Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-18T19:59:02.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Investigation of the Pathology of “Grouse Disease.”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

L. Cobbett  and
G. S. Graham-Smith
L. Cobbett
Affiliation:
University Lecturer in Pathology, Cambridge.
G. S. Graham-Smith
Affiliation:
University Lecturer in Hygiene, Cambridge.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The causes of death of the grouse are, of course, various. We ourselves have seen pleuropneumonia (in a bird long kept in captivity in Cambridge), pericarditis, necrotic patches in the liver, an obscure chronic disease of the peritoneum, and septic infection from a gangrenous fracture of the wing. On the other hand the great majority of birds, either picked up dead on the moor, or caught by keepers when weak and unable to fly, have been found to be all more or less in the same condition; they were wasted, badly infested with Trichostrongylus pergracilis, and often also with Davainea urogalli or Hymenolepis microps, or with both. More or less pathological change was seen in the caeca; the mucous membrane was often reddened, and under the binocular microscope considerable changes were seen, though we did not observe gross ulceration. Sections examined under the higher powers showed serious chronic inflammatory changes particularly in the immediate neighbourhood of the worms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , April 1910 , pp. 1 - 36
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1910

References

page 3 note 1 The Grouse Disease, The Field Office, London, 1873.

page 3 note 2 The eliology and pathology of Grouse Disease, Fowl Enteritis and some other diseases affecting birds. 1892. London, Macmillan & Co.

page 10 note 1 MacConkey, A. (1905). “Lactose-fermenting bacteria in faeces,” Journ. of Hygiene, v. p. 333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 13 note 1 The measurements of the various parts of the alimentary canal vary greatly in different birds.

page 16 note 1 In 26 specimens the contens of both caeca were used for counting the strongyli; and 14 specimens arrived dead and therefore useless for minute histological examination.

page 19 note 1 In this and the following Table 0 indicates that no organisms of the B. coli type were present in the cultures, and – that cultures were not made.

page 19 note 2 In the birds of Class II the strongyli were noted as few, but subsequent experience with counting methods showed that what appeared few to an ordinary examination might sometimes turn out be 100 or more when counted.

page 28 note 1 Our observations have been made on a small number of birds, but Dr E. A. Wilson who will shorty publish statistics based on the examination of a very large number of birds during several years, informs us that Davainea is abundant througout the years, and the Hymenolepis is abundant from May to October. The number of the latter gradually diminish from November to February, but rise stddenly in the early part of March.