Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T02:06:42.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the Action of Electrolytes on Bacteria. Part I. The Action of Monovalent and Divalent Salts on the Conductivity of Bacterial Emulsions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

C. Shearer
C. Shearer
Affiliation:
(From the Pathological Laboratory, University of Cambridge.)
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.

The action of univalent and bivalent salts on bacteria in affeting the conductivity of thick emulsions of the meningococcus and B. coli demonstrates the important fact, that they alter the conductivity of these germs in the living condition, in a very definite manner. In this alteration, the predominant part is played by the cat-ion.

All monovalent cat-ions, with the exception of the H-ion, such as those of Na, K, Li, Rb, produce a rapid increase in conductivity or a fall in resistance. In its early stages this increase in conductivity is readily reversible in these solutions. If allowed to follow its due course, however, it leads finally to death in about two hours, when the bacterial cells no longer offer any resistance to the passage of the ions. The conductivity of the emulsion then becomes that of the fluid in which the emulsion has been suspended.

Bivalent cat-ions and the H-ion, on the other hand, at first produce a slight fall in conductivity or an increase in resistance, followed, swecondly, by an irreversible increase in conductivity which is slow and gradual resulting finally in death after 48 or more hours. This is shown by the car-ions of Ca, Sr, Ba, and Cd.

In a balanced solution such as sea-water, blood plasma, Ringer's solution, van't Hoff's solution, where a certain quantity of CaCl2 antagonises a larger amount of NaCl and KCl, the conductivity of bacterial emulsions undergoes no change, but remains constant.

Dead in distinction to living bacteria offer little resistance to the passage of ions of a solution. It would seem the relativity high resistance of the bacterial cell is due to some condition present in the living and absent in the dead state.

It has been shown by experiments on animals that the condition of increased conductivity of the cell is coupled with a loss of virulence in the case of some pathogenic bacteria. It is not clear from these experiments if this is due to the actual death of the germs in a monovalent salt solution, or to a detoxicating action of these solutions on the germs. It would seem there is some evidence for believing that the latter takes place, as the lost lethal power returns in the presence of a small trace of Ca. In bivalent salt solutions no loss of toxicity takes place. It has been pointed out that the action of monovalent and bivalent salts on bacteria offers a new explanation of certain experiments with gas gangrene organisms, where it is at present considered that the action of the salts are on the tissues of the animal and not on the bacteria.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 18 , Issue 3 , October 1919 , pp. 337 - 360
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1919

References

Brooks, C. S. (1917). Bot. Gaz. lxiv. 306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bugarsky, and Tangl, (1897). Zeitschr. f. Phys. ii. 297.Google Scholar
Bullock, and Cramer, (1919). Proc. Roy. Soc. Ser. b, xc. 513.Google Scholar
Cramer, W. (1918). Biochem. Jr. xii. 210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danysz, (1900). Ann. Inst. Past. xiv. 641.Google Scholar
Fischer, A. (1895). Jahrb. d. Botanik, xxvii. 1.Google Scholar
Flexner, S. (1907). Jr. Exp. Med. ix. 105.Google Scholar
Girard, P. (1910). Jr. Physiol. Path. gén. xii. 471.Google Scholar
Girard, P. (1919a). Compt. Rend. clxviii. 1335.Google Scholar
Girard, P. (1919b). Compt. Rend. clxix. 94.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. H. (1918). Brit. Med. Jr. 1918, 110.Google Scholar
Gray, J. (1916). Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Ser. b, ccvii. 481.Google Scholar
Höber, R. (1913). Archiv ges. Phys. cl. 15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loeb, J. (1906). Dynamics of Living Matter, New York.Google Scholar
Loeb, and Wastenays, (1915). Jr. Biochem. xxi.Google Scholar
McClendon, J. F. (1910). Am. Jr. Phys. xxvii. 270.Google Scholar
Mines, G. R. (1911). Jr. Phys. xlii. 309.Google Scholar
Oker-Blom, (1900). Pflüg. Archiv, lxxix. 510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osterhout, W. J. V. (1913). Bot. Gaz. lv. 446.Google Scholar
Osterhout, W. J. V. (1915). Bot. Gaz. lix. 315.Google Scholar
Osterhout, W. J. V. (1918). Jr. Biochem. xxxvi. 557.Google Scholar
Perrin, J. (1904). Jr. Chimie Phys. ii. 601.Google Scholar
Porges, (1905). Wien. klin. Wochenschr. 1905, 691.Google Scholar
Róth, W. (1897). Elektrische Leitfähigkeit thierischer Flüssigkeiten.Google Scholar
Schryver, S. B. (1913). Proc. Roy. Soc. Ser. b, lxxxvi. 460.Google Scholar
Shearer, C. (1917). Proc. Roy. Soc. Ser. b, lxxxix. 440.Google Scholar
Sørensen, S. P. L. (1917). Travaux de Labt. Carlsberg, xii. 1.Google Scholar
Stewart, G. N. (1899). Jr. Phys. xxiv. 356.Google Scholar
Stewart, G. N. (1910). Jr. Pharm. Therap. i. 49.Google Scholar
Stiles, and Jørgensen, (1915). Ann. Bot. xxix. 349 and 610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiles, and Jørgensen, (1918). Bot. Gaz. lxv. 526.Google Scholar
Stiles, and Kidd, (1919). Proc. Roy. Soc. Ser. b, xc. 448.Google Scholar
Woelfel, A. (1908). Biochem. Jr. iii. 146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar