The Kinds of Bacteria found in River Water

Edwin Oakes Jordan

doi:10.1017/S002217240003271X

- Aa
- Aa

Cited by 8
Cited by
- 8
Crossref Citations

This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

THOMAS, S. B. and THOMAS, BLODWEN F. 1955. THE BACTERIOLOGY OF FARM WATER SUPPLIES: A STUDY OF THE COLONY COUNT IN 72 HOURS AT 22°. Journal of Applied Bacteriology, Vol. 18, Issue. 2, p. 312.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

Thomas, S. B. 1949. THE TYPES OF BACTERIA COMMONLY FOUND IN FARM AND CREAMERY WATER SUPPLIES AND THEIR ACTION ON MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS. International Journal of Dairy Technology, Vol. 2, Issue. 4, p. 224.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

Taylor, C. B. 1942. Bacteriology of fresh water: III. The types of bacteria present in lakes and streams and their relationship to the bacterial flora of soil. Journal of Hygiene, Vol. 42, Issue. 03, p. 284.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

Burke-Gaffney, H. J. O'D. 1932. The Classification of the Colon-Aerogenes Group of Bacteria in Relation to their Habitat and its Application to the Sanitary Examination of Water Supplies in the Tropics and in Temperate Climates. A Comparative Study of 2500 Cultures. Journal of Hygiene, Vol. 32, Issue. 01, p. 85.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

Bardsley, Doris A. 1926. B. coli as an Index of Faecal Pollution of Water Supplies. Journal of Hygiene, Vol. 25, Issue. 01, p. 11.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

Stewart, Matthew J. 1917. A Study of the Coltform Organisms Infecting the Wounds of War. Journal of Hygiene, Vol. 16, Issue. 03, p. 291.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

Plücker, W. 1914. Nachweis und Beurteilung des Bacterium coli in Trinkwasser. Zeitschrift für Untersuchung der Nahrungs- und Genußmittel, Vol. 27, Issue. 7, p. 521.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

MacConkey, Alfred 1905. Lactose-Fermenting Bacteria in Faeces. Journal of Hygiene, Vol. 5, Issue. 03, p. 333.

CrossRef

Google Scholar

Google Scholar Citations

View all Google Scholar citations for this article.

Scopus Citations

View all citations for this article on Scopus
×

Volume 3, Issue 1
pp. 1-27

The Kinds of Bacteria found in River Water

Edwin Oakes Jordan ^(a1)

- https://doi.org/10.1017/S002217240003271X
- Published online: 15 May 2009

Extract

1. The kinds of bacteria that are isolated by the gelatin plate method from certain river waters freshly polluted with sewage are different from those found in the same water collected a long distance below the point of pollution.

2. In the freshly polluted river water non-chromogenic Staphylococci were found much more abundantly than in the purer waters.

3. In the freshly polluted water the fluorescent bacteria and a group of non-gas-producing, non-liquefying bacteria (Group XI.) were less abundant than in the purer waters.

4. A larger proportion of organisms belonging to the Proteus group were isolated from gelatin plates than from fermentation tubes. The reverse is true of the B. coli and B. lactis aerogenes types. A certain selective influence even upon gas-producing organisms would seem from this to be exerted by the conditions within the fermentation tube.

5. The study of a rather large number of separately isolated cultures belonging to the class of fluorescent microorganisms shows that the differences between the ‘liquefying’ and ‘non-liquefying’ varieties are more constant than is sometimes assumed. The action of these forms upon milk is just as diagnostic as their action upon gelatin. All the strains of fluorescent bacteria that were encountered (58) proved to be motile.

6. Considering as a whole the various physiological tests applied to the several groups of microorganisms, it is found that within almost every group as constituted in the accompanying tables divergence is shown by closely allied organisms in respect to indol formation and reduction of nitrates. The formation of a surface pellicle on broth is also a phenomenon that presents no apparent correlation with more s alient physiological characteristics.

Export citation

Request permission

Copyright

COPYRIGHT: © Cambridge University Press 1903

References

Hide All

^{page 1 note 1} Journal Experimental Med., 1900, v, p. 271Journal of Hygiene, 1901, i, p. 295 see Map on p. 296.

^{page 1 note 2} The average number of colonies per one c.c. during the investigation was 5800, the mean of 67 daily determinations.

^{page 1 note 3} Illinois State Board of Health, Report of the Sanitary Investigation of the Illinois River and its Tributaries, 1901, p. 179.

^{page 2 note 1} Cf. Journ. Experimental Med., 1900, V., p. 271.

