Beijerinck’s contribution to the virus concept — an introduction

  • A. van Kammen
Part of the Archives of Virology. Supplementa book series (ARCHIVES SUPPL, volume 15)


The existence of viruses was first recognized when certain pathogens were found to pass through filters that otherwise stop bacteria. Pasteur made such observations in 1887 with the pathogen of rabies, but he thought that the pathogen was a very subtle microbe. In 1886 Adolf Mayer studied the mosaic disease of tobacco plants. He was unable to observe the least trace of a microbe, but still assumed that the pathogen was a bacterium. In 1892 Iwanovsky demonstrated that tobacco mosaic was caused by an agent that passed through bacteria-proof filters but he insisted till the end of his life that the tobacco mosaic virus was a small bacterium. Similar observations were made by Loeffler and Frosch in 1898 on foot-and-mouth disease of cattle. Beijcrinck confirmed the filterability of tobacco mosaic virus but confirmed its properties in more detail and then, in 1898, firmly concluded that tobacco mosaic virus is not a microbe but a contagium vivum fluidum. His idea that a pathogen can be a soluble molecule that proliferates when it is part of the protoplasm of a living cell was revolutionary and new. This new concept has laid the foundation of virus research and directed further studies on the nature of viruses.


Tobacco Plant Tobacco Mosaic Virus Mosaic Disease Virus Research Tobacco Mosaic Virus Particle 
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. 1.
    Bawden FC, Pirie NW (1937) The isolation and some properties of liquid crystalline substances from solanaceous plants infected with three strains of tobacco mosaic virus. Proc R Soc London Ser B 123: 274–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bawden FC, Pirie NW, Bernal JD, Fankuchen I (1936) Liquid crystalline substances from virus-infected plants. Nature 138: 1051–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beijerinck MW (1898a) Over een Contagium vivum fluidum als oorzaak van de vlekziekte der tabaksbladen. Versi Gew Verg Wis en Natuurk Afd., 26 Nov. 1898. Kon Akad Wetensch Amsterdam VII: 229–235Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Beijerinck MW (1898b) Über ein Contagium vivum fluidum als Ursache der Flek-kenkrankheit der Tabaksblätter. Verh Kon Akad Wetensch VI: 3–21 [English translation (1942) Concerning a contagium vivum fluidum as cause of the spot disease of tobacco leaves. Phytopathol Classics 7: 33-52]Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beijerinck MW (1900) De l’existence d’un principe contagieux vivant fluide, agent de la nielle des feuilles de tabac. Arch Néerl Sci Ex Natur, Haarlem, Ser II: 3, 164–186Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beijerinck MW (1917) The enzyme theory of heredity. Proc Section of Sciences, Kon Akad Wetensch 19: 1275–1289Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beijerinck MW (1921) Verzamelde Geschriften van M.W. Beijerinck. M Nijhoff, The Hague [in five volumes; a sixth volume published in 1940 contains a biography and papers by Beijerinck, which appeared after 1920]Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bernal JD, Fankuchen I (1941) X-ray and crystallographic studies of plant virus preparations. J Gen Physiol 25; part 1:111-165; part 2: 120-146; part 3: 147-165Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fraenkel-Conrat H (1956) The role of nucleic acid in the reconstitution of active tobacco mosaic virus. J Am Chem Soc 78: 882–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fraenkel-Conrat H, Williams RC (1955) Reconstitution of active tobacco mosaic virus from its inactive protein and nucleic acid components. Proc Natl Acad Sci US 41: 690–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fraenkel-Conrat H, Singer B (1957) Virus reconstitution. IL Combination of protein and nucleic acid from different strains. Biochem Biophys Acta 24: 540–548Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Franklin RE, Klug A, Holmes KC (1957) X-ray diffraction studies of the structure and morphology of tobacco mosaic virus. Ciba Found Symp: The nature of viruses. Churchill, London, pp 39–55Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gierer A, Schramm G (1956a) Die Infektiosität der Nukleinsäure aus Tabaksmosaikvirus. Z Naturforsch 116: 138–142Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gierer A, Schramm G (1956b) Infectivity of ribonucleic acid from tobacco mosaic virus. Nature 177: 702PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    D’Hérelle F (1921) Le bacteriophage. Masson, ParisGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hershey AD, Chase M (1952) Independent functions of viral protein and nucleic acid in growth of bacteriophage. J Gen Physiol 36: 39–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Iterson Jr G van, Dooren de Jong LE den, Kluyver AJ (1940) Martinus Willem Beijerinck. His life and his work. M Nijhoff, The Hague [reprinted 1983 by Science Tech, Madison]Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ivanovsky D (1892) Über die Mosaikkrankheit der Tabakspflanze. St Petersb Acad Imp Sci Bull 35:67–70 [English translation (1942) Concerning the mosaic disease of tobacco. Phytopathol Classics 7: 25-30]Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kausche GA, Pfankuch E, Ruska A (1939) Die Sichtbarmachung von pflanzlichen Virus im Übermikroskop. Naturwissenschaften 27: 292–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Loeffler F, Frosch P (1898) Berichte (I-III) der Kommission zur Erforschung der Maul-und Klauenseuche bei dem Institut für Infektionskrankheiten in Berlin. Zbl Bakt Para-sitenkr 123: 371–391Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lwoff A, Horne RW, Tournier P (1962) A system of viruses. Cold Spring Harbor Symp Quant Biology. Basic Mech Anim Virus Biol 27: 51–55Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mulvania M (1926) Studies on the nature of the virus of tobacco mosaic. Phytopathology 16: 853–871Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mayer AE (1886) Über die Mosaikkrankheit des Tabaks. Landw Versuchsstation 32: 451–467 [English translation (1942) Concerning the mosaic disease of tobacco. Phy-topathol Classics 7:11-24]Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pasteur L (1890) La rage. Lecture 65: 449–465Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pfankuch E, Kausche GA (1940) Isolierung und übermikroskopische Abbildung eines Bakteriophagen. Naturwissenschaften 28: 46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schlesinger M (1934) The Feulgen reaction of the bacteriophage substance. Nature 138: 508–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Stanley WM (1935) Isolation of a crystalline protein possessing the properties of tobacco mosaic virus. Science 81: 644–645PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stanley WM (1936) Chemical studies on the virus of tobacco mosaic. VI. Isolation from diseased Turkish tobacco plants of a crystalline protein possessing the properties of tobacco mosaic virus. Phytopathology 26: 305–320Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Twort FW (1915) An investigation on the nature of ultra-microscopic viruses. Lancet ii: 1241–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. van Kammen
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Molecular BiologyWageningen Agricultural UniversityWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations