HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Phillips, B. P. Articles by Reyniers, J. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Phillips, B. P. Articles by Reyniers, J. A.

Studies on the Ameba-Bacteria Relationship in Amebiasis

COMPARATIVE RESULTS OF THE INTRACECAL INOCULATION OF GERMFREE, MONOCONTAMINATED, AND CONVENTIONAL GUINEA PIGS WITH Entamoeba Histolytica¹

Germfree, monocontaminated, and conventional (control) guinea pigs were maintained on identical sterilized rations and inoculated intracecally with E. histolytica derived from cultures of the ameba with T. cruzi. The results showed that none of 35 germfree animals developed amebic lesions. Furthermore, the longest observed period of survival of the ameba in the germfree intestine was five days, in one animal, and the amebae were few in numbers and in poor condition when observed in animals sacrificed beyond the second post-inoculation day. Of 37 conventional guinea pigs inoculated as controls for the germfree series, 34 developed acute ulcerative amebiasis, and the other three animals harbored the ameba when sacrificed on the 21st post-inoculation day. The results of similar studies with monocontaminated animals were in great contrast to those obtained in the germfree series. Acute ulcerative amebiasis was produced in guinea pigs of two experimental series which harbored E. coli and A. aerogenes, respectively, as monocontaminants. The results have shown that although E. histolytica is unquestionably the causative organism of intestinal amebiasis, the responsibility for the disease must be shared with other microorganisms, the activities of which contribute to the etiology, pathogenesis, and pathology. In the absence of such microbial associates, the ameba appeared to be a harmless microbe incapable of independent survival in the intestine.

¹ These studies were aided by a contract between the Office of Naval Research, Department of the Navy and the University of Notre Dame, NR: 131–167.

² National Institutes of Health, National Microbiological Institute, Laboratory of Tropical Diseases, Bethesda, Maryland.

³ LOBUND Institute, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H. A. REIMANN INFECTIOUS DISEASES: Annual Review of Significant Publications Arch Intern Med, November 1, 1956; 98(5): 639 - 671. [Abstract] [PDF]