Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:49:29.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematoda): susceptible and resistant strains of mice are indistinguishable following natural infection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

M. E. Scott
Affiliation:
Institute of Parasitology, McGