Archiv für Mikrobiologie

, Volume 7, Issue 1–5, pp 420–438 | Cite as

Studies upon the methane-producing bacteria

  • H. Albert Barker


  1. 1.

    A survey has been given of the non-spore-forming methaneproducing organisms on the basis of the rare descriptions scattered throughout the literature.

  2. 2.

    The reasons for the great difficulty of isolating these organisms have been discussed and as a result methods have been developed which make possible the growth of various representatives of this group in solid media.

  3. 3.

    For the first time highly purified cultures of four different types have been obtained by transferring single colonies into appropriate culture media but it has not as yet been possible to isolate strictly pure cultures.

  4. 4.

    Nevertheless, the purified cultures allowed of a positive identification on the basis of morphological and physiological characters of four clearly distinct types of methane-producing organisms which have been described under the names of Methanosarcina methanica, Methanococcus Mazei, Methanobacterium Söhngenii, and Methanobacterium Omelianskii.



Pure Culture Solid Medium Great Difficulty Distinct Type Single Coloni 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. J. K. Baars, Dissertation, Delft 1930.Google Scholar
  2. H. A. Barker, Arch. f. Mikrobiol. 7, 404, 1936.Google Scholar
  3. D. H. Vergey, Manual of Determinative Bacteriology. 4th Edition. Williams and Wilkins Co., Baltimore, 1934.Google Scholar
  4. C. R. Breden and A. M. Buswell, J. Bact. 26, 379, 1933.Google Scholar
  5. A. M. Buswell and S. L. Neave, Illinois State Water Survey, Bulletin No. 30, 1930.Google Scholar
  6. C. Coolhaas, Centralbl. f. Bakt. II, 75, 161, 1928. (Cf. also Dissertation, Wageningen, 1927).Google Scholar
  7. J. Groenewege, Med. Burg. Geneesk. Dienst, Deel 1, 66, 1920.Google Scholar
  8. I. C. Hall, J. Infect. Dis. 29, 317, 1921.Google Scholar
  9. A. J. Kluyver and J. K. Baars, Proc. Kon. Akad. Wet. A'dam. 35, 370, 1932.Google Scholar
  10. A. J. Kluyver and C. B. van Niel, Centralbl. f. Bakt. II, 94, 369, 1936.Google Scholar
  11. K. B. Lehmann and R. O. Neumann, Bakteriologische Diagnostik. 7te Aufl. München, Lehmann's Verlag, 1927.Google Scholar
  12. P. Mazé, C. r. Acad. Sci. 137, 887, 1903.Google Scholar
  13. P. Mazé, C. r. soc. biol. 78, 398, 1915.Google Scholar
  14. H. Müller-Thurgau, Centralbl. f. Bakt. II, 20, 353, 449, 1908.Google Scholar
  15. W. Omelianski, Centralbl. f. Bakt II 11, 369, 1904.Google Scholar
  16. W. Omelianski, Centralbl. f. Bakt. II, 15, 673, 1906.Google Scholar
  17. W. Omelianski, Ann. Inst. Past. 30, 56, 1916.Google Scholar
  18. J. Smit, J. Path. and Bact. 36, 455, 1933.Google Scholar
  19. N. L. Söhngen, Dissertation, Delft, 1906; Rec. trav. chim. Pays-Bas 29, 238, 1910.Google Scholar
  20. M. Stephenson and L. H. Stickland, Biochem. J. 27, 1517, 1933.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1936

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Albert Barker
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of MicrobiologyTechnical UniversityDelftHolland

Personalised recommendations