Ascaris maritima, Leuckart.—This is a well-marked species. Judging from the characters presented by the solitary, sexually-immature female which supplied Leuckart with his only means of diagnosis, this worm may be briefly described as a filariform nematode about 3/4″ in length and about 1/25″ in breadth. Although there are no cephalic aliform membranes, the cuticle immediately below the lips forms small and distinct projections, one on either side of the head (‘Die Mensch. Par.,’ Bd. ii, s. 877).
This entozoon was discovered by Dr Pfaff at Jacobshavn, near Godhavn, West Greenland, in April, 1865. Two years later he sent the specimen to Krabbe, who afterwards transmitted it to Leuckart. In the original communication addressed to the Copenhagen helminthologist, Dr Pfaff states that he procured the worm from amongst matters vomited by a child, and he incidentally observes that he had hitherto encountered only Bothriocephalus cordatus and Oxyuris vermicularis amongst Greenlanders. As to the source of infection, Prof. Leuckart not unnaturally refers to the similar conditions of existence shared by the human and carnivorous inhabitants of that country. It is well known that bears, polar-bears, seals, and walruses are largely infested by nematodes (Asc. transfuga, A. osculata, Ophiostoma dispar, &c.), but these various species are quite distinct from Dr Pfaff’s little “spulwurm.”
Ascaris lumbricoides, Linneus.—This common parasite was for a long while regarded as identical with the great lumbricoid of the horse, but the question has been finally settled by Schneider, who has shown that the human worm, although identical with Dujardin’s Ascaris suilla of the hog, is nevertheless quite distinct from the Ascaris megalocephala of solipeds. The large lumbricoid occasionally found in the ox belongs to the human worm. Our large human helminth resembles the common earth-worm in general appearance only. The males usually measure from four to six inches in length, and the females from ten to fourteen inches. Some have been reported up to seventeen or eighteen inches in length. The body is smooth, fusiform, and elastic, and marked by numerous fine transverse rings. It is attenuated towards either extremity, the anterior end terminating in a prominently three-lobed mouth The tail is bluntly pointed. The female is much shorter than the male, having a diameter of nearly a quarter of an inch. The male is supplied with a double spiculum, its tail being always more or less curved towards the central surface. The female reproductive orifice is situated above the centre of the body. According to Schneider, the tail supports from 138 to 150 caudal papillæ, that is, from 69 to 75 on either side of the median line. Below the anus the papillæ are regularly arranged in pairs, seven in number, the two uppermost pairs being double.
Notwithstanding the advantage which the size of this entozoon affords us in the matter of observation and experiment, we are yet ignorant as to the precise mode in which the young gain access to the human body. From what has been said respecting the quick growth of Ascaris mystax in the dog, and from what has been observed respecting the rapid growth of the so-called A. suilla in the hog, we know that the worm requires but a short time to pass from the larval to the sexual state. The view of Hering, Mosler, Davaine, and others, who suppose that these worms are reared in a direct manner by swallowing the ova, is, as Leuckart observed, not yet proved. We are not in full possession of the facts of larval development. It is true that Professor Heller’s interesting “find” has shown that when these worms first gain access to the human body their size is quite insignificant. At the post mortem of an imbecile, Heller discovered eighteen young worms, varying in size from about 1/9″ to 1/2″ in length (2·75 to 13 mm.). The sexes were indistinguishable. As a set-off against this, Leuckart’s repeated attempts to rear Ascaris lumbricoides and A. mystax by means of direct feeding-experiments with the eggs all failed. Thus, we are yet left in doubt as to the destiny of the larvæ during the period which elapses between the time of their escape from the egg and the time of their entry into the human body. So important is the question as to the mode of origination, growth, and subsequent development of the larvæ, that it may be well to trace, however briefly, what steps have been taken to clear up the matter. Leuckart obtained his negative results by the administration of ripe ova to