Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-14T06:51:19.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The serological grouping of Streptococcus lactis (group N) and its relationship to Streptococcus faecalis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

P. M. F. Shattock  and
A. T. R. Mattick
P. M. F. Shattock
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
A. T. R. Mattick
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, University of Reading
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

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

1. It has been shown on serological and biochemical grounds that Str. faecalis falls into Lancefield's group D. Str. liquefaciens is considered to be a variety of Str. faecalis, and Str. glycerinaceus (Orla Jensen) has insufficient claim to a separate name.

2. Str. lactis has, on biochemical and serological grounds, been clearly differentiated from Str. faecalis and the other members of group D.

3. Reasons are given for assigning Str. lactis to a new serological group ‘N’ into which Str. cremoris also falls.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 43 , Issue 3 , September 1943 , pp. 173 - 188
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1943

References

REFERENCES

Andrewes, F. W. & Horder, T. J. (1906). Lancet, 2, 708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, S. H. & Johnson, W. T. (1924). J. Infect. Dis. 34, 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergey, D. H. (1939). Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, p. 335. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Breed, R. S. (1928). The Newer Knowledge of Bacteriology and Immunology, p. 383. Chicago: Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Brown, H. (1919). Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, Monograph no. 9.Google Scholar
Chapman, G. H. (1936). J. Bact. 32, 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colebrook, L., Elliot, S. D., Maxted, W. R., Morley, C. W. & Mortell, Mary (1942). Lancet, 2, 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. G. (1935). J. Dairy Res. 6, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, J. G. & Rogers, H. J. (1939). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 446.Google Scholar
Demeter, K. J. (1929). Milchw. Forsch. 8, 201.Google Scholar
Dible, J. H. (1921). J. Path. Bact. 24, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fry, R. M. (1938). Paper read at meeting of Pathological Section of Royal Society of Medicine, 6 12.Google Scholar
Fry, R. M. & Hare, T. (1939). Paper read at meeting of Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 6 01. (See also (1939), Lancet, 1, 451.)Google Scholar
Fuller, A. T. (1938). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 19, 130.Google Scholar
Graham, N. C. & Bartley, E. O. (1939). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 538.Google Scholar
Hammer, B. W. & Baker, M. P. (1926). Res. Bull. Ia Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 99.Google Scholar
Hobbs, B. C. (1939). J. Dairy Res. 10, 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, T. & McCloy, J. M. (1916). Lancet, 2, 632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hucker, G. J. (1932). Tech. Bull. N. Y. St. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 190.Google Scholar
Hunwicke, R. F. (1935). Brit. Pat. 425, 216.Google Scholar
Kleckner, A. L. (1935). J. Lab. Clin. Med. 21, 111.Google Scholar
Kruse, W. (1903). Zbl. Bakt. Abt. I, 34, 737.Google Scholar
Lancefield, R. C. (1933). J. Exp. Med. 57, 571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancefield, R. C. (1940-1941). The Harvey Lectures Series, 36, 251.Google Scholar
Lister, J. (1878). Trans. Path. Soc. Lond. 29, 425.Google Scholar
Little, R. B. (1939). 13th Ann. Rep. N.Y. St. Ass. Dairy Milk Insp. p. 35.Google Scholar
Löhnis, F. (1909). Zbl. Bakt. Abt. II, 22, 553.Google Scholar
Long, H. F. & Hammer, B. W. (1936). Res. Bull. Ia Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 206.Google Scholar
MacCallum, W. G. & Hastings, T. W. (1899). J. Exp. Med. 4, 521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, K. (1926). Zbl. Bakt. I. Abt. Orig. 99, 416.Google Scholar
Meyer, K., (1930). Z. Immunforsch. 68, 98.Google Scholar
Meyer, K. & Schönfeld, H. (1926). Zbl. Bakt. I. Abt. Orig. 99, 402.Google Scholar
Nichols, A. A. (1939). J. Dairy Res. 10, 202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orla Jensen, S. (1919). The Lactic Acid Bacteria. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Report (1937). Nat. Inst. Res. Dairy., Reading, p. 37.Google Scholar
Seelemann, M. & Flint, A. (1941). Arch. wiss. prakt. Tierheilk. 77, 67.Google Scholar
Seelemann, M. & Nottbohm, H. (1940). Zbl. Bakt. I. Abt. Orig. 146, 142.Google Scholar
Shattock, P. M. F. (1937). Univ. Reading: Thesis.Google Scholar
Sherman, J. M. (1937). Bact. Rev. 1, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J. M. (1938). J. Bact. 35, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J. M., Mauer, J. C. & Stark, P. (1937). J. Bact. 33, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J. M., Smiley, K. L. & Niven, C. F. (1940). J. Dairy Sci. 23, 529.Google Scholar
Sherman, J. M. & Stark, P. (1934). J. Dairy Sci. 17, 525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J. M., Stark, P. & Mauer, J. C. (1937). J. Bact. 33, 483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherman, J. M. & Wing, H. (1937). J. Dairy Sci. 33, 315.Google Scholar
Stableforth, A. W. (1937). J. Path. Bact. 45, 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, P. & Sherman, J. M. (1935). J. Bact. 30, 639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thiercelin, M. E. (1899). C.R. Soc. Biol., Paris, 5, 269.Google Scholar
Topley, W. W. C. & Wilson, G. S. (1936). The Principles of Bacteriology and Immunity, p. 456. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Weatherall, C. & Dible, J. H. (1929). J. Path. Bact. 32, 413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wordley, E. (1921). J. Hyg., Camb., 20, 60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yawger, & Sherman, (1937). J. Dairy Sci. 20, 101.Google Scholar