pmc logo image
Logo of jbacterJ Bacteriol SubscriptionsJ Bacteriol Web Site

Formats:

J Bacteriol. 1969 August; 99(2): 520–526.
PMCID: PMC250049
Effect of Bacterial Contamination on Cecal Size and Cecal Contents of Gnotobiotic Rodents
Walter J. Loesche
1Forsyth Dental Center, Boston, Massachusetts 02115
Abstract
In the present investigation the effect of various bacterial contaminations of gnotobiotic mice and rats on cecal size is presented. Of the species tested, Bacteroides oralis and Fusobacterium nucleatum did not establish in germ-free mice. Streptococcus mutans, Clostridium difficile, a Neisseria strain and two recent cecal isolates established, but failed to exert an effect upon the cecum of mice. A group K streptococcus and B. fragilis increased the cecal size apparently by increasing the levels of water-soluble protein, peptides, and carbohydrates in the cecal contents. Mixed ileal bacteria decreased the cecal size by preventing accumulation of soluble proteins and carbohydrates in the cecum. A Peptococcus strain caused a reduction by lowering the levels of insoluble material in the cecum. When this strain was combined with two Clostridium isolates and introduced into gnotobiotic rats, 50 to 65% cecal reduction was observed. This polycontamination did not decrease the per cent water of the cecal contents but caused lower levels of both soluble and insoluble material to accumulate in the cecum. No net nitrogen absorption from the distal small intestine occurred in either the germ-free or polycontaminated rats.
Full text
Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (997K), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • ABRAMS GD, BAUER H, SPRINZ H. Influence of the normal flora on mucosal morphology and cellular renewal in the ileum. A comparison of germ-free and conventional mice. Lab Invest. 1963 Mar;12:355–364. [PubMed]
  • Abrams GD, Bishop JE. Effect of the normal microbial flora on gastrointestinal motility. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1967 Oct;126(1):301–304. [PubMed]
  • DAHLQVIST A, BULL B, GUSTAFSSON BE. RAT INTESTINAL 6-BROMO-2-NAPHTHYL GLYCOSIDASE AND DISACCHARIDASE ACTIVITIES. I. ENZYMIC PROPERTIES AND DISTRIBUTION IN THE DIGESTIVE TRACT OF CONVENTIONAL AND GERM-FREE ANIMALS. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1965 Jan;109:150–158. [PubMed]
  • Erdös EG. Hypotensive peptides: bradykinin, kallidin, and eledoisin. Adv Pharmacol. 1966;4:1–90. [PubMed]
  • Gustafsson BE, Norman A. Physical state of bile acids in intestinal contents of germfree and conventional rats. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1968;3(6):625–631. [PubMed]
  • HUDSON JA, LUCKEY TD. BACTERIA INDUCED MORPHOLOGIC CHANGES. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1964 Jul;116:628–631. [PubMed]
  • LINDSTEDT G, LINDSTEDT S, GUSTAFSSON BE. MUCUS IN INTESTINAL CONTENTS OF GERMFREE RATS. J Exp Med. 1965 Feb 1;121:201–213. [PubMed]
  • Loesche WJ. Protein and carbohydrate composition of cecal contents of gnotobiotic rats and mice. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1968 May;128(1):195–199. [PubMed]
  • Loesche WJ. Accumulation of endogenous protein in the cecum of the germfree rat. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1968 Nov;129(2):380–384. [PubMed]
  • LOESCHE WJ, SOCRANSKY SS, GIBBONS RJ. BACTEROIDES ORALIS, PROPOSED NEW SPECIES ISOLATED FROM THE ORAL CAVITY OF MAN. J Bacteriol. 1964 Nov;88:1329–1337. [PubMed]
  • LOWRY OH, ROSEBROUGH NJ, FARR AL, RANDALL RJ. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem. 1951 Nov;193(1):265–275. [PubMed]
  • Reddy BS, Wostmann BS. Intestinal disaccharidase activities in the growing germfree and conventional rats. Arch Biochem Biophys. 1966 Mar;113(3):609–616. [PubMed]
  • SCHAEDLER RW, DUBS R, COSTELLO R. ASSOCIATION OF GERMFREE MICE WITH BACTERIA ISOLATED FROM NORMAL MICE. J Exp Med. 1965 Jul 1;122:77–82. [PubMed]
  • SKELLY BJ, TREXLER PC, TANAMI J. Effect of a Clostridium species upon cecal size of gnotobiotic mice. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1962 Jul;100:455–458. [PubMed]