dogs, rabbits, swine, and mice. The eggs of Ascaris lumbricoides have been kept alive by Dr Davaine for a period of more than five years. I have myself watched the development of their contents in fresh water through all the stages of yolk segmentation up to the stage of an imperfectly-organised, coiled, intra-chorional embryo, and have kept them in the latter condition for a period of three months. According to Davaine (‘Comptes Rendus,’ 1858, p. 1217), the fully-developed embryo is cylindrical, its length being, 1/100th of an inch. The mouth is not furnished with the three characteristic papillæ of the genus, and the tail terminates suddenly in a point. Davaine administered some of his five-year-old embryos to rats, and had the satisfaction of finding a few of these eggs in the rodent’s fæces, with their embryos still living, but striving to emerge. He also gave eggs to a cow, and introduced others into the stomachs of dogs in small linen-covered flasks. As a general result it may be said that the embryos escaped from their shells. Those eggs, however, in which the yolk-segmentation had not arrived at the early embryonal stage remained unaffected. According to Heller, the embryo of A. lumbricoides casts its first skin while still within the egg, and “a subsequent ecdysis probably completes its definitive form” (l. c., s. 615). So far back as 1853 Verloren reared coiled intra-chorional embryos in the eggs of Ascaris marginata within a period of fifteen days in distilled water. I also reared the embryos of this species in fresh water, and kept them alive for a period of nearly a year and a half, at the expiration of which time, and during the warm weather, some few of them succeeded in making their escape. According to Davaine, the eggs of many nematode species will readily retain their vitality though long exposed to dryness, but their yolk-contents will not go on developing during this period of exposure. As regards A. mystax, however, Heller remarks that whilst “the eggs have a great power of resisting external influences, their development is not arrested in spirits of wine, chromic acid, or oil of turpentine” (l. c., s. 631). In the case of Ascaris tetraptera of the mouse, embryonic formation goes on in spite of the absence of external moisture. Davaine has noticed the same thing in the oxyurides of rodents. Dryness does not even destroy the eggs of A. lumbricoides and Trichocephalus dispar. It would seem, in short, that the eggs of nematodes which normally take up their residence in cats, dogs, and in the carnivora which reside in arid regions, will develop embryos in the egg without external moisture. As before remarked, Davaine thinks it is not necessary that these nematode embryos should pass through any intermediary bearer, and he believes that they are often directly transferred to the stomach of their “hosts” whilst adhering in the form of an impalpable dust to the coats of their bearers, whence they are detached by the animal’s frequent habit of licking the fur. Davaine’s view has received some support from the observations and experiments of Unterberger with the eggs of Ascaris maculosa. This observer administered eggs of the worm to doves (whose fæces were free of eggs), and seventeen days after found ova in the fæces.
With the eggs of the Ascaris megalocephala of the horse I performed numerous experiments. I reared the embryos in simple fresh water, and found them during warm weather escaping before the expiration of five months. I also succeeded in rearing these larvæ in pond mud, noticing, at the same time, that after their escape from the shell they grew more or less rapidly up to a certain point, after which they ceased growing. The addition of horses’ dung to soft wet mud in one case, and of cows’ dung in another, neither appeared to advance nor retard the process of embryonal formation, so long as the embryos were enclosed in their shells. On the other hand, when I reared embryos in simple horse-dung purposely kept moist, they attained a higher degree of organisation than did those in wet mud or water. Having watched hundreds of these larvæ under varying conditions, I came to the conclusion that, after escape from the egg, their activity, growth, and strength was most marked when they occupied media which happened to be impure. Davaine experimented on cows, and Leuckart also experimented on horses, with the eggs of this worm without success. Leuckart also failed to rear the larvæ in intermediary hosts. Some eggs passed through the water-palmer unaltered.
