35
26
لسا
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
C.O.
Reference :-
885/25
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
34
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS FOR THE YEAR 1919.
Keilin, D. (III., 1918.) Sur quelques modes particuliers de résistance des larves de Diptères contre la dessiccation. Bulletin, Society Entomology. France, pages 102-104.
"
""
(I., 1919). On the structure of the Larva- and the Systematic Position of the genera Mycetobia Meig., Ditomyia Winn., and Symmerus Walk. (Diptera Nematocera). Annals and Magazine of Natural History, III., 33-42, plates II.-V.
(II., 1919.) Supplementary Notes on the formation of a cocoon by
Cyclorhaphous Dipterous larvæ. Parasitology, XI., 237-238.
(IV., 1919.) On the alimentary canal and its appendages in the larvæ of Scatopsida and Bibionidæ (Diptera Nematocera), with some remarks on the parasites of these larvae. Entomological Monthly Magazine, 3rd series, V., 92-96, two text-figures.
Munro, J. W. (VII., 1919.) Report of Scabies Investigations. Journal, Royal Army Medical Corps, XXXIII., 1-41, six text-figures and two charts. Hindle, E. (IX., 1919.) Sex inheritance in Pediculus humanus var. corporis,
Journal of Genetics, VIII., 267-277, one chart. Nuttall, G. H. F. (II., 1919.) The biology of Pediculus humanus.
JE
Supple- mentary Notes. Parasitology, XI., 201-220, plate X., one text-figure.
Anatole Emile Blanchard Raphaël
(1857-1919). (IX., 1919.)
Obituary. Transactions of the Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, XII., 85-86, with portrait.
(1919.) The need of an Institute for Parasitological Research in Privately Cambridge. 19 pages, frontispiece, and four plans, 4°. printed at the University Press, Cambridge.
Journal,
Warburton, C. (1919.) Annual Report for 1918 of the Zoologist.
Royal Agricultural Society of England, 1918, LXXIX., 258-263.
73616
No. 22.
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE OF THE TROPICAL DISEASES RESEARCH FUND, held at the Colonial OFFICE AT 4 P.M. ON FRIDAY, THE 19TH OF DECEMBER, 1919.
Present:
SIR J. WEST RIDGEWAY (Chairman).
SIR J. ROSE BRADFORD.
SIR H. J. READ.
PROFESSOR J. W. W. STEPHENS.
MR. JEFFRIES (Secretary).
1. THE minutes of the previous meeting* were passed.
2. The Committee proceeded to discuss the financial position of the fund in connexion with applications from Professor Nuttall for an increased grant for the Quick Laboratory, Cambridge, and from the Academic Registrar of the University of London for the restoration of the grant formerly made in aid of the Chair of Protozoology at that University.
In deciding to allocate the grants for the forthcoming year in the same way as for the past year, the Committee expressed regret that the funds available did not permit them to increase the grants now being made or to make any fresh grants; but they hoped, in the event of the restoration of the income of the fund to its pre-War basis, to be able to restore the grants formerly made and now discontinued, and to consider applications for the increase of the present grants.
In this connexion they desired that it should be ascertained whether any action had been taken to invite contributors to the fund to increase their contributions to the pre-War rate, and, if not, they recommended that such action should be taken. 3. It was decided not to renew for the present the publication of the Annual Report, which has been discontinued during the War.
The Committee adjourned at 4.45 p.m.
* No. 19.
72591
No. 23.
REPORT ON WORK DONE IN CONNEXION WITH THE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF PROTOZOOLOGY DURING 1915-1916 AND 1919, BY H. M. WOODCOCK, D.Sc. (LOND.), FELLOW OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE. (Received in Colonial Office, 20th December, 1919.)
As briefly mentioned in my last report,* for the year
1914-1915
I took up war work at the King George Military Hospital at the end of July, 1915.
The need for expert protozoological examination of the dysen- teric cases returning from Gallipoli becoming apparent, I offered, with the sanction of the University authorities, to undertake all this work regularly, and was appointed, early in September, a member of the Laboratory Staff, as Honorary Para- sitologist. Incidentally, I was the first Protozoologist to take up this war service, which proved subsequently of such great importance. From this time onwards the ordinary departmental work ceased, and in fact since then the University Depart- ment cannot be said to have been in active existence.
Most of my time was occupied, naturally, with the routine examination of cases of dysentery and malaria. However, in collaboration with my colleagues, Messrs. Ledingham and Penfold, who were responsible for the bacteriological side of the work, I published notes on the protozoan parasites occurring in the fæces (1), in November, 1915. These were intended as a guide to what was likely to be met with by those engaged in this work.
This paper, I may mention, was the pioneer of many similar descriptions which have since appeared. I was able to point out, for the first time in recent years, the occurrence of human ooccidiosis as a not uncommon infection amongst men who had been in the East. The manner of this rediscovery well illustrates the value of the trained protozoologist in the determination of newly-occurring parasites. When passed in the fæces the oocysts are only in an early condition of development, and do not show the fully-diagnostic characters, e.g., the number of spores and sporozoites. But, having studied and being thoroughly acquainted with Coccidia, I knew, from the appearance, size, and structure of these cysts that they could be nothing else than Coccidian oocysts. Furthermore, from the fact that the contents were sometimes divided into two masses, but never into four, I was enabled to say that these cysts must belong to the genus Isospora, which possesses two sporoblasts (subsequently spores), and not four. That this parasite was indeed Isospora was subsequently confirmed by Wenyon, who obtained the further development of the oocysts in kept fæces. If I may be allowed to say so, this was an interesting case of scientific deduction, only possible for one with an ample general knowledge of Protozoa.
But by far the most important fact brought out by our joint work, as indicated in this paper, was that we found the type of dysentery occurring during this autumn. period was very largely, indeed almost entirely, bacillary and not amoebic. Indeed, during this period I had not a single case of amoebic; whereas, on the other hand, my colleagues were able to obtain definite evidence of bacillary dysentery in a very large proportion of the cases examined. The whole tendency at that time was to consider a large percentage of the cases as being amoebic and not bacillary, and I know that our results were looked upon by some as not giving a correct indication of the 1elative proportions of the two types. Since then it has been amply proved that far too much was made of amoebic dysentery in connexion with the Gallipoli cases. and that the percentage of this type was not nearly so high as was alleged. The fact of the matter is that in only too many instances the diagnosis was made by people who did not really know an Amoeba. I have not the slightest doubt, myself. that even in London laboratories at that time many Amoebae were regarded as E. histolytica which were in reality E. coli (i.e., the harmless form). An amateur protozoologist with only a few weeks' training is not going to be able to distinguish between the two! It takes years of study of living Protozoa for a man to possess the requisite knowledge how to distinguish accurately between two generally similar forms, such as these two species of Amoeba when in the active state. experienced worker can correctly differentiate between them, although even to him it is by no means always easy.
An
Thus the pioneer work from the laboratory of the King George Hospital han been proved to have been right in all respects, and I am very glad to have been associated with it.
D
t
* No. 134 in Miscellaneous No. 301.