Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T01:04:32.215Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanism of adhesion and detachment at the anterior end of Merizocotyle icopae (Monogenea: Monocotylidae) including ultrastructure of the anterior adhesive matrix

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2004

B. W. CRIBB ,
W. D. ARMSTRONG  and
I. D. WHITTINGTON
B. W. CRIBB
Affiliation:
Centre for Microscopy and Microanalysis, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia Department of Zoology and Entomology, School of Life Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
W. D. ARMSTRONG
Affiliation:
Centre for Microscopy and Microanalysis, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland 4072, Australia
I. D. WHITTINGTON
Affiliation:
Monogenean Research Laboratory, Parasitology Section, The South Australian Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, South Australia 5000, Australia Marine Parasitology, Environmental Biology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia 5005, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The anterior adhesive mechanism was studied for Merizocotyle icopae (Monogenea: Monocotylidae). Adult anterior apertures can open and close. In addition, duct endings terminating within the apertures are everted or retracted depending on the stage of attachment. Adhesive in adults is synthesized from all 3 secretory types (rod-shaped, small and large spheroidal bodies) found within anterior apertures. All exit together and undergo mixing to produce the adhesive matrix, a process that depletes duct contents. A greater number of ducts carrying rod-shaped bodies is depleted than ducts containing spheroidal bodies which changes the ratio of secretory types present on detachment. Detachment involves elongation of duct endings and secretion of additional matrix as the worm pulls away from the substrate. The change in secretory type ratio putatively modifies the properties of the secreted matrix enabling detachment. Only after detachment do ducts refill. During attachment, individual secretory bodies undergo morphological changes. The larval and adult adhesive matrix differs. Anterior adhesive in oncomiracidia does not show fibres with banding whereas banded fibres comprise a large part of adult adhesive. The data suggest that this is the result of adult spheroidal secretions modifying the way in which the adult adhesive matrix forms.

Keywords

tegumentparasiteadhesive gelstissue adhesionelectron microscopyoncomiracidiaadult
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 129 , Issue 2 , August 2004 , pp. 181 - 190
Copyright
2004 Cambridge University Press

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

BUCHMANN, K. ( 1999). Immune mechanisms in fish skin against monogeneans – a model. Folia Parasitoligica 46, 1–9.Google Scholar
CHISHOLM, L. A. & WHITTINGTON, I. D. ( 2000). Egg hatching in 3 species of monocotylid monogenean parasites from the shovelnose ray Rhinobatos typus at Heron Island, Australia. Parasitology 121, 303–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CRIBB, B., ARMSTRONG, W. & WHITTINGTON, I. ( 2004). Simultaneous fixation using glutaraldehyde and osmium tetroxide or potassium ferricyanide-reduced osmium for the preservation of monogenean flatworms: an assessment for Merizocotyle icopae. Microscopy Research and Technique 63, 102–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EL-NAGGAR, M. M. & KEARN, G. C. ( 1983). Glands associated with the anterior adhesive areas and body margins in the skin parasitic monogenean Entobdella soleae. International Journal for Parasitology 13, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FLAMMANG, P. ( 1996). Adhesion in echinoderms. In Echinoderm Studies, Vol. 5 ( ed. Jangoux, M. & Lawrence, L. M. ), pp. 1–60. Balkema, Rotterdam.
HAMWOOD, T. E., CRIBB, B. W., HALLIDAY, J. A., KEARN, G. C. & WHITTINGTON, I. D. ( 2002). Preliminary characterisation and extraction of anterior adhesive secretion in monogenean (platyhelminth) parasites. Folia Parasitologica 49, 39–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
HERMANS, C. O. ( 1983). The duo-gland adhesive system. Oceanography Marine Biology Annual Review 21, 283–339.Google Scholar
KEARN, G. C. & EVANS-GOWING, R. ( 1998). Attachment and detachment of the anterior adhesive pads of the monogenean (platyhelminth) parasite Entobdella soleae from skin of the common sole (Solea solea). International Journal for Parasitology 28, 1583–1593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LIN, A. C. & GOH, M. C. ( 2002). Investigating the ultrastructure of fibrous long spacing collagen by parallel atomic force and transmission electron microscopy. Proteins 49, 378–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RADMACHER, M., TILLMANN, R. W., FRITZ, M. & GAUB, H. E. ( 1992). From molecules to cells: imaging soft samples with atomic force microscopy. Science 257, 1900–1905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RIEGER, R. M., TYLER, S., SMITH, J. P. S. & RIEGER, G. E. ( 1991). Platyhelminthes: Turbellaria. In Microscopic Anatomy of Invertebrates, Vol. 3: Platyhelminthes and Nemertinea ( ed. Harrison, F. W. & Bogitsh, B. J. ), pp. 7–140. Wiley-Liss, New York.
SMITH, A. M. ( 2002). The structure and function of adhesive gels from invertebrates. Integrative and Comparative Biology 42, 1164–1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SMITH, A. M., QUICK, T. J. & PETER, R. L. S. ( 1999). Differences in the composition of adhesive and non-adhesive mucus from the limpet Lottia limatula. Biological Bulletin 196, 34–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SMITH, A. M. & MORIN, M. C. ( 2002). Biochemical differences between trail mucus and adhesive mucus from marsh periwinkle snails. Biological Bulletin 203, 338–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WHITTINGTON, I. D., ARMSTRONG, W. D., CHISHOLM, L. A. & CRIBB, B. W. ( 2004). A comparison of the anterior adhesive system in the oncomiracidium and adult of the monogenean parasite Merizocotyle icopae (Monocotylidae). Parasitology Research (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WHITTINGTON, I. D., CHISHOLM, L. A. & ROHDE, K. ( 2000). The larvae of Monogenea (Platyhelminthes). Advances in Parasitology 44, 139–232.Google Scholar
WHITTINGTON, I. D., CRIBB, B. W., HAMWOOD, T. E. & HALLIDAY, J. A. ( 2000). Host-specificity of monogenean (platyhelminth) parasites: a role for anterior adhesive areas? International Journal for Parasitology 30, 305–320.Google Scholar
WHITTINGTON, I. D. & CRIBB, B. W. ( 2001). Adhesive secretions in the Platyhelminthes. Advances in Parasitology 48, 101–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar