JPET xPharm- The Comprehensive Pharmacology Reference

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by ROBINSON, H. J.
Right arrow Articles by GRAESSLE, O. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by ROBINSON, H. J.
Right arrow Articles by GRAESSLE, O. E.
Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics, Vol. 76, Issue 3, 316-325, 1942
Copyright © 1942 by American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics


IN VITRO AND IN VIVO STUDIES OF GRAMICIDIN, TYROTHRICIN AND TYROCIDINE

HARRY J. ROBINSON 1 and OTTO E. GRAESSLE 1

1 From the Merck Institute for Therapeutic Research, Rahway, N. J.

1. Tyrocidine and tyrothricin appear to exert a marked bactericidal action on aerobic and anaerobic gram-positive bacteria in the absence of blood or serum. Under similar conditions gramicidin appears to be primarily bacteriostatic.

2. In the presence of blood or serum tyrocidine and tyrothricin lose their bactericidal properties whereas gramicidin retains its bacteriostatic properties. Under these conditions tyrothricin becomes primarily bacteriostatic, apparently by virtue of its gramicidin content.

3. In vivo results indicate that when mice are infected and treated by intraperitoneal injection, gramicidin and tyrothricin are active whereas tyrocidine is not. Gramicidin or tyrothricin are only effective when given in direct contact with the infecting bacteria.

4. No protection was afforded to mice infected by intraperitoneal injection when treatment was given by oral, subcutaneous or intravenous administration. Likewise, mice infected by vein were not protected by intraperitoneal treatment.

Submitted on August 11, 1942







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
All ASPET Journals Molecular Pharmacology Pharmacological Reviews
 Molecular Interventions Drug Metabolism and Disposition

Copyright © 1942 by the American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.