These results, so far as they go, seem to be borne out by facts of a professional order. Thus, an instance has been brought under my notice where a considerable number of peasants and their children, dwelling in a parish in Yorkshire, were infested with this worm. There was, in short, a local endemic helminthiasis. Through the parish runs a stream which supplies the cottagers with all the water they employ for domestic purposes (washing, drinking, and so forth). Some of the peasants living by the side of the stream keep pigs, and the sewage from this source has been allowed to pass into the stream itself. Now, if Schneider’s determination as to the identity of the lumbricoid of man and the pig is correct (which I do not doubt), the explanation of the cause of the endemic becomes a very simple matter. But it does not explain all that we desire to know about the young worms. Either the freed embryos before they enter the human bearer accomplish further changes of form and growth in the sewage or impure water; or, what is far less probable, they pass into the bodies of intermediary hosts (such as insect-larvæ, Gammari, Entomostraca, &c.) to undergo the necessary changes. Practically, no doubt, it comes to the same thing in the end. Even if we suppose that the Ascaris suilla and A. lumbricoides are not identical species, still it is evident that any person discharging the eggs of lumbricoids in the vicinity of open waters becomes, by that fact, a source and centre of infection. To ensure an endemic it is probably only further necessary that the human inhabitants should employ the contaminated water for domestic purposes. But time and an increase of temperature must be allowed for the bringing about of those known and unknown larval changes that alike form the necessary antecedents of infection. In this connection I will only add, that if the present position of the question be such as I have here represented it to be, we see that Mosler was not far wrong when he suggested that “contamination of the drinking water with the eggs out of privies is to be blamed” as a source of infection. According to Heller, from whom I quote, Mosler actually demonstrated the presence of the eggs in water thus exposed. In like manner it becomes obvious that Davaine’s practical remark (although it was based on the assumption of a direct infection by the eggs), that filtration will probably be sufficient to prevent infection, loses nothing of its hygienic value.
The foregoing observations naturally lead one to the question of frequency and distribution. Davaine holds that the comparative infrequency of this parasite in Paris is due to the free use of the filter. In London, though not uncommon, the worm rarely occurs in great numbers in one bearer. Those cases in our hospitals, where considerable numbers have been present, have usually come up from suburban or country places. Heller states that these worms were found in 9·1 per cent. of post mortems conducted at Dresden, in 12 per cent. at Erlangen, and in 17 per cent. at Kiel. He quotes Huss as stating that no one is free from this worm in Finland. The prevalence of large round worms in warm countries generally is well known. Throughout India and the East they are extremely abundant, and the same may be said of the West Indies, Brazil, and the adjacent territories. Professor Dyce and others have remarked on the extreme prevalence of lumbrici in the Mauritius, but they are comparatively rare along the sea border. In all situations where there is an abundant fresh-water supply these parasites are particularly common, as in the lowlands of Holland and the lake districts of Sweden. The abundance of water is certainly not alone sufficient to explain the frequency of the parasite, seeing that the most important factor is that which rests upon the uncivilised habits of the rural population. What, therefore, it may be asked, can be the cause of immunity enjoyed by Icelanders in this respect? The answer is not apparent; nevertheless Krabbe and Finsen have testified to the fact that Iceland is the only country that is entirely free from Ascaris lumbricoides.
As remarked in my previous work the number of worms present in any human bearer is usually small, varying commonly from one to six or eight. Cases in which scores or hundreds have existed are comparatively rare. Küchenmeister mentions the case of one child who passed 103 examples, and of another child that harbored from 300 to 400 worms. Dr Gilli, of Turin, gives a case where 510 were passed by a child, and Cruveilhier estimated that over 1000 existed in an idiot girl, whose intestines he found crammed with them. A remarkable case has also been communicated to me by Dr Mackeith, of Sandhurst, Kent, who, by means of santonine, expelled from a little girl, five and a half years of age, 300 lumbrici; and I am likewise indebted to Dr Cooper Rose for notes of a case in which about thirty lumbrici were expelled, chiefly in consequence of the employment of this drug. The most interesting fact, however, in this case was that the child was only fifteen months old. In this case the symptoms were severe.
The proper habitat of the lumbricus is the upper and middle part of the small intestine. From this situation it often wanders into the stomach, and frequently gains access to the outer world, not only by the natural passages of the mouth, nostrils, and anus, but also, occasionally, in a more direct way, by perforating the intestinal and abdominal walls. Many cases are on record where lumbrici have passed into the abdominal cavity. In other instances they have lodged themselves within the abdominal viscera and pulmonary organs. When they find their way into the parietes of the abdomen and adjacent parts, they usually give rise to the formation of abscesses requiring surgical interference.