Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-vt8vv Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-08-16T18:21:53.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Bionomics of the Vinegar Eelworm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2009

B. G. Peters
B. G. Peters
Affiliation:
From the Department of Helminthology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

From considerations of previous work on the vinegar eelworm, and from the writer's experiments, it is concluded that:

I.—Concerning physical and chemical stimuli:

(a) The worm has very little need of oxygen, but displays a negative geotaxis which is independent of dissolved oxygen as a stimulus.

(b) It tolerates temperatures between 0° and 35°, can survive short intervals at 20°, and can live for several days at 37°. It is practically indifferent to light.

(c) The worm and its larvæ are very susceptible to drying, surviving only a few minutes a thorough desiccation from water.

(d) The toleration limits for hydrogen ion concentration are pH: 1·6 on the acid side and about pH : 11 on the alkaline side.

(e) So far as can be ascertained, the worm tends to make the medium in which it lives slightly but permanently more acid than it would otherwise be.

(f) It is very sensitive to iodine, ammonia and chloroform, but is extraordinarily resistant to most chemical substances, including acidity indicators and buffer solutions.

(g) It can be grown in most culture media, and has been cultured aseptically by Zimmermann, who finds that either bacteria (living or dead) or an unknown substance from the autolysate of yeast is essential as food.

Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 6 , Issue 1 , March 1928 , pp. 1 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1928

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

Borellus, Petrus, 1656.—“Observationum Microcospicarum Centuria” (3rd part of “De vero Telescopii Inventore…”), pp. 1–45 (Hagæomitum).Google Scholar
Clark, W. M., and Lubs, H. A., 1917.—“The Colorimetric Determination ofHydrogen Ion Concentration and its applications in Bacteriology," Journ. Bad., 11, Part 1, p. 1; Part 2, p. 109; Part 3, p. 191.Google Scholar
Conte, A., 1900A.—“De l'lnfluence du Milieu nutritif sur le Déloppement des Nétodes libres,” Comp. Rend. Soc, de Bio!., Paris, LII, pp. 374–375.Google Scholar
Conte, A., 1900B.—“Sur les Conditions de Ponte des Nematodes,” Comp. Rend. Soc. De Biol., Paris, LII, pp. 375–376.Google Scholar
Davaine, C, 1865.—“Recherches sur l'Anguillule du Vinaigre (Rhabditis aceti, Dujardin),” Comp. Rend, de l'Acad. d. Sci., Paris, LXI, pp. 259–262.Google Scholar
Dujardin, M. F., 1845.—“Histoire naturelle des Helminthes,” pp. 239–244 (Paris).Google Scholar
Goeze, J., 1774.—“Mikroskopische Erfahrungen iiber die Essigaale,” Natiirforscher, I, pp. 1–53.Google Scholar
Hansen, E. C, 1889.—“Ueberdie in dem Schleimflusse lebender Bäume beobachteten Mikroorganismen,” Centralbl. f. Bakt. u. Parasit., V., pp. 632–640, 663–667, 693–696.Google Scholar
Henneberg, W., 1900.—“Zur Biologie des Essigaales (Anguillula aceti),” Centralbl. f. Bakt., Parasit. u. Infekt. (Jena), Abt. 2, VI, pp. 180–184. (Abstract by Henneberg of his own articles in Deutsche Essigindustrie, 1899, Nos. 45–52; 1900, Nos. 1–5; 10 figs. (Berlin).)Google Scholar
Hogg, J., 1863.—" The Vinegar Eel,” Pop. Sci. Rev., London, II, pp. 213–219, 7 figs.Google Scholar
Imms, A. D., 1925.—"A General Textbook of Entomology," pp. 68, 152, 602, 646 (London).Google Scholar
Kling, A., et Lassieur, M. et Mme, A., 1922.—“Appareil pour la Dérmination de la Concentration d'une Solution en Ions hydrogénes; Application ä Recherche des Acidcs minéraux dans le Vinaigre,” Compt. rend., Paris, No. 174. p. 165.Google Scholar
Lindner, G., 1889.—“Studien iiber die Biologie und hygienische Bedeutung der im Essig lebenden Nematoden,” Centralbl. f. Bakt. u. Parasit., Jena, VI, pp. 633–638, 663–668, 694–698.Google Scholar
LinnÆs, C, 1767.—“Systema Naturæ” 12th edition, p. 1326 (Holmiae).Google Scholar
Loeb, J., 1918.—“Forced Movements, ropisms, and Animal Conduct” (Philadelphia and London).Google Scholar
Ludwig, F., 1886.—“Ueber Alkoholg㧲ung und Schleimfluss lebender Bäume,” Hedwigia, XXV, pp. 168–172.Google Scholar
Man, J. G. DE 1910.—“Beiträge zur Kenntnis der in dem weissen Schleimfluss der Eichen lebenden Anguilluliden,” Zool. Jahrb. {Abt. f. Syst.), XXIX, pp 359–394.Google Scholar
Mitchell, C. A., 1916.—“Vinegar—its Manufacture and Examination” (London).Google Scholar
Müller, O. F., 1783.—“Anmerkungen beym Durchlesen einiger Aufsätze in dem 10 ersten Stucken des Naturforschers,” Naturforscher, XIX, pp. 161–163.Google Scholar
Ogilvie, L., 1924.—“Observations on the ‘Slime Fluxes’ of Trees,” Trans. Brit. Mycol. Soc., IX, pp. 167–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pallecchi, T., 1893.—“Sulla Resistenza vitale dell' Anguillula dell' Aceto,” Atti d. Soc. Ligust. d. Set. Nat. e Geogr. Genova, IV, pp. 332–343.Google Scholar
Peters, B. G., 1927a.—“On the Nomenclature of the Vinegar Eelworm,” Journ. Helm., V, pp. 133–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, B. G., 1927b.—“On the Anatomy of the Vinegar Eelwonn,” Journ. Helm., V, pp.Google Scholar
Rio, A. Del, 1898.—“Sobre la Anguillula del Vinagre,” Rev. Chilena de Hij., Santiago de Chile, IV, pp. 62–66.Google Scholar
Unwin, E. E., 1907.—“The Vinegar Fly (Drosophila funebris),” Trans. Ent. Soc. London, pp. 285–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmermann, A., 1921.—“Recherches expémentales sur l'Elevage aseptiquc de l'Anguillule du Vinaigre,” Rev. Suisse de Zool., XXVIII, pp. 357–380.Google Scholar