Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T14:40:41.518Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Estimation of the Cyst Contents of the Potato-root Eelworm H. rostochiensis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2016

D. W. Fenwick
D. W. Fenwick
Affiliation:
Nematology Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Research on the potato-root eelworm Heterodera rostochiensis has been severely handicapped by the fact that it is virtually impossible to estimate the infectivity of individual cysts. Since the infectivity of an individual cyst is determined by the number of viable larvae present within it, the problem can be settled in one of two ways—either by means of a technique which recovers all the viable larvae and rejects the non-viable or by estimating firstly the total contents and then the proportion of them which is viable. Techniques for the recovery of larvae from cysts have been described by Fenwick (1941) and Fenwick and Franklin (1940). The former of these sought to express soil infectivity directly in terms of available larvae per gm. of soil while the latter was concerned merely with obtaining a representative sample of larvae from a given batch of cysts. Neither claimed to estimate viability of the contents. A further technique (Bracey, 1946) which was described in a paper circulated among interested workers was a modification of that described by Fenwick and Franklin (loc. cit.) and claimed to express viability of cyst contents directly as a percentage.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 26 , Issue 2-3 , June 1952 , pp. 55 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1952

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

Boyd, A. E. W., 1941.—“Determination of death in the larvae of the Potato-Root Eelworm.” Nature, Lond., 148 (3765), 782–783. (W.L. 14900.)Google Scholar
Bracey, P., 1946.—“A method for the rapid assessment of eelworm mortality.” Typewritten publication with limited circulation.Google Scholar
Chitwood, B. G. and Feldmesser, J., 1948.—“Golden Nematode population studies.” Proc. helm. Soc. Wash., 15 (2), 43–55.Google Scholar
Fenwick, D. W., 1939.—“Some experiments on the extra-corporeal hatching of the eggs of Ascaris suum .” J. Helminth., 17 (2), 69–82. (W.L. 112246.)Google Scholar
Fenwick, D. W., 1942.—“The degree of Heterodera infectivity of soil and its determination.” J. Helminth., 20 (1/2), 50–66. (W.L. 112246.)Google Scholar
Fenwick, D. W., 1951.—“A new modification of the McMaster slide for use in Potato-root Eelworm investigations.” J. Helminth., 25 (3/4), 173–176. (W.L. 112246.)Google Scholar
Fenwick, D. W. and Franklin, M. T., 1942.—“Identification of Heterodera species by larval length. Technique for estimating the constants determining the length variations within a given species.” J. Helminth., 20 (3/4), 67–114. (W.L. 11224b.)Google Scholar
Lapage, G., 1935.—“The behaviour of sterilised exsheathed infective Trichostrongylid larvae in sterile media resembling their environment in Ovine hosts.” J. Helminth., 13 (2), 115–128. (W.L. 112246.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapage, G., 1935.—“The second ecdysis of infective nematode larvae.” J. Parasit., 27 (2), 186–206. (W. L. 11428.)Google Scholar
Peters, B. G. and Fenwick, D. W., 1949.—“Field trials with D-D mixture against Potato-root Eelworm.” Ann. appl. Biol, 36 (3), 364–382. (W.L. 1025.)Google Scholar
Smedley, E. M., 1936.—“The action of certain Halogen compounds on the Potato Eelworm, Heterodera schachtii .” J. Helminth., 14 (1), 11–20. (W.L. 112246.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar