1910.] PARASTTIC PJiOTOZOA OF RKU (;U()T;sk. G99 



tetraonis, but have not found Spii'oclijete.s, tliongli the spei-ni of these 

 lice are deceptively like 8pivochpetes at first sight. Dr. Hambon 

 has suggested that lice act Jis transmitters of tlie Spirocha^te that 

 he found in feathei--pidp. This is possible, and as a. matter of fact, 

 evidence is accumulating and tending to show that the carryino- 

 of disease in a particular host is not restricted to any one species 

 of Arthropod, but that several organisms differing in o-enera as 

 well as in species, may become active agents in the dissemination 

 of protozoal parasites. 



Among Spirochc-etes known from the blood of various birds may 

 be mentioned Spirochaita gcdlinarum of fowls, S. anserina of 

 geese, and a Spirochsete cultivated by Tiipfer from the blood of 

 the owl. 



/S. yaUinarum is the pathogenic agent of a fatal disease in fowls 

 and is spread from bird to bird by the tick, Aryas j^ersicus. 



S. lagopodis is much too rare, I think, to be a serious cause of 

 disease in grouse, although leucocytosis was found in a grouse 

 infected with S. lagopodis, in the blood of which bird many 

 vacuolated mononuclear leucocytes occurred. 



(B) PARASITES FOUND IN THE ALIMENTARY TRACT 

 OF GROUSE. 



(a) Flagellata. 



TnicrioMoxAS ebeiithi. 

 (Plate LXI. figs. 43-50.) 



While examining, on the moors, the Cfecal contents of grouse — 

 more especially for Spirochaetes — I have sometimes observed a 

 Flagellate Protozoon moving therein. 



The parasite was seen to possess an undulating membrane, the 

 vibrations of which often i-egulated the paiasite's active move- 

 ments ; at other times ilagella were seen anteriorly whose active 

 forward movements dragged the body of the organism onwards. 



The structui-e of the parasite is complex. The organism closely 

 resembles, both in size and shape, the parasite described recently 

 (1909) by Martin and Robertson from the c?eca of the fowl. The 

 flagellate of the fowl, first seen by Eberth in 1862, was named 

 Trypanosoma eherthi by Kent (1881), Spirochceta eherthi by Liihe 

 (1906), while Stein, Leuckart, and Laveran and Mesnil more 

 correctly considered it to be a Trichomonas. The nomenclature 

 of the parasite is discussed at length by Martin and Robertson 

 (1909). These authors describe both Trichomonas And Monocer- 

 comona-s forms as well as a, Trypanosoma, and state that they 

 " have observed some cases of which the most natural explanation 

 would be to regard the A Y^^rypanosoma], B [7'richonwnas], and 

 C [2Ionocercomonas\ conditions as stages in one life cycle " ; other- 

 wise the parasites are distinct and there is a mixed infection. 



It seems to me that the fla<>ellate which I have seen in the 



