Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T20:51:48.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sclerostome Parasites of the Horse in England1. II. New Species of the Genus Cylichnostomum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Charles L. Boulenger
Charles L. Boulenger
Affiliation:
(From the Research Laboratory in Agricultural Zoology, University of Birmingham.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In a recent number of Parastilogy (1916) an account was given of the species of Triodontophorus and Oesophagodontus found in the alimentary tract of horses in the neighbourhood of Birmingham, more particularly in the Redditch district of Worcestershire. In company with the worms of these two genera were several species of Cylichnostomum, occurring in some of the hosts in considerable numbers both in the colon and caecum.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , February 1917 , pp. 203 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1917

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

Boulenger, C. L. (1916). Sclerostome Parasites of the Horse in England. I. The Genera Triodontophorus and Oesophagodontus. Parasitology, VIII. (4).Google Scholar
Lriper, R. T. (1910). Exhibition of a Series of Specimens of Entozoa. Proc. Zool. Soc. 1910 (1), 147.Google Scholar
Looss, A. (1900). Notizen zur Helminthologie Egyptens. III. Die Sclerostomen der Pferde und Esel in Egypten. Centralbl. Bakter. etc. Abt. 1. XXVII. 150–184.Google Scholar
Looss, A. (1901). The Sclerostomidae of Horses and Donkeys in Egypt. Rec. Egypt. Govt. School of Med. I. 25.Google Scholar
Mehlis, (1831). Oken's Isis, 79.Google Scholar
Railliet, A. and Henry, A. (1902). Sur les Sclérostomiens des Equidés. C. r. Soc. Biol. 1902, p. 5.Google Scholar