Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T03:20:59.926Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Immunological effects and productivity variation of red mite (Dermanyssus gallinae) on laying hens- implications for egg production and quality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2007

S. Arkle ,
J.H. Guy  and
O. Sparagano
S. Arkle*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
J.H. Guy
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
O. Sparagano
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Abstract Red mite (Dermanyssus gallinae; De Geer, 1778) is currently one of the most detrimental ectoparasites in laying birds across several countries. Symptoms of D. gallinae infestation include reduction in production, poor egg quality, increased mortality and also a compromise to welfare. Feeding on its host for only short periods of time, the red mite spends the vast proportion of its short life-cycle hidden deep within the house substructure. For this reason, it is the preference of red mite to occupy free range or barn systems as opposed to caged, since a greater number of potential hiding places can be sought. A problem which will therefore be amplified within the EU with the impending ban on production in laying cages. This, in conjunction with concern over resistance to acaricides, toxicity risks and acaricide withdrawal, make control particularly problematic and financially draining for producers. Therefore alternative methods must be sought, such as vaccine development. However, in order for this to be achieved, an understanding of mite antigenicity must first be established.

Thus, the purpose of this study was to assess immunological response of humeral antibodies to naturally occurring mite antigens, using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and SDS-PAGE. Antibodies were derived from egg yolk and blood sera which were collected from commercial laying farms across the UK with varying levels of red mite infestation and using different production systems (caged, barn and free range). In addition, mites were trapped and counted periodically so as to follow population dynamics over a flock lifespan in conjunction with a series of production measures (Laying percentage, eggs per bird per week, mortality and temperature). The results describe the effect of red mite infestation on production parameters, immunological response and the relationship between them.

Keywords

red miteDermanyssus gallinaevaccineimmunologyIgY
Type
Reviews
Information
World's Poultry Science Journal , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , June 2006 , pp. 249 - 257
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2006

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

Arkle, S., Blackett, S.M., Guy, J.H. and Sparagano, O. (2004) Variation in the population of Dermanyssus gallinae in a free range laying unit and effectiveness of control. British Poultry Science 45: Supplement 1: S45–S46 (Abstr).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arasteh, N., Aminirissehei, A.H., Yousif, A.N., Albright, L.J. and Durance, T.D. (2004) Passive immunisation of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) with chicken immunoglobulins (IgY). Aquaculture 231: 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axtell, R.C. and Arends, J.J. (1990) Ecology and management of arthropod pests of poultry. Annual Review of Entomology 35: 101–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Butler, J.E., Feldbush, T.L., Mcgivern, P.L. and Stewart, N. (1978) The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA): a measure of antibody concentration or affinity? Immunochemistry 15: 131–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bruneau, A., Dernburg, A., Chauve, C. and Zenner, L. (2001). First in vitro cycle of the chicken mite, Dermanyssus gallinae (De Geer 1778), utilising an artificial feeding device. Parasitology 123: 583–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chauve, C. (1998) The poultry red mite Dermanyssus gallinae (De Geer, 1778) Current situation and future prospects for control. Veterinary Parasitology 79: 239–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chirico, J. and Tauson, R. (2002) Traps containing acaricides for the control of Dermanyssus gallinae. Veterinary Parasitology 110: 109–116CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cosoroaba, I. (2001). Massive Dermanyssus gallinae invasion in battery-husbandry raised fowls. Revue de Médecine Vétérinaire 152 (1): 89–96.Google Scholar
Devaney, J.A. and Augustine, P.C. (1987) Correlation of estimated and actual northern fowl mite populations with the evolution of specific antibody at low molecular weight polypeptide in the sera of infested hens. Poultry Science 67: 549–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, J.H., Khajavi, M., Hlalele, M.M. and Sparagano, O. (2004) Red mite (Dermanyssus gallinae) prevalence in laying units in Northern England. British Poultry Science 45: Supplement 1: S15 (Abstr).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karlsson, M., Kollberg, H. and Larsson, A. (2004) Chicken IgY: utilizing the evolutionary advantage. World's Poultry Science Journal 60: 341–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilpinen, O. (2001) Activation of the poultry red mite, Dermanyssus gallinae (Acari: Dermanyssidae), by increasing temperatures. Experimental and Applied Acarology 25: 859–867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkwood, A.C. (1967) Anaemia in poultry infested with red mite Dermanyssus gallinae. The Veterinary Record 80 (17): 514–516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laemmli, U.K. (1970) Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 227: 680–685.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, S., Kim, J. and Jee, C. (2002) Immune effects on the somatic antigens against Dermanyssus gallinae and Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus in chicken. Korean Journal of Veterinary Research 42(2): 253–260.Google Scholar
Mohammed, H.O., Yamamoto, R., Carpenter, T.E. and Ortmayer, H.B. (1986). Comparison of egg yolk and serum for the detection of Mycoplasma gallisepticum and M. synoviae antibodies by ELISA. Avian Diseases 30: 398–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nix, J. (2005) Farm management pocket book. 35th Edition. White Horse Press Ltd. Whitstable, UK, pp 244.Google Scholar
Nordenfors, H., Höglund, J. and Uggla, A. (1999) Effects of temperature and humidity on oviposition, moulting and longevity of Dermanyssus gallinae (Acari: Dermanyssidae). Journal of Medical Entomology 36: 68–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, W.D. and Pettit, D.M. (2004). Immunization against sheep scab: preliminary identification of fractions of Psoroptes ovis which confer protective effects. Parasite Immunology 26: 307–314.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willadsen, P. (1999) Immunological control of ectoparasites: past achievements and future research priorities. Genetic Analysis: Biomolecular Engineering 15: 131–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wojcik, A.R., Grygon-Franckiewicz, B., Zbikowska, E. and Wasielewski, L. (2000) Invasion of Dermanyssus gallinae (De Geer, 1778) in poultry farms in the Torun Region. Polish Parasitological Society 46(4): 511–515.Google Scholar