Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:11:57.598Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Cause of Appendicitis and other Intestinal Lesions in Man and Other Vertebrates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

A. E. Shipley
A. E. Shipley
Affiliation:
Fellow and Tutor of Christ's College, Cambridge, and Reader in Zoology in the University.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Our observations on a large number of recently dead or dying grouse impels us to believe that in many cases death is primarily caused by the presence of parasitic worms, either Cestodes or Nematodes in various parts of the alimentary canal.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , December 1908 , pp. 263 - 279
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1908

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

Arboré-Rally, (1900). Arch, de méd. des Enfants.Google Scholar
Askanazy, (1895). Deutsch. Arch. klin. Med., LV. p. 104Google Scholar
BéGonin, (1902). Journ. d. méd. Bordeaux, XXXII. p. 623.Google Scholar
Bergmann, (1890). Prag. med. Wochenschr. No. 50 (Ref. Centralbl. f. Bact. x. 259).Google Scholar
Braun, (1908). Die Tierischen Parasiten des Mensohen. Würzburg.Google Scholar
Chantemesse, and Ramond, (1897). Comp. Rend. Soc. Biol. Paris, 10 Sér. IV. p. 713.Google Scholar
Czerny, and Heddäus, (1898). Beitr. z. klin. Chirurgie, XXI. p. 513.Google Scholar
Edens, (1906). Centralb. f. Bakt. u. Parasitenk., I. Abt. XL. p. 499.Google Scholar
Faure, and Marotel, (1902). Soc. des Sci. Vétér. de Lyon, p. 142.Google Scholar
French, and Boycott, (1905). Journ. Hygiene, V. p. 274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galli-Valerio, (1903). Centralbl. f. Bakt. u. Parasitenk. Originate, XXXIV. p. 350.Google Scholar
Girard, (1901). Comptes Rend. Soc. Biol. Paris, p. 265.Google Scholar
Grünbaum, (1904). Brit. Med. Journ. I. p. 817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guiart, and Grimbert, (1906). Précis de diagnostic chimique. Paris, p. 562.Google Scholar
Guiart, and Grimbert, (1906). Precis de Medicine. Diagnostic Chimique, Microscopique et Parasi-tologique. Paris, p. 556.Google Scholar
Guiart, and Grimbert, (1907). Nosographie Générate.Google Scholar
Hanau, (1903). München. med. Wochenschr., L. p. 1094.Google Scholar
Kahane, (1907). Correspondenzblatt für Schweizer Aertze, XXXVII. p. 235.Google Scholar
Kaposi, H. (1902). Beitr. z. klin. Chir., XXVII. p. 539.Google Scholar
Kelly, and Hurdon, (1905). The Vermiform Appendix and its Diseases.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martignon, (1901). Ref. Miinchen. med. Wochenschr.Google Scholar
Metchnikoff, (1901). Bull. Acad. Med. Paris, p. 301.Google Scholar
Metchnikoff, (1906). Harben Lectures. The New Hygiene. London, Chapter II.Google Scholar
Moore, B. F. (1906). Brit. Med. Journ. II. p. 364.Google Scholar
Moore, V. A. (1895). U.S. Dept. of Agricult., Bureau of Animal Industry, Circular 3.Google Scholar
Moore, and Thursfield, (1906). Brit. Med. Journ. II. p. 364.Google Scholar
Morkowitins, (1902). Centralblatt f. d. Qrenzgeb.Google Scholar
Moty, (1902). Echo méd. du Nord, VI. p. 217.Google Scholar
Nason, (1904). Journ. Amer. Med. Assoc., XLIII. p. 1145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppe, (1903). Miinchen. med. Wochenschr., L. p. 859.Google Scholar
Oui, (1906). Rev. prat, d'obstét. et de paed., XIX. p. 223.Google Scholar
Page (1906). New York Med. Journ., LXXXIII. p. 137.Google Scholar
Piana, (1880). Mem. Ac. Sci. Instit. Bologna, 4 Ser. II. p. 387.Google Scholar
Pinal, (1807). Nosographie Qmerale. Paris.Google Scholar
Ramstedt, (1902). Deutsche med. Wochemchr., XXVIII. p. 919.Google Scholar
Ransome, (1905). U.S. Dept. of Agricult., Bureau of Animal Industry, Circular 85.Google Scholar
Ruffer, (1901). Brit. Med. Journ., I. p. 208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiller, (1902). Beitr. z. klin. Chirurgie, XXXIV. p. 197.Google Scholar
Schöppler, (1906). Centralbl. f. Bait. u. Parasitenk. I. Abt., Originate, XLI., p. 453.Google Scholar
Schwankhaus, (1901). Amer. Pract.Google Scholar
Seiffert, O. (1908). In Braun's Die Tierischen Parasiten. Wiirzburg. Supplement to Fourth Edition.Google Scholar
Spieler, (1904). Wiener klin. Wochenschr., pp. 40, 71.Google Scholar
Still, (1899). Brit. Med. Journ., I. p. 898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Triboulet, (1901). Soc. méd. d. Hôp., 3 S., XVIII. p. 417.Google Scholar
Vigouroux, and Collet, (1905). Bull. Mem. Soc. Anat. Paris, LXXX. p. 270.Google Scholar
Wagener, (1904). Deutsches Arch. f. klin. Med., LXXXI. p. 328.Google Scholar
Ward, H. B. (1907). Stud, from the Zool. Lab., The Univ. of Nebraska, No. 69. 1907.Google Scholar
Weinberg, (1906). Comptes Rend. Soc. Biol. Paris, 1906.Google Scholar
Weinberg, (1906). Comptes Rend. Soc. Biol. Paris, p. 648.Google Scholar
Weinberg, (1907). Ann. Jnstit. Pasteur, XXI. pp. 417, 442, 533 and 561 (many figures).Google Scholar
Wichmann, J. (1889). Inaug. Dissert. Kiel: Schmidt and Klaunig.Google Scholar