The Kinds of Bacteria found in River Water

Edwin Oakes Jordan

doi:10.1017/S002217240003271X

The Kinds of Bacteria found in River Water

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 May 2009

Edwin Oakes Jordan

Show author details

Edwin Oakes Jordan: Affiliation:
Associate Professor of Bacteriology in the University of Chicago.

Article contents

Extract
References

Rights & Permissions

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. The kinds of bacteria that are isolated by the gelatin plate method from certain river waters freshly polluted with sewage are different from those found in the same water collected a long distance below the point of pollution.

2. In the freshly polluted river water non-chromogenic Staphylococci were found much more abundantly than in the purer waters.

3. In the freshly polluted water the fluorescent bacteria and a group of non-gas-producing, non-liquefying bacteria (Group XI.) were less abundant than in the purer waters.

4. A larger proportion of organisms belonging to the Proteus group were isolated from gelatin plates than from fermentation tubes. The reverse is true of the B. coli and B. lactis aerogenes types. A certain selective influence even upon gas-producing organisms would seem from this to be exerted by the conditions within the fermentation tube.

5. The study of a rather large number of separately isolated cultures belonging to the class of fluorescent microorganisms shows that the differences between the ‘liquefying’ and ‘non-liquefying’ varieties are more constant than is sometimes assumed. The action of these forms upon milk is just as diagnostic as their action upon gelatin. All the strains of fluorescent bacteria that were encountered (58) proved to be motile.

6. Considering as a whole the various physiological tests applied to the several groups of microorganisms, it is found that within almost every group as constituted in the accompanying tables divergence is shown by closely allied organisms in respect to indol formation and reduction of nitrates. The formation of a surface pellicle on broth is also a phenomenon that presents no apparent correlation with more s alient physiological characteristics.

Type: Research Article
Information: Journal of Hygiene , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , January 1903 , pp. 1 - 27

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S002217240003271X [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1903

References

^{page 1 note 1} Journal Experimental Med., 1900, v, p. 271Google ScholarJournal of Hygiene, 1901, i, p. 295 see Map on p. 296.Google Scholar

^{page 1 note 2} The average number of colonies per one c.c. during the investigation was 5800, the mean of 67 daily determinations.

^{page 1 note 3} Illinois State Board of Health, Report of the Sanitary Investigation of the Illinois River and its Tributaries, 1901, p. 179.Google Scholar

^{page 2 note 1} Cf. Journ. Experimental Med., 1900, V., p. 271.Google Scholar

^{page 3 note 1} The general methods of preparation employed in the work were those recommended by the Bacteriological Committee of the American Public Health Association (Reports and Papers of the Amer. Public Health Association, Vol. XXIII., p. 60, 1898); with slight modifications:

(a) The reaction of the sugar-broths used for the fermentation tests was neutral to phenolphthalein instead of 1.5 acid.

(b) The ordinary nutrient gelatin, agar and broth were 1.0 acid.

^{page 3 note 2} Journ. Experimental Med., 1899, IV.Google Scholar

^{page 3 note 3} Irons, E. E, Journal of Hygiene, 1902, Vol. II., p. 314.CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 4 note 1} Cultures not yielding positive results, e.g., in curdling milk, within ten days, are recorded in the tables as negative, i.e. by the minus sign.

^{page 4 note 2} Proc. Roy. Soc., 1897, LXI. p. 415.Google Scholar

^{page 4 note 3} Journal. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., 1899, IV. p. 32.Google Scholar

^{page 4 note 4} Journ. Experimental Med., 1899, IV. p. 609.Google Scholar

^{page 6 note 1} American Journal of Medical Sciences, 09., 1895.Google Scholar

^{page 6 note 2} Journ. of Experimental Med., 1901, V. p. 368.Google Scholar

^{page 6 note 3} loc. cit.

^{page 6 note 4} loc. cit.

^{page 6 note 5} op. cit. p. 372.

^{page 6 note 6} American Medicine, 1902, III p. 504.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 1} Journ. Experimental Med., 1897, II. p. 549.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 2} The Fermentation Tube, Wilder Quarter Century Book, p. 212.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 3} B, Vulgare, Lehmann, and Neumann, Bacteriology, translation by Weaver, p. 295.Google Scholar

^{page 8 note 4} Journ. of Med. Research, 1901, vi. p.211.Google Scholar

^{page 9 note 1} Journ. Experimental Med., 1899, iv. p.609.Google Scholar

^{page 9 note 2} Annals of Botany, 1899, xiii. p. 197.Google Scholar

^{page 9 note 3} loc. cit.

^{page 9 note 4} op. cit.

^{page 9 note 5} Ueber Fêulnissbakterien, Leipzig, 1885.Google Scholar

^{page 9 note 6} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1892, xii. p. 629.Google Scholar

^{page 10 note 1} op. cit.

^{page 11 note 1} Journ. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., 1899, Vol. VI. p. 32;Google Scholar

Thompson Yates Laboratories Reports, 1898—1899, p. 37.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 1} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1899, Vol. VI. p. 399.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 2} loc. cit. p. 145.

^{page 12 note 3} loc. cit. p. 292.

^{page 12 note 4} Memoirs, National Academy of Science, 1895, Vol. VIII. p. 436.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 5} loc. cit. pp. 438, 439.

^{page 12 note 6} Memoirs, National Academy of Science, 1896, Vol. VIII. pp. 9, 20, 22.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 7} Centralbl. f. Bacteriologie, 1888, Vol. VI. p. 544.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 8} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1889, Vol. VI. p. 391.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 9} Flügge, , loc. cit., p. 294.Google Scholar

^{page 12 note 10} loc. cit., p. 64.

^{page 13 note 1} Cohn, , Beitrêge zur Biologie der Pflanzen, Vol. I., Heft II. p. 175, 1875; also Flügge, loc. cit, p. 196.Google Scholar

^{page 13 note 2} Flügge, , loc. cit., p. 199.Google Scholar

^{page 13 note 3} Globig, , Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1888, Vol. III. p. 322.Google Scholar

^{page 13 note 4} Flügge, , loc. cit., p. 198.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 1} Migula, , loc. cit. p. 516.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 2} loc. cit. p. 585.

^{page 14 note 3} loc. cit. p. 112.

^{page 14 note 4} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1899, Vol. VI. p. 382.Google Scholar

^{page 14 note 5} loc. cit. pp. 38, 48.

^{page 14 note 6} Chester, loc. cit. p. 237.Google Scholar

^{page 15 note 1} Report of Mass. Board of Health, 1890, pp. 831, 835 837.Google Scholar

^{page 15 note 2} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1899, Vol. VI. pp. 381, 396.Google Scholar

Phil. Trans. Royal Soc., London, 1888, p. 277.Google Scholar

^{page 15 note 3} Flügge, loc. cit, p. 318.Google Scholar

^{page 15 note 4} loc. cit. p. 160.

^{page 15 note 5} loc. cit. p. 58.

^{page 15 note 6} loc. cit. p. 833.

^{page 15 note 7} loc. cit. p. 25.

^{page 15 note 8} loc. cit. p. 162.

^{page 15 note 9} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1892, Vol. XI. p. 143;Google Scholar

Migula, loc. cit. p. 247.Google Scholar

^{page 15 note 10} loc. cit. p. 12.

^{page 15 note 11} loc. cit.

^{page 15 note 12} loc. cit.

^{page 15 note 13} loc. cit.

^{page 15 note 14} loc. cit. p. 142.

^{page 15 note 15} loc. cit. p. 58.

^{page 16 note 1} loc. cit. p. 460.

^{page 16 note 2} loc. cit. p. 105.

^{page 17 note 1} Landwirthsch. Jahrbücher, 1899Google Scholar

Chester, loc. cit. p. 147.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 2} Report of Storrs Agric. Exp. Sta., 1894, p. 81.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 3} loc. cit. 1899, p. 52.

^{page 17 note 4} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 366.

^{page 17 note 5} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 356.

^{page 17 note 6} loc. cit. p. 830.

^{page 17 note 7} loc. cit. 1899, pp. 50, 58.

^{page 17 note 8} Mass. Inst. of Tech. Quart., VI. p. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 9} loc. cit. p. 39.

^{page 17 note 10} loc. cit. 1894, pp. 57, 82, 83.

^{page 17 note 11} loc. cit., 1899, p. 56.

^{page 17 note 12} loc. cit. p. 32.

^{page 17 note 13} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1896, Vol. XIX. p. 187.Google Scholar

^{page 17 note 14} loc. cit. p. 29.

^{page 17 note 15} Report of the New York Acad. of Science, 1895, Vol. VIII. p. 360.Google Scholar

^{page 18 note 1} Untersuch. des Leitmeritzer Trinkwassers, Leitmeritz, 1887.Google Scholar

Migula, loc. cit. p. 730.Google Scholar

^{page 18 note 2} loc. cit. p. 18.

^{page 18 note 3} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 373.

^{page 18 note 4} Das Oesterreichische Sanitêtswesen, 1889, Nos. 14– 23.Google Scholar

Migula, loc. cit. p. 731.

^{page 18 note 5} loc. cit. p. 442.

^{page 18 note 6} loc. cit. p. 40.

^{page 18 note 7} loc. cit. 1894, p. 83.

^{page 19 note 1} Laurent, , Ann. de l'Institut Pasteur, 1890, Vol. IV. p. 465.Google Scholar

^{page 19 note 2} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 302.

^{page 19 note 3} Fischer, , Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1887, Vol. II. p. 74.Google Scholar

^{page 19 note 4} Zimmermann, loc. cit. p. 46.

^{page 19 note 5} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene. p. 44.

^{page 19 note 6} loc. cit. p. 482.

^{page 19 note 7} loc. cit. p. 8.

^{page 20 note 1} Grotenfelt, , Fortschritte d. Medizin, 1889, Vol. VII. p. 41.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 2} loc. cit. p. 781.

^{page 20 note 3} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, Vol. VI. p. 381.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 4} loc. cit. p. 52.

^{page 20 note 5} loc. cit. pp. 58, 60.

^{page 21 note 1} Botan. Gazette, 1900, Vol. XXX. p. 261.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 2} Report of Storrs Agric. Exp. Sta. 1894, p. 28.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 3} loc. cit. p. 80.

^{page 21 note 4} loc. cit., Vol. I. p. 160, 1875.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 5} Am. Jour. Med. Science, 1892.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 6} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1886, Vol. I. p. 94.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 7} loc. cit. p. 117.

^{page 22 note 1} loc. cit. p. 178.

^{page 22 note 2} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1890, Vol. VII. p. 495.Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 3} loc. cit., 1895, Vol. V. p. 32.Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 4} Houston, , Parliamentary Blue Books, 1898, 1899, 1900, Supplem. XXVIII.Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 5} Horrocks, , Bacteriological Examination of Water; London, 1901.CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 6} Winslow and Hunnewell, Science, 05 23, 1902.Google Scholar

Article contents

The Kinds of Bacteria found in River Water

Extract

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests