Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T08:04:41.810Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Researches on the intestinal protozoa of monkeys and man

X. The life-history of Dientamoeba fragilis: observations, experiments, and speculations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Clifford Dobell
Clifford Dobell
Affiliation:
National Institute for Medical Research, London, N.W. 3
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The morphology and life-history of Dientamoeba fragilis, as observable in cultures, are described and illustrated, and the stages correlated with those commonly found in human faeces.

2. The nuclear structure especially is reinterpreted, and nuclear and cytoplasmic division are described in detail.

3. It is shown that the “normal” binucleate condition of this “amoeba” represents an arrested telophase stage of mitosis—the “granules” in the nuclei being really chromosomes (constant in number), and the strand connecting the nuclei being a persistent centrodesmus. The chromosome number is probably 6 (certainly not 4).

4. Binary fission is the only method of reproduction hitherto observed: no cysts or other stages in the life-history have been discovered.

5. Attempts to transmit D. fragilis to a man and 2 macaques (M. rhesus and M. sinicus) by administration of trophic amoebae per os—and in the case of M. rhesus inoculation per anum—were unsuccessful. It was also found impossible to infect chickens permanently by injection per anum (though one chick acquired an infection lasting for a week).

6. Consideration of its cytology and development leads to the conclusion that D. fragilis is not a true amoeba but an aberrant flagellate closely related to Histomonas. No flagellate stages, however, have yet been discovered.

7. Some consequences of this conclusion are briefly discussed, and hopeful directions for further inquiries are indicated.

8. On analogy with Histomonas, it is suggested that D. fragilis may be conveyed from man to man not by direct oral infection with trophic forms but in the ova of a nematode worm—possibly Trichuris (or Ascaris?).

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , November 1940 , pp. 417 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1940

