Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T01:57:37.055Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Immunological Studies on Experimental Infection of Pigs with Ascaris suum Goeze, 1782. III.—The Antibody Response and Acquired Immunity*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2009

L. F. Taffs
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Pathology, School of Veterinary Medicine, Cambridge

Extract

Two experiments are described in which antibodies against A. suum were detected in the circulation of infected pigs by means of the conglutinating complement absorption test. The pattern and nature of the antibody response was studied. In 21 out of 24 cases the sera antibody titres rose after test doses of infective eggs were given, and on 18 of these occasions a rise in titre was observed within seven days. Following infection two peaks of antibody were detected. At three to four weeks the antibody content of the serum reached its highest concentration, and a further rise was apparent between the 37th and 56th days.

The phenomenon of “self-cure” was demonstrated following reinfection. This was manifested by a depression of the egg count and the elimination of Ascaris worms from the intestine, with a concomitant rise in the antibody content of the serum.

In three out of five pigs which were initially infected, the infection became patent between the 51st and 58th days. On only one occasion out of thirteen were any superimposed larvae able to reach maturity.

Pigs which had been previously infected exhibited resistance to a challenge dose. This was shown by (1) the absence of clinical signs, (2) a resistance to larval migration, and (3) an inhibition of larval growth. In this demonstration of an active acquired immunity to A. suum infection in pigs, a correlation between resistance and high sera titres was observed.

Type
Research Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1964

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

Lapage, G. and Muncey, D. W., 1952.—“Veterinary parasitology”, 1950. p. 104. Oliver and Boyd, London.Google Scholar
Loughlin, E. H. and Stoll, N. R., 1946.—“An efficient concentration method (AEX) for detecting helminthic ova in faeces (modification of the Telemann technic).” Amcr. J. trop. Med., 26. 517527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roberts, F. H. S., 1934.—“The large roundworm of pigs, Ascaris lumbricoides L., 1758. Its life history in Queensland, economic importance and control.” Bull. Animal Hlth. Sta. Yeerongpilly, Australia, No. 1.Google Scholar
Stoll, N. R., 1923.—“Investigations on the control of hookworm disease. XV. An effective method of counting hookworm eggs in faeces.” Amer. J. Hyg., 3, 5970.Google Scholar
Stoll, N. R., 1929.—“Studies with the strongyloid nematode, Haemonchus contortus.” Amer. J. Hyg., 10, 384418.Google Scholar
Taffs, L. F., 1961a.—“The in vitro action of immune pig serum on second- and third-stage Ascaris suum larvae.” Parasitology, 51, 327334.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taffs, L. F., 1961 b.—“Immunological studies on experimental infection of pigs with Ascaris suum Goeze, 1782. I. An introduction with a review of the literature and the demonstration of complement-fixing antibodies in the serum.” J. Helminth., 35, 319344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taffs, L. F., 1963.—“Immunological studies on experimental infection of pigs with Ascaris suum, 1782. II. The use of the conglutinating complement absorption test for the demonstration of Ascaris antibody. J. Helminth., 37, 309380.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wharton, L. D., 1915.—“The development of the eggs of Ascaris lumbricoides.” Phillip. J. Sci. Sect. B. trop. Med., 10, 1923.Google Scholar
White, E. G., 1941.—“Chronic focal interstitial hepatitis in the pig.” Vet. J., 97, 155172.Google Scholar
Yoshida, S., 1919.—“On the development of Ascaris lumbricoides L.J. Parasit., 5, 105115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar