NUMERATION DES GEFuES vIvAlrt'S TABLE DE TAYLOR...
NUMERATION DES GEFuES vIvAlrt'S
TABLE DE TAYLOR (1962)
L
.
”
Humération des germes vivants
?kbie de Taylor (1362)
Extrait de "Th~ory and practice in experimantal bacterioSo&'
1965)
p. 204
Tables 6.10 - 6.12. The mst p-mbable num?jer (F4.P.N.) of organisms in
viable counts by the Dilution method
Each of these tables has been computed for ajdilution factor of 10, and for
ei-ther 5, 8, or 1.0 tubes inoculated fmm eacb dilution of culture (Tables 6.10,
6.11, 6.12 respectively).
The entries in earh table are the numbers ofiturbid tubes observed after
inoculation of the same volume fmm any three succefsive XI-fold dilutions. The
statcd V.P.N. is the estirxxted mean viable Count pcr inoculum taken f?-om the most
concentrated suspension.
Fkample 1 - Suppose 1 rrïl was inoculated fromjthe 10°, 10ml and 10-*dilutions
of culture into 5 tubes for each dilution, and that:the nu&ers of turbid tubes
obscrved aftcr incubation wcre 4-3-1, Table 6.10 shows that the M.P.?, = 2.6 per
inoculum taken from t-h- 10' dilution.
Example2 - Suppose the sarKI rcsults wer~ obtained with tubes inoculated
f-mm lo-3, N4 and 10-5 dilutions. Ti-e R.P.W. is t/cn 2.6 per inoculum taken from
the 10-2 dilution, or 2.6 x X3 pzr inoculum of und$luted culture.
The tables include only those combinations of results likely to be compati-
ble with equation 6.3 : the pmbability that a ,@ven result wxiLd be obtained
fmm the stated M.P.N. is provided in the oripjnal papers.
The published form of these tables diffcrs sfirshtly from that used here as
they wze originally computed for a different form ~)f the dilution count. Instead
of making serial di1u-Cans of culture and tak?ln~ the same volume -fmm each dilu-
tion for inoculation, as described hem, the cultur-4 was not diluted but diffe=nt
volumes of inoculum were taken froc, i-t, for exa@e li!, 1, and 0.1 ml, the resti-
ting differences in thc concentration of culture medium beirq ignored. The pu-
blished tables therefora givo the F!.P.X./ml.. or per 100 ml culture.
/
l *. .JL
t
t .
-2-
Table 6.X - Values of tl-c M.P.N. for 5 tub% inoc@att-cd fmm each of
thrx?e successive 10 - fo1.d dilutions (T~yl.or, 1962)
nlI&ers of
?h.llnb?rs of
1
turbid tubes
twbi.~ tukes
ohsemed at three
obscr&c! a-t thrw
t
successive
SUC+S s i-w
M.P.?T.
1
dilutions
dilWt ions
Cp?r inoculuri! of.1
the first dilutx$n)
7
I
0
1
0
0.1.8
2.3
1
0
0
0.20
3.3.
1
1
0
0.40
3.3
2
0
0
0.%5
4.6
2
0
1
il.68
4.9
2
1
0
0.68
7.0
2
2
0
i).n3
9.5
3
0
0
0.78
7.9
3
0
1
l .1
11.0
3
1
0
1.1
14.0
3
2
0
1.4
13.0
4
0
0
1.3
17.9
4
0
1
1.7
22.0
4
1
0
1.7
28.0
4
1
1
2.1
24.0
4
2
cl
2.2
35.0
4
2
1
2.6
54.0
4
3
cl
2.7
92'i-o
lGO.O
TABLE DE TAYLOR (1962)
L
.
”
Humération des germes vivants
?kbie de Taylor (1362)
Extrait de "Th~ory and practice in experimantal bacterioSo&'
1965)
p. 204
Tables 6.10 - 6.12. The mst p-mbable num?jer (F4.P.N.) of organisms in
viable counts by the Dilution method
Each of these tables has been computed for ajdilution factor of 10, and for
ei-ther 5, 8, or 1.0 tubes inoculated fmm eacb dilution of culture (Tables 6.10,
6.11, 6.12 respectively).
The entries in earh table are the numbers ofiturbid tubes observed after
inoculation of the same volume fmm any three succefsive XI-fold dilutions. The
statcd V.P.N. is the estirxxted mean viable Count pcr inoculum taken f?-om the most
concentrated suspension.
Fkample 1 - Suppose 1 rrïl was inoculated fromjthe 10°, 10ml and 10-*dilutions
of culture into 5 tubes for each dilution, and that:the nu&ers of turbid tubes
obscrved aftcr incubation wcre 4-3-1, Table 6.10 shows that the M.P.?, = 2.6 per
inoculum taken from t-h- 10' dilution.
Example2 - Suppose the sarKI rcsults wer~ obtained with tubes inoculated
f-mm lo-3, N4 and 10-5 dilutions. Ti-e R.P.W. is t/cn 2.6 per inoculum taken from
the 10-2 dilution, or 2.6 x X3 pzr inoculum of und$luted culture.
The tables include only those combinations of results likely to be compati-
ble with equation 6.3 : the pmbability that a ,@ven result wxiLd be obtained
fmm the stated M.P.N. is provided in the oripjnal papers.
The published form of these tables diffcrs sfirshtly from that used here as
they wze originally computed for a different form ~)f the dilution count. Instead
of making serial di1u-Cans of culture and tak?ln~ the same volume -fmm each dilu-
tion for inoculation, as described hem, the cultur-4 was not diluted but diffe=nt
volumes of inoculum were taken froc, i-t, for exa@e li!, 1, and 0.1 ml, the resti-
ting differences in thc concentration of culture medium beirq ignored. The pu-
blished tables therefora givo the F!.P.X./ml.. or per 100 ml culture.
/
l *. .JL
t
t .
-2-
Table 6.X - Values of tl-c M.P.N. for 5 tub% inoc@att-cd fmm each of
thrx?e successive 10 - fo1.d dilutions (T~yl.or, 1962)
nlI&ers of
?h.llnb?rs of
1
turbid tubes
twbi.~ tukes
ohsemed at three
obscr&c! a-t thrw
t
successive
SUC+S s i-w
M.P.?T.
1
dilutions
dilWt ions
Cp?r inoculuri! of.1
the first dilutx$n)
7
I
0
1
0
0.1.8
2.3
1
0
0
0.20
3.3.
1
1
0
0.40
3.3
2
0
0
0.%5
4.6
2
0
1
il.68
4.9
2
1
0
0.68
7.0
2
2
0
i).n3
9.5
3
0
0
0.78
7.9
3
0
1
l .1
11.0
3
1
0
1.1
14.0
3
2
0
1.4
13.0
4
0
0
1.3
17.9
4
0
1
1.7
22.0
4
1
0
1.7
28.0
4
1
1
2.1
24.0
4
2
cl
2.2
35.0
4
2
1
2.6
54.0
4
3
cl
2.7
92'i-o
lGO.O