Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:32:31.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Serological Varieties of Typhus Fever

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

A. Felix  and
M. Rhodes
A. Felix
Affiliation:
From the Bacteriological Department, Lister Institute, London.
M. Rhodes
Affiliation:
From the Bacteriological Department, Lister Institute, London.
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. Fletcher and Lesslar's observations on two serological types of tropical typhus have been fully confirmed.

2. The antigenic relationship between the indologenic B. proteus X 19 and the non-indologenic Kingsbury strain is of the same order as that obtaining between the X 19 and X 2 types of B. proteus X.

3. The Kingsbury strain is an antigenic variant derived from the original X 19 culture and represents another serological type of B. proteus X. The symbol XK is suggested for this type.

4. Sera from cases of classical European typhus and of endemic typhus of the United States of America and of Australia have been tested for the occurrence of main and group O agglutinins for the known types of B. proteus X.

5. H agglutination as source of error in the diagnosis of typhus cases is illustrated by some examples.

6. Sera from cases of tsutsugamushi from Sumatra and Japan react with type XK like the Malayan cases of this disease described by Fletcher and co-workers.

7. This latter reaction is of the order of group O agglutination. It is suggested that antigenically the virus of tsutsugamushi corresponds to another serological type of B. proteus X which is yet unknown.

8. The data published on the serum reactions in Rocky Mountain spotted fever and in the “fièvre exanthématique” of Marseilles are analysed. It is suggested that these two diseases represent further serological varieties of typhus.

9. The significance hitherto attached to negative agglutination tests with B. proteus X and to negative cross-immunity tests obtained with some typhuslike diseases requires revision in the light of recent observations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , April 1931 , pp. 225 - 246
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1931