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

Bijlsma, U. G. (1919). Onderzoek naar het voorkomen van darmprotozoën bij Nederlanders. (Acad. Proefschr., Amsterdam.) 8°. Utrecht.Google Scholar
Bishop, A. (1931). The morphology and method of division of Trichomonas. Parasitology, 23, 129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, A. (1938). Histomonas meleagridis in domestic fowls (Gallus gallus). Cultivation and experimental infection. Parasitology, 30, 181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeck, W. C. & Stiles, C. W. (1923). Studies on various intestinal parasites (especially amoebae) of man. Bull. No. 133, Hyg. Lab., Washington.Google Scholar
Brug, S. L. (1936). Dientamoeba fragilis. Geneesk. Tijdschr. Ned.-Indië, 76, 1288.Google Scholar
Brug, S. L. (1936 a). The nuclear division of Dientamoeba fragilis. Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 30, 283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brug, S. L. (1936 b). Observations on Dientamoeba fragilis. Ann. trop. Med. Parasit. 30, 441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caldwell, F. C., Caldwell, E. L., & Davis, G. E. (1930). Some aspects of the epidemiology of infestation with Trichuris and Ascaris as revealed in a study at the hospitals for the insane and the home for mentally defective children in the State of Alabama. Amer. J. Hyg. 11, 619.Google Scholar
Calkins, G. N. (1933). The Biology of the Protozoa. (2 ed.) 8°. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craig, C. F. (1926). The nuclear structure of Dientamoeba fragilis. J. Parasit. 13, 137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Das Gupta, B. M. (1936). A case of human infection with Dientamoeba fragilis Jepps & Dobell, 1918, in Calcutta. Indian med. Oaz. 71, 528.Google Scholar
Dobell, C. (1909). Researches on the intestinal protozoa of frogs and toads. Quart. J. micr. Sci. 53, 201.Google Scholar
Dobell, C. (1919). The Amoebae living in Man: a Zoological Monograph. 8°. London.Google Scholar
Dobell, C. (1928). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and II. Description of the whole life-history of Entamoeba histolytica in cultures. Parasitology, 20, 357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C. with Bishop, A. (1929). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and III. The action of emetine on natural amoebic infections in macaques. Parasitology, 21, 446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C. (1931). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and IV. An experimental study of the histolytica-like species of Entamoeba living naturally in macaques. Parasitology, 23, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C. (1933). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and V. The Endolimax of macaques. Parasitology, 25, 436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C. (1934). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and VI. Experiments with the trichomonads of man and the macaques. Parasitology, 26, 531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C. (1935). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and VII. On the Enteromonas of macaques and Embadomonas intestinalis. Parasitology, 27, 564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C. (1936). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and VIII. An experimental study of some simian strains of “Entamoeba coli.” Parasitology, 28, 541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C. (1938). Researches on the intestinal Protozoa of Monkeys and Man. I. General introduction, and IX. The life-history of Entamoeba coli, with special reference to metacystic development. Parasitology, 30, 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobell, C., Gettings, H. S., Jepps, M. W., & Stephens, J. B. (1918). A study of 1300 convalescent cases of dysentery from home hospitals [etc.]. Med. Res. Comm., Spec. Rep. Ser., No. 15.Google Scholar
Dobell, C. & Laidlaw, P. P. (1926). On the cultivation of Entamoeba histolytica and some other entozoic amoebae. Parasitology, 18, 283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drbohlav, J. J. (1924). The cultivation of the protozoön of blackhead. J. med. Res. 44, 677.Google Scholar
Feulgen, R. (1926). Die Nuclealfä;rbung. Handb. biol. Arb.-Meth. (Abderhalden), Abt. v T. 2, H. 10 (Lief. 213), p. 1055.Google Scholar
Gittings, J. C. & Waltz, A. D. (1927). Dientamoeba fragilis. Amer. J. Dis. Child. 34, 542.Google Scholar
Greenway, D. (1928). Dientamoeba fragilis en la Argentina. Arch. Argent. Enferm. Apar. Dig. (Buenos Aires), 3, 897.Google Scholar
Hakansson, E. G. (1936). Dientamoeba fragilis, a cause of illness. Report of case. Amer. J. trap. Med. 16, 175.Google Scholar
Hakansson, E. G. (1937). Dientamoeba fragilis: some further observations. Parasitology, 17, 349.Google Scholar
Halawani, A. E. (1930). Dientamoeba fragilis from a culture of human faeces. [Demonstration.] Trans. Roy. Soc. trop. Med. Hyg. 23, 326.Google Scholar
Halawani, A. E. (1933). A brief note on a case of Dientamoeba fragilis infection found in Egypt. J. Egypt. med. Ass. 16, 94.Google Scholar
Haughwout, F. G. & Horrilleno, F. S. (1920). The intestinal animal parasites found in one hundred sick Filipino children. Philippine J. Sci. 16, 1.Google Scholar
Hegner, R. (1929). The protozoa of wild monkeys. Science, 70, 539.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hegner, R. & Chu, H. J. (1930). A comparative study of the intestinal protozoa of wild monkeys and man. Amer. J. Hyg. 12, 62.Google Scholar
