1950
DOI: 10.1093/infdis/86.1.46
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Immunologic Studies with Malleomyces Mallei and Malleomyces Pseudomallei. I. Serological Relationships between M. Mallei and M. Pseudomallei

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
0
2

Year Published

1966
1966
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
18
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…and Bacillus mallei Our characterization of Pseudomonas pseudomallei and Bacillus mallei in terms of physiological and nutritional properties amply confirms the close resemblance between these two species, which has been suggested by others on the basis of simi-larities in pathogenicity (Whitmore, 1913), antigenic constitution (Stanton & Fletcher, 1925;Cravitz & Miller, 1950) and phage susceptibility (Smith & Cherry, 1957). The phenotypic resemblances assume even deeper significance in view of the virtual identity in the GC content of the respective DNAs (Mandel, 1966).…”
Section: The Afinities and Taxonomic Position Of Pseudomonas Pseudomasupporting
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…and Bacillus mallei Our characterization of Pseudomonas pseudomallei and Bacillus mallei in terms of physiological and nutritional properties amply confirms the close resemblance between these two species, which has been suggested by others on the basis of simi-larities in pathogenicity (Whitmore, 1913), antigenic constitution (Stanton & Fletcher, 1925;Cravitz & Miller, 1950) and phage susceptibility (Smith & Cherry, 1957). The phenotypic resemblances assume even deeper significance in view of the virtual identity in the GC content of the respective DNAs (Mandel, 1966).…”
Section: The Afinities and Taxonomic Position Of Pseudomonas Pseudomasupporting
confidence: 79%
“…B. pseudomallei was discovered and described by Whitmore (1913), and his choice of a specific name was determined by its resemblances in pathological and cultural respects to the agent of glanders. Subsequently, Stanton & Fletcher (1925) and Cravitz & Miller (1950) showed that there are also serological relationships between these two bacterial species. For several decades the systematic position of B. pseudomallei also remained obscure, and it followed B. mallei through Malleorn yces, Loeflerella and Pfeifferella.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the names suggest, B. mallei and B. pseudomallei are closely related species (19,56,59,69). These ␤-Proteobacteria can now be directly compared at the genomic level because the B. pseudomallei K96243 genomic sequence is available at the Sanger Institute website (http://www.sanger.ac.uk/) and the B. mallei ATCC 23344 genomic sequence is available at the TIGR (The Institute for Genomic Research) website (http://www.tigr.org/).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mesmo havendo uma ótima concordância do ELISA-i quando comparado com o teste de ϐixação de complemento (FC) que possui sensibilidade em torno dos 90% a 95%, este último tem o risco de apresentar reações falso-negativas ocasionalmente observadas no soro de alguns animais (jovens, gestantes ou idosos), além de reações falso-positivas que podem ocorrer em aproximadamente 1% dos soros testados ao se utilizar antígeno de células inteiras, o que o leva a ser superado pelos resultados obtidos no ELISA-i (Cravitz & Miller 1950, Verma et al 1990. O animal gestante que apresentou resultado positivo no ELISA e negativo na Fixação de Complemento, provavelmente deve-se à limitação desse úlƟ mo teste, que pode apresentar resultados falsos-negativos, especialmente em soros de burros, mulas e animais gestantes (Gregory & Waag, 2008).…”
Section: Resultsunclassified
“…Embora a FC tenha uma sensibilidade de aproximadamente 90% a 95%, as reações falso-negativas são ocasionalmente observadas no soro de animais jovens, gestantes e idosos e reações falso-positivas também ocorrem em aproximadamente 1% dos soros testados onde atribui-se ao uso de antígeno composto por células inteiras (Cravitz & Miller 1950, OIE 2008a. Além disso, existem entraves quanto a padronização insuϐiciente do antígeno, o que pode comprometer a qualidade da reação, resultando em limitações no que diz respeito à especiϐicidade e sensibilidade da técnica.…”
Section: Introductionunclassified