Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T09:07:16.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental Infections of Cattle with Fasciola hepatica: The production of an acquired self cure by challenge infection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

J. G. Ross
J. G. Ross
Affiliation:
Veterinary Research Division, The Farm, Stormont, Belfast
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Experiments are described in which calves were given 200 metacercariae and then a challenge infection of 300 metacercariae. When the challenge infection was given 3 weeks after the initial infection a small but insignificant reduction in take was observed. When the challenge infection followed 18 weeks after the initial infection, the existing infection was eliminated. This phenomenon is referred to as an “acquired self cure”.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 41 , Issue 2-3 , June 1967 , pp. 223 - 228
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1967

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

Bugge, G., 1927.—“Comparable investigations into fascioliasis in cattle and sheep.” Tierärztl. Resch. 33, 833–38.Google Scholar
Dawes, B. and Hughes, D. L., 1964.—“Fascioliasis: the invasive stages of Fasciola hepatica in mammalian hosts.” Advances in Parasitology, (2), 97–108. Ac. Press. London and New York.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dixon, K. E., 1964.—“The relative suitability of sheep and cattle as hosts for the liver fluke. Fasciola hepatica.” J. Helminth., 38, 203–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durban, C. G., 1952.—“Longevity of the liver fluke, Fasciola hepatica, in sheep.” Proc. helm. Soc. Wash., 19, 120.Google Scholar
Facey, R. U. and Marsden, P. D., 1960.—“Fascioliasis in man: An outbreak in Hampshire”. Br. med. J., 2, 019–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, B. Z., 1905.—“Fasciola hepatica in the laboratory white mouse”. J. Parasit., 51, 22.Google Scholar
Michel, R. L., 1952.—“Inhibition of development of Trichostrongyhts retortaeformis”. Nature, Lond., 169, 933–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ross, J. G., 1905.—“Experimental infections of cattle with Fasciola hepatica: A comparison of low and high infection rates”, Nature, Lond., 208, 907.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. G., 1966a.—“Studies of immunity to Fasciola hepatica. Naturally acquired immunity in rabbits”, Br. vet. J., 122, 209–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. G., 1966 b.—“Studies of immunity to Fasciola hepatica. Naturally acquired immunity in cattle”. (In Preparation).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. G., 1966 c.—“An abattoir survey of cattle liver infections with Fasciola hepatica”. Br. vet. J., 122, 489–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. G., Todd, J. R. and Dow., C, 1966.—“Single experimental infections of calves with the liver fluke Fasciola hepatica (Linnaeus, 1958)”. J. comb. Path., 76, 07–81.Google Scholar
Srivastava, H. D., Muralidhavam, S. R. G. and Dutt, S. C., 1964.—“Pathology of experimental infections of Schistosoma indicum, Montgomery (1900), to young sheep”. Ind. J. vet. Sci., 34, 35–40.Google Scholar
Stoll, N. R., 1929.—“Studies of the strongyloid ncmatodc Haemonchus contortus. I. Acquired resistance of hosts under natural reinfection conditions out of doors”. Am. J. Hyg., 10, 384.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. W., 1961.—“Liver fluke infection in man”. Lancet, 2, 1334–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Urquhart, G. M., Jarrett, W. F. H. and Mulligan, W., 1962.—“Helminth immunity”. Adv. vet. Set., 7, 87–129.Google Scholar