||
Luminous | |||
DISTRIBUTION | Animal pathogen, epizoon | ||
Plant pathogen, epiphyte | |||
Soil | |||
Milk | |||
Fresh water | |||
Salt water | |||
Sewage | |||
Iron bacterium | |||
Sulphur bacterium |
FOOTNOTES.
1 Sir H. A. Blake has called attention to the fact that the “mosquito theory” of malaria is mentioned in a Sanscrit manuscript of about the 6th century A.D.↩
1 Sir H. A. Blake pointed out that the “mosquito theory” of malaria is mentioned in a Sanskrit manuscript from around the 6th century CE __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
4 The pronunciation of this word according to English standards is kok-si; the continental pronunciation is kok-kee; the commonest American seems to be kok-ki. We prefer the latter since it is easier and more natural and should like to see it adopted. (Author.) ↩
4 The pronunciation of this word in English is kok-si; the continental way is kok-kee; the most common American pronunciation seems to be kok-ki. We prefer the latter as it is easier and feels more natural, and we would like to see it adopted. (Author.) __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
5 With the possible exception of blue green algæ which have been found with bacteria in the above-mentioned hot springs. Seeds of many plants have been subjected to as low temperatures as those above-mentioned without apparent injury. ↩
5 With the possible exception of blue-green algae that have been discovered alongside bacteria in the previously mentioned hot springs. Seeds from many plants have been exposed to temperatures as low as those mentioned above without any noticeable damage. injury __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
7 “By cellulose is understood a carbohydrate of the general formula C6H10O5 not soluble in water, alcohol, ether, or dilute acids but soluble in an ammoniacal solution of copper oxide. It gives with iodine and sulphuric acid a blue color and with iodine zinc chloride a violet and yields dextrose on hydrolysis.”—H. Fischer. ↩
7 “Cellulose is a carbohydrate with the general formula C6H10O5 that doesn't dissolve in water, alcohol, ether, or weak acids, but does dissolve in an ammonia solution of copper oxide. It produces a blue color when mixed with iodine and sulfuric acid, and a violet color when mixed with iodine and zinc chloride, yielding dextrose upon hydrolysis.” —H. Fischer. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
8 The sulphur bacteria are partially prototrophic for S; probably the iron bacteria also for Fe. Some few soil bacteria have been shown to be capable of utilizing free H, and it seems certain that the bacteria associated with the spontaneous heating of coal may oxidize free C. So far as known no elements other than these six are directly available to bacteria. ↩
8 Sulfur bacteria can partially produce their own nutrients from sulfur; it's likely that iron bacteria can do the same with iron. A few soil bacteria have been found to use free hydrogen, and it's clear that the bacteria involved in the spontaneous heating of coal may oxidize free carbon. As far as we know, no elements other than these six are directly accessible to bacteria __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
9 Only a few kinds of bacteria so far as known are proto-autotrophic. The nitrous and nitric organisms of Winogradsky which are so essential in the soil, and which might have been the first of all organisms so far as their food is concerned, and some of the sulphur bacteria are examples. ↩
9 So far, only a few types of bacteria are known to be proto-autotrophic. The nitrous and nitric organisms identified by Winogradsky, which are crucial for the soil and might have been the first organisms in terms of their food sources, along with some sulfur bacteria, are examples. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
10 The term pathogenic is also applied to certain non-parasitic saprophytic bacteria whose products cause disease conditions, as one of the organisms causing a type of food poisoning in man (Clostridium botulinum), which also probably causes “forage poisoning” in domestic animals. ↩
10 The term pathogenic is also used for some non-parasitic saprophytic bacteria whose byproducts lead to disease, such as one of the organisms responsible for a type of food poisoning in humans (Clostridium botulinum), which likely also causes “forage poisoning” in domestic animals. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
11 The term “fermentation” was originally used to denote the process which goes on in fruit juices or grain extracts when alcohol and gas are formed. Later it was extended to apply to the decomposition of almost any organic substance. In recent years the attempt has been made to give a chemical definition to the word by restricting its use to those changes in which by virtue of a “wandering” or rearrangement of the carbon atoms “new substances are formed which are not constitutents of the original molecule.” It may be doubted whether this restriction is justified or necessary. A definition is at present scarcely possible except when the qualifying adjective is included as “alcoholic fermentation,” “ammoniacal fermentation,” “lactic acid fermentation,” etc. ↩
11 The term “fermentation” was initially used to describe the process that occurs in fruit juices or grain extracts when alcohol and gas are produced. Later, it was broadened to include the breakdown of nearly any organic material. Recently, there’s been an effort to define the term chemically by limiting its use to those changes in which a “wandering” or rearrangement of carbon atoms leads to the formation of “new substances that are not components of the original molecule.” It’s debatable whether this limitation is justified or necessary. Currently, it’s hardly possible to define it without the qualifying adjectives like “alcoholic fermentation,” “ammoniacal fermentation,” “lactic acid fermentation,” etc. ↩
13 It is probable that this is the way “Jack o’lanterns” or “Will o’ the wisps” are ignited. Marsh gas is produced as above outlined from the vegetable and animal matter decomposing in swampy places under anaërobic conditions and likewise phosphine. These escape into the air and the “spontaneous combustion” of the phosphine ignites the marsh gas. ↩
13 It’s likely that this is how “Jack o’lanterns” or “Will o’ the wisps” are lit. Marsh gas forms from the breakdown of plant and animal matter in swampy areas under anaerobic conditions, along with phosphine. These gases escape into the air, and the “spontaneous combustion” of phosphine ignites the swamp gas. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
16 It will be noted that the names of enzymes (except some of those first discovered) terminate in ase which is usually added to the stem of the name of the substance acted on, though sometimes to a word which indicates the substance formed by the action, as lactacidase, alcoholase. ↩
16 It's worth noting that the names of enzymes (except for a few of the first ones discovered) end with ase, which is typically added to the root of the name of the substance being acted upon. However, it can also be added to a term that indicates the substance produced by the reaction, such as lactacidase and alcoholase. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
18 In the author’s laboratory in the past ten years all sterilization except those few objects in blood and serum work which must be dry, has been done in autoclaves of the type shown in Fig. 81 which are supplied with steam from the University central heating plant. A very great saving of time is thus secured. ↩
18 In the author's lab over the past ten years, all sterilization, except for a few items related to blood and serum work that need to be dry, has been carried out in autoclaves like the one shown in Fig. 81, which get steam from the university's central heating system. This approach has saved a significant amount of time. ↩
19 The author has tested an “electric milk purifier” (Fig. 102) which was as efficient as a first-class pasteurizer and left the milk in excellent condition both chemically and as far as “cream line” was concerned. The cost of operation as compared with steam will depend on the price of electricity. ↩
21 For a discussion of this method of standardization consult the following:
21 For a discussion of this method of standardization, check out the following:
- Clark & Lubs—J. Bact., 1917, II, 1–34, 109–136, 191–236.
- Committee Report—Ibid., 1919. IV, 107–132.
- Jones—J. Inf. Dis., 1919, 25, 262–268.
- Fennel & Fisher—Ibid., 444–451.
Additional references will be found in these articles. ↩
Additional references will be found in these articles. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
22 Term also applied to the solidification of serum in media: e.g., the Hiss inulin medium for the differentiation of pneumococci (see diplococcus of pneumonia). ↩
22 This term is also used for the solidification of serum in media: e.g., the Hiss inulin medium for distinguishing pneumococci (see diplococcus of pneumonia). ↩
23 The term “antigen” is also used to designate substances which may take the place of what are supposed to be the true antigens in certain diagnostic reactions (Chapter XXIX, Complement Fixation Test for Syphilis). ↩
23 The term “antigen” is also used to refer to substances that might substitute for what are believed to be the true antigens in specific diagnostic reactions (Chapter XXIX, Complement Fixation Test for syphilis). __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
24 If the antitoxin is later concentrated (see last paragraph in this chapter) a serum containing as little as 175 units per cc. may be commercially profitable. ↩
24 If the antitoxin is later concentrated (see last paragraph in this chapter) a serum with as little as 175 units per cc. can be commercially profitable __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
INDEX
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M |
N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z |
- A
- Abbot, 17
- Abilgaard, 26
- Abrin, 262
- Absorption of free nitrogen, 117
- tests, 267
- Accidental carriers, 241
- structures, 43
- Acetic acid, 99
- Acetobacter acidi oxalici, 83
- xylinum, 83
- Achorion schœnleinii, 27, 34
- Acid, acetic, 99
- Acquired immunity, 251, 252
- Actinomyces bovis, 30, 36
- Actinomycosis, cause of, 30, 36
- path of entrance of, 244
- Actions, reducing, 113
- Activating enzymes, 125
- Active immunity, definition of, 251, 252
- production of, 252
- Activities of bacteria, importance of, 31
- Acute coryza, 244
- disease, 233
- Adulteration of food, anaphylactic test in, 293
- Aërobes, facultative, 76
- strict, 76
- Aërobic, 76, 215
- Agar, composition of, 179
- Agent, chemical, for disinfection, 156–163
- Agglutinating group, 266
- Agglutination, acid, 266
- Agglutinin, 265
- Agglutinogen, 266
- Agglutinoid, 270
- Aggressins, 288
- Air, bacteria in, 71
- Albumin in bacteria, 84
- Alcohol as antiseptic, 160
- as disinfectant, 160
- Alcoholase, 125
- Alcoholic fermentation, 31, 100
- Alexin, 271, 273
- Algæ, relation to bacteria, 37
- Alimentary tract as path of entrance, 246
- Alkalies as disinfectants, 158
- Allergic, 290
- Amboceptor, 273
- Amboceptorogen, 274
- Amebic dysentery, 29, 35
- Ameboid cells, 247
- colonies, 224
- Amino-acids, relation to green plants, 119
- Ammonia, structural formula, 103
- Ammoniacal fermentation, 32
- Amœba coli, 29, 35
- Amphitrichic, 46
- Amylase, 124
- Anaërobes, 76
- Anaërobic, 76, 215
- Analysis of ash, 82
- chemical, of tubercle bacilli, 85
- Anaphylactic, anti-, 290
- Anaphylatoxin, 290
- Anaphylaxis, 289
- Anaximander, 18
- Anderson, 289
- Anderson and McClintic, phenol coefficient, 165
- Andrei, 25, 33
- Anilin dyes, as antiseptic, 162
- Animal carriers, 239
- inoculation, uses of, 227
- Animalcules, 19, 33
- Animals, disinfection of, 170
- Ankylostoma duodenale, discovery of, 27, 34
- Anthrax, 17, 28, 35
- Anti-agglutinins, 270
- aggressins, 288
- amboceptors, 275
- antisera in snake poisoning, 275
- anaphylactic, 290
- anaphylaxis due to intracellular digestion, 292
- protein immunity compared to, 292
- bacterial immunity, 254, 255
- bodies, 259
- body, action, 260
- complement, 274
- complementophil amboceptor, 275
- cytophil amboceptor, 275
- diphtheritic serum, 263
- enzyme, 122, 262
- function of, 262
- Antigen, 259
- Antigens, fats and fatty acids as, 260
- Antipollenin, 263
- Antiprecipitins, 270
- Antisepsis, 131
- Antiseptic, 131
- Antisera in snake poisoning, 275
- Antisnake venoms, 275
- Antitetanic serum, 263
- Antitoxic immunity, 254, 255
- Antitoxin, 261
- Antitoxins, 261–264
- Antivenin, 263
- Apes, 227
- Apparatus of Barber, 196
- Appearance of growth on culture media, 217
- Appert, 20, 31, 34
- Aqueous gentian violet, 205
- Arborescent growth, 221
- Aristotle, 18
- Aromatic compounds, production of, 104, 111
- Arrak, 100
- Arsenate, reduction of, 114
- Arsenite, oxidation of, 115
- Arthus, 289
- phenomenon, 289
- Articles, unwashable, disinfection of, 169
- washable, disinfection of, 169
- Artificial immunity, 251, 252
- Ase, termination of name of enzyme, 124
- Asepsis, 131
- Aseptic, 131
- Ash, analysis of, 82
- Asiatic cholera, 27, 34, 73, 238, 239, 246, 248, 249
- Attenuated, 253
- Autoclave, air pressure sterilizer, 138
- pressure sterilizer, 138
- Autogenous vaccines, 284
- in epidemic, 241
- Autoinfection, 234
- Autolysis, 149
- self-digestion, 126
- Autotrophic, 86
- Available nitrogen, loss of, 113
- Azotobacter, 118
- B
- Babes-Ernst corpuscles, 45
- Bacilli, butter, 209
- Bacillus, 52, 60, 62
- Bacillus of blue milk, 31
- Bacteria, absorption of N by, 117
- acid fast, 84, 209
- adaptability, range of, 90
- advantage of motility to, 45
- aids in isolation of, 197
- anaërobic, 32
- cause of disease in animals, 30
- of souring of milk, 32
- cell groupings of, 55
- chains of, 38
- chemical composition of, 39, 81
- elements in, 82
- classed as fungi, 37
- definition of, 40
- development of, 90
- distribution of, 71
- energy relationships, 39
- environmental conditions for growth, 72
- first classification of, 34
- food relationships of, 39
- injurious, 72
- isolation of, 194
- measurement of, 40, 203
- metabolism of, 86
- methods of study of, 171
- morphology of, 41
- motile, 45
- nitric, 114
- nitrous, 114
- nucleus of, 42
- occurrence, 71
- pathogenic, outside the body, 237
- phosphorescent, 111, 112
- position of, 37
- rate of division, 43
- of motion, 45
- relation to algæ, 33, 37
- reproduction of, 37, 55
- root tubercle, 86, 87
- size of, 37, 40
- soil, chief function of, 119
- source of N, 102
- speed of, 45
- spiral, 53
- staining of, 204–212
- sulphur, 63
- thermophil, 75, 77
- universal distribution of, 90
- in vinegar-making, 99
- Bacteria, 62, 66, 70
- Bacterial agglutinin, 265
- Bacterin, 253
- Bacteriocidin, 272
- Bacteriological culture tubes, 184
- Bacteriology, pathogenic, definition of, 231
- Bacteriolysin, 272
- Bacteriopurpurin, 62, 63, 112
- Bacteriotropin, 281
- Bacterium abortus, agglutinin of, 265
- Ballon pipette, 193
- Balsam, mounting in, 207
- Hair stylist, 253
- apparatus, 196
- Barnyards, disinfection of, 167
- Baskets, wire, 184
- Bassi, 27
- silkworm disease, 34
- Bastian, 24
- Baumgartner, 256
- Beaded growth, 221
- Bed-bugs, 241
- Beds, contact, 116
- hot, 117
- Beer, pasteurization of, 141, 144, 145
- Beggiatoa, 63
- Beggiatoaceae, 63
- Behring, 30
- Belfanti, 271
- Berg, 27, 34
- Berkefeld filter, 154
- Bichloride of mercury as disinfectant, 158
- Bilharzia, 28, 35
- Bilharzia disease, 28, 35
- Biochemical reactions, definition of, 87
- Biological relationships, immunity reactions, 255, 270
- Bipolar germination of spore, 48
- Bismarck brown, 209, 212
- Black-leg, 51, 73, 238, 243, 248, 251
- vaccine, 254
- Bleaching powder as disinfectant, 158
- Blood, collection of, 228
- Blue milk, bacterial cause of, 34
- Boehm, 27, 34
- Boiling as disinfectant, 133
- Boils, 237, 240, 243
- Bollinger, 29, 30, 35, 36
- Hat, 20, 33
- Bordet, 271
- Botrytis bassiana, 27, 34
- Bottles, staining of, 206
- Bougies, 154
- Bouillon, 173
- Boyer, 260
- Bread, salt rising, 95, 97
- Bronchopneumonia, 233, 246
- Broth, appearance of growth in, 218
- Brownian movement, 47, 203
- Brushes, disinfection of, 169
- Bubonic plague, 239
- Buchner, 271
- Budding of yeasts, 37
- Bulgarian fermented milk, 98
- Burning as disinfectant, 132
- Burying as disinfectant, 154
- Bütschli, 41, 43
- Butter, 97
- Butyric acid fermentation, 32, 99
- Buzzards, 241
- C
- Cabbage disease due to protozoa, 36
- Cadaverin, 104
- Caignard-Latour, 31, 34
- Calcium hypochlorite as disinfectant, 158
- oxide as disinfectant, 158
- Candles, filter, 153, 154
- Canned goods, food poisoning by, 104
- spoilage of, 51
- Canning, introduced, 21, 34
- principles involved, 133
- Capsule, 44, 45
- Carbohydrates in bacterial cell, 84
- fermentation of, 93–101
- Carbol-fuchsin, 206
- Carbolic acid as antiseptic, 159
- Carbol-xylol, 209
- Carbon cycle, 107
- Carbon, 271
- Cardano blockchain, 18
- Carrier problem, solution of, 240
- Carriers, 239
- Cars, stock, disinfection of, 170
- Catalase, 125
- Catalytic agents, function of, 123
- Catalyzer, 123
- Cattle, 227
- Causation of disease, 24, 128
- Cell, constituents of, 84
- Cells, chemical stimuli of, 257
- Cellular theory of immunity, 256, 280
- Cellulose, definition of, 83
- occurrence of, 83
- Chain, 56
- Channels of infection, 243
- Chaos, 25
- Characteristic groupings, 58
- Characteristics of enzymes, 121
- of toxins, 126
- Charrin, 265
- Chart, descriptive, 217
- Chauveau, 256
- Cheese, eyes in, 96
- Chemical composition of bacteria, 39, 81, 85
- Chemotherapy, 249, 255
- Deer, 21, 27, 31, 34
- Chicken cholera, 30
- Chief agglutinin, 267
- cell, 267
- Chitin, 72
- Chlamydobacteria, 63
- Chlamydothrix, 63
- Chloride of lime as disinfectant, 158
- Chlorine as disinfectant, 157
- Chloroform as antiseptic, 162
- as disinfectant, 162
- Chlorophyl, 37, 112
- Chlorosis, Egyptian, 27, 35
- Cholera, Asiatic, carriers of, 239
- Cholesterins as cell constituents, 84
- Chromogenesis, 112
- Chromoparic, 112
- Chromophoric, 112
- Chronic disease, 232
- Chronological table, 33–36
- Chymosin, 124
- Circulation of carbon, 107
- Classification, advantage of, 59
- Cleaning of slides, 207
- Clearing of sections, 209
- Closed space disinfection, 161
- Clostridium, 49
- Clothing, disinfection of, 170
- Coagglutinins, 267
- Coagulases, 124
- Coagulating enzymes, 124
- Coagulation temperature of proteins, 51
- Coal, spontaneous heating of, 88
- Coamboceptors, 274
- Cobra, 275
- Coccaceae, 62, 66, 68
- Coccus, appearance of, on dividing, 57
- Coenzymes, 122
- Cohen, 28, 33, 35, 59
- Cold as antiseptic, 148
- Colds, due to universal carriers, 240
- Colonies, characteristics of plate, 223–226
- definition of, 173
- Color production, 112
- Colorimetric method of standardization, 175
- Combustion, spontaneous, 116
- Commensal, 87
- Commercial preparation of lactic acid, 99
- Communicable disease, 232
- Complement, 273
- Complementoid, 274
- Complementophil haptophore, 273
- Complements, nature of, 274
- Composition, chemical, 81–85
- Concentration of antitoxin, 264
- Condenser, 200
- Conditions for growth, general, 72
- Congenital immunity, 251, 252
- Conjunctiva as path of entrance, 244
- Constant temperature apparatus, 213
- Contact beds, 116
- Contagion, direct and indirect, 34
- Contagious abortion, agglutination test, 268
- Contagium, definition of, 232
- Contamination of food by carriers, 241
- Continuous pasteurization, 141
- Contrast stains, 205
- Convalescents, control of, 239–240
- Cornalia, 29
- Corpuscles, Babes-Ernst, 45
- Corrosive sublimate as disinfectant, 158
- Corynebacterium diphtheriæ, 64, 69, 128, 233, 234, 261, 263
- Coryza, acute, 244
- Cotton plugs, 21, 184
- Coughing, 248
- Crateriform liquefaction, 221
- Cream ripening, 97
- Create, 271
- Crenothrix, 61
- Creolin as disinfectant, 160
- Cresols as disinfectants, 159
- Culture, definition of, 171
- Cultures, anaërobic, 188–192
- Curled edge, 225
- Cutaneous inoculation, 228
- Cycle, carbon, 107
- Cystitis, 234
- Cytolysin, 272
- Cytolysins, 271–279
- Cytolytic, 272
- Cytophil group, 273
- Cytoplasm, 41
- Cytotoxic, 272
- D
- Dallera, 289
- Dark field illumination, 204
- Davaine, 28, 35
- Death-point, thermal, 75
-
- determination of, 215
-
- Decomposition, how caused, 108
- Deep culture tubes, 190–191
- Degeneration forms, 54
- Delousing method in typhus, 242
- De Martin, 35
- Denitrification, 114
- Deodorant, 131
- Descriptive chart, 217
