Bacteria Cyclogeny

©Copyright 2000 by Enderlein Enterprises
by Professor Dr. Günther Enderlein, Germany, Original German edition published in 1916
(Explore Issue: Volume 10, Number 1)

After things have reached their unfoldment,
Each returns to its origin
-- Lao Tsu, Tao Te Ching Chapter 16, 7^th Century BC

The Bacteria Cyclogeny¹ is the morphological developmental cycle through the sum of all generations, beginning with the simplest morphological unit (Mych, Mychit or Mychomerit) to the highest morphological structure pertinent to each particular species, ending again with the unit Mychit or Mychomerit. This is, a phylogenetically high form takes its course, starting from the Mychit to the Dimychit and all appearance forms of the Syndimychit, up to the syntact Syndimychit, and back to the Mych -- usually with the tiniest step forward being distributed over numerous generations.

The single course through one cyclogenetic developmental cycle is a Cyclode. The Cyclode consists of two different forms of development, namely of a continuously occurring Arthrogony that is a proliferating development through simple splitting and a simultaneous, generally very slow, progressive development that is characterized by morphological changes. The multiplying development is the Auxanogeny,¹ the progressive development is the Probaenogeny.¹ Both, so to say, represent a coordinating system of the development. The system of both coordinates, Auxanogeny and Probaenogeny, result in the Cyclogeny. The process of the gradual, morphological construction -- usually distributed over countless generations -- is the progressive Probaenogeny; the dissolution of the resultant morphological construction into lower complexes down to the total disintegration into the morphological unit, the Mychit, is the degressive Probaenogeny.

The Probaenogeny can be traversed slowly (bradybaen) or quickly (euprobaen). Thus, there are bradybaenic and euporbaenic species. This, however, can also be dependent on outer conditions, outer circumstances. (Comp. VI ß).

As the Ontogeny according to Haeckel's biogenetic law represents an abbreviated course through the Phylogeny of an individual, so the Cyclogeny is nothing less than an actual repetition of the Phlogeny in the present, although in abbreviated form, yet, divided over countless generations of individuals. In the Ontogeny, the diverse stages of the Phylogeny are passed through by an individual in a compressed form, while in the Cyclogeny, the individual phylectic stages are repeated by countless generations of individuals. Additionally, as in every multicellular organism, the Onotgeny cannot avoid the stage of the unit of all building blocks, namely the cell (fructified ovum cell -- sperm, egg/ovum). It is impossible for the Mychotes to exclude the Mychit entirely from the Cyclogeny because it is the stage of its unit. During the Cyclode, all Dimychote enter into the stage of the Mychit through the formation of Gonidie, Basit and fructified Oit.

The individual stages of the morphological construction and destruction are the Cyclostages. The Cyclostage is a strictly morphological concept. A Cyclostage standing before another in the Cyclode is a Prostase; when it follows another, it stands in Metastase to it. Each Cyclode has a summit of its morphological construction (Culmination). Each bacterial form has a summit in its morphological construction, beyond which it cannot develop (the Culminant). Every complete Cyclode begins with the sexual union of two Mychomere (Spermit and Oit), reaches its Culmination and ends in the formation of the Mychomere. The incomplete Cyclode can be shortened in most diverse ways. For instance, the formation of the Mychomere can be omitted due to direct germination of Gonodie, so that it is not required that a Culminant be reached in every Cyclode.

If a Cyclode does not reach the Culminant due to a prior occurring degressive Probaenogeny, then the culminating Cyclostage is the Conculminant. Each species can have several Conculminant. The stating of the Culmination of a Cyclode in a bacterial species, is therefore, not necessarily identical with determining the Culminant, but one may also be dealing with a Conculminant.

Because each Cyclostage is composed of a greater or smaller number of generations, it must always have two growth forms that alternate with one another. For instance, Dimychit and Didimychit alternate. Thus, the microscopic picture shows the presence of both short rods and rods of double lengths. The Dimychit grows into a Didimychit after its Mychomitosis and this again falls apart into two Dimychit. This continues generally through numerous generations.

The simultaneity of the Auxanogeny and the Probaenogeny may be interrupted for the latter for a more or less long period. This elimination of the Pro-baenogeny is called Mochlosis.¹ It is common under the same external conditions as are indicated in medical practice for bacterial cultures. The bacteria then vegetate under stable conditions for weeks, months and even much longer, remaining in the identical Cyclostage without moving upward in Probaenogeny by even a trace. Bacteriology has remained fixed with the Mochlose. The general knowledge of bacteria always pertains to the condition of the Mochlose, particularly because the parasitic lifestyle offers such parallel conditions for bacteria and causes a Mochlose in numerous cases. Pathogenicity and virulence are frequently connected with the parasitic Cyclostage. This Cyclostage is the Virulent Stage.

When the blocking of the Cyclode by Mochlosis gets cancelled, it is called Mochlolysis.¹

Let the following be said for a clearer understanding of the concept of Cyclogeny. As in insects, the Imaginal stage is reached through the development of an egg, larval stages and pupa stage. Even so, the Cyclogeny is the coursing through no less manifold development steps, with the difference that this course is not dependent on an individual, but generally, on a vast number of generations. One could compare the Cyclogeny with a metagenesis that is gigantically potentized, of which, additionally, each stage, yes, even each modification within each stage, can be capable of reproducing itself without any change in numerous generations.

Additional diversities can be noted within the number of generations of a Cyclostage, which are not of a comparative-morphological nature, but which are characterized by properties of shape, physiology and biology. Such a section, consisting of a sum of constant generations that excel through, at least, one such characteristic, is called a Formant.

Each morphological formed physiological and biological property that is specific to a Cyclostage or a Formant, and thus defines it, is a Designant.

