Analyze Diet
The Journal of experimental medicine1905; 7(2); 176-182; doi: 10.1084/jem.7.2.176

Comparative Statistics of Antitoxin Horses: A Study of the Records of One Hundred Horses Immunized to Diphtheria Toxin, with Composite of Curves.

Abstract: 1. Better results in the production of diphtheria antitoxin can be obtained with greater experience in the selection of the most suitable type of horses to be used. Young animals are usually to be preferred. Over one-half of all such horses can be made to yield 300-unit serum, while a third will yield (5)oo-unit serum. 2. High-test horses require a shorter time to immunize and will yield a potent serum for a longer period than will low-test horses. 3. The period of usefulness of an antitoxin horse is short, and on an average endures only a few months. 4. A horse having attained a maximal antitoxic height begins to suffer a decline in antitoxin, which is usually as rapid as the ascent has been, and is unaffected by subsequent injections of diphtheria toxin.
Publication Date: 1905-04-25 PubMed ID: 19866992PubMed Central: PMC2124562DOI: 10.1084/jem.7.2.176Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

This research is a statistical study that examines the production of diphtheria antitoxin in one hundred horses, suggesting that younger horses and those with higher initial antitoxin levels can produce a stronger serum in a shorter time and for a longer period.

Selection of Suitable Horses

  • The study makes observations on horse selection for diphtheria antitoxin production. It notes that better outcomes can be obtained if one gains more experience in choosing the most suitable horses.
  • The research highlights that younger horses are usually preferred for this purpose. More than half of such horses can produce a 300-unit serum, a significant serum potency, and one-third of the young horses are capable of yielding a 500-unit serum.

High-test vs Low-test Horses

  • There’s a comparison between ‘high-test’ horses and ‘low-test’ horses based on the time taken to immunize and the period during which they can produce a potent serum.
  • Horses with higher initial antitoxin levels (High-test horses) necessitate a shorter time for immunization and can yield a potent serum for a more extended period compared to horses with lower initial antitoxin levels (Low-test horses).

Lifespan of an Antitoxin Horse and Its Antitoxic Heights

  • The research finds that a horse’s period of usefulness in producing antitoxins is rather short, usually lasting only a few months on average.
  • Also, when a horse reaches its maximum antitoxic height or peak ability to produce antitoxins, it begins to experience a decline in antitoxin production. This decline is suggested to be as rapid as the horse’s climb to the peak.
  • The research also highlights that the decline in antitoxin production seems to be unaffected by any subsequent injections of diphtheria toxin given to the horse, implying that such injections do not help restore or boost a horse’s antitoxin production once it starts declining.

Cite This Article

APA
Hubbert WR. (1905). Comparative Statistics of Antitoxin Horses: A Study of the Records of One Hundred Horses Immunized to Diphtheria Toxin, with Composite of Curves. J Exp Med, 7(2), 176-182. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.7.2.176

Publication

ISSN: 0022-1007
NlmUniqueID: 2985109R
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 7
Issue: 2
Pages: 176-182

Researcher Affiliations

Hubbert, W R
  • Detroit, Mich.

Citations

This article has been cited 1 times.
  1. Zurawski DV, McLendon MK. Monoclonal Antibodies as an Antibacterial Approach Against Bacterial Pathogens.. Antibiotics (Basel) 2020 Apr 1;9(4).
    doi: 10.3390/antibiotics9040155pubmed: 32244733google scholar: lookup