Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T13:30:29.033Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The survival of bacteria in dust. II. The effect of atmospheric humidity on the survival of bacteria in dust

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

O. M. Lidwell  and
E. J. Lowbury
O. M. Lidwell
Affiliation:
Medical Research council Group for Research in Industrial Physiology and the Common Cold Research Unit, from Harvard Hospital, Salisbury
E. J. Lowbury
Affiliation:
Medical Research council Group for Research in Industrial Physiology and the Common Cold Research Unit, from Harvard Hospital, Salisbury
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.

Dust from scarlet-fever wards was exposed to a controlled range of atmospheric humidities by enclosure in metal boxes containing anhydrous calcium chloride and saturated solutions of potassium carbonate, sodium nitrite, potassium bromide and sodium sulphate.

The death-rate of total organisms, Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes in the dust was assessed by periodic sampling of series of twenty 10mg. portions. A positive correlation between atmospheric humidity and death-rate was observed for the three groups of organisms counted in three specimens of dust.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 48 , Issue 1 , March 1950 , pp. 21 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1950

References

REFERENCES

Bardsley, D. A. (1948). J. Hug., Camb. 46, 269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchbinder, L., Solowey, M. & Solotorowsky, M. (1941). J. Bact. 42, 615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunklin, E. W. & Puck, T. T. (1948). J. Exp. Med. 87, 87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flosdorf, E. W. and Mudd, S. (1935). J. Immunol. 29, 389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haagen, E. (1939). zbl. Bakt. 143, 283.Google Scholar
Hammer, B. W. (1911). J. Med. Res. 24, 527.Google Scholar
Heller, G. (1941). J. Bact. 41, 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirstein, F. (1902). Z. Hyg. InfektKr. 39, 123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lidwell, O. M. (1949). Nature, Lond. 164, 1012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lidwell, O. M., Lovelock, J. E. & Raymond, W. F. (1948). Med. Res. Coun., Spec. Rep. Ser., Lond., no. 262, pp. 82–122.Google Scholar
Lidwell, O. M. & Lowbury, E. J. (1950 a). J. Hyg., Camb., 48, 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lidwell, O. M. & Lowbury, E. J. (1950 b). J. Hyg., Camb., 48, 28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lidwell, O. M. & Lowbury, E. J. (1950 c). J. Hyg., Camb., 48, 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morton, H. E. & Pulaski, E. J. (1938). J. Bact. 35, 163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noguchi, H. (1918). J. exp. Med. 27, 425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, F. E. M. (1948). J. Sci. Instrum. 25, 73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stamp, Lord (1947). J. gen. Microbiol. 1, 251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swift, H. F. (1921). J. exp. Med. 33, 69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar