0 
38 
AVe have obtained or compiled the following measurements for the 
embryophores of the taenias of man: 
T. solium, almost round, 31 to 36 /jl. 
T. saginata, ovoid, 35 to 40 by 20 to 30 /x. 
T. confusa, 39 by 30 g. 
T. africmia, 31 to 39 by 33.8 g. 
T. al)ietina, 31 to 37.5 by 30 to 33.9 g. 
From these measurements it will be seen that the eggs of T. abie- 
tina do not agree exactly with any of the species mentioned. 
C alcareous corpiiscles. — The calcareous corpuscles are exceedingly 
numerous, round to oval in shape, varying considerably in size, and , 
attaining IT. 6 in diameter. Comparing these with the measure- 
ments given for other forms, we have the following table : ; 
Tsenia solium, up to 12 [x, sparse. 
T, saginata, up to 18 g, plentiful. 
T. confusa, up to 11 /x, sparse. ‘ i 
T. africana, 10.4 by 16.9 /x, sparse. jl 
T. hominis, very numerous. 
T. ahietina, up to 17.6 g, very numerous. ] 
The data given above are scarcely sufficient to enable one to express | 
a positive opinion upon the systematic value of T. ahietina. The}^ , 
seem, however, to be too meager to fully justify its separation from , 
T . saginata.^ and almost too much to fully justify viewing it as a | 
typical T. saginata. 
Were these fragments sent to us for determination, without knowl- ! 
edge of their origin, we should conclude that they were probably a 
dwarfed specimen of Taenia saginata. j 
In order to obtain opinions from other persons, we have submitted ' 
the fragments to Hassall, Ransom, and Ward, requesting them to j 
come to a conclusion before they inquired into the history of the ' 
material. Ward was disinclined to consider the segments as belong- ; 
ing to T. saginata^ while Hassall and Ransom were both inclined to j 
consider them as belonging to this species. 
Under existing circumstances no exact determination can be ac- I i 
cepted as final, but four of the five helminthologists who have re- 
examined the material incline to the saginata determination, while | 
one is disinclined. . ; 
That the material does not agree exactly with the t 3 -pical Tsenia , ! 
saginata^ as we find it in this countiy, must be admitted, but we do ' ) 
^not feel justified at present in recognizing it as of full specific rank, i 
Under existing circumstances perhaps the best solution of the ' 
matter is to accept it as a doubtful subspecies, Tsenia saginata ahietina * j 
and call attention to the worm in the hope that some new specimens 
may be collected which will permit of a definite opinion. We must 
look to the physicians in the North and West, j^articularly to those 
near Sault Ste. Marie, to find such material. 