Jepps, M. W. (1921). Notes on the intestinal protozoa of 971 men at the University War Hospital, Southampton. J. Roy. Army Med. Corps, 37, 366.Google Scholar
Jepps, M. W. & Dobell, O. (1918). Dientamoeba fragilis n.g., n.sp., a new intestinal amoeba from man. Parasitology, 10, 352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knowles, R. & Das Gupta, B. M. (1936). Some observations on the intestinal protozoa of macaques. Indian J. med. Res. 24, 547.Google Scholar
Kudo, R. (1926). Observations on Dientamoeba fragilis. Amer. J. trop. Med. 6, 299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kudo, R. (1931). Handbook of Protozoology. 8°. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lopez-Neyka, C. R. & Pebegbin, E. S. (1933). Contributión al estudio de las protozoosis intestinales del hombre en España con indicación de varias especies nuevas en la Peninsula. Med. Paises Calidos (Madrid), 6, No. 5 [pp. 1–7, reprint].Google Scholar
Lörincz, F. (1933). Über das Vorkommen von menschlichen Darmprotozoen in Ungarn. Arch. Schiffs- u. Tropenhyg. 37, 276.Google Scholar
Mollari, M. & Anzulovic, J. V. (1938). Cultivation and pathogenicity of Diendamoeba fragilis, with a case report. J. trop. Med. Hyg. 41, 246.Google Scholar
Niimi, D. (1936). Studies on Blackhead. I. Morphology, development and pathogenicity of causal agent in body of host. J. Japanese Soc. vet. Sci. 15, 15. [English abstract.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niimi, D. (1937). Studies on Blackhead. II. Mode of infection. Parasitology, 16, 23.Google Scholar
Niimi, D. (1938). Studies on Blackhead. III. Test of surgical operation, immunology and chemotherapy. Parasitology, 17, 3.Google Scholar
Nöller, W. (1922). Die wichtigsten parasitiscben Protozoen des Menschen und der Tiere. Die tierischen Parasiten der Haus- u. Nutztiere, 1 (Teil 1, pp. 1–272). Berlin.Google Scholar
Regendanz, P. (1929). Ueber die Uebertragung der Entamoeba histolytica, Entamoeba coli und Dientamoeba fragilis auf Ratten. Zbl. Bakt. I (Orig.) 111, 412.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. (1923). Note on a case infected with Dientamoeba fragilis, Jepps and Dobell, 1917 [sic]. J. trop. Med. Hyg. 26, 243.Google Scholar
Sapero, J. J. (1939). Clinical studies in non-dysenteric intestinal amebiasis. Amer. J. trop. Med. 19, 497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sapero, J. J. & Johnson, C. M. (1939). Endamoeba histolytica and other intestinal parasites. Incidence in variously exposed groups of the navy. U.S. Nav. med. Bull. 37, 279.Google Scholar
Smith, T. (1895). An infectious disease among turkeys caused by protozoa (infectious entero-hepatitis). Bull. U.S. Bur. Anim. Ind. (U.S. Dep. Agric.), No. 8, p. 7.Google Scholar
Svensson, R. (1928). A survey of human intestinal protozoa in Sweden and Finland. (A preliminary report.) Parasitology, 20, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svensson, R. (1935). Studies on human intestinal protozoa [etc.]. Acta med. Scand. Suppl. lxx. [pp. x + 115.]Google Scholar
Svensson, R. & Linders, F. J. (1934). The chances of detecting infections with intestinal protozoa. Acta med. Scand. 81, 267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taliaferro, W. H. & Becker, E. R. (1924). A note on the human intestinal amoeba, Dientamoeba fragilis. Amer. J. Hyg. 4, 71.Google Scholar
Theiler, H. & Farber, S. M. (1936). Trichomonas muris, parasitic in the oxyurid nematodes, Aspicularis tetraptera and Syphacia obvelata, from white mice. Parasitology, 28, 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, J. G. & Robertson, A. (1923). Dientamoeba fragilis, Jepps and Dobell, 1917 [sic]. A case of human infection in England. J. trop. Med. Hyg. 26, 135.Google Scholar
Thomson, J. G. & Robertson, A. (1925). Notes on the cultivation of certain amoebae and flagellates of man, using the technique of Boeck and Drbohlav. J. trop. Med. Hyg. 28, 345.Google Scholar
Tyzzer, E. E. (1919). Developmental phases of the protozoon of “blackhead” in turkeys. J. med. Res. 40, 1.Google Scholar
Tyzzer, E. E. (1920). The flagellate character and reclassification of the parasite producing “blackhead” in turkeys—Histomonas (gen.nov.) meleagridis (Smith). J. Parasit. 6, 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tyzzer, E. E. (1934). Studies on histomoniasis, or “blackhead” infection, in the chicken and the turkey. Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts Sci. 69, 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenrich, D. H. (1936). Studies on Dientamoeba fragilis (Protozoa). I. Observations with special reference to nuclear structure. J. Parasit. 22, 76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenrich, D. H. (1937). Studies on Dientamoeba fragilis (Protozoa). II. Report of unusual morphology in one case with suggestions as to pathogenicity. J. Parasit. 23, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenrich, D. H. (1939). Studies on Dientamoeba fragilis (Protozoa). III. Binary fission with special reference to nuclear division. J. Parasit. 25, 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenrich, D. H., Stabler, R. M., & Arnett, J. H. (1935). Endamoeba histolytica and other intestinal protozoa in 1060 college freshmen. Amer. J. trop. Med. 15, 331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wenyon, C. M. (1926). Protozoology. s2 vols. 8°. London.Google Scholar