^{page 3 note 1} The general methods of preparation employed in the work were those recommended by the Bacteriological Committee of the American Public Health Association (Reports and Papers of the Amer. Public Health Association, Vol. XXIII., p. 60, 1898); with slight modifications:

(a) The reaction of the sugar-broths used for the fermentation tests was neutral to phenolphthalein instead of 1.5 acid.

(b) The ordinary nutrient gelatin, agar and broth were 1.0 acid.

(c) The broth used for both the fermentation and the indol tests was always freed from sugar by Smith';s method.

^{page 3 note 2} Journ. Experimental Med., 1899, IV.

^{page 3 note 3} Irons, E. E, Journal of Hygiene, 1902, Vol. II., p. 314.

^{page 4 note 1} Cultures not yielding positive results, e.g., in curdling milk, within ten days, are recorded in the tables as negative, i.e. by the minus sign.

^{page 4 note 2} Proc. Roy. Soc., 1897, LXI. p. 415.

^{page 4 note 3} Journal. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., 1899, IV. p. 32.

^{page 4 note 4} Journ. Experimental Med., 1899, IV. p. 609.

^{page 6 note 1} American Journal of Medical Sciences, 09., 1895.

^{page 6 note 2} Journ. of Experimental Med., 1901, V. p. 368.

^{page 6 note 3} loc. cit.

^{page 6 note 4} loc. cit.

^{page 6 note 5} op. cit. p. 372.

^{page 6 note 6} American Medicine, 1902, III p. 504.

^{page 8 note 1} Journ. Experimental Med., 1897, II. p. 549.

^{page 8 note 2} The Fermentation Tube, Wilder Quarter Century Book, p. 212.

^{page 8 note 3} B, Vulgare, Lehmann, and Neumann, Bacteriology, translation by Weaver, p. 295.

^{page 8 note 4} Journ. of Med. Research, 1901, vi. p.211.

^{page 9 note 1} Journ. Experimental Med., 1899, iv. p.609.

^{page 9 note 2} Annals of Botany, 1899, xiii. p. 197.

^{page 9 note 3} loc. cit.

^{page 9 note 4} op. cit.

^{page 9 note 5} Ueber Fêulnissbakterien, Leipzig, 1885.

^{page 9 note 6} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1892, xii. p. 629.

^{page 10 note 1} op. cit.

^{page 11 note 1} Journ. of Pathol. and Bacteriol., 1899, Vol. VI. p. 32;

Thompson Yates Laboratories Reports, 1898—1899, p. 37.

^{page 12 note 1} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1899, Vol. VI. p. 399.

^{page 12 note 2} loc. cit. p. 145.

^{page 12 note 3} loc. cit. p. 292.

^{page 12 note 4} Memoirs, National Academy of Science, 1895, Vol. VIII. p. 436.

^{page 12 note 5} loc. cit. pp. 438, 439.

^{page 12 note 6} Memoirs, National Academy of Science, 1896, Vol. VIII. pp. 9, 20, 22.

^{page 12 note 7} Centralbl. f. Bacteriologie, 1888, Vol. VI. p. 544.

^{page 12 note 8} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1889, Vol. VI. p. 391.

^{page 12 note 9} Flügge, , loc. cit., p. 294.

^{page 12 note 10} loc. cit., p. 64.

^{page 13 note 1} Cohn, , Beitrêge zur Biologie der Pflanzen, Vol. I., Heft II. p. 175, 1875; also Flügge, loc. cit, p. 196.

^{page 13 note 2} Flügge, , loc. cit., p. 199.

^{page 13 note 3} Globig, , Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1888, Vol. III. p. 322.

^{page 13 note 4} Flügge, , loc. cit., p. 198.

^{page 14 note 1} Migula, , loc. cit. p. 516.

^{page 14 note 2} loc. cit. p. 585.

^{page 14 note 3} loc. cit. p. 112.

^{page 14 note 4} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1899, Vol. VI. p. 382.

^{page 14 note 5} loc. cit. pp. 38, 48.

^{page 14 note 6} Chester, loc. cit. p. 237.

^{page 15 note 1} Report of Mass. Board of Health, 1890, pp. 831, 835 837.

^{page 15 note 2} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1899, Vol. VI. pp. 381, 396.

Phil. Trans. Royal Soc., London, 1888, p. 277.

^{page 15 note 3} Flügge, loc. cit, p. 318.

^{page 15 note 4} loc. cit. p. 160.

^{page 15 note 5} loc. cit. p. 58.

^{page 15 note 6} loc. cit. p. 833.

^{page 15 note 7} loc. cit. p. 25.

^{page 15 note 8} loc. cit. p. 162.

^{page 15 note 9} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1892, Vol. XI. p. 143;

Migula, loc. cit. p. 247.

^{page 15 note 10} loc. cit. p. 12.

^{page 15 note 11} loc. cit.

^{page 15 note 12} loc. cit.

^{page 15 note 13} loc. cit.

^{page 15 note 14} loc. cit. p. 142.

^{page 15 note 15} loc. cit. p. 58.

^{page 16 note 1} loc. cit. p. 460.

^{page 16 note 2} loc. cit. p. 105.

^{page 17 note 1} Landwirthsch. Jahrbücher, 1899

Chester, loc. cit. p. 147.

^{page 17 note 2} Report of Storrs Agric. Exp. Sta., 1894, p. 81.

^{page 17 note 3} loc. cit. 1899, p. 52.

^{page 17 note 4} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 366.

^{page 17 note 5} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 356.

^{page 17 note 6} loc. cit. p. 830.

^{page 17 note 7} loc. cit. 1899, pp. 50, 58.

^{page 17 note 8} Mass. Inst. of Tech. Quart., VI. p. 3.

^{page 17 note 9} loc. cit. p. 39.

^{page 17 note 10} loc. cit. 1894, pp. 57, 82, 83.

^{page 17 note 11} loc. cit., 1899, p. 56.

^{page 17 note 12} loc. cit. p. 32.

^{page 17 note 13} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1896, Vol. XIX. p. 187.

^{page 17 note 14} loc. cit. p. 29.

^{page 17 note 15} Report of the New York Acad. of Science, 1895, Vol. VIII. p. 360.

^{page 18 note 1} Untersuch. des Leitmeritzer Trinkwassers, Leitmeritz, 1887.

Migula, loc. cit. p. 730.

^{page 18 note 2} loc. cit. p. 18.

^{page 18 note 3} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 373.

^{page 18 note 4} Das Oesterreichische Sanitêtswesen, 1889, Nos. 14– 23.

Migula, loc. cit. p. 731.

^{page 18 note 5} loc. cit. p. 442.

^{page 18 note 6} loc. cit. p. 40.

^{page 18 note 7} loc. cit. 1894, p. 83.

^{page 19 note 1} Laurent, , Ann. de l'Institut Pasteur, 1890, Vol. IV. p. 465.

^{page 19 note 2} Flügge, loc. cit. p. 302.

^{page 19 note 3} Fischer, , Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1887, Vol. II. p. 74.

^{page 19 note 4} Zimmermann, loc. cit. p. 46.

^{page 19 note 5} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene. p. 44.

^{page 19 note 6} loc. cit. p. 482.

^{page 19 note 7} loc. cit. p. 8.

^{page 20 note 1} Grotenfelt, , Fortschritte d. Medizin, 1889, Vol. VII. p. 41.

^{page 20 note 2} loc. cit. p. 781.

^{page 20 note 3} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, Vol. VI. p. 381.

^{page 20 note 4} loc. cit. p. 52.

^{page 20 note 5} loc. cit. pp. 58, 60.

^{page 21 note 1} Botan. Gazette, 1900, Vol. XXX. p. 261.

^{page 21 note 2} Report of Storrs Agric. Exp. Sta. 1894, p. 28.

^{page 21 note 3} loc. cit. p. 80.

^{page 21 note 4} loc. cit., Vol. I. p. 160, 1875.

^{page 21 note 5} Am. Jour. Med. Science, 1892.

^{page 21 note 6} Zeitschr. f. Hygiene, 1886, Vol. I. p. 94.

^{page 21 note 7} loc. cit. p. 117.

^{page 22 note 1} loc. cit. p. 178.

^{page 22 note 2} Centralbl. f. Bakteriol., 1890, Vol. VII. p. 495.

^{page 22 note 3} loc. cit., 1895, Vol. V. p. 32.

^{page 22 note 4} Houston, , Parliamentary Blue Books, 1898, 1899, 1900, Supplem. XXVIII.

^{page 22 note 5} Horrocks, , Bacteriological Examination of Water; London, 1901.

^{page 22 note 6} Winslow and Hunnewell, Science, 05 23, 1902.

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0

Total number of PDF views: 0 *

Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *

Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed

This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

The Kinds of Bacteria found in River Water

CAPTCHA *

Metrics

Full text views Full text views reflects the number of PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Abstract views Abstract views reflect the number of visits to the article landing page.

Full text views

Abstract views