- Diagnosis, agglutination test in, 265–267
- Diastase, 124
- Diffusion of food through cell wall, 41
- Digestion of proteins, 102
- Dilution method of isolation, 194
- Dimethylamine, structural formula, 103
- Diphtheria antitoxin, 30, 263, 264
- Diplobacillus, 55
- Diplococcus, 56
- Diplococcus, 66, 69
- Diplospirillum, 55
- Discharges, 228
- Discontinuous sterilization, 133
- Disease, acute, 233
- of animals to man, 232
- Bilharzia, 28, 35
- cabbage, 30, 35
- causation of, 24, 128
- communicable, 232
- contagious, 34, 232
- of flies, 28, 35
- germ, 25, 27, 33
- hookworm, 28, 35
- infectious, 232, 240
- Johne’s, 246, 248
- non-specific, 233
- protozoal, eradication, 242
- transmission, 242
- silkworm, 27, 29, 34, 35
- skin, 243
- specific, 27, 30, 233
- transmission of, 26, 232
- Dishes, Petri, 181
- Disinfectant, 131
- Disinfectants, chemical, action of, 156–163
- Disinfection, agents in, 131–163
- Dissemination of organisms, 247
- Distaso, 42, 43
- Distilling sour mash, 98
- Division, planes of, 55–58
- Dobell, 43
- Dorset, 84
- Dosage of vaccines, 286
- Dose, minimum lethal, 264
- standard test, 264
- Douglas, 42, 43, 280
- Dourine, 245, 248
- Drumstick spore, 49
- Dry heat, 21, 133
- Drying, 131, 132
- Dubini, 27, 34
- Ducrey’s bacillus, 245
- Dunham’s peptone, 177
- Durham, 265
- Dyes, anilin, as antiseptics, 162
- Dysenteries, 242, 246, 248, 249
- Dysentery, amebic, 29, 35
- tropical, 29
- E
- Ectoplasm, 41
- Edema, malignant, 237, 243
- Edge of colony, 225
- Effuse colony, 224
- Egg sensitization, 292
- Ehrenberg, 33, 34
- Ehrlich, 256, 276
- Ehrlich’s theory, 256–260
- Eichstedt, 28, 34
- Electric milk purifier, 152
- Electricity, 79, 150
- Elements in bacteria, 82, 86, 88, 89
- Elimination of organisms, 248
- Empusa muscæ, 28, 29, 35
- Emulsin, 122
- Endo-enzymes, 126
- Endogenous infection, 235
- Endoplasm, 41
- Endotoxins, 128, 276
- Energy relationships, 39
- transformations, 86–90
- Ensilage, 98
- Enteritis, 233
- Entire edge, 225
- Entrance of organisms, 243–246, 247
- Environmental conditions, 72, 130, 213
- Enzymes, 84, 121–126
- Enzymoid, 262
- Epidemics, 241
- Epitheliolysin, 272
- Eosin, 204
- Equatorial spore, 49
- Eradication of disease, 236, 242
- Erysipelas, hog, 248
- Erythrobacillus prodigiosus, 66, 68, 70, 77, 113
- Essential structures, 41
- Essentials of a culture medium, 172
- Esters, 84, 110
- Ether as disinfectant, 162
- Bacteria, 62
- Exanthemata, 248
- Exhaustion factor in immunity, 251
- theory of immunity 256
- Existence, conditions for, 72
- Exo-enzymes, 126
- Exogenous infection, 235
- Exotoxins, 128
- Experiment, Pasteur’s, 21
- Experimental animals, 227
- External auditory meatus, 244
- genitalia, 245
- Extracellular enzymes, 126
- Extract broth, 176
- Eyes in cheese, 96, 97
- F
- Factors affecting disinfectants, 164, 165
- Facultative, 215
- Failure of cytolytic serums, 275
- of vaccines, 286
- Fat colors, 112
- splitting enzymes, 124
- Father of bacteriology, 19
- of microscope, 19
- Fats as antigens, 260
- Favus, 27, 34, 243
- Feces, bacteria in, 72
- Feeding, as inoculating method, 228
- Feinberg, 43
- Ferment, organized, 126
- unorganized, 126
- Fermentation, 31, 93
- Fermented milk, Bulgarian, 98
- Fever, due to invisible organisms, 25
- Fibrin ferment, 124
- Filament, 56
- Filiform growth, 221
- Film, fixing of, 207
- preparation of, 207
- Filter, Berkefeld, 154
- Filterable virus, 234
- Filtration, 152–154
- First order, receptors of, 261, 262
- Fischer, 42, 45
- Fixation test, complement, 276
- Fixed virus, 253
- Fixing of film, 207
- Flagella, 45–47
- staining of, 210
- Flash process of pasteurization, 145
- Fleas, 241
- Flexner, 276
- Flies, 28, 35, 241
- Flügge, 271
- Fodor's, von, 271
- Food adulteration, complement-fixation test in, 279
- Food contamination by carriers, 241
- Foot-and-mouth disease, 244, 248
- Forage poisoning, 87
- Foreign body pneumonia, 245
- Formaldehyde as disinfectant, 160
- Formalin, 160
- Formol, 160
- Forms, cell, 52–54
- Fox fire, 111
- Foxes, 241
- Fracastorius, 25, 33
- Free acid, 175
- Fruiting organs, 37
- Fuchs, 31, 34
- Fuchsin, 205
- Fungi, bacteria as, 37
- Funnel-shaped liquefaction, 221
- G
- Gabbet's blue, 206
- method of staining, 209
- Gall-bladder, 248
- Galvanotaxis, 79
- Gas formation in cheese, 96, 97
- Gaseous fermentation, 93–95
- Gaspard, 26, 34
- Gelatin, advantage of, 178
- Gemmation, 37
- General conditions for growth, 72
- infections, vaccines in, 286
- Generation, spontaneous, 17–24
- Generic names introduced, 33
- Genitals, 245
- Gentian violet, selective action of, 162
-
- stain, 205
-
- Germ, free air, 153
- theory of disease, 25
- German measles, 233
- Germination of spore, 48
- Germs, 33
- Gescheidel, 271
- Giemsa stain, 43
- Glanders, 26, 233, 238, 244, 248, 249, 268, 277
- Glands, mammary, 248
- salivary, 248
- Gleichen, 32
- Globulin in bacteria, 84
- Glycerine broth, 176
- Glycerinized potato, 172
- Glycogen as cell constituent, 84
- Goats, 227
- Gonidia, 63
- Gonococcus, 245
- Gonorrhea, 248, 249
- Good health, 296
- Grain rust, 26, 34
- Gram positive organisms, 162, 208
- Gram’s method of staining, 208
- solution, 208
- Granular edge, 225
- Granules, metachromatic, 212
- Granulose in bacteria, 84
- Grape juice, pasteurization of, 141
- Grass bacilli, 209
- Green plants, N nutrition of, 118
- Griesinger, 27, 28, 35
- Group, agglutinating, 266
- Groupings, cell, 55–58
- Growth, appearance in media, 217
- Gruber, 265, 268
- Gruby, 28, 34
- Gum-like substance in bacteria, 83
- H
- Haeckel, 280
- Hanging drop slide, 203
- Haptophore, complementophil, 273
- Harness, disinfection of, 169
- Hay fever, 263, 292
- Health, 296
- Heat as disinfectant, 132–144
- Heated serum, 271, 277, 278, 279
- Heating of manure, 116
- Hellmich, 84
- Van Helmont, 18
- Hemagglutinin, 265
- Hemicellulose, 83
- Hemolysin, 272
- Hemolytic amboceptor, 278
- Hemorrhagic septicemia, 246
- Henle, 27, 34, 233
- Hericourt, 289
- Herpes tonsurans, 28, 34
- Hesseling, von, 32