References

REFERENCES

Arkwright, J. A. (1921). J. Path. and Bact. 24, 36.Google Scholar
Arkwright, J. A. (1930). System of Bacteriology, Med. Res. Council, London, 1, 335.Google Scholar
Baerthlein, K. (1918). Zentralbl. f. Bakt.Abt. i, Orig. 81, 369.Google Scholar
Boinet, Piéri, J. and Dunan, J. (1928 a). Bull. Acad. Méd. 3rd Ser. 100, 949.Google Scholar
Boinet, Piéri, J. and Dunan, J. (1928 b). Marseille-Médical, 65, 703 (12 5).Google Scholar
Bull, L. B. (1923). Med. J. Australia, 1, 443.Google Scholar
Burnet, E. and Durand, P. (1929). Bull. Soc. Path. exotique, 22, 85.Google Scholar
Burnet, E. and Olmer, D. (1927). Arch. Inst. Pasteur, Tunis, 16, 317.Google Scholar
Conseil, E. (1929). Arch. Inst. Pasteur, Tunis, 18, 86.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1916). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 29, 873.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1917). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 26, 602.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1922). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 35, 57.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1930). Lancet, 1, 505.Google Scholar
Fletcher, W. (1930). Proc. R. Soc. Med. 23, Sect. Epidem. p. 1021.Google Scholar
Fletcher, W. and Field, J. W. (1927). Bull. Inst. Med. Res., Fed. Malay States, No. 1.Google Scholar
Fletcher, W. and Lesslar, J. E. (1925). Bull. Inst. Med. Res., Fed. Malay States, No. 2.Google Scholar
Fletcher, W. and Lesslar, J. E. (1926). Bull. Inst. Med. Res., Fed. Malay States, No. 1.Google Scholar
Fletcher, W., Lesslar, J. E. and Lewthwaite, R. (1928). Trans. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. London, 22, 161.Google Scholar
Fletcher, W., Lesslar, J. E. and Lewthwaite, R. (1929). Trans. Soc. Trop. Med. Hyg. London, 23, 57.Google Scholar
Friedberger, E., Zorn, W. and Meissner, G. (1922). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 34, 259.Google Scholar
Havens, L. C. (1927). J. Infect. Dis. 40, 479.Google Scholar
Hone, F. S. (1922). Med. J. Australia, 1, 1.Google Scholar
Hone, F. S. (1923). Med. J. Australia, 1, 435.Google Scholar
Ishiwara, K. and Ogata, N. (1923). Zentralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. i, Orig. 90, 164.Google Scholar
Jötten, K. W. (1919). Berl. klin. Wochenschr. p. 270.Google Scholar
Kawamura, R. (1926). Med. Bull. College of Med., Cincinnati Univ. 4, Special Nos. 1 and 2.Google Scholar
Kelly, F. L. (1923). J. Infect. Dis. 32, 223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerlee, A. L. and Spencer, R. R. (1929). Publ. Health Rep., Washington, 44, 179.Google Scholar
Kuczynski, M. H. (1927). Die Erreger des Fleck- u. Felsenfiebers, Berlin: J. Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxcy, K. F. (1929 a). Publ. Health Rep., Washington, 44, 589.Google Scholar
Maxcy, K. F. (1929 b). Publ. Health Rep., Washington, 44, 1735.Google Scholar
Maxcy, K. F. (1929 c). Publ. Health Rep., Washington, 44, 1935.Google Scholar
Maxcy, K. F. and Havens, L. C. (1923). Amer. J. Trop. Med. 3, 495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Megaw, J. W. D. (1921). Ind. Med. Gaz. 56, 361.Google Scholar
Megaw, J. W. D. (1924). Ind. Med. Gaz. 59, 68.Google Scholar
Megaw, J. W. D., Shettle, F. B. and Roy, D. N. (1925). Ind. Med. Gaz. 60, 53.Google Scholar
Mooser, H. (1928). J. Infect. Dis. 43, 261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mooser, H. (1929). J. Infect. Dis. 44, 186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Munter, H. (1928). Zeitschr. f. Hyg. 109, 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neill, M. H. (1917). Publ. Health Rep. Washington, 32, 1105.Google Scholar
Neukirch, P. and Kreuscher, A. (1919). Beitr. zur Klinikd. Infektionskr. u. Immunitätsf. 8, 68.Google Scholar
Olmer, D. (1925). Marseille-Médical, Aug. 5 and Nov. 5.Google Scholar
Olmer, D. (1928). Bull. Acad. Méd. 3rd Ser. 100, 996.Google Scholar
Otto, R. (1928). Zentralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. i, Orig. 106, 279.Google Scholar
Otto, R. and Munter, H. (1930). Handbuch d. pathog. Mikroorg. hrsg. Kolle, Kraus u. Uhlenhut, Jena, 8, 1107.Google Scholar
Penfold, W. J. and Corkill, A. B. (1928). Med. J. Australia, 2, 304.Google Scholar
Peverelli, P. (1930). Geneesk. Tijdschr. v. Nederl. Indië, 70, 436.Google Scholar
Pfeiffer, R. (1904). Festschr. zu Ehren Robert Kochs.Google Scholar
Pinkerton, H. (1929). J. Infect. Dis. 44, 337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salubritäts-Kommission, (1916). Feldärztl. Blätter, K. u. K. 2. Armee, No. 11.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, H. (1919). Zentralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. i, Orig. 83, 430.Google Scholar
Schütze, H. (1921). J. Hygiene, 20, 330.Google Scholar
Schütze, H. (1930). Brit. J. Exp. Pathol. 11, 34.Google Scholar
Spencer, R. R. and Maxcy, K. F. (1930). - Publ. Health Rep. Washington, 45, 440.Google Scholar
van Steenis, P. B. (1929). Geneesk. Tijdschr. v. Nederl. Indië, 69, 572.Google Scholar
Wassermann, A. (1903). Zeitschr. f. Hyg. 42, 262.Google Scholar
Weil, E. (1920). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 33, 61.Google Scholar
Weil, E. (1922). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 35, 25.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1916). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 29, 33.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1917 a). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 30, 393.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1917 b). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 30, 1509.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1918). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 31, 637.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1921). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 31, 457.Google Scholar
Wheatland, F. L. (1926). Med. J. Australia, 1, 261.Google Scholar
Wilson, W. J. (1927). J. Hygiene, 26, 213.Google Scholar
Wolff, G. (1922 a). Zentralbl. f. Bakt. Abt. i, Orig. 89, Beih. 225.Google Scholar
Wolff, G. (1922 b). Ergebn. Hyg. Bakt. 5, 532.Google Scholar
Wolff, J. W. (1929). Geneesk. Tijdschr. v. Nederl. Indië, 69, 429.Google Scholar
Zeiss, H. (1918). Arch. f. Hyg. 87, 246.Google Scholar