Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T02:07:53.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Comparative Susceptibility of Lymnaea natalensis (Kraus) and L. rufescens (Gray) to Infection with Fasciola gigantica (West African strain) and the Tissue Responses in the Snails

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2009

M. P. Chandra Rao
M. P. Chandra Rao
Affiliation:
Central Veterinary Laboratory, Weybridge*
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Observations on infection and the development of F. gigantica (W. African strain) in the susceptible L. natalensis and in the less susceptible mature L. rufescens (from Pakistan) and the histological study of the two species of snails at various stages of development of the contained parasite, revealed that,

The miracidia appeared to take a longer time to start penetrating the less susceptible host.

There was no significant tissue reaction even in L. rufescens to the development of the sporocysts. The development of the sporocysts which were embedded in denser tissues of the snails was apparently retarded in both the species of snail.

Type
Research Papers
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 40 , Issue 1-2 , June 1966 , pp. 131 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

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

Brooks, C. P., 1953.—“A comparative study of S. mansoni in Tropicorbis havanensis and Australorbis glabratus”. J. Parasit., 39, 195–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chia-Tung Pan, , 1963.—“Generalised and focal tissue responses in the snail A. glabratus infected with S. mansoni.” Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 113 Art. 1, 475–485.Google Scholar
Dinnik, J. A. and Dinnik, M. N., 1956.—“Observations on the succession of redial generations of F. gigantica Cobbold in a snail host.” Z. Tropenmed. Parasit., 7, 397–419.Google Scholar
Faust, E. C., 1924.—“The reactions of the miracidia of Schistosoma japonicum and S. haematobium in the presence of their intermediate hosts.” J. Parasit, 10, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Files, V. S. and Cram, E. B., 1949.—“A study on the comparative susceptibility of snail vectors to strains of Schistosoma mansoni”, J. Parasit., 35, 555–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hubendick, B., 1951.—“Recent Lymnaeidae.” K. Svenska Vetensk Akad. Handl., 3, 1.Google Scholar
Kendall, S. B., 1949a.—“L. stagnalis as an intermediate host of F. hepatica”. Nature, Loud., 163, 880–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendall, S. B., 1949b.—“Nutritional factors affecting the rate of development of F. hepatica in L. truncatula”. J. Helminth., 23, 179–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendall, S. B., 1950.—“Snail hosts of F. hepatica in Britain”. J. Helminth., 24, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendall, S. B., 1960.—“Epidemiology and control of Fascioliasis.” Acta vet. hung., 10, 1–12.Google Scholar
Newton, W. L., 1952.—“The comparative tissue reaction of two strains of A. glabratus to infection with S. mansoni”. J. Parasit., 38, 362–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarwar, M. M., 1957.—“Fasciola indica Varma, a synonym of Fasciola gigantica Cobbold.” Biologia Lahore 3, 168–175.Google Scholar
Sudds, R. H. Jr, 1960.—“Observations of Schistosome miracidial behaviour in the presence of normal and abnormal snail hosts and subsequent tissue studies of these hosts”. J. Elisha Mitchell Scient. Soc., 76, 121–133.Google Scholar
Tripp, M. R., 1963.—“Cellular responses of Mollusks.” Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., 113, Art. 1, 467–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar