Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T03:59:08.635Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An evaluation of three sampling methods to monitor a digenetic trematode Centrocestus formosanus in a spring-fed ecosystem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2013

VALENTIN CANTU ,
THOMAS M. BRANDT  and
THOMAS L. ARSUFFI
VALENTIN CANTU*
Affiliation:
San Marcos Aquatic Resource Center, 500 East McCarty Lane, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA
THOMAS M. BRANDT
Affiliation:
San Marcos Aquatic Resource Center, 500 East McCarty Lane, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA
THOMAS L. ARSUFFI
Affiliation:
Llano River Field Station, Texas Tech University, P.O. Box 186, Junction, TX 76849, USA
*
*Corresponding author: San Marcos Aquatic Resource Center, 500 East McCarty Lane, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA. Tel: 512-353-0011 ext. 225. Fax: 512-353-0856. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Centrocestus formosanus is a digenetic trematode from Asia that parasitizes multiple hosts and is a concern in the Comal River, Texas, USA, because of its negative effects on the endangered fountain darter Etheostoma fonticola. To determine a practical sampling method to monitor C. formosanus in the Comal River, we evaluated three sampling methods using wild-caught fish, caged fish reared in the laboratory, and cercariometry. Cercariometry detected significant spatial and temporal patterns of cercarial density in river water that were similar with metacercarial intensity in caged fish, but inconsistent with metacercarial intensity in wild-caught fish. Our results also showed a positive correlation between cercarial density in river water and metacercarial intensity in caged fish. Conversely, the relationship was not significant between cercarial density and metacercarial intensity in wild-caught fish. Because cercariometry predicted similar trends with the caged fountain darter sampling method, cercariometry was useful in predicting C. formosanus gill infections, infection rate, and longevity in infected fountain darters. Although trends from cercariometry and caged fish sampling methods were similar, we recommend cercariometry because it was less expensive to use given the amount of sampling effort required and provides trends that can be used to make pro-active management decisions in C. formosanus-infested aquatic ecosystems.

Keywords

Centrocestus formosanusEtheostoma fonticolacercarial densityintensityprevalenceinfection ratecercariometry
Type
Parasitology Express
Information
Parasitology , Volume 140 , Issue 7 , June 2013 , pp. 814 - 820
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

REFERENCES

Alcaraz, G., Perez-Ponce de Leon, G., Garcia, L., Leon-Regagnon, V. and Vanegas, C. (1999). Respiratory responses of grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella (Cyprinidae) to parasitic infection by Centrocestus formosanus (Digenea). Southwestern Naturalist 44, 222–226.Google Scholar
Balasuriya, L. K. S. W. (1988). A study on the metacercarial cysts of a Centrocestus species (Digenea: Heterophyidae) occurring on the gills of cultured cyprinid fishes in Sri Lanka. Journal of Inland Fish 4, 3–10.Google Scholar
Blazer, V. S. and Gratzek, J. B. (1985). Cartilage proliferation in response to metacercarial infections of fish gills. Journal of Comparative Pathology 95, 273–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandt, T. M., Graves, K. G., Berkhouse, C. S., Simon, T. P. and Whiteside, B. G. (1993). Laboratory spawning and rearing of the endangered fountain darter. Progressive Fish-Culturist 55, 149–156.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cantu, V. (2003). Spatial and temporal distribution of Centrocestus formosanus in river water and endangered fountain darters (Etheostoma fonticola) in the Comal River, Texas. Master's thesis, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas.Google Scholar
Fahlquist, L. and Slattery, R. N. (1997). Water quality assessment of the Comal Springs riverine system, New Braunfels, Texas, 1993–94: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 099–97, 6. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/Fs09997/ current as of 21 December 2011.Google Scholar
Fleming, B. P., Huffman, D. G., Bonner, T. H. and Brandt, T. M. (2011). Metacercarial distribution of Centrocestus formosanus among fish hosts in the Guadalupe River Drainage of Texas. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 23, 117–124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
George, W. O. (1952). Geology and ground-water resources of Comal County, Texas: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1138.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. S., Bolick, A., Alexander, M., Oborny, E. and Monroe, A. (2012). Fluctuations in densities of the invasive gill parasite Centrocestus formosanus (Trematoda: Heterophyidae) in the Comal River, Comal County, Texas, USA. Journal of Parasitology 98, 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knott, K. E. and Murray, H. D. (1991). Mystery fluke in Melanoides tuberculata (Gastropoda: Thiaridae) in the San Antonio Zoo, San Antonio, Texas. Combined Annual Meetings, Western Society of Malacologists and American Malacological Union, parasites in Cuba. Malacological Review 23, 47–52.Google Scholar
Kuhlman, T. A. (2007). The predominant definitive avian hosts of the invasive Asian trematode, Centrocestus formosanus, in the headwaters of the Comal, San Antonio, and San Marcos rivers of Central Texas. Master's thesis, Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas.Google Scholar
Madhavi, R. (1986). Distribution of metacercariae of Centrocestus formosanus (Trematode: Heterophyidae) on the gills of Aplocheilus panchax. Journal of Fish Biology 29, 685–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDermott, K. (2000). Distribution and infection relationships of an undescribed digenetic trematode, its exotic intermediate host, and endangered fishes in springs of west Texas. Master's thesis, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas.Google Scholar
McDonald, D. L., Bonner, T. H., Brandt, T. M. and Trevino, G. H. (2006). Size susceptibility to trematode-induced mortality in the endangered fountain darter Etheostoma fonticola. Journal of Freshwater Ecology 21, 293–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, A. J., Salmon, M. J., Huffman, D. G., Goodwin, A. E. and Brandt, T. M. (2000). Prevalence and pathogenicity of a heterophyid trematode infecting the gills of an endangered fish, the fountain darter, in two central Texas spring-fed rivers. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 12, 283–289.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prentice, M. A. (1984). A field-evolved differential filtration method for recovery of schistosome cercariae. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 78, 117–127.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prentice, M. A. and Ouma, J. H. (1984). Field comparison of mouse immersion and cercariometry for assessing the transmission potential of water containing cercariae of Schistosoma mansoni. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 78, 169–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salmon, M. (2000). Impact of an undescribed heterophyid trematode on the fountain darter Etheostoma fonticola. Master's thesis, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, Texas.Google Scholar
Scholz, T. and Salgado-Maldonado, G. (2000). The introduction and dispersal of Centrocestus formosanus (Nishigori, 1924) (Digenea: Heterophyidae) in Mexico: a review. American Midland Naturalist 143, 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stables, J. N. and happell, L. H. (1986). Diplostomum spathaceum (Rud. 1819): effects of physical factors on the infection of rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) by cercariae. Parasitology 93, 71–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Theron, A. (1979). A differential filtration technique for the measurement of Schistosome cercarial densities in standing waters. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 57, 971–975.Google ScholarPubMed
Theron, A. (1986). Cercariometry and the epidemiology of schistosomiasis. Parasitology Today 2, 61–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
USFWS (United States Fish and Wildlife Service) (1996). San Marcos/Comal (Revised) Recovery Plan. Albuquerque, New Mexico.Google Scholar
Yamaguti, S. (1975). A Synoptical Review of Life Histories of Digenetic Trematodes of Vertebrates. p. 590. Keigaku Publishing Co., Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar