NO. 5 INTERMEDIATE HOSTS OF ASIATIC BLOOD FLUKE BARTSCTI 3/ 



not until these mollusks were implicated as intermediate hosts of 

 Schistosoma japonicnm that a renewed interest was manifested. 



Bavay and Dautzenberg (i8, p. 38), in their "Description de 

 Coquilles Nouvelles de L'Indo-Chine ", discuss Oncomclania and 

 Hemibia. 



In 1923 Mcleney and Faust (29) demonstrated that Oncomclania 

 served in the Soochow area as intermediate host of Schistosoma 

 japonicnm. 



In 1924 Faust (34) published " Schistosomiasis in China ", in 

 which he states that he and Meleney also found what they called 

 Katayama nosopJiora. which I named in 1925 Katayama fansti, to 

 be a carrier. 



In the same year appeared Faust's (33) paper, " Notes on Larval 

 Flukes from China ", in which he cites all the localities in which they 

 have demonstrated intermediate hosts. 



Faust here states that : 



These forms are all amphibious in habits. They are not found in large or swift 

 bodies of water, but in among the grass and weeds and moist humus of over- 

 hanging banks all along terminal canals and quiet coves. They are also found 

 in the rice nursery beds * * * The snails do not live in clayey soil, but can 

 usually be located near freshly deposited human fertilizer. The region north 

 of the Yangtze Valley is incompatible to their existence. Here, too, the On- 

 comelanias are found only in streams with considerable lime supply. 



Faust and Meleney's schistosomiasis studies in China resulted in 

 Nelson Annandale's researches in intermediate host subject. His 

 studies (31) are recorded in 1924 in his paper on "The MoUuscan 

 Hosts of the Human Blood Fluke in China and Japan, and Species 

 Liable to be Confused with Them", where he expresses the conclu- 

 sion that Katayama of Robson is not generically distinct from Onco- 

 uielania. He fails to recognize true Oncomclania hnpensis, citing 8 

 nun for its lieight, though that species is almost half again that size. 

 He lumps all of Heude's species under Oncomelania hupensis, retain- 

 ing only as doubtfully specifically distinct, Oncomelania longiscala 

 and Oncomelania sublaevis. Such a conclusion is n(jt surprising, con- 

 sidering the scant material available for his studies. He establishes 

 two sections : Katayamae and Hemibiae. In the first he places On- 

 comelania nosophora (Robson) and Oncomelania formosana (Pils- 

 bry). His Hemibiae embraces Oncomelania hupensis Gredler, in 

 which species he includes Melania ( ? Sulcospira) schmackeri Bottger 

 erroneously, also Heude's Hemibia schmackeri, carectoruin, luteola, 

 crassa, and costulata, and Oncomelania sublaevis (not sublevis Heude) 

 and longiscata. His treatment of Blanfordia has been discussed under 

 that genus. 



