Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:22:16.718Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative studies on the biology and morphology of Echinococcus granulosus from domestic livestock, moose and reindeer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

G. K. Sweatman  and
R. J. Williams
G. K. Sweatman
Affiliation:
Hydatid Research Unit, New Zealand Medical Research Council, Medical School, University of Otago
R. J. Williams
Affiliation:
Hydatid Research Unit, New Zealand Medical Research Council, Medical School, University of Otago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. As an intermediate host of the hydatid tapeworm in boreal North America, the moose is of relatively greater importance than other indigenous cervids (white-tailed deer, wapiti, barren-ground caribou) primarily because of a higher rate of infection in different individuals and the fertility of the hydatid cysts.

2. The European reindeer introduced into north-western Canada is of considerable importance as an intermediate host where it occurs locally.

3. Timber wolves are the important definitive hosts; no infections occurred naturally or were produced experimentally in the bobcat, Canada lynx, raccoon, fisher, marten, striped skunk or European ferret.

4. A description using biological and morphological criteria is presented for Echinococcus granulosus granulosus in dogs, sheep and other domestic animals, E. g. borealis subsp.nov. in timber wolves, moose and other cervids indigenous to North America, and E. g. canadensis Webster and Cameron, 1961, in dogs and reindeer introduced into north-western Canada from Laplandic Norway.

5. The rate of cystic growth, scolex production, infectability of timber wolves and dogs and prepatent period are similar for all three subspecies.

6. E. g. borealis reached a gravid state in experimental red foxes (Vulpes fulva).

7. Hydatid cysts developed only rarely in sheep fed eggs of E. g. borealis or E. g. canadensis.

8. Eggs of E. g. granulosus produced only one viable hydatid cyst in a series of experimental red deer (Cervus elaphus) and fallow deer (Dama dama).

9. E. g. granulosus, E. g. borealis and E. g. canadensis are morphologically distinct, the most distinctive characters occur in E. g. canadensis.

10. Besides the above and E. multilocularis, other species in Echinococcus are little known. Those recognized as being currently valid are E. lycaontis, E. ortleppi, E. felidis, E. cameroni, E. oligarthrus, E. cruzi and possibly E. patagonicus.

The writers wish to thank Sir Charles Hercus and the other members of the Hydatid Research Committee for their interest and encouragement in the present study. Valuable discussion in the early stages of this work was had with Prof. A. M. Fallis, Director, Department of Parasitology, Ontario Research Foundation. Much of the field work was done with various members of the Ontario Research Foundation; Institute of Parasitology, McGill University; Canada Department of Agriculture; and Canada Department of Northern Affairs and Natural Resources, to whom we extend our thanks. Norwegian material was kindly provided by Dr Sven Skjenneberg, Statens Veterinaera Laboratorium for Nord-Norge. Technical assistance was provided by Messrs G. D. Page, D. V. Weston, Miss L. A. Duncan and Mrs B. R. Clarke.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 53 , Issue 3-4 , November 1963 , pp. 339 - 390
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