- Heterologous sera, 276
- Heterotrophic, 86
- Hill, 33
- Hilton Hotels, 27
- Hoffman, 24
- Hog cholera, 231, 242, 248, 252, 253
- erysipelas, 248
- Holders, 143
- Holmes, 28, 34
- Homologous sera, 276
- Hookworm disease, 28, 34
- Horses, 227, 263
- Host, 87
- Hot beds, 117
- Hunger in immunity, 251
- Hydrochloric acid, 246
- Hydrogen, function of, 98
- Hydrophobia, 249
- Hydrostatic pressure, 79
- Hygienic laboratory, 165
- Hypochlorites, 157, 158
- I
- Ice cream poisoning, 104
- Identification of bacteria, 216, 217
- Immersion oil, 201
- Immunity, 236, 250–296
- acquired, 251, 252
- active, 251, 252–255
- antibacterial, 254, 255
- antitoxic, 254, 255
- artificial, 251, 252
- classification of, 251
- congenital, 251
- factors in, 295
- modifying, 250
- inherited, 251, 252
- natural, 295
- passive, 251, 252, 253
- to protein, 290
- reactions, value, 255
- relative, 250
- summary of, 295
- theories of, 256
- Inactivate, 272
- Incubation period, 26, 232
- Incubator, 213
- Index, chronological, 31
- Indicator, 278
- Indol, 104
- Infection, 232
- Infectious diseases, 232
-
- control of, 240
-
- Infective organisms, specificity of location, 249
- Infestation, 232
- Infested, 232
- Influenza, 239, 241, 246
- Infusoria, 33
- Inhalation, 228
- Inherited immunity, 251, 252
- Inoculation of animals, 227
- Inoculations, first protective, 30
- of smallpox, 24
- Insects, 241, 242
- Instruments, sterilization, 136, 167
- Intracardiac, 228
- Intracellular enzyme, 166
- Invasion, 232
- Invertase, 124
- Involution forms, 53, 212
- Iodine, 157
- Iron bacteria, 86
- function of, 89
- Irregular forms, 53
- Isolation of anaërobes, 190
- Itch mite, 27, 34
- K
- Chain, 32, 35
- Kidneys, 248
- Kinase, 125
- Kircher, 18, 25, 33
- Klebs, 29, 35
- Klencke, 28, 34
- Koch, 17, 27, 29, 30, 33, 36
- Koch’s postulates, 233
- Kraus, 268
- Kruse, 254
- Chef, 28, 35
- L
- Laboratory, 124
- Lachrymal canal, 244
- Lactacidase, 125
- Lactic acid bacteria, 97
- fermentation, 96–99
- Lancisi, 25, 33
- Landois, 271
- Latour, 31, 34
- Laveran, 25, 30
- Lecithin as antigen, 279
- Leeuwenhoek, 19, 32, 33
- Legumes, 118
- Leidy, 27, 33, 34, 35
- Le Moignac, 284
- Leprosy, 233, 244, 249
- Inferior, 32
- Lethal dose, 264
- Leukocytes, washing of, 281
- Lice as carriers, 241
- Liebert, 28, 34
- Light, action on bacteria, 75
- Linnaeus, 25
- Lipase, 124
- Lipochromes, 113
- Lipoids as antigen, 274
- Lipovaccines, 284
- Liquefaction of gelatin, 221
- of protein, 103
- Liquid blood serum, 182
- Liquids, sterilization of, 153
- Lister, 29, 30, 35
- Litmus milk, 177
- Living bacteria, examination of, 201
- Localized infections, vaccines in, 286
- Location of organisms, specificity of, 249
- Lockjaw, 231, 233
- Loeffler’s blood serum, 182
- blue, 206
- Loop needles, 193
- Lophotrichic, 46
- Delete, 29, 35
- Lungs, 245, 249
- Lye washes as disinfectants, 159
- Lymph channels in dissemination, 247
- Lysol as disinfectant, 160
- M
- McClintock, 165
- McCoy, 160
- Macrococcus, 52
- Macroscopic agglutination, 265
- Malaria, 25, 30, 32, 242
- Malarial parasite, 30, 249
- Malignant edema, 237, 243
- Mallease reaction, 269
- Mallein test, 292
- Malta fever, 268
- Mammary glands, 248
- Mandler filter, 154
- Manure, liquid, disinfection of, 169
-
- heating of, 40
-
- Margaropus annulatus, 242
- Martin, 32
- Mass cultures, 188
- Massart, 42
- Maximum conditions, 72, 73, 74, 76
- Measles, 246, 248, 250
- Measly pork, 28
- Measurement of bacteria, 203
-
- special unit of, 40
-
- Meat broth, 173
- Mechanical vibration, 80
- Medico-legal examination, 269, 279, 293
- Medium. See Culture medium
- Meningitis, 239, 244
- Meningococcus, 244
- Mercuric chloride, 158
- Merismopedia, 57
- Metabiosis, 103
- Metabolism, 86–91
- Metachromatic granules, 44, 45, 59, 212
- Metastases, 235
- Metatrophic, 86
- Metchnikov, 256, 280
- Methods of inoculation of animals, 227
- Methylamine, 103
- Methylene blue, 205, 206
- Mice, white, 227
- Microbiology, 231
- Micrococcus, 52, 60, 62, 66, 68, 69, 245
- Micrometer, 203
- Micromillimeter, 40
- Micron, 40
- Microörganisms, 32
- Microscope, improvements in, 30, 36
- Microspira, 61, 63
- Microsporon furfur, 28, 34
- Middle ear, 241
- Migula’s classification, 62
- Milk, blue, 31, 34
- Minimum conditions, 72, 73, 74, 77
- lethal dose, 264
- Mirror, use of, 200
- Mixed infection, 234
- vaccine, 285
- Mixotrophic, 86
- M. L. D., 264
- Mohler, 167
- Moist heat, 133
- Moisture, 73
- Mold colonies, 226
- Molds in alcoholic fermentation, 100
- Molecular respiration, 88, 89
- Monas, 33
- Monkeys, 227
- Monotrichic, 45
- Montague, 24
- Mordants, 204, 211
- Morphology, 41–58
- Mosquitoes and malaria, 25, 242
- Motile bacteria, 45
- Motion of bacteria, 47
- Mounting in balsam, 207
- Mouth cavity, 244
- Mu, 40
- Mucosæ as channels of infection, 244
- Müller, 33, 34, 59
- Mumps, 239
- Municipal disinfection, 170
- Müntz, 32, 35
- Muscardine, 34
- Mycelia, 39, 226
- Mycobacteriaceæ, 64
- Mycobacterium, 64, 69
- Mycoproteid, 83
- Mycorrhiza, 119
- Myxomycetes, 38
- N
- Nägeli, 29, 35
- Nasal cavity, 244
- discharges, 248
- Natural gas, 95
- Needham, 20, 33
- Needles, inoculation, 192
- Negative complement-fixation test, 278
- phase, 287
- Neisser’s granules, 45
- stain, 212
- Nencki, 83
- Nephrolysin, 272
- Neufeld, 281
- Neurin, 104
- Neurotoxin, 272
- Neuvel, 43
- Nichrome wire, 193
- Nitrate broth, 177
- Nitrates in soil, 115
- Nitric bacteria, 114
- Nitrification, 32, 35
- Nitrite, oxidation of, 114
- Nitrogen, absorption of, 117
- Nitrous bacteria, 114
- Non-pathogenic, 87
- Non-specific disease, 233
- Normal agglutinins, 266
- serum, 272
- Nosema bombycis, 29, 35
- New, 183
- jar, 192
- Noxious retention theory, 255
- Nuclein, 42, 43
- Nucleoprotein, 43
- Nucleus, 42, 43
- Nutrition of green plants, 118
- Nuttal, 271
- O
- Obermeier, 29, 35
- Objective, oil immersion, 200, 201
- Oblique germination of spore, 48
- Occurrence of bacteria, 71
- Official classification, 59
- Oidium albicans, 27, 34
- Oil bath, 167
- Omodei, 27
