Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:22:40.367Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eimeria necatrix: the development and characteristics of an egg-adapted (attenuated) line

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

M. W. Shirley
M. W. Shirley
Affiliation:
Houghton Poultry Research Station, Houghton, Huntingdon, Cambs. PE17 2DA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Sporozoites of Eimeria necatrix inoculated into the allantoic cavities of embryonating eggs completed their life-cycle in the chorio-allantoic membranes and produced fully viable oocysts. Subsequently, as a result of repeated passage in this host, an egg-adapted line was developed and was found to be markedly less pathogenic for chickens than the nonpassaged parent strain. Antigens capable of inducing protective immunity against challenge with low doses of the parent strain were retained, however, indicating a possible use for this egg-adapted (attenuated) line of E. necatrix in the immunization of comercially reared chickens.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 81 , Issue 3 , December 1980 , pp. 525 - 535
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

Carter, R. (1973). Enzyme variation in Plasmodium berghei and Plasmodium vinckei. Parasitology 66, 297–307.Google Scholar
Cooper, D. M. & Timms, J. R. (1972). The rearing and maintenance of breeding chickens in isolators. I. Glassfibre isolators. Avian Pathology 1, 45–57.Google Scholar
Davies, S. F. M. (1956). Intestinal coccidiosis in chickens caused by Eimeria necatrix. Veterinary Record 68, 853–7.Google Scholar
Horton-Smith, C. & Long, P. L. (1959). The effects of different anticoccidial agents on the intestinal coccidioses of the fowl. Journal of Comparative Pathology and Therapeutics 69, 192–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L. (1966). The growth of some species of Eimeria in avian embryos. Parasitology 56, 575–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L. (1970 a). Some factors affecting the severity of infection with Eimeria tenella in chicken embryos. Parasitology 60, 435–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L. (1970 b). Eimeria tenella: chemotherapeutic studies in chick embryos with a description of a new method (chorioallantoic membrane foci counts) for evaluating infections. Zeitschrift für Parasitenkunde 33, 329–38.Google Scholar
Long, P. L. (1972 a). Eimeria mivati: reproduction, pathogenicity and immunogenicity of a strain maintained in chick embryos by serial passage. Journal of Comparative Pathology 82, 439–45.Google Scholar
Long, P. L. (1972 b). Eimeria tenella: reproduction, pathogenicity and immunogenicity of a strain maintained in chick embryos by serial passage. Journal of Comparative Pathology 82, 429–37.Google Scholar
Long, P. L. (1974). The growth of Eimeria in cultured cells and in chicken embryos: a review. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Coccidia and related Organisms, Guelph, Ontario, 1973, pp. 57–82. London, Ontario: Murray Kelly Printing.Google Scholar
Long, P. L., Joyner, L. P., Millard, B. J. & Norton, C. C. (1976). A guide to laboratory techniques used in the study and diagnosis of avian coccidiosis. Folia Veterinaria Latina 6, 201–17.Google Scholar
Long, P. L. & Millard, B. J. (1977). Eimeria: immunisation of young chickens kept in litter pens. Avian Pathology 6, 77–92.Google Scholar
Long, P. L., Millard, B. J. & Shirley, M. W. (1977). Strain variation within Eimeria meleagrimitis from the turkey. Parasitology 75, 177–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michael, E. & Hodges, R. D. (1972). The pathogenic effects of Eimeria necatrix: a comparison of single and repeated infections. Veterinary Record 91, 258–62.Google Scholar
Rose, M. E. & Long, P. L. (1962). Immunity to four species of Eimeria in fowls. Immunology 5, 79–92.Google Scholar
Ryley, J. F. & Betts, M. J. (1973). Chemotherapy of chicken coccidiosis. Advances in Pharmacology and Chemotherapy 11, 221–93.Google Scholar
Shibalova, T. A. (1972). Cultivation of chicken coccidia in chick embryos. II. Experiments with Eimeria brunetti, E. necatrix, E. praecox, E. mitis, E. acervulina and E. maxima. Acta Protozoologica 9, 299–303.Google Scholar
Shirley, M. W. (1975). Enzyme variation in Eimeria species of the chicken. Parasitology 71, 369–76.Google Scholar
Shirley, M. W. (1978). Electrophoretic variants of phosphoglucomutase in different species and strains of Eimeria from the chicken. In Avian Coccidiosis (ed. Long, P. L., Boorman, K. N. and Freeman, B. M.), pp. 127–34. Edinburgh: British Poultry Science Ltd.Google Scholar
Shirley, M. W. & Lee, D. L. (1977). Isoelectric focusing of coccidial enzymes. Journal of Parasitology 63, 390–2.Google Scholar
Shirley, M. W., Millard, B. J. & Long, P. L. (1977). Studies on the growth, chemotherapy and enzyme variation of Eimeria acervulina var. diminuta and E. acervulina var. mivati. Parasitology 75, 165–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shirley, M. W. & Rollinson, D. (1979). Coccidia: the recognition and characterisation of populations of Eimeria. In Problems in the Identification of Parasites and their Vectors, vol. 17, pp. 7–30. Oxford, London, Edinburgh and Melbourne: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Tyzzer, E. E., Theiler, H. & Jones, E. E. (1932). Coccidiosis in gallinaceous birds. II. A comparative study of species of Eimeria of the chicken. American Journal of Hygiene 15, 319–93.Google Scholar