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

Borgmeier, T. (1957). Basic questions of systematics. Syst. Zool. 6, 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braun, M. (1894–1900). In Bronn's Klassen und Ordunungen des Thier-Reichs, Band IV, Vermes; Abt. 1b, Cestodes, pp. 1535–56. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Bronzini, E. & Bertolino, P. (1958). Indagini sperimentali sulla specificita dell’ Echinococcus granulosus allo stato adulto. Boll. Zool. 21, 219–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brumpt, E. & Joyeux, C. (1924). Description d'un nouvel echinocoque Echinococcus cruzi n.sp. Ann. Parasit. hum. comp. 2, 226–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, A. E. (1923). Notes on buffalo: anatomy, pathological conditions, and parasites. Vet. J. 79, 331.Google Scholar
Cameron, T. W. M. (1926). Observations on the genus Echinococcus Rudolphi, 1801. J. Helminth. 4, 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, T. W. M. (1960). The incidence and diagnosis of hydatid cyst in Canada Echinococcus granulosus var. canadensis. Parasitologia, 2, 381–90.Google Scholar
Clunies Ross, I. (1929). Observations on the hydatid parasite Echinococcus granulosus (Batsch, 1786) Rudolphi, 1805, and the control of hydatid disease in Australia. Bull. Coun. Scient. Indust. Res. Aust. 40, 63 pp.Google Scholar
Coutelen, F. R., Callot, J. & Desportes, C. (1939). Récéptivité de l'écureuil (Sciurus vulgaris) et du rangondin (Myocastor coypus) à l'échinococcose secondaire expérimentale. Ann. Parasit. hum. comp. 17, 162–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coutelen, F., Lecroart, D. & Cochet, G. (1939). Sur la récepitivité de la souris blanche à l'échinococcose secondaire expérimentale, par inoculation intrapéritonéale de sable hydatique d'hydatides échinococciques du cheval. Ann. Parasit. hum. comp. 17, 4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dévé, F. (1901). De l'échinococcose secondaire, 256 pp. Société d'Editions Scientifiques, Paris.Google Scholar
Dévé, F. (1933). Le souris blanche, animal réactif pour les inoculations échinococciques. Un essai de sérothérapie anti-échinococcique aspécifique. C.R. soc. Biol., Paris, 113, 1443–5.Google Scholar
Dévé, F. (1935). Réceptivité de la souris opposée à la resistance du lapin à l'inoculation de sable échinococcique de cheval. C.R. soc. Biol., Paris, 119, 25, 351.Google Scholar
Dévé, F. (1949). L'échinococcose primitive (maladie hydatique), 362 pp. Paris: Masson et Cie.Google Scholar
Dew, H. R. (1925). The histogenesis of the hydatid parasite (Taenia echinococcus) in the pig. Med. J. Aust. 12, 101–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drežancić, I. & Wikerhauser, T. (1956). Prilog eksperimentalnoj invaziji mačke i lisice s Echinococcus granulosus. Vet. Arhiv. Zagreb, 26, 179–82.Google Scholar
Erlanger, R. S. von (1890). Der Geschlechtsapparat der Taenia echinococcus. Z. Wiss. Zool. 50, 555–9.Google Scholar
Gemmell, M. A. (1959). Hydatid disease in Australia. VI. Observations on the Carnivora of New South Wales as definitive hosts of Echinococcus granulosus (Batsch, 1786) (Rudolphi, 1801), and their role in the spread of hydatidiasis in domestic animals. Aust. Vet. J. 35, 450–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomori, G. (1941). Observations with differential stains on human islets of Langerhans. Amer. J. Path. 17, 395–406.Google ScholarPubMed
Hall, M. C. (1919). The adult taenioid cestodes of dogs and cats, and of related carnivores in North America. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 55, 1–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, T. A., Ruttan, R. A. & Benson, W. A. (1955). Hydatid disease (Echinococcus granulosus) in Saskatchewan big game. Trans. 20th North Amer. Wildl. Conf. pp. 198–208.Google Scholar
Hutchison, W. F. & Bryan, M. W. (1960). Studies on the hydatid worm, Echinococcus granulosus. I. Species identification of the parasite found in Mississippi. Amer. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 9, 606–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jacobs, J. A., Russell, R. D. & Wilson, J. T. (1959). Physics and Geology, 424 pp. New York, Toronto, London: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J. A. (1949). Hydatid disease. Post Grad. Med. J. 25, 107–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
López-Neyra, C. R. & Soler Planas, M. A. (1943). Revision del genero Echinococcus Rud. y descripción de una especie nuéva parárita intestinal del perro en Almería. Rev. Ibér. Parasitol. 3, 169–94.Google Scholar
Lörincz, F. (1938). Die Rolle der Katze in der Verbreitung der Echinococcosis. Zbl. Bakt. 129, 1–11.Google Scholar
Lubinsky, G. (1959). Anomalies of oncotaxy in two species of Echinococcus from North America. Canad. J. Zool. 37, 793–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubinsky, G. (1960). The variability of the number of rostellar hooks in two species of Echinococcus from North America. Canad. J. Zool. 38, 605–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matoff, K. N. & Jantscheff, J. (1954). Kann Echinococcus granulosus im Darm des Fuchses (Canis vulpes) sich zur Geschlechtsreife entwickeln? Acta Vet. Budapest, 4, 411–18.Google Scholar
Matoff, K. & Tierarzt, J. J. (1950). Entwickelt sich Echinococcus granulosus normal im darm des Fuchses (Canis vulpes). Fac. méd. Vét. 26, 249–57.Google Scholar
