Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T04:27:07.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Morphology and Life History of the Fowl Nematode Ascaridia lineata (Schneider)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

James E. Ackert
James E. Ackert
Affiliation:
Professor of Zoology and Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Parasitologist.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Studies were made on the morphology, with special emphasis on the taxonomic characters, of 220 mature male and female Ascaridia lineata (Schneider) from chickens at Manhattan, Kansas, U.S.A., and Cambridge, England.

2. Eggs arising in the anterior ovary pass into the posterior uterus; similarly, eggs from the posterior ovary pass into the anterior uterus.

3. In young females eggs may be fertilised at any place in the uteri; in adults, fertilisation occurs near the distal ends of the uteri.

4. With the aid of a micromanipulator, a small structure in one pole of the mature egg, previously decribed as an opening, an opercular plug in the shell, or as an internal thickening of the shell, was found to be a solid, conical appendage of the vitelline membrane, free from the shell.

5. Fertilised eggs develop to the coiled embryo (infective) stage in 16 days when incubated in water at 30° C.; in 1 mm. of water at 33° C., they become infective in 10 days.

6. Water cultures of fertile eggs do not develop when kept at constant temperatures of 0° C., or of 10° C.; at 15° C., development proceeds.

7. Constant refrigeration of fertile eggs in water cultures for 1 month at 0° C. so lower the vitality that, on being incubated subsequently at 30° C., they divide slowly and soon die; keeping the eggs at 10° C. for 1 month has no deleterious effect on them when incubated subsequently at 30° C.

8. In hatching, the embryo may escape from any part of the egg shell, either in the duodenum of the host, or in water cultures; newly hatched larvae swallowed by the chicken seldom become established; infestation normally result from the ingestion of embryonated eggs.

9. The habitat of A. lineata is the duodenum, especially the portion which is a few centimetres posterior to the entrance of the bile ducts; determination of hydrogen-ion concentrations showed that the nematodes live in nearly neutral media (av. 6·7).

10. Penetration of the duodenal mucosa by larvae 10–17 days old is frequent in young chickens; occasionally, a larva goes on through the intestinal wall to the liver and lungs, but ordinarily, after the 17th day the young worms withdraw from the mucosa into the lumen of the intestine.

11. Young A. lineata grew to maturity in 50 days in chickens parasitised when about a month old; in six 8-day periods following hatching of the larvae, the average daily growth in length per period was about 0·12 mm. in the first period, 0·75 mm. in the second, 1·5 mm. in the third, fourth, and fifth periods, and 3mm. in the sixth period.

12. At least three moults occur before the adult from of the nematode is developed. Important morphological changes associated with the moults include: after first moult, presence of pre-anal swelling (males), and of anal prominence in both sexes; after second moult, lips with oral papillae and dentigerous ridges, projecting Iateral folds (alae) present in newly hatched larvae replaced by non-projecting lateral lines, females with vulva and shorter tail proportionately, and males with pre-anal sucker and three pairs of caudal papillae; after third moult, external characters similar to those of the adult A. lineata.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , July 1931 , pp. 360 - 379
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1931

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

Ackert, Jame E. (1920). Studies on the development of Ascaridia perspicillum, parasitic in fowls. Anat. Rec. 17, 331–332.Google Scholar
Ackert, Jame E. (1923). On the habitat of Ascaridia perspicillum (Rud.). J. Parasit. Urbana 10, 101–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackert, Jame E. and Herrick, C. A. (1928). Effects of the nematode Ascaridia lineata (Schneider) on growing chickens. J. Parasit. 15, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackert, Jame E., Mcllvaine, Marian Fisher and Crawford, Naomi Zimmerman (1931). Resistance of chickens to parasitism affected by vitamin A. Amer. J. Hyg. 13, 320–336.Google Scholar
Ackert, Jame E. and Nolf, L. O. (1931). Resistance of chickens to parasitism affected by vitamin B. Amer. J. Hyg. 13, 337–344.Google Scholar
Baker, A. D., Conklin, R. L., Maw, W. A. and Fogerty, C. D. (1929). Preliminary report on poultry parasite investigation at MacDonald College. Poultry Science, 8, 59–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baylis, H. A. (1929). A Manual of Helminthology, Medical and Veterinary. 303 pp. London.Google Scholar
Boulenger, C. L. (1923). A collection of nematode parasites from Zanzibar. Parasitology, 15, 113–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cram, Eloise B. (1927). Bird parasites of the Nematode sub-orders Strongylata, Ascaridata, and Spirurata. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 140, 1–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorman, H. P. (1928). Studies on the life cycle of Heterakis papillosa (Bloch). Trans. Amer. Micr. Soc. 47, 379–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dujardin, F. (1845). Histoire naturelle des helminths ou vers intestinaux. 654 pp. Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeborn, S. B. (1923). Nieotine as a poultry vermifuge. Science, n.s. 57, 692–693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gedoelst, L. (1916). Notes sur la faune parasitaire du Congo Belge. Rev. Zool. Africaine, 5, 1–90.Google Scholar
Goeze, J. A. E. (1782). Versuch einer Naturgeschichte der Eingeweidewürmer thierischer Körper. 471 pp. Blankenburg.Google Scholar
Guberlet, John E. (1924). Notes on the life history of Ascaridia perspicillum (Rud.). Trans. Amer. Micr. Soc. 43, 152–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrick, C. A. (1926). Studies on the resistance of chickens to the nematode Ascaridia perspicillum (Rud.). Amer. J. Hyg. 6, 153–172.Google Scholar
Itagaki, S. (1927). On the life history of the chicken nematode, Ascaridia perspicillum. Proc. World's Poultry Congress, Ottawa, Canada, pp. 339–344.Google Scholar
Itagaki, S. (1930). The nature of the parasite nodules in the caecal walls of fowls and the development of Heterakis vesicularis. Proc. FourthWorld's Poultry Congress, Sect. C, pp. 481–483.Google Scholar
Kempster, H. L. (1926). Growth of the domestic fowl. Missouri Agric. Exp. Sta. Res. Bull. 96, 108–121.Google Scholar
Lane, Clayton.(1914). Suckered round-worms from India and Ceylon. Indian J. Med. Res. 2, 655–669.Google Scholar
Lewis, E. A. (1930). An account of a survey of the parasite helminths of some domestic animals in mid-west Wales. J. Helminthology, 8, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linstow, O. F. S. von (1883). Nematoden, Trematoden und Acanthocephalen, gesammelt von Prof. Fedtschenko in Turkestan. Arch. Naturgesch. 49, 274–314.Google Scholar
Linstow, O. F. S. von (1884). Helminthologisches. Arch. Naturgesch. 50, 125–145.Google Scholar
Magalha˜es, P. S. de (1892). Notes d'helminthologie Brésilienne (deuxiéme note). Bull. Soc. Zool. France, 17, 219–221.Google Scholar
Railliet, A. and Henry, A. (1912). Quelques nematodes parasites des reptiles. Bull. Soc. de Path. Exot. 5, 251–259.Google Scholar
Rudolphi, K. A. (1803). Neue Beobachtungen über die Eingeweidewürmer. Arch. Zool. und Zool. 3, 1–32.Google Scholar
Schneider, A. (1866). Monographie der Nematoden. 357 pp. Berlin.Google Scholar
Schrank, F. von P. (1788). Verzeichniss der bisher hinlänglich bekannten Eingeweidewürmer, nebst einer Abhandlung über ihre Anverwandtschaftem. 116 pp. München.Google Scholar
Schwartz, B. (1925). Ascaridia lineata, a parasite of chickens in the United States. J. Agric. Res. 30, 763–772.Google Scholar
Travassos, L. (1913). Sobre as especies braxileiras da subfamilia Heterakinae Railliet et Henry. Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz, 5, 271–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar