34 THE UNIVERSITY SCIENCE BULLETIN. 



CONCLUSIONS. 



1. That there is great variation in the acid-proof ness of different 

 strains of B. smegmatis. 



2. That even in positive sputums there is some tinctorial dif- 

 ference of the tubercle bacillus toward Fonte 's stain, whereas with 

 the other methods very little if any tinctorial variations were ob- 

 served. 



3. That Gabbet's, Ziehl-Neelsen 's, Pappenheim 's, and Bunge 

 and Trantenroth 's methods are not at all reliable as a means of 

 differentiating the tubercle bacillus from the rest of the acid-fast 

 group. 



4. That Fonte's method seems to be much superior to the other 

 methods, but not entirely reliable in urine, and even in sputum ex- 

 aminations. The percentage of error can only be determined by 

 much more extensive work. 



5. That the error of all of these methods seems to be that of 

 giving too many positive results. 



6. That Fonte 's method might prove quite serviceable in urine 

 and feces examinations when used along with the clinical symp- 

 toms, cellular content and chemical tests. In case any of the 

 latter are negative, animal inoculation should be resorted to. It 

 must be remembered that none of the above staining methods 

 can be relied upon alone. Probably few errors are made in sputum 

 examination, on the positive side, by any of the routine methods, 

 because clinical symptoms are usually pronounced before the 

 sputum is examined. Perhaps many more sputums are called 

 negative that should be positive than the reverse. However, 

 there is at least some chance for error on the positive side in sputum 

 examinations. With urine and feces the great problem confronting 

 the bacteriologist is to rule out the saprophytes. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY. 



1. Jordan. General Bact., 4th edition, p. 355. 



2. Gabbot. Webster's Diagnostic Methods, 3d ed., p. 20. 



3. Ziehl-Neelsen. Webster's Diagnostic Methods, 3d ed., p. 19. 



4. Pappenheim. Webster's Diagnostic Methods, 3d ed., p. 21. 



5. BuNGE and Trantenroth. Webster's Diagnostic Method^, 3d ed., p. 23. 



6. Fonte. Centralbl. f. Bakt. I, Feb. 26, 1909. 



7. Alverez and Tavil. "Archiv. de Physiol, norm, et Path." 1835, No. 7. 



8. Klemperer N. Bittu. Virchow's Archives 5, 103. 



