50 Henry B. Ward 



able to ascertain, have been construed as such, together with the 

 pubHcations which have contributed to the explanation of any 

 doubtful cases. No attempt has been made to include all refer- 

 ences to human eye worms other than F. loa, although the in- 

 volved condition of this subject has resulted in bringing together 

 here the majority of these also. The list includes only the more 

 prominent text-books, or such as contain extended discussions 

 or original contributions to a knowledge of this species. For 

 valuable assistance and criticism in the preparation of this bib- 

 liography I am indebted to Professor J. I. Wyer, librarian of the 

 University of Nebraska. 



In printing these references the two numbers separated by a 

 colon denote volume and page, i. e. 28:510 means volume 28, 

 page 510. An additional number in parentheses before the two 

 just explained denotes the series and is used only when the vol- 

 umes of each series are numbered separately from those of pre- 

 ceding series. 



Bibliography 



Addario^ C. 



1885. Su di un nematode dell'occhio umano. Ann. d. ottalm., 

 14:135-48, I pl. 



This much-cited paper deals with another species, F. conjunc- 

 tivae, identical with the form described later by Grassi as 

 F. inermis, a normal parasite of horse and ass, and an occa- 

 sional one in man. It is entirely distinct from F. loa. 



Annett, H. E., Button, J. E., and Elliott, J. H. 



1901. Report of the Liverpool Expedition to Nigeria. Part 

 11. Filariasis. Thompson Yates Laboratory Reports, 

 4:1-93, 14 pl. 

 Found F. diurna in a boy of lower' Nigeria who was also in- 

 fected with F. loa. Second case of F. loa without embryos 

 in blood. Relation of F. diurna and F. Bancrofti discussed 

 at length; weight of evidence favors identity. 



Arrachart, J. N. 



1805. Memoires, dissertations et observations de chirurgie. 

 Paris, 8°, 302 pp. 



320 



