Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:42:25.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The feeding performance of the Ixodid Rhipicephalus appendiculatus Neum. on rabbits, cattle and other hosts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Denis Branagan
Denis Branagan
Affiliation:
East African Veterinary Research Organization, Muguga, P.O. Kabete, Kenya and Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Easier Bush, Roslin, Midlothian, Scotland*
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A study was made between 1967 and 1971 at Edinburgh University and at EAVRO, Muguga, of the variability in feeding performance of all three instars of Rhipicephalus appendiculatus Neum., with a view to better prediction of transmissions of Theileria parva. Variability could be definitely ascribed to factors within the ticks only when vigour was reduced after prolonged storage and when mating opportunity was withheld from attached females. Lower environmental temperatures prolonged engorgement, but it was arguable whether this effect was produced through the tick or through the host. All other sources of variability arose from influences within the host. The most significant of these were recognised in responses by rabbits in which resistance had been induced by successive infestations. Resistance was manifested by prolonged engorgement, by a reduction in numbers engorged and in degree of repletion, and by an increasing severity in host reaction. Three resistance mechanisms were suggested by host reactions—one appearing at the earliest stages of attachment, a second with the deposition of cement, and a third at the start of salivation. Each varied in efficacy, and each was capable of arresting an infestation. Cumulative and synergistic responses were ascribed to interactions between these mechanisms. Storage periods, sizes of infestations and sex ratios of R. appendiculatus were standardised within routine procedures, and abundant records of previous and subsequent performances on rabbits and cattle are presented for comparison and reference. Comparison of feeding performances on different animals suggests that cattle, buffalo, eland, waterbuck and oryx are as satisfactory as hosts as the rabbit, whereas Thomson's gazelle, wildebeest, sheep and goat are less so. Immature instars successfully completed engorgement on mongoose, cane rat, genet, domestic fowl and spur-fowl.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 64 , Issue 3 , November 1974 , pp. 387 - 400
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. R. (1973). Tick resistance: basophils in skin reactions of resistant guinea pigs.—Int. J. Parasitol. 3, 195–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bailey, K. P. (1960). Notes on the rearing of Rhipicephalus appendiculatus and their infection with Theileria parva for experimental transmission.—Bull. epizoot. Dis. Afr. 8, 33–34.Google Scholar
Balashov, Yu. S. (1968). Bloodsucking ticks (Ixodoidea)—vectors of diseases of man and animals.—Misc. Publ. ent. Soc. Am. 8, 376 pp. [Translation 500, Medical Zoology Dept, U.S. NAMRU, 3, Cairo, Egypt.]Google Scholar
Berenberg, J. L., Ward, P. A. & Sonenshine, D. E. (1972). Tick-bite injury: mediation by a complement-derived chemotactic factor.—J. Immun. 109, 451–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branagan, D. (1969). The maintenance of Theileria parva infections by means of the Ixodid tick Rhipicephalus appendiculatus.—Trop. Anim. Hlth Prod. 1, 119–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branagan, D. (1973 a). Observations on the development and survival of the Ixodid tick Rhipicephalus appendiculatus Neumann, 1901 under quasi-natural conditions in Kenya.—Trop. Anim. Hlth Prod. 5, 153–165.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Branagan, D. (1973 b). The developmental periods of the Ixodid tick Rhipicephalus appendiculatus Neum. under laboratory conditions.—Bull. ent. Res. 63, 155–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (1962). Second meeting of the FAO/OIE expert panel in tick-borne diseases of livestock, Cairo. Report AN 1962/10. 72 pp.Google Scholar
Gregson, J. D. (1970). Antigenic properties of tick secretions.—J. Parasit. 56, 1038–1039.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoogstraal, H. (1956). African Ixodoidea. 1. Ticks of the Sudan, with special reference to Equatoria Province and with preliminary reviews of the genera Boophilus, Margaropus and Hyalomma.—1101 pp. Washington, D.C., United States Department of the Navy, Bureau of Medicine and Surgery. Research Report No. NM 005 050.29.07.Google Scholar
Irvin, A. D., Purnell, R. E. & Peirce, M. A. (1973). Some observations on the feeding behaviour of the tick Rhipicephalus appendiculatus (Neumann, 1901) on cattle and rabbits in the laboratory.—Trop. Anim. Hlth Prod. 5, 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kheisin, E. M. & Lavrenenko, L. E. (1956). Duration of bloodsucking and diurnal rhythm of feeding and detachment of Ixodes ricinus L. females.—Zool. Zh. 35, 379–383. [In Russian.]Google Scholar
Lees, A. D. (1946). The water balance in Ixodes ricinus L. and certain other species of ticks.—Parasitology 37, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moorhouse, D. E. & Tatchell, R. J. (1966). The feeding processes of the cattle-tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini): a study in host-parasite relations. Part 1. Attachment to the host.—Parasitology 56, 623–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newson, R. M., Mella, P. N. P. & Franklin, T. E. (1973). Observations on the numbers of the tick Rhipicephalus appendiculatus on the ears of Zebu cattle in relation to hierarchical status in the herd.—Trop. Anim. Hlth Prod. 5, 281–283.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Riek, R. F. (1962). Studies on the reactions of animals to infestation with ticks. VI. Resistance of cattle to infestation with the tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini).—Aust. J. agric. Res. 13, 532–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. (1968 a). Acquisition by the host of resistance to the cattle tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini).—J. Parasit. 54, 657–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. (1968 b). Resistance of cattle to the tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). I. Development of ticks on Bos taurus.—J. Parasit. 54, 663–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. (1968 c). Resistance of cattle to the tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). II. Stages of the life-cycle of the parasite against which resistance is manifest.—J. Parasit. 54, 667–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tatchell, R. J. & Bennett, G. F. (1969). Boophilus microplus: antihistaminic and tranquilising drugs and cattle resistance.—Expl Parasit. 26, 369–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trager, W. (1939). Acquired immunity to ticks.—J. Parasit. 25, 57–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeoman, G. H. & Walker, J. B. (1967). The Ixodid ticks of Tanzania. A study of the zoogeography of the Ixodidae of an East African country.—215 pp. London, Commonwealth Institute of Entomology.Google Scholar
Young, A. S., Branagan, D., Brown, C. G. D., Burridge, M. J., Cunningham, M. P. & Purnell, R. E. (1973). Preliminary observations on a theilerial species pathogenic to cattle isolated from buffalo (Syncerus caffer) in Tanzania.—Br. vet. J. 129, 382–389.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed