Agglutination and Dissociation Studies with Lactobacilli

Abstract

Attempts to classify lactobacilli have been many and varied. Such different criteria of classification as morphology, acid production, carbohydrate fermentation, surface-tension resistance and serological reactions have been used only to result in a tangle of miscellaneous data which tend to increase rather than to clarify the discrepancies in the literature. It is not the purpose of this communication to furnish serological data which will solve the problem, but rather to bring out a few points which may explain some of the apparent inconsistencies in the results obtained by different workers. Attention has been focussed during recent years upon the phenomenon of dissociation. The lactobacilli have received only scant notice in this field. The agglutination reactions of this group of bacteria when reported, with but few exceptions carry no particular reference to the type of the strain used. Even the sum-total of cross agglutination reactions reported for L. acidophilus of intestinal origin, L. acidophilus of oral origin and L. bulgaricus is very meager. Kulp and Rettger (1924) abandoned agglutination tests because of spontaneous agglutination. However, they obtained cross complement fixation between L. bulgaricus and L. acidophilus. Most of the current literature is in agreement to the effect that in all so-called species of lactobacilli whether of L. bulgaricus or of L. acidophilus, indigenous to the mouth, gastrointestinal tract or soil, the "X" or rough form of colony and the 455

Comparative Metabolism of the R and S Variants of Lactobacillus plantarum (Orla-Jensen)

“…R to S dissociation has not been accomplished. The dissociative path of this species of lactobacillus was directly opposite to that of L. acidophilus as shown by Upton and Kopeloff (1932) and Raney and Kopeloff (1934) who consistently failed to induce S to R variation but readily produced R to S transformation.…”

Optical Activity of Lactic Acid Produced by L. acidophilus and L. bulgaricus

“…Since so few strains were used our results should be considered suggestive rather than conclusive. However it is tempting to correlate them with the findings of Upton and Kopeloff (1932) who used the same strains. They showed that the rough form appeared to be antigenically distinct from the smooth form in both L. acidophilus and L. bulgaricus.…”