Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T22:13:21.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some New Observations on the Developmental Cycle of the Organism of Bovine Pleuropneumonia and Related Microbes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Emmy Klieneberger  and
J. Smiles
J. Smiles
Affiliation:
From the Lister Institute, Elstree, Herts and the National Institutefor for Medical Research, Hampstead,
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.

A study of the growth phases of pleuropneumoma has been carried out by two new methods: (1) a new fixing and staining technique, (2) a new dark-ground method. The results obtained by the two methods are in good agreement, and the life cycle of the organism of bovine pleuropneumoma and related microbes as revealed by means of both methods has been described.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 42 , Issue 2 , April 1942 , pp. 110 - 123
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1942

References

REFERENCES

Barnard, J. E. (1925). Lancet, 2, 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordet, J. (1910). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 24, 161.Google Scholar
Collier, W. A. (1939). J. Path. Bact. 48, 579.Google Scholar
Dahmen, H. (1929). Handb. Path. Mikroorg., Kolle, Kraus, Uhlenhuth, 3rd edit. 9, 1.Google Scholar
Edward, D. G. ff. (1940). J. Path. Bact. 50, 409.Google Scholar
Freiberger, G. (1912). Z. InfektKr. Haustiere, 12, 455.Google Scholar
Frosch, P. (1923). Arch. wiss. u. prakt. Tierheilk. 49, 35, 273.Google Scholar
Klieneberger, E. (1934). J. Path. Bact. 39, 409.Google Scholar
Klieneberger, E. (1938). J. Hyg., Camb., 38, 458.Google Scholar
Klieneberger, E. (1940). J. Hyg., Camb., 40, 204.Google Scholar
Kuhn, P. & Sternberg, K. (1931). Zbl. Bakt. Orig. 121, 113.Google Scholar
Laidlaw, P. P. & Elford, W. J. (1936). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 120, 292.Google Scholar
Ledingham, J. C. G. (1933). J. Path. Bact. 37, 393.Google Scholar
Nocard, , Roux, , Borrel, , Salimbeni, & Dujardin-Beaumetz, (1898). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 12, 240.Google Scholar
Nowak, J. (1929). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 43, 1330.Google Scholar
Ørskov, J. (1927). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 41, 473.Google Scholar
Ørskov, J. (1938). Zbl. Bakt. Orig. 141, 229.Google Scholar
Sabin, A. B. (1941). Bact. Rev. 5, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seiffert, G. (1937). Zbl. Bakt. Orig. 139, 337.Google Scholar
Shoetensack, H. M. (1934). Kitasato Arch. 11, 277.Google Scholar
Shoetensack, H. M. (1936). Kitasato Arch. 13, 269.Google Scholar
Smiles, J. (1926). J. Roy. Micr. Soc. 46, 257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, F. F., Wei, H., McWhirter, D. L. & Edgar, J. (1935). J. Path. Bact. 40, 391.Google Scholar
Turner, A. W. (1935). J. Path. Bact. 41, 1.Google Scholar
Woglom, W. H. & Warren, J. (1939). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wroblewski, W. (1931). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, 47, 94.Google Scholar