Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:16:23.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chickens and pigs as transport hosts for Ascaris, Trichuris and Oesophagostomum eggs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2001

A. OLSEN ,
A. PERMIN  and
A. ROEPSTORFF
A. OLSEN
Affiliation:
Danish Bilharziasis Laboratory, Jaegersborg Allé 1D, 2920 Charlottenlund, Denmark
A. PERMIN
Affiliation:
Network for Production and Health of Poultry in Developing Countries, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Bülowsvej 15, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Copenhagen, Denmark Danish Centre for Experimental Parasitology, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Ridebanevej 3, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Copenhagen, Denmark
A. ROEPSTORFF
Affiliation:
Danish Centre for Experimental Parasitology, The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Ridebanevej 3, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Copenhagen, Denmark
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ten chickens and 2 pigs were fed non-embryonated eggs of Ascaris suum, Trichuris suis and Oesophagostomum dentatum. Each chicken was fed approximately 15000 eggs of each parasite species while approximately 300000 eggs were given to each of the pigs. After passage in chickens 8.3% of O. dentatum eggs were recovered in faeces compared to 61.1% and 41.6% of A. suum and T. suis eggs, respectively. After passage in pigs the percentages were 38.4%, 49.1% and 30.3%, respectively. After embryonation in the laboratory, 1000 eggs of each parasite species having passed through chickens or pigs or having been kept in the laboratory as controls were fed to groups of 6 pigs to check the infectivity. The number of A. suum recovered from pigs was similar in the 3 groups with 34.0, 52.8 and 41.8%, respectively. The recovery of T. suis in the pig passage group was 54.0% which was significantly lower than the recovery in the chicken passage group (81.8%) and the laboratory group (88.0%). The number of O. dentatum recovered was not significantly different among the 3 experimental groups, the percentage recovery being 30.5, 9.2 and 28.5%, respectively. One explanation for the lower infectivity of T. suis in the pig passage group may be that the eggs have been sublethally damaged through their passage. The results demonstrate that chickens and pigs can act as transport hosts for A. suum, T. suis and O. dentatum, and it is highly probable that these domestic animals are able to act also as transport hosts for the human parasite equivalents. This will have important consequences for the environmental and behavioural strategies in human helminth control programmes.

Keywords

chickenspigstransport hostsAscaris suumTrichuris suisOesophagostomum dentatum
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 123 , Issue 3 , March 2001 , pp. 325 - 330
Copyright
© 2002 Cambridge University Press

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

ACKERT, J. E. (1922). Investigations on the control of hookworm disease. IV. The relation of the domestic chicken to the spread of hookworm disease. American Journal of Hygiene 2, 26–38.Google Scholar
ACKERT, J. E. & PAYNE, F. K. (1922). Investigations on the control of hookworm disease. V. The domestic pig and hookworm dissemination. American Journal of Hygiene 2, 39–50.Google Scholar
BOES, J., NANSEN, P. & STEPHENSON, L. (1997). False-positive Ascaris suum egg counts in pigs. International Journal for Parasitology 27, 833–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BOES, J., JOHANSEN, M. V., ERIKSEN, L., BøGH, H. O., NANSEN, P. & STEPHENSON, L. S. (1998). False-positive Trichuris suis egg counts in pigs in relation to coprophagia. Parasite 5, 91–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BUNDY, D. A. P. & COOPER, E. S. (1989). Trichuris and trichuriasis in humans. Advances in Parasitology 28, 107–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
BURDEN, D. J. & HAMMET, N. C. (1976). A comparison of the infectivity of Trichuris suis ova embryonated by four different methods. Veterinary Parasitology 2, 307–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CHANDLER, A. C. (1924). Animals as disseminators of hookworm eggs and larvae. The Indian Medical Gazette 59, 533–537.Google Scholar
CROMPTON, D. W. T. (1989). Biology of Ascaris lumbricoides. In Ascariasis and its Prevention and Control (ed. CROMPTON, D. W. T. NESHEIM, M. C. &PAWLOWSKI, Z. S.), pp. 9–44. Taylor & Francis, London.
JONES, H. I. (1976). The role of pigs in the dissemination of Ascaris and hookworm infections in Papua New Guinea. Papua New Guinea Medical Journal 19, 153–155.Google Scholar
MINGA, U. M., KATULE, A. M., MAEDA, T. & MUSASA, J. (1989). Potential and problems of the traditional chicken industry in Tanzania. In Proceedings of the Seventh Tanzania Veterinary Association Scientific Conference, Arusha, Tanzania, December 1989.Google Scholar
OTTO, G. F., CORT, W. W. & KELLER, A. E. (1931). Environmental studies of families in Tennessee infested with Ascaris, Trichuris and hookworm. American Journal of Hygiene 14, 156–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PERMIN, A. & HANSEN, J. W. (1998). Epidemiology, diagnosis and control of poultry parasites. A FAO Animal Health Manual, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
PERMIN, A., HENNINGSEN, E., MURRELL, K. D., ROEPSTORFF, A. & NANSEN, P. (2000). Establishment of Ascaris suum larvae in pigs fed A. suum-infected chicken liver and lungs. International Journal for Parasitology 30, 867–868.Google Scholar
POLDERMAN, A. M & BLOTKAMP, J. (1995). Oesophagostomum infections in humans. Parasitology Today 11, 451–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROEPSTORFF, A., BJøRN, H. & NANSEN, P. (1987). Resistance of Oesophagostomum spp. in pigs to pyrantel citrate. Veterinary Parasitology 24, 229–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROEPSTORFF, K. & MURRELL, K. D. (1997). Transmission dynamics of helminth parasites of pigs on continuous pasture: Ascaris suum and Trichuris suis. International Journal for Parasitology 27, 563–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROEPSTORFF, A., ERIKSEN, L., SLOTVED, H.-C. & NANSEN, P. (1997). Experimental Ascaris suum infection in the pig: worm population kinetics following single inoculations with three doses of infective eggs. Parasitology 12, 443–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ROEPSTORFF, A. & NANSEN, P. (1998). Epidemiology, diagnosis and control of helminth parasites in swine. A FAO Animal Health Manual, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
SLOTVED, H. C., BARNES, E. H., BJORN, H., CHRISTENSEN, C. M., ERIKSEN, L., ROEPSTORFF, A. & NANSEN, P. (1996). Recovery of Oesophagostomum dentatum from pigs by isolation of parasites migrating from large intestinal contents embedded in agar-gel. Veterinary Parasitology 63, 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SLOTVED, H. C., BARNES, E. H., ERIKSEN, L., ROEPSTORFF, A., NANSEN, P. & BJORN, H. (1997). Use of agar-gel technique for large scale application to recover Ascaris suum larvae from intestinal contents of pigs. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 38, 207–212.Google Scholar
STEENHARD, N. R., STOREY, P. A., YELIFARI, L., PIT, D. S. S., NANSEN, P. & POLDERMAN, A. M. (2000). The role of pigs as transport hosts of the human helminths Oesophagostomum bifurcum and Necator americanus. Acta Tropica 76, 125–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
STOLTZFUS, R. J. & DREYFUSS, M. L. (1998). Guidelines for the Use of Iron Supplements to Prevent and Treat Iron Deficiency Anemia. INACG/WHO/UNICEF, Washington, DC.