Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T04:24:09.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of immunity on the early events in the life-cycle of Eimeria tenella in the caecal mucosa of the chicken

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

M. Elaine Rose ,
A. M. Lawn  and
B. J. Millard
M. Elaine Rose
Affiliation:
Houghton Poultry Research Station, Houghton, Huntingdon, Cambs. PE17 2DA
A. M. Lawn
Affiliation:
Houghton Poultry Research Station, Houghton, Huntingdon, Cambs. PE17 2DA
B. J. Millard
Affiliation:
Houghton Poultry Research Station, Houghton, Huntingdon, Cambs. PE17 2DA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A comparison was made between the early events (a sexual stages) in the life-cycle of Eimeria tenella in specifically immunized and control chickens. Particular attention was paid to the quantitative aspects and to the transport of sporozoites within intra-epithelial lymphocytes (IEL) from the enterocytes of the surface epithelium to the enterocytes of the crypts. There was a moderate decrease in the number of parasites initially seen in the mucosa of the immune birds, suggesting that some of the effects of immunity are exerted before penetration of the surface enterocytes, but the reduction in the numbers of developing parasites was more marked. This latter effect was due, at least partly, to failure of transfer of sporozoites from IELs to crypt enterocytes. These findings are discussed in relation to the efficacy of the immunity induced.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 88 , Issue 2 , April 1984 , pp. 199 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

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

Augustin, R. & Ridges, A. P. (1963). Immunity mechanisms in Eimeria meleagrimitis. In Immunity to protozoa (ed. Garnham, P. C. C., Pierce, A. E. and Roitt, I.), pp. 296–335. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Carson, F. L., Martin, J. H. & Lynn, J. S. (1973). Formalin fixation for electron microscopy: a re-evaluation. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 59, 365–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Challey, J. R. & Burns, W. C. (1959). The invasion of the cecal mucosa by Eimeria tenella sporozoites and their transport by macrophages. Journal of Protozoology 6, 238–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chinchilla, M. & Frenkel, J. K. (1978). Mediation of immunity to intracellular infection (Toxoplasma, Besnoitia) within somatic cells. Infection and Immunity 19, 999–1012.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, P. J., Parry, S. H. & Porter, P. (1978). The role of secretory IgA in anticoccidial immunity in the chicken. Immunology 34, 879–88.Google ScholarPubMed
Davis, P. J. & Porter, P. (1979). A mechanism for secretory IgA-mediated inhibition of the cell penetration and intracellular development of Eimeria tenella. Immunology 36, 471–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Guy-Grand, D. & Vassalli, P. (1982). Nature and function of gut granulated T-lymphocytes. In Recent Advances in Mucosal Immunity (ed. Strober, W., Hanson, L. A. and Sell, K. W.). pp. 301–12. New York: Raven Press.Google Scholar
Horton-Smith, C., Long, P. L. & Pierce, A. E. (1963). Behavior of invasive stages of Eimeria tenella in the immune fowl (Gallus domesticus). Experimental Parasitology 14, 66–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klesius, P. H., Qualls, D. F., Elston, A. L. & Fudenberg, M. H. (1978). Effects of bovine transfer factor in mouse coccidiosis (Eimeria ferrisi). Clinical Immunology and Immunopathology 10, 214–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kouwenhoven, B. & Van Der Horst, C. J. G. (1973). Histological observations with respect to the immune mechanism in Eimeria acervulina infection in the domestic fowl. Zeitschrift für Parasitenkunde 42, 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawn, A. M. & Rose, M. E. (1982). Mucosal transport of Eimeria tenella in the cecum of the chicken. Journal of Parasitology 68, 1117–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leathem, W. D. & Burns, W. C. (1967). Effects of the immune chicken on the endogenous stages of Eimeria tenella. Journal of Parasitology 53, 180–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liburd, E. M., Pabst, H. F. & Armstrong, W. D. (1972). Transfer factor in rat coccidiosis. Cellular Immunology 5, 487–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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. & Rowell, J. (1958). Counting oocysts of chicken coccidia. Laboratory Practice 7, 515–18, 534.Google Scholar
Mesfin, G. M. & Bellamy, J. E. C. (1979). Effects of acquired resistance on infection with Eimeria falciformis var. pragensis in mice. Infection and Immunity 23, 108–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morehouse, N. F. (1938). The reaction of the immune intestinal epithelium of the rat to reinfection with Eimeria nieschulzi. Journal of Parasitology 24, 311–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niilo, L. (1967). Acquired resistance to reinfection of rabbits with Eimeria magna. Canadian Veterinary Journal 8, 201–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Pattillo, W. H. (1959). Invasion of the cecal mucosa of the chicken by sporozoites of Eimeria tenella. Journal of Parasitology 45, 253–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peirce, M. A. (1980). A simple staining technique to demonstrate the sporozoite refractile globule in coccidian parasites. Parasitology 80, 551–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, M. E. (1967). Immunity to Eimeria tenellar and Eimeria necatrix infections in the fowl. I. Influence of the site of infection and the stage of the parasite. II. Cross-protection. Parasitology 57, 567–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, M. E. & Hesketh, P. (1976). Immunity to coccidiosis: stages of the life-cycle of Eimeria maxima which induce, and are affected by, the response of the host. Parasitology 73, 25–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, M. E. & Long, P. L. (1969). Immunity to coccidiosis: gut permeability changes in response to sporozoite invasion. Experientia 25, 183–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, M. E., Long, P. L. & Bradley, J. W. A. (1975). Immune responses to infection with coccidia in chickens: gut hypersensitivity. Parasitology 71, 357–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, M. E., Peppard, J. V. & Hobbs, S. M. (1983). Characterisation of antibody responses to infection with Eimeria nieschulzi, an intracellular parasite of the small intestine of the rat. Parasite Immunology (in the Press).Google Scholar
Ryley, J. F. (1973). Cytochemistry, physiology and biochemistry. In The Coccidia, Eimeria, Isospora, Toxoplasma and Related Genera (ed. Hammond, D. M. and Long, P. L.), pp. 145–181. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Tyzzer, E. E., Theiler, M. & Jones, E. E. (1932). Coccidiosis in gallinaceous birds. II. A comparative study of species of Eimeria in the chicken. American Journal of Hygines 15, 319–93.Google Scholar
Van Doorninck, W. M. & Becker, E. R. (1957). Transport of sporozoites of Eimeria necatrix in macrophages. Journal of Parasitology 43, 40–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiesner, J. (1979). Biliary IgA from infected chickens as agglutinating factor for Eimeria tenella — sporozoites. Journal of Protozoology 25, 46.Google Scholar