74 
Journal of Agricultural Research 
Vol. XI, No. 3 
could be obtained as to whether these samples were from glandered or 
nonglandered animals. Eight samples gave questionable results to com¬ 
plement-fixation and positive results to conglutination; of these post¬ 
mortem reports was obtained in three instances, typical glanders lesions 
being found. Twelve samples gave questionable results to the comple¬ 
ment-fixation test and negative results to conglutination. These ani¬ 
mals were apparently in perfect health, and had given negative results 
to the ophthalmic-mallein test. The questionable results to the comple¬ 
ment-fixation test in these cases were regarded as being nonspecific. One 
sample gave negative results to complement fixation and questionable 
to conglutination. 
SUMMARY 
(1) The conglutination test for glanders is a specific complement- 
deviation reaction. 
(2) It should be used in conjunction with the complement-fixation and 
agglutination tests, as no one test is infallible. 
(3) The conglutination test, as has been noted by others, is a more 
sensitive test than complement-fixation, and absolute accuracy in the 
technic is necessary to obtain good results, as a slight excess of any of 
the ingredients of the conglutination system will lead to a misleading 
reaction. 
(4) The condition of the serum to be tested should be perfect in the 
conglutination test, although, if necessary, an unsatisfactory sample may 
be used by titrating it against the conglutination system. 
(5) In the testing of mule serums and those horse serums possessing 
nonspecific complement-fixing bodies, the conglutination test is superior 
to the complement-fixation test. 
LITERATURE CITED 
(1) Andersen, C. W. 
1913. UEBER DIE VERWERTUNG DER KONGLUTINATIONSREAKTION ADS DIAG- 
NOSTISCHE PROBE bEim rotz. In Centbl. Bakt. [etc.], Abt. 1, Orig., 
Bd. 72, Heft 4/5, p. 394 - 39 8 - Literatur, p. 398. 
(2) Bordet, Jules, and Gay, F. P. 
1906. sur les relations des sensibilisatrices avec l’alExine. In Ann. 
Inst. Pasteur, t. 20, no. 6, p. 467-498. 
(3) Ehrlich, P., and Sachs, H. 
1902. ueber den mechanismus der amboceptorenwirkung. In Berlin. 
Klin. Wchnschr., Jahrg. 39, No. 21, p. 492-496. 
(4) Fitch, C. P. 
1916. report on the conglutination test with special reference to the 
diagnosis of glanders. In Rpt. N. Y. State Vet. Coll., 1914/15, p. 
102-115. References, p. 113-115. 
(5) M’Fadyean, John. 
1896. preliminary note on the sero-diagnosis of glanders. In Jour. 
Compar. Path, and Therap., v. 9, no. 4, p. 322-323. 