Mazzotti, L. (1958). Resultados negativos de la infección experimental de seis zorras de la especie Urocyon cinereoargenteus, con Echinococcus granulosus. Rev. Inst. Salub. Enferm. Trop., Mexico, 18, 63–6.Google Scholar
Miller, M. J. (1953). Hydatid infection in Canada. Canad. Med. Ass. J. 68, 423–34.Google ScholarPubMed
Napolitano, B. B., Napolitano, A. G. & Ferro, A. (1953). Hidatidosis experimental ovina. Arch. Internac. Hidat. 13, 233–58.Google Scholar
Oparin, P. G. (1958). Intrauterine infestation of lambs by Echinococcus. (In Russian.) Veterinarija, 35, 82.Google Scholar
Ortlepp, R. J. (1934). Echinococcus in dogs from Pretoria and vicinity. Onderstepoort J. Vet. Sci. 3, 97–108.Google Scholar
Ortlepp, R. J. (1937). South African helminths. Part I. Onderstepoort J. Vet. Sci. 9, 311–36.Google Scholar
Osimani, J. J., Migbaro, E. F. & Abella, C. M. (1953). Étude expérimentale de l'action des ultrasons sur la larve d' Echinococcus granulosus. Ann. Parasit. hum. comp. 28, 33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penfold, H. B. (1938). An attempt to immunize lambs against hydatid disease. Med. J. Aust. 25th yr., 1, 375–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, R. L. (1955). North American Moose, 280 pp. Toronto: University of Tronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rausch, R. (1952). Studies on the helminth fauna of Alaska. XI. Helminth parasites of microtine rodents—taxonomic considerations. J. Parasit. 38, 415–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rausch, R. (1953). The taxonomic value and variability of certain structures in the cestode genus Echinococcus (Rud. 1801) and a review of recognized species. Thapar Commen. Vol. Lucknow, pp. 233–46.Google Scholar
Rausch, R. & Williamson, F. S. L. (1959). Studies on the helminth fauna of Alaska. XXXIV. The parasites of wolves, Canis lupus L. J. Parasit. 45, 395–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ritcey, R. W. & Edwards, R. Y. (1958). Parasites and diseases of the Wells Gray moose herd. J. Mammal. 39, 139–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulte, F. (1950). Echinococcus alveolaris in der Leber eines Sumpfbibers. Berl. u. München. Tierarztl. Wchnschr. 2, 29–30.Google Scholar
Schwabe, C. W., Schinazi, L. A. & Kilejian, A. (1959). Host-parasite relationships in echinococcosis. II. Age resistance to secondary echinococcosis in the white mouse. Amer. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 8, 29–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simpson, G. G. (1945). The principles of classification and a classification of mammals. Bull. Amer. Nat. Hist. 85. New York.Google Scholar
Southwell, T. (1927). Experimental infection of the cat and the fox with the adult Echinococcus. Ann. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 21, 155–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweatman, G. K. (1952). Distribution and incidence of Echinococcus granulosus in man and other animals with special reference to Canada. Canad. Publ. Hlth J. 43, 480–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Sweatman, G. K., Robinson, R. G. & Manktelow, B. W. (1963). Comparative observations on the scolex and germinal membrane of Echinococcus granulosus as a source of secondary hydatid cysts. Amer. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 12, 199–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweatman, G. K. & Williams, R. J. (1962). Wild animals in New Zealand as hosts of Echinococcus granulosus and other taeniid tapeworms. Trans. Roy. Soc. N.Z. (Zoology) 2, 221–50.Google Scholar
Szidat, L. (1960). Echinococcus patagonicus sp.nov. (Cestoda) parasito del zorro Dusicyon culpaeus culpaeus (Mol.). Neotrópica, Buenos Aires, 6, 13–6.Google Scholar
Turner, E. L., Dennis, E. W. & Berberian, D. A. (1937). The production of artificial immunity against hydatid disease in sheep. J. Parasit. 23, 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verster, A. (1961). Helminth research in South Africa. V. Echinococcus in South Africa. J. S. Afr. Vet. Med. Ass. 32, 181–5.Google Scholar
Vogel, H. (1957). Über den Echinococcus multilocularis Süddeutschlands. I. Das Bandwurmstadium von Stammen menschlicher und tierischer Herkunft. Z. Trop. Parasit. 8, 404–54.Google Scholar
De Waele, A. & Pennoit-de Cooman, E. (1938). Etude expérimentale de l'échinococcose secondaire. Ann. Parasit. hum. comp. 16, 121–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, G. A. & Cameron, T. W. M. (1961). Observations on experimental infections with Echinococcus in rodents. Canad. J. Zool. 39, 877–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitten, L. K. & Shortridge, E. H. (1961). Three unusual cases of secondary hydatid cysts of the peritoneal cavity of the pig, dog and cat. N.Z. Vet. J. 9, 7–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, R. J. & Sweatman, G. K. (1963). Parasitology, 53, 391–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witenberg, G. (1933). Zur Kenntnis der Verbreitung von Echinokokkus und Trichinen in Palästina. Arch. Schiffs-u. Tropen-Hyg. 37, 37–41.Google Scholar
Wright, A. I. (1962). Echinococcus granulosus from English dogs. Canad. J. Zool. 40, 195–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamashita, J., Ohbayashi, M. & Konno, S. (1956). Studies on echinococcosis. III. On experimental infection in dogs, especially on the development of Echinococcus granulosus (Batsch, 1786). Jap. J. Vet. Res. 4, 113–22.Google Scholar
Yamashita, J., Ohbayashi, M. & Konno, S. (1957). Studies on echinococcosis. V. Experimental infection of the sheep. Jap. J. Vet. Res. 5, 43–50.Google Scholar