Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-19T02:18:27.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Report on a Collection of Cestoda, mainly from Egypt

Part IV. Conclusion.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

F. J. Meggitt
F. J. Meggitt
Affiliation:
Biological Department, University College, Rangoon.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Originally containing only four genera, this family of recent years has been increased by the addition of twelve more and has further been subdivided by Hunter (1927, 1929) into four sub-families: Caryophyllaeinae, Lytocestinae, Pseudolytocestinae, Wenyoninae. Of these, the Lytocestinae and Pseudolytoeestinae have vitellaria either wholly or partly in the cortical parenchyma and differ from each other only in the degree to which these are cortical; a difference hardly of sub-family rank, which should consist of characters of absolute not relative value: the Caryophyllaeinae and Wenyoninae, with vitellaria wholly medullary, differ from each other in the position of the genital pore and the absence of uterine glands, differences again not of sub-family rank. There remain therefore two well-marked sub-families, the Caryophyllaeinae and the Lytocestinae, the differences between which are given in the following table.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , June 1930 , pp. 338 - 345
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1930

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hunter, G. W. (1927). Notes on the Caryophyllaeidae of North America. III. J. Parasit. Urbana, 14, 16–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, G. W. (1929). New Caryophyllaeidae from North America. J. Parasit. Urbana 15, 185–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krabbe, H. (1869). Bidrag til Kundskab om Fuglenes Baendelorme. Dansk. Viden. Selsk. Skr., nat. math. Afd. (5), 8, 249–363.Google Scholar
Lühe, M. (1900). Untersuchungen über die Bothriocephaliden mit marginalen Genital öffnungen. Zeitschr. f. wise. Zool. 68, 43–112.Google Scholar
Lydekker, R. and Blaine, G. (1913–1916). Catalogue of the Ungulate Mammals in the British Museum (Natural History). Brit. Mus.Google Scholar
Meggitt, F. J. (1927). Report on a collection of Cestoda, mainly from Egypt. Part I. Families Anoplocephalidae, Davaineidae. Parasitology, 19, 314–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meggitt, F. J. (1927 a). Report on a collection of Cestoda, mainly from Egypt. Part II. Cyclophyllidea Family Hymenolepididae. Parasitology 19, 420–450.Google Scholar
Meggitt, F. J. (1928). Report on a collection of Cestoda, mainly from Egypt. Part III. Cyclophyllidea (conclusion): Tetraphyllidea. Parasitology 20, 315–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharpe, R. B. (1899–1912). A Hand-list of the Genera and Species of Birds. Brit. Mus.Google Scholar
Trouessart, E. L. (1898–1904). Catalogus mammalium tam viventium quam fossilium. Berolini.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodland, W. N. F. (1924). On a new Bothriocephalus and a new genus of Proteocephalidae from Indian fresh-water fishes. Parasitology, 16, 441–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodland, W. N. F. (1925). On some remarkable new Monticellia-like and other cestodes from Sudanese siluroids. Quart. J. Micros. Sci. 69, 703–729.Google Scholar
Woodland, W. N. F. (1926). On the genera and possible affinities of the Caryophyllaeidae: a reply to Drs O. Fuhrmann and J. G. Baer. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1, 49–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar