No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
On the Morphology and Systematic Position of Echinopharynx, a New Genus of Bursate Nematode from Testudo tabulata
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 November 2009
Extract
Our present knowledge of the Strongylid parasites of reptiles is based primarily on Dujardin (1845), who refers all the forms along with those of other vertebrates under a common genus Strongylus, and described four species from the reptilian hosts. Since then our knowledge of parasitic fauna has considerably increased, and von Linstow (1878–89) gave an enlarged list under the same genus from reptiles and also a few under the genus Kalicephalus, Later, with improved methods of Nematode study the forms described were revised, and it was found necessary to split the genus Strongylus, and several groups of a diverse character were recognised. The genus Strongylus was thus split up into several genera, and some of them were removed from the family Strongylidæ. The form Strongylus dispar of Dujardin from the Anguis fragilis was removed into a separate genus, Oswaldocruzia and Strongylus auricularis, with its characters in the absence of buccal capsule and the bifid and trifid distal ends of the spicule seemed more closely allied to Trichostrongylidæ Leiper, and was also removed to the genus Oswaldocruzia.
- Type
- Research Papers
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1925
References
Baylis, H. A., and Daubney, R., 1922.—“Report on the Parasitic Nematode in the Collection of the Zoological Survey of India.” Mem. Ind. Mus., Calcutta, vol. VII., No. 4, pp. 331–335.Google Scholar
Daubney, R., 1923.—“Notes on the genus Diaphanoccphalus (Nematode: Strongylidæ), parasitic in Reptiles, with a description of three new Species.” Parasit., vol. XV., No. I., pp. 67–74. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dujardin, F., 1845.—“Histoire Naturelle des Helminthes ou vers Intestinaux.” Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraipont, J., 1882.—“Nouveaux vers parasites de l’Uromastix acanthinurus.” Bull, de l’Acad. Roy. de Belgique, Ser. 3, torn, III., No. 2, pp. 99–110.Google Scholar
Goodey, T., 1924.—“The Anatomy of Œsophagostomum dentatum (Rud.), a Nematode Parasite of the Pig, with Observations on the Structure and Biology of the free-living Larvæ.” Journ. of Helm., vol. I No. 1, pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodey, T., 1924.—“Œsophagostomes of Goats, Sheep and Cattle.” Journ. Of Helm., vol. II., No. 3, pp. 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodey, T., 1924.—“Some New Members of the genus Œsophagostomum from the Roan Antelope and the Wart Hog.” Journ. of Helm., vol. II., No. 3, pp. 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leiper, R. T., 1913.—“Observations on certain Helminths of Man.” Trans. Roy. Soc. Med., vol. VI., No. 8, pp. 265–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linstow, O. Von, 1878–1889.—“Compendium der Helminthologie,” vols. I. and II. Hanover.Google Scholar
Ortlepp, R., 1923.—“Observations on the Nematodes genera Kalicephalus, Diaphanocephalus and Occipitodontus g.n., and on the Larval Developmentof Kalicephalus philodryadus sp.n” Journ. of Helm., vol. I., pp. 165–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skriabin, K. I., 1916.—“Parasitic Trematodes and Nematodes collected by the Expedition of Professors Dogiel and I. Sokolov in British East Africa” (Translation), pp. 117–121.Google Scholar
Thapar, G. S., 1924.—“On Kiluluma Skriabin, a genus of Strongylid Nematodes parasitic in the African Rhinoceros.” Journ. of Helm., vol. II. No. 5, pp. 209–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar