Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T11:37:42.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Technique of Cestode Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Robert A. Wardle
Robert A. Wardle
Affiliation:
University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The accurate identification of cestodarian and cestodan helminths depends so much upon the correct interpretation of their internal morphological features that a rapid yet satisfactory routine technique in their preparation for microscopical examination is much to be desired. Not all workers publish their technical methods, and, among those who do, no two seem to be in agreement. Some of the collection and preservation methods, in particular, which are advocated, whilst admirable for museum specimens or histological study, are impracticable under the conditions of a field survey, where many host animals have to be quickly examined and rapidly accumulating specimens are preserved and studied by methods which will not strain unduly the limited facilities of a field laboratory or a small biological station.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , June 1932 , pp. 241 - 252
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1932

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Baylis, H. A. (1922). Notes on the collection and preservation of parasitic worms. Parasitology, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Essex, H. E. (1927). The structure and development of Corallobothrium. Illinois Biol. Monogr. 11 (3).Google Scholar
Gough, L. H. (1911). Monograph of the tapeworms of the sub-family Avitellinae. Quart. J. Micr. Sci. 56.Google Scholar
Hoff, E. C. et Hoff, H. E. (1929). Proteocephalus pugetensis, a new tapeworm from a stickleback. Trans. Amer. Micr. Soc. 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, G. W. (1927). Studies on the Caryophyllaeidae. Illinois Biol. Monogr. 11 (4).Google Scholar
Lapin, M. L. (1927). Eine neue Methode für die Anfertigung durchsichtiger plastischer Rekonstruktionen. Z. f. wiss. Mikr. 44.Google Scholar
Lebedkin, S. (1930). Die rationelle Technik der Herstellung von plastischen Rekonstruktionen und die Zelluloidmodelle. Z. f. wiss. Mikr. 47.Google Scholar
Meggitt, P. J. (1924). On the collection and examination of tapeworms. Parasitology, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millzner, T. M. (1926). On the cestode genus Dipylidium from cats and dogs. Univ. California Publ. Zool. 28.Google Scholar
Norman, J. K. (1923). Methods and technique of reconstruction. J. Roy. Micr. Soc. 1923.Google Scholar
Peters, K. (1922). Ueber graphische Rekonstruktion in Schragansicht. Z.f. wiss. Mikr. 39.Google Scholar
Politzer, G. (1928). Ueber eine Verbesserung der Ergebnisse des Wachsplattenrekon-struktionverfahrens durch Anwendung der Rontgenstrahlen. Z.f. wiss. Mikr. 45.Google Scholar
Southwell, T. (1930). Fauna of British India: Cestodes. London.Google Scholar