A bacterial colony that contains identical Cyclostages is isostatic. A colony containing different stages is mixostatic. In the presence of identical Formants, it is conform; with different Formants, it is difform.

The concept of Cyclogeny specifically replaces the explanations for the phenomena of mutations in bacteria through the mutation theory. The contrast is, in brief, the following: The mutation theory belongs to the realm of Monomorphism. It declares every manifestation of changeability to be a new formation, the development of entirely new species, sub-species, etc. Cyclogeny shows on the basis of morphological knowledge that all changeability within each bacterial species is a manifestation of Pleomorphism and that the bacterial species have diverse physiological and biological properties, according to the level of their construction and destruction, spread over countless generations.

The research method is based on the intellectual integration of morphological factors in Embryology. This intellectual function contains within itself some dangers for error, which, however, become increasingly eliminated as the steps narrow down that connect the observed stages. The findings conclude themselves into a chain, with the result of absolute knowledge.

This identical method has been applied for determining the Bacteria Cyclogeny. Here, too, the steps have soon narrowed down, soon expanded again, as the morphological knowledge required. In difficult morphological conditions and uncertain results, the developmental processes have been followed directly under the microscope, such as in the Zoit, Pseudascit, etc. In strongly euprobaenic forms, such as the cholera pathogen, the steps by which the cultures were observed were essentially between _ hour and _ day. For other forms later on, very large steps were sometimes required, such as between one and eight days. Always, the examination began first with a hanging drop, alive. In each case, measurements then followed, which were kept track of in the simultaneously prepared culture. In this way, it was possible to identify morphological phenomena often with the aid of the micrometer, although they may a t first give a different impression of themselves.

That the apparent abundance of names for the differentiation of cyclogenetic stages is, in fact, a great savings on names, will become practically ever more noticeable the more the stages described as diverse species and even genera become recognized as cyclogenetic appearance forms of a single species. The species names of all these developmental forms then fall away and get arranged within the categories of the cyclogenetic groups. The species names for each appearance form, which are again and again useful for defining the species, get displaced by the category comprising all that is cyclogenetically pertinent and which facilitates an arrangement by groups of all biological knowledge among the species, simultaneously including all species and pertaining to all.

As we can learn from this, the knowledge that shape, physiological and biological differences can be dependent on morphological variations, is, as yet, only developing. Many Formants will prove to be Cyclostages when examined morphologically. That this needs not necessarily to be the case is shown, for instance from the excellent studies by Rosenow (comp. VI ß) on Streptococci. The five varieties which have, hereby become established, Streptococcus haemolyticus, Str. rheumaticus, Str. viridans, Str. pneumoniae, and Str. mucosus -- all must carry the name of the oldest species, according to the Priority Law and that name is Mogallia pneumoniae (Weichselb. 1886) [=Str. lanceolatus, Gamal. 1888].

In order to express the appearance form by name for systematic, morphological and practical purposes, it is recommended to append to the species name also the name of the Cyclostage in which the species happens to occur to indicate the diverse morphological appearance forms. For example: Zygostatis maximum (Miller,1892); Synascit=
Bacterium binucleatum (Swell. 1907) (only short Synascit); Microsp. comma, Schröt. Gonascit, M. comma, Schröt. Phytit (the typical form); Syncrotis buccalis (Robin) Synascit (the form of the mouth); S. buccalis (Rob.) Basit (the most frequent form in artificial cultures); Corynobacterium diphtheriae (Löffl.) Cytascit (= the typical form); C. diphtheriae (Löffl.) Phytit (= the cyclogenetic stage in which the C. pseudodiphtheriticum usually grow, therefore not being differentiable from it microscopically and in structure, being differentiable only through additional cultivation); Cor. diffidens, Enderl. Cyctascit (= stage, growing in fresh hyaline colonies); C. diffidens, Enderl. Phytit (= stage, growing in white, thick colonies); Sclerothrix tuberculosis (Koch) Phytasicit (= usual stage); S. tuberc. (Koch) Gonasciat (= stage with formation of Gonidie); S. tuberc. (Koch) Gonidie (= the condition of Gonidie); Migulanum anthracis (Koch) Sporascit (= the usual "sporogenic form"); M. anthracis (Koch) Gonascit (= the "asporogenic form").

For those cases, however, for which the presence of structural, physiological and/or biological differences cannot be proven to be Cyclostages, there remains for now only this: To append behind the name a brief statement regarding the determining Designation, or if there already is a name, to add it below the species with the designation Formant, e.g., Rosenow's Streptococcus pneumoniae (Weichs.) form haemolyticus. Or one could also use "form. " or ß" etc. Although it is not customary to give names to developmental forms, such as a larva form of insects or the fin of a tapeworm, at this point I can see no other way for reaching clarity. Presumably, with more detailed knowledge, there can be clearly defined derivations of groups and laws within the group of Formants, by which this can be avoided.

There are among the bacteria such entirely different developmental processes, compared to all higher organisms (apart from some Protozoa). This makes the systematic measuring standard quite useless. When this is already the case for the larger groups of the system, because the phylogenetic summit is recognizable only through the Culminant, this applies in a much vaster measure within the genus of the species. The Culminant of prostage Cyclostages are not at all differentiated from the Culminant of other phylogenetically low-standing species, except through the one fact that they can develop themselves under suitable external conditions (conditional factors) into the metastage Culminant. In this, the focus must be placed upon the can because one can never determine with absolute conviction whether the offered conditional factors are actually appropriate for the development of the Culminant of the relevant species.

The causative factors for Cyclogeny consist of interior causes (causal factors) and exterior causes (conditional factors).

1 Introduction by Enderlein,1916 (3) p. 405.

[Back to Top]