Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T11:49:48.683Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Herpetomonads from the Alimentary Tract of certain Dung-Flies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Doris L. Mackinnon
Doris L. Mackinnon
Affiliation:
Assistant in the Zoology Department, University College, Dundee.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Musca domestica and other non-biting flies frequenting similar feeding-grounds, are probably all liable to infection with a common flagellate. The great variability of this form is shown on comparing the flagellates in the larvae with those in the mature flies of Homalomyia, sp. and of Scatophaga lutama.

2. Infection is casual–i.e. by the mouth. In the case of the dung-flies examined, the larvae ingest faecal matter infected with herpetomonad cysts: the cysts develop into flagellates in the mid-gut, where they multiply with great rapidity: towards the close of larval life, when the larva stops feeding, they round up in the hind-gut, and are for the most part passed out as cysts. A few survive the pupal stage in a half-encysted condition, but it is probable that the infection of the adult fly is usually freshly acquired. The cycle in the fly is similar to that in the larva, and is in agreement with Patton's account of Herpetomonas muscae-domesticae. The parasite was never found in the ovaries or ova. Patton's suggestion that the degree of infection depends directly on the number of cysts ingested, is borne out by the much higher rate of infection in the larvae than in the flies: this is not surprising when we remember the complete restriction of the feeding larva to the infected area.

3. It is important to use some reliable cytological stain such as iron-haematoxylin as a control to Romanowsky stains where possible, seeing that very different results are sometimes given by the two methods.

4. The apparent double flagellum is produced in the course of longitudinal division. The new flagellum grows up alongside the old, and is not merely split off from it: this is best seen in the flagellate from the larva, where the body of the organism usually divides at an earlier period than in the fly. Study of the living flagellate is necessary to a clear understanding of the process of division.

5. I have seen no conjugation in the living herpetomonads. Occasionally flagellates were met with in Giemsa preparations devoid of a tropho-nucleus. Such individuals might be regarded as male gametes; it is more likely that they are simply degenerate forms. Sufficient consideration is not given to the possibility of degeneration in richly-nourished, rapidly multiplying protozoa, such as the trypanosomes and their allies.

6. In encystment the flagellum is not cast off bodily, but is drawn down into the cell by the kineto-nucleus, which moves to a position either alongside of, or posterior to the tropho-nucleus. In this way apparent Crithidia or even trypanosome forms are produced, but there is no hint of an undulating membrane. Small blunt “trypanosomes” were also produced occasionally by adhesion of the flagellum to the body-wall in the “stickiness” resulting from confinement under a cover-glass: the efforts of the flagellum to free itself raised up an undulating membrane, and produced a very deceptive appearance.

7. The early stages of encystment could be induced by keeping the flagellates under waxed-down cover-slips, where they would continue to live for 30—40 hours. Similar results were got by transferring flagellates to agar-agar, or by subjecting the larval host to starvation for a day or two.

8. From what I have seen, I do not agree with Chatton and Alilaire's suggestion to divide the genus Herpetomonas into Leptomonas and Herpetomonas proper. I do not think that these authors are justified in regarding the double flagellum and the presence of a long rhizoplast as generic characters.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 3 , Issue 3 , September 1910 , pp. 255 - 274
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1910