- Opsonic index, 281, 282, 287
- Opsonin, 281
- Opsonins, 281, 282, 295
- Optimum conditions, 72, 73, 74
- Order, receptors of first, 261–264
- Organic acids, 84, 110
- catalyzers, 123
- Organisms, dissemination of, in body, 247
- Organized ferments, 126
- Osmotic pressure, 78, 149, 216
- Otitis media, 244
- Otto, 289
- Overproduction theory, 257, 258
- Owen, 27, 34
- Oxidation, 114, 115
- Oxidizing enzymes, 125
- Oxygen, compressed, 77
- Oyster sensitization, 292
- Announcement, 26
- Ozone, 77, 150, 157
- P
- Pancreas, 248
- Papillate, 221
- Paget, 27, 34
- Paraffin oil, 190
- Parasite, 87
- Parodko, 77
- Partial agglutinin, 267
- amboceptor, 274
- Passive immunity, 251, 252
- Pasteur, 17, 21, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 253, 256, 283
- Pasteur-Chamberland filter, 154
- Pasteurization, 139–147
- Pathogenic, 87
- Paths of elimination, 248
- of entrance, 243–247
- Peacock, 26
- Pebrine, 29, 35
- Pedesis, 47
- Peptone solution, Dunham’s, 177
- Period of incubation, 26, 232
- Peritonitis, 234
- Peritrichic, 46
- Peronospora infestans, 28, 34
- Pretty, 33, 35
- Pet animals, 241
- Petri dishes, 181, 188
- Petroleum, 95
- Pfeiffer, 271
- Pfeiffer’s phenomenon, 271
- Pfeifferella mallei, 65, 69, 265
- Phagocytes, 247
- Phagocytic index, 281
- Phagocytosis, 243, 280–288, 295
- theory, 256
- Pharynx, 245
- Phase, negative, 287
- positive, 287
- Phenol coefficient, 165, 166
- Phenolphthalein, 174
- Phenomenon, anaphylactic, 292
- Phosphate reduction, 114
- rock, 115
- Phosphorescence, 111
- Phosphorus cycle, 108
- Photogenesis, 111
- Physical agents for disinfection, 131–155
- Physiological activities, 93–129
- Physiology of bacteria, 71–171
- Phytotoxins, 127, 128
- Pickling, 98
- Pigeons, 227
- Pigments, 84, 112, 113
- Pimples, 234, 240, 243
- Filipino, 284
- Pipettes for inoculation, 193
- Piroplasma bigeminum, 233, 242, 249
- Piroplasmoses, 242, 249
- Pirquet, von, 289
- Pityriasis versicolor, 28, 34
- Plague, 246
- Planes of division, 56, 57
- Planococcus, 62
- Planosarcina, 62
- Plants and animals, 39
- Plasmodiophora brassicæ, 30, 36
- Plasmolysis, 41, 42, 78
- Plasmoptysis, 42, 78
- Plate colonies, study of, 224–226
- Plates, dilution, 194, 195
- Platinum needles, 193
- Plectridium, 49
- Plenciz, 26, 31
- Plugs, cotton, 21, 184
- Pneumococcus, 240, 245
- Pneumonia, 240, 245, 246, 248
- vaccination against, 241
- Poisoning, cheese, 104
- Polar germination, 48, 49
- granules, 45
- Poliomyelitis, 244
- Pollender, 28, 35
- Polysaccharides, fermentation of, 95
- Polyvalent vaccine, 285
- Pork, measly, 28
- Position of bacteria, 37
- Positive phase, 287
- test, 278
- Postulates, Koch’s, 233
- Potato, acidity of, 182
- Power, opsonic, 287
- Practical sterilization and disinfection, 166–170
- Pragmidiothrix, 63
- Precipitinogen, 269
- Precipitinoid, 270
- Precipitins, 268–270
- anti-, 270
- Preparation of antitoxin, 263
- Preservation of slides, 207, 208
- Preservative, alcohol as, 160
- in vaccine, 284
- Pressure, hydrostatic, 79
- Prevention of disease, 235, 236, 253, 255, 283
- Preventive vaccination, colds, 241
- Prevost, 26
- Primary infection, 234
- Process kettle, 137
- Pro-enzyme, 121
- Prophylaxis, 289
- Protamine in bacteria, 84
- Protease, 124
- Protective inoculation, first, 30
- Protein in bacteria, 84
- Proteus vulgaris, 67, 70, 77
- Protoautotrophic, 115
- Protoplasm, 41, 59
- Prototrophic, 86
- Protozoa, cause of disease, 30
- Protozoal diseases, transmission of, 242
- Pseudomonas family, 65, 70
- Pseudomonas pyocyanea, 62, 65, 70, 128, 265
- Ptomaines, 103, 104
- Puccinia graminis, 26, 34
- Puerperal fever, 28, 34
- Punctiform colonies, 223
- Puncture cultures, 185
- Pure culture, 171, 194–199
- Purification of streams, 73
- of water, 150
- Purin bases in bacteria, 84
- Pus cocci, 73
- Putrefaction, 27, 31, 33
- Putrescin, 104
- R
- Bunnies, 227
- Rabies, bacteriological examination in, 229
- Räbiger’s method of staining, 210
- Radiations, 79
- Radium, 79
- Rancidity of butter, 101
- Rashes, serum, 289
- urticarial, 292
- Rate of division, 43, 91
- of movement, 45
- Rats, 227, 241
- Rayer, 28, 35
- Reaction of medium, 81, 174, 175, 216
- Reactions, biochemical, 87
- Reaumur scale, 33
- Receptors, 257, 258, 259, 261–280
- Recurrent fever, 29, 35
- Red corpuscles, 249, 278, 279
- Redi, 19
- Reducing actions, 112, 113
- enzymes, 125
- Refrigeration as antiseptic, 148
- Reinke, 80
- Relapses, 235
- Relationships of bacteria, 37–40
- Rennet, 124
- Renucci, 27, 34
- Reproduction, 37, 63, 90
- Resistance to disease, 241, 250
- of spores, 50
- Respiratory function, 88
- tract, 246
- Retarders, 143
- Rheumatism, 245
- Rhizobium leguminosarum, 65, 68, 69, 118
- Rhizoid colonies, 222, 223
- Rhizopus nigricans, 226
- Rhodobacteraceae, 63
- Rhodococcus, 66, 69
- Richet, 289
- Ricin, 262
- Rideal, 165
- Rideal-Walker method, 165
- Rimpau, 281
- Beef, 29, 35
- Ringworm, 28
- Ripening of cheese, 32
- of cream, 97
- Robin, 262
- Rock, phosphate, 115
- Rocky Mountain spotted fever, 242
- Rogers, 265
- Röntgen rays, 79
- Room temperature, 213
- Rooms, disinfection of, 167
- incubator, 213
- Root tubercle bacteria, 86, 87, 108
- tubercles, 117
- Rosenau, 289
- Rot, potato, 28, 34
- Round worm, 232
- Roup, 244
- Roux, 30
- Rubbing as inoculation, 195
- Rust, grain, 26, 34
- Ruzicka, 42
- S
- Saccate liquefaction, 222
- Safranin, 205
- Saliva, 248
- Salivary glands, 248
- Sake, 100
- Salt-rising bread, 95
- Saprogenic, 102
- Saprophilic, 103
- Saprophyte, 87, 238
- Sarcina, 57, 58, 60, 66, 68, 69
- Sarcoptes scabiei, 27, 34
- Sauerkraut, 98
- Scarlet fever, 246, 248, 250
- Scavengers, bacteria as, 108
- Chic, 289
- Schistosomum hematobium, 28, 35
- Schlösing, 32, 35
- Schönlein, 27, 34
- Schroeder and Shower, 21
- Schultze, 21, 34
- Schwann, 21, 31, 34
- Sea, bacteria in, 71, 111
- Sealing air-tight, 20
- Secondary infection, 234
- Sections, staining of, 209
- Selective media, 198, 199
- Self-limited, 233
- Semmelweis, 28, 35
- Sensitization, 290
- Sensitized animal, 290
- Septicemias, hemorrhagic, 246
- Sero-bacterins, 254
- Serum, antidiphtheritic, 263
- Serums, cytolytic, failure of, 275
- Sewage disposal, 101, 116
- sulphate, reduction in, 114
- Shape of spore, 48
- Sickness, serum, 289, 292
- Side-chain theory, 256, 258
- Silkworm disease, 27, 29, 34, 35
- Size of bacteria, 37, 40
- Skatol, 104
- Skin, channel of infection, 243
- Slant cultures, 186
- Slide, cleaning of, 207
- Slope cultures, 186
- Sludge tanks, 116
- Small intestine, 249
- Smallpox, 24, 26, 34, 239, 246, 248
- Smith, 289
- tubes, 184
- Snake poisons, 263, 275
- venoms, 128
- Sneezing, 248
- Soap, 160
- medicated, 160
- Society of American Bacteriologists, classification, 63
- Sodium hypochlorite, 158
- Soil, acid, 81
- Solid media, 172, 173
- Solution, Gram’s, 208
- stock, 205
- Sore throat, 240, 241
- Sound, 80
- Sour mash, 98
- Source of complement, 277
- Souring, 98
- Spallanzani, 20, 31, 34
- Species determination, 59, 60
- Specific amboceptor, 274, 278, 279
- Specificity of agglutinins, 267
- Spermotoxin, 272
- Spherical form, 52
- Spherotilus, 63
- Spirillaceæ, 63, 65
- Spirilloses, 241, 242
- Spirillum, 53, 54, 55, 61, 63, 66, 68, 69
- rubrum, 113
- Spirochæta, 61
- Spirochetes, 53, 242
- Spirosoma, 63
- Splenic fever, 28
- Split products of proteins, 291
- Splitting enzymes, 124
- of fats, 101
- Spoilage of canned goods, 51, 78
- Spoiling of food, 91
- Spontaneous combustion, 105, 116
- Sporangia, 226
- Spore, 47–51
- Spores, cause spoiling of canned goods, 51
- Sprinkling filters, 116
- Stab cultures, 185
- Stables, disinfection of, 167
- Stain, anilin fuchsin, 205
- Staining, 204–212
- Standard antitoxin, 264
- Standardization, colorimetric method, 175
- Staphylococcus, 57, 58
- Staphylococcus, 66, 68, 69
- Staring, 196
- Steam at air pressure, 134
- Stegomyia, 242
- Sterile, 131
- Sterilization, 130
- Sterilizers, pressure, 137
- steam, 135
- Stimuli, chemical, 257, 258, 259
- Stock cars, 170
- Stomach, 246
- Straight needles, 192
- Stratiform liquefaction, 222
- Strawberry poisoning, 292
- Streak methods of isolation, 196
- plates, 188
- Streptobacillus, 53, 56
- Streptococcus, 56, 60, 245
- Streptococcus, 60, 62, 66, 68, 69
- Streptospirillum, 55
- Streptothrix, 38
- Streptothrix bovis, 30, 36
- Strict aërobe, 76
- Structures, accidental, 43
- Subcutaneous inoculation, 227
- Subdural inoculation, 228
- Substrate, 123
- Successive existence, 103
- Sugar broth, 176, 177
- Sulphate reduction, 114
- Sulphur bacteria, 63, 86, 115
- Summary in immunity, 295
- Ehrlich’s theory, 259
- Sunning, 148
- Surface reactions, 91, 92
- Surgical instruments, 167
- Susceptibility, 235
- Swine, 227
- Symbionts, 87, 103
- Symbiosis, 87
- Synthetic media, 172, 183
- Syphilitic antigen, 277, 279
- Syphilis, 233, 245, 248, 249
- T
- Tabbing of antigens and antibodies, 294
- Tænia solium, 28, 35
- Tapeworm, 28, 35, 232
- Taxes, 203
- Temperature conditions, 74
- Test, complement deviation, 277
- Testicle, 249
- Tetanus, 231, 238, 243, 249, 251, 252
- Tetracoccus, 57
- Tetrad, 57
- Texas fever, 232, 233, 242
- Thaer, 31
- Theories of immunity, 256
- Theory, anaphylaxis (author’s), 290–292
- Thermal death point, 75, 215
- Thermophil bacteria, 75, 77
- Thermoregulator, 213
- Thermostat, 213
- Thiobacteria, 63
- Thiothrix, 63
- Thread, 56
- Thrombin, 124
- Thrush, 27, 34, 244
- Ticks, 241
- Tiedemann, 26
- Tinea, 28
- Tissue contrast stains, 205
- Titer, 268
- Titration, 174
- Tonsil, 245, 249
- Tonsillitis, 245
- Touissant, 283
- Toxin, diphtheria, 264
- Toxin-antitoxin method, 254
- Toxins and enzymes compared, 127
- Toxoid, 262
- Toxophore group, 261, 262, 273
- Tract, alimentary, 246
- Transmission, accidental carriers in, 241
- Transverse division, 54, 56
- Traube, 271
- Treponema pallidum, 245
- Trichina, 27
- Trichina spiralis, 27, 34, 35
- Trichinosis, 28, 35
- Trichophyton, 243
- Trichophyton tonsurans, 28, 34
- Trimethylamine, 104
- Tropical dysentery, 29
- lands, 242
- Tropisms, 203
- True toxins, 128
- Trypanosomes, 242
- Trypanosomiases, 241, 243
- Tubercle bacteria, 85, 209
- Tuberculin reaction, 292, 293
- Tuberculosis, 73, 233, 238, 245, 246, 248, 249
- Tuberculous milk, 248
- Tubes, culture, 184
- Two spores in a bacterium, 50
- Tyndall, 24
- Tyndallization, 133
- Tyndall’s box, 23, 24, 35
- Typhoid bacilli, 73, 238
- Typhus, 242
- Typical cell forms, 52
- U
- Ultramicroscope, 204
- Ultramicroscopic organisms, 234
- Ultraviolet rays, 150
- Unfavorable environment theory, 256
- Unit of antitoxin, 264
- of measurement, 40
- Universal carrier, 240
- Unorganized ferment, 126
- Unwashable articles, 169
- Urea, 106
- Urease, 125
- Urethral discharges, 248
- Urine, 72
- Urticarial rashes, 292
- V
- Vaccines in chicken cholera, 30
- Vaccine, 253
- Vaccines, bacterial, 283
- Vacuoles, 42, 43, 44, 59
- Vaginal discharges, 248
- Varo Bank, 25
- Vaughan, 291
- Vaughan and Novy’s mass cultures, 188
- Vegetable toxins, 127, 128
- Vegetables, forcing of, 117
- Vehicles, disinfection of, 169
- Venoms, antisnake, 275
- Viborg, 26, 34
- Vibration, mechanical, 80
- Vibrio, 33, 35, 53, 65, 68, 69
- Vignal tubes, 189
- Villemin, 29, 35
- Villous growth, 219, 221
- Vinegar, 99, 114
- Virulence, 235
- Virus, 234
- Vultures, 241
- W
- Walker, 165
- Wall, cell, 41
- Warden, 260
- Washable articles, disinfection of, 169
- Washing leukocytes, 281
- Wassermann test, 277
- Water, bacteria in, 73
- Webb, 253
- Weigert, 17, 30, 36, 42, 257, 258
- Welch’s method of staining, 210
- Whooping cough, 246, 250
- Widal test, 265
- test, 268
- Will o’ the wisp, 105
- Wine, pasteurization of, 141
- Winogradsky, 32, 63, 86
- Wire baskets, 184
- nichrome, 193
- Wollstein, 26, 34
- Woronin, 30, 36
- Wound infections, 17, 25, 26, 27, 30, 34, 36, 233, 234, 240, 243, 248
- Wright, 280
Punctuation has been standardised and simple typographical errors have been repaired. Hyphenation, quotation mark usage, and obsolete/variant spelling (including variant spellings of proper nouns) have been preserved as printed.
