Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-16T17:54:26.552Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of temperature of incubation on the results of tests for differentiating species of coliform bacteria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

C. B. Taylor
C. B. Taylor
Affiliation:
Freshwater Biological Association, Wray Castle, Ambleside
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. A study has been made of different types of coliform bacteria with particular reference to (a) their ability to ferment lactose in MacConkey broth at different temperatures, and (b) the effect of using different temperatures of incubation for the indol, methyl-red, V.P., and citrate tests.

2. It was found that 97% of the cultures of Bact. coli (indol positive, methyl-red positive, V.P. negative, citrate negative) examined could ferment lactose with production of acid and gas between 40 and 44° C. The number was not appreciably reduced at 45° C. but was markedly reduced at 46° C. 28% of the cultures of Bact. coli (indol negative, methyl-red positive, V.P. negative, citrate negative) and 15% of Bact. aerogenes (indol negative, methyl-red negative, V.P. positive, citrate positive) were found to be positive at 44° C.

3. The adoption of a temperature of incubation of 30°C. for the V.P. test as advocated by Levine (1941) and the use of O'Meara's test showed that many cultures previously regarded as unable to produce acetylmethylcarbinol were in fact able to do so. Employing a temperature of 30°C. for 5, or in some cases 7, days for the methyl-red test, it was found that with nearly all the cultures tested there was an inverse correlation between the results of the methyl-red test and those of the V.P. test. With these modifications in technique some cultures originally designated as Intermediate type I were found to have reactions corresponding with those of Bact. aerogenes type I. Similarly, many cultures originally classified as Intermediate type II should have been typed as Bact. aerogenes type II.

4. It was found that all cultures of Intermediate type I classified as such by the new technique were incapable of using the nitrogen of uric acid for growth, but that the majority produced hydrogen sulphide. Cultures of Bact. aerogenes type II, on the other hand, grew well in uric acid medium, but produced no hydrogen sulphide.

The investigation described in this paper was carried out by the Freshwater Biological Association, as part of the programme of the Water Pollution Research Board of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research. The paper is published by permission of the Department.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , April 1945 , pp. 109 - 115
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1945

References

REFERENCES

American Public Health Association (1936). Standard Methods of Water Analysis, 8th ed. New York: American Public Health Association.Google Scholar
Barritt, M. M. (1936). J. Path. Bact. 42, 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barritt, M. M. (1937). J. Path. Bact. 44, 679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batty-Smith, C. G. (1941). J. Hyg., Camb., 41, 521.Google Scholar
Batty-Smith, C. G. (1942). J. Hyg., Camb., 42, 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergey, D. H. (1939). Manual of Determinative Bacteriology, 5th ed. Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Co.Google Scholar
Carpenter, P. L. & Fulton, M. (1937). Amer. J. Publ. Hlth, 27, 822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clegg, L. F. L. & Sherwood, H. P. (1939). J. Hyg., Camb., 39, 361.Google Scholar
Kluyver, A. J. & Molt, E. L. (1939). Proc. Acad. Sci. Amst. 42, 118. Brit. Chem. Physiol. Abstr. A, 3, 1939, 525.Google Scholar
Levine, M. (1941). Amer. J. Publ. Hlth, 31, 351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levine, M., Epstein, S. S. & Vaughn, R. H. (1934). Amer. J. Publ. Hlth, 24, 505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Metropolitan Water Board (1936). Thirty-first Annual Report. London.Google Scholar
Ministry of Health (1939). The Bacteriological Examination of Water Supplies, Report no. 71. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
O'Meara, R. A. Q. (1931). J. Path. Bact. 34, 401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherwood, H. P. & Clegg, L. F. L. (1942). J. Hyg., Camb., 42, 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuart, C. A., Mickle, F. L. & Borman, E. K. (1940). Amer. J. Publ. Hlth, 30, 499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C. B. (1941). J. Hyg., Camb., 41, 17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Titttsler, R. P. & Sandholzer, L. A. (1935). J. Bact. 29, 349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utermohlen, W. P. & Georgi, C. E. (1940). J. Bact. 40, 449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werkman, C. H. & Gillen, G. F. (1932). J. Bact. 23, 167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, G. S., Twigg, R. S., Wright, R. C., Hendry, C. B., Cowell, M. P. & Maier, I. (1935). Spec. Rep. Ser. Med. Res. Coun., Lond., no. 206.Google Scholar