6 THE BACTERIOPHAGE AND ITS BEHAVIOR 



to be clearly defined. To attempt to reconcile "bacteriolysis" and 

 "bacteriophagy," making them identical and co-extensive is a scientific 

 absurdity. Yet this is precisely what some authors, fortunately now 

 becoming fewer in number, seem to have thought they must do. 



In a lengthy review of the literature dealing with the bacteriophage 

 Otto and Munter^^"* go into the historical aspect of the subject,* citing 

 all of the more important contributions upon the question of bac- 

 teriolysis in general, beginning with that of Kruse and Pansinif upon 

 the autolysis of the pneumococcus. 



But bacteriolysis and bacteriophagy are by no means synonomous. 

 Bacteriolysis, the general syndrome, is but an episode in bacteriophagy. 

 It is not the event which distinctly characterizes the phenomenon. Bac- 

 teriophagy is certainly not involved in the autolysis of B. pyocyaneiis, 

 as observed by Emmerich and Low,| nor in the autolysis of B. anthracis, 

 as noted by Gamaleia§ and studied by Malfitano-H 



The mechanism of the process here is not related to bacteriophagy 

 any more than is the bacteriolysis of this same anthrax bacillus when 

 subjected to the serum of certain animals. There is a similar lack of 

 relationship as regards the inhibitory effects of old normal cultures 

 upon the development of certain bacteria, as first reported by Eijk- 



* Mention may be made of the fact that in presenting this historical review 

 Otto and Munter did not seek to introduce any question of priority. Indeed, their 

 paper is entitled "Bacteriophagy," bearing the sub-title "d'Herelle's Phenome- 

 non," a fact in itself significant. Otto and Munter, like the other German investi- 

 gators, have, in my opinion been perfectly logical in this respect. My sole criti- 

 cism of the historical part of the review of Otto and Munter is one of a purely 

 scientific nature; a criticism concerning the abuse of generalizations. 



t Kruse, W., and Pansini, S. — Untersuchungen iiber den Diplococcus pneu- 

 moniae und verwandte Streptokokken. Zeitschr. f. Hyg. u. Infektionskrankh., 

 1892, 11, 279. 



X Emmerich, R., and Low, O. — Bakteriolytische Enzyme als Ursache der 

 erworbenen Immunitat und die Heilung von Infektionskrankheiten durch diesel- 

 ben. Zeitschr. f. Hyg. u. Infektionskrankh., 1899, SI, 1. 



§ Gamaleia. — Bakteriolysine-bakterienzerstorenden Fermente. Abst. in: — 

 Centralbl. f. Bakt., I. Orig., 1899, 26, 661. 



II Malfitano, G. — La bacteriolyse de la bacteridie charbonneuse. Compt. 

 rend. Acad, sci., 1900, 131, 295. 



Malfitano, G. and Strada, F. — Evaluation du pouvoir prot6olytique des bac- 

 teridies du charbon. Compt. rend. Soc. biol., 1905, 59, 118; — Des influences qui 

 peuvent faire varier le pouvoir prot6olytique des liquides en contact avec des 

 bact^ridies du charbon. Compt. rend. Soc. biol., 1905, 59, 120; — Influence de 

 I'a^ration des cultures sur le pouvoir proteolytique des bacteridies charbonneuse. 

 Compt. rend. Soc. biol., 1905, 69, 197. 