Punctuation has been standardized and minor typos have been fixed. Hyphenation, use of quotation marks, and outdated or variant spellings (including different spellings of proper nouns) have been kept as they were printed.
Repeated text in tables was indicated by dittos in the original book; here, the text is copied in full.
Repeated text in tables was shown with ditto marks in the original book; here, the text is fully copied.
The descriptive chart insert has been moved from between pages 216 and 217 to the end of the book.
The descriptive chart insert has been relocated from between pages 216 and 217 to the end of the book.
The following changes have also been made:
The following changes have also been made:
- Page 26: ‘this scourge which had devastated’
for ‘this scourge which had devasted’ - Page 30: ‘to be the cause of a disease in cabbage,’
[added comma] - Page 32: ‘alcoholic, lactic and butyric’
for ‘alcoholic, lactic and butryic’ - Page 32: ‘however, workers busied themselves’
for ‘however, workers, busied themselves’ [deleted extra comma] - Page 56: ‘Fig. 43.—Streptobacillus’
for ‘Fig. 43.—Steptobacillus’ - Page 57: ‘from a genus of algæ’
for ‘from a genus of algae’ - Page 58: ‘staphylococcus—irregular’
for ‘staphylococcus—irrgular’ - Page 59: ‘so that it is impossible’
for ‘so that is is impossible’ - Page 62: ‘Illustrates the genus Spirochæta’
for ‘Illustrates the genus Spirochaeta’ - Page 63: ‘since it is without a sheath’
for ‘since it is without a a sheath’ - Page 64: ‘Corynebacterium diphtheriæ’
for ‘Corynebacterium diphtheriae’ - Page 67: ‘Prazmowski, 1880; anaërobic’
for ‘Prazmowski, 1880; anaerobic’ - Page 70: ‘growth processes involving oxidation’
for ‘growth processes involving oxidadation’ - Page 70: ‘EE—Anaërobes, rods swollen at sporulation’
for ‘EE—Anaerobes, rods swollen at sporulation’ - Page 73: ‘percentage of water is permissible’
for ‘percentage of water is permissable’ - Page 95: ‘Material taken from the bottom’
for ‘Material taken from the botton’ - Page 102: ‘large-moleculed and not diffusible’
for ‘large-moleculed and not diffusable’ - Page 104: ‘various kinds of “meat poisoning,”’
for ‘various kinds of “meat posisoning,”’ - Page 106: ‘formed under anaërobic conditions’
for ‘formed under anaerobic conditions’ - Page 110: ‘volatile fatty acids, ethereal’
for ‘volatile fatty acids, etheral’ - Page 127: ‘but in much larger doses’
for ‘but in much large doses’ - Page 131: ‘“antiseptic” may become a disinfectant’
for ‘“antiseptic” may become a disfectant’ - Page 141: ‘quarantine station barge’
for ‘quaratine station barge’ - Page 147: ‘A continuous milk pasteurizer.’
for ‘A continuous milk pastuerizer.’ - Page 163: ‘especially when a large amount of material’
for ‘expecially when a large amount of material’ - Page 179: ‘these must be sterilized’
for ‘these must be steriliized’ - Page 191: ‘Deep tubes showing anaërobic’
for ‘Deep tubes showing anaerobic’ - Page 193: ‘less than one-twentieth of platinum’
for ‘less than one-twentieth of platimum’ - Page 207: ‘grease-free cloth, handkerchief’
for ‘grease-free cloth, handerchief’ - Page 210: ‘Stain with Löffler’s blue’
for ‘Stain with Löffller’s blue’ - Page 211: ‘slide to cause precipitates’
for ‘slide to cause preciptates’ - Page 213: ‘grows at body temperature (37°)’
[added closing parenthesis] - Page 217: ‘working on a revision’
for ‘working on a revission’ - Page 220: ‘inoculation for facultative anaërobes’
for ‘inoculation for facultative anërobes’ - Page 231: ‘the unicellular microörganisms’
for ‘the unicellular micro-organisms’ [split across line] - Page 232: ‘unicellular pathogenic microörganisms’
for ‘unicellular pathogenic micro-organisms’ [split across line] - Page 233: ‘the fact of self-limitation’
for ‘the fact of self-limitaion’ - Page 242: ‘the cattle tick (Margaropus annulatus).’
for ‘the cattle tick (Margaropus annulatus.)’ - Page 244: ‘B. Mucosæ directly continuous’
for ‘f. Mucosæ directly continuous’ - Page 245: ‘localized infection as in micrococcal, streptococcal’
for ‘localized infection as in micrococcal, strepococcal’ - Page 248: ‘ELIMINATION OF PATHOGENIC MICROÖRGANISMS.’
for ‘ELIMINATION OF PATHOGENIC MICRO-ORGANISMS.’ [split across line] - Page 254: ‘sometimes added to attenuate’
for ‘sometimes added to attentuate’ - Page 256: ‘Metchnikoff has since elaborated’
for ‘Metchinkoff has since elaborated’ - Page 266: ‘This is analogous to what’
for ‘This is analagous to what’ - Page 280: ‘other names, but ascribed’
for ‘other names, but asscribed’ - Chart: ‘(10 minutes’ exposure in nutrient broth when this is adapted to growth of organism)’
for ‘(10) minutes’ exposure in nutrient broth when this is adapted to growth of organism)’ - Page 299: ‘Allergic, 290’
[index entry was printed twice] - Page 308: ‘Foreign body pneumonia’
for ‘Foreignbody pneumonia’ - Page 309: ‘oxidation of’
for ‘ox dation of’ - Page 311: ‘Microspira’
for ‘Miscospira’ - Page 311: ‘Microsporon’
for ‘Miscrosporon’ - Page 314: ‘Plasmodiophora brassicæ’
for ‘Plasmodiophora bassicæ’ - Page 317: ‘Starin, 196’
[index entry was printed between Standardization and Staphylococcus] - Page 318: ‘Thermostat’
for ‘Thermostadt’
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!