166 RELATIONSHIPS OF THE COCCACE^ 



were drawn from contaminated cultures, or from the fact 

 that short bacilli were mistaken for cocci. It is possible 

 that Str. bombycis (Bechamp), Cohn, and Str. Pastori- 

 anus, Krassilschtschik, and M. lardarius, Krassilscht- 

 schik, all three isolated from the bodies of diseased silk- 

 worms, may represent a distinct type; and Migula's record 

 of the occurrence in great numbers of a streptococcus, 

 Str. Sphagni, in swamp water suggests the possible exist- 

 ence of saprophytic forms. Neither of these types has 

 been worked out with fullness, however. 



The streptococci described in connection with various 

 specific diseases seem to possess an equally slight claim 

 to recognition as distinct types. Andrewes and Horder 

 found no evidence of a specific streptococcus acting as the 

 causative agent in scarlet fever. Their investigations 

 tended also to discredit the organism described under the 

 name of M. rheumaticus as the specific agent in rheumatic 

 fever. Two supposedly typical cultures which they 

 examined were examples of Str. salivarius and Str.fcecalis, 

 respectively. 



The Str. scarlatina, described by Gordon (1901), is dis- 

 tinguished from typical Str. pyogenes by the formation of 

 conglomerate masses in broth, and by the frequent occur- 

 rence of rod-like forms in its chains. This is evidently 

 the same organism described by Kurth (1 891) as associated 

 with scarlet fever, under the name Str. conglomerate. 

 It does not appear to form a distinct species. 



The organism described by Bruce (1893) as the causa- 