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

REFERENCES

Aders, W. M. (1909). Herpetomonas aspongopi. Parasitology, ii. No. 3, pp. 202–7. 2 text-figs.Google Scholar
Alexieff, A. (1909). Les flagellés parasites de l'intestin des batrachiens indigènes. Compt. rend. Soc. Biol., lxvi. pp. 199–201.Google Scholar
Berliner, E. (1909). Flagellaten-Studien. Arch. f. Protistenk, xv. pp. 297–325. 2 pls.Google Scholar
Chatton, E. (1909). Sur un trypanosomide nouveau, Leptomonas agilis, d'une réduve indigène (Harpactor iracundus, Scop.). Compt. rend. Soc. Biol., lxvi. pp. 981–2.Google Scholar
Chatton, E. (1909). Sur un trypanosomide nouveau d'une Nycteribie, et sur les relations des formes Trypanosoma, Herpetomonas, Leptomonas et Crithidia. Compt. rend. Soc. Biol., lxvii. pp. 42–4. 5 text-figs.Google Scholar
Chatton, E. and Alilaire, E. (1908). Co-existence d'un Leptomonas (Herpetomonas) et d'un Trypanosoma chez un muscide non vulnérant, Drosophila confusa, Staeger. Compt. rend. Soc. Biol., lxiv. p. 1004. 1 text-fig.Google Scholar
Hindle, E. (1909). The life-history of Trypanosoma dimorphon. Univ. California Publications. Zool., vi. pp. 127–44. 3 pls., 1 text-fig.Google Scholar
Léger, L. (1902). Sur la structure et la mode de multiplication des flagellés du genre Herpetomonas, Kent. Compt. rend. Acad. Sc., cxxxiv. pp. 781–4. 7 figs.Google Scholar
Léger, L. (1903). Sur quelques Cercomonadines nouvelles ou peu connues parasites des insectes (note préliminaire). Arch. f. Protistenk., ii. pp. 180–9. 4 figs.Google Scholar
Léger, L. (1904). Sur un nouveau flagellé parasite des tabanides. Compt. rend Soc. Biol., lvii. pp. 613–5. 6 figs.Google Scholar
Mackinnon, D. L. (1909). Note on two new flagellate parasites in fleas—Herpetomonas ctenophthalmi, n. sp., and Crithidia histrichopsyllae, n. sp. Parasitology, ii. No. 3, pp. 288–95. 1 pl.Google Scholar
Minchin, E. A. (1908). Investigations on the development of Trypanosomes in the Tsetse flies and other Diptera. Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sc, lii. pp. 159–260. 6 pls.Google Scholar
Minchin, E. A. (1909). The structure of Trypanosoma lewisi in relation to microscopical technique. Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sc, liii. pp. 755–808. 3 pls.Google Scholar
Novy, F. G., Macneal, W. J. and Torrey, H. N. (1906). Mosquito Trypanosomes. Journ. Hyg., vi. p. 110.Google Scholar
Patton, W. S. (1907). Preliminary note on the development of a species of Herpetomonas found in Culex pipiens. Brit. Med. Journ., ii. pp. 78–80.Google Scholar
Patton, W. S. (1908). Herpetomonas lygaei. Arch. f Protistenk., xii. pp. 131–46. 1 pl.Google Scholar
Patton, W. S. (1909). The parasite of Kala-azar and allied organisms. Lancet, clxxvi. pp. 306–9. 2 text-figs.Google Scholar
Patton, W. S. (1909). The life-cycle of a species of Crithidia parasitic in the intestinal tracts of Tabanus hilarius and Tabanus sp.? Arch. f. Protistenk., xv. pp. 333–62. 1 pl., 2 text-figs.Google Scholar
Patton, W. S. (1909). A critical review of our present knowledge of the Haemoflagellates and allied forms. Parasitology, ii. pp. 91–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, W. S. and Strickland, C. (1908). A critical review of the relations of blood-sucking invertebrates to the life-cycles of the trypanosomes of vertebrates, etc. Parasitology, i. pp. 322–46. 12 text-figs.Google Scholar
Porter, A. (1909). The life-cycle of Herpetomonas jaculum, Léger, parasitic in the alimentary tract of Nepa cinerea. Parasitology, ii. pp. 367–91. 1 pl. and 1 text-fig.Google Scholar
Prowazek, S. v. (1904). Die Entwicklung von Herpetomonas, einem mit den Trypanosomen verwandten Flagellaten (Vorläufige Mitteilung). Arb. a. d. Kaiserl. Gesundh., xx. pp. 440–52. 7 figs.Google Scholar
Prowazek, S. v. (1909). Arch. f. Sch. u. Trap. Hyg., xiii.Google Scholar
Robertson, M. (1909). Studies on Ceylon Haematozoa, No. 1. The life-cycle of Trypanosoma vittatae. Quart. Journ. Microsc. Sci., liii. pp. 665–95. 2 pls. and 4 text-figs.Google Scholar
Rosenbusch, F. (1909). Trypanosomen-Studien. Arch. f. Protistenk., xv. pp. 263–96. 2 pls.Google Scholar
Rosenbusch, F. (1910). Über eine neue Encystierung bei Crithidia muscae-domesticae. Centralbl. f. Bakt, liii. pp. 387–93. 1 pl.Google Scholar
Roubaud, E. (1908). Fixation, multiplication, culture d'attente des trypanosomes pathogènes dans la trompe des mouches tsetse. Compt. rend. Acad. Sci., cxlvi. p. 423.Google Scholar
Roubaud, E. (1908). Sur un nouveau flagellé parasite de l'intestin des muscides au Congo français—Leptomonas mesnili, n. sp.; nouveau flagelle à formes trypanosomes de l'intestin de muscides non piqueurs. Compt. rend. Soc. Biol., lxiv. pp. 1107–8:Google Scholar
Roubaud, E. (1908). Sur un nouveau flagellé parasite de l'intestin des muscides au Congo français—Leptomonas mesnili, n. sp.; nouveau flagelle à formes trypanosomes de l'intestin de muscides non piqueurs. Compt. rend. Soc. Biol., lxv. p. 29.Google Scholar
Werner, H. (1908). Über eine eingeisselige Flagellatenform im Darm der Stuben-fliege. Arch. f. Protistenk., xiii. pp. 19–22. 2 pls.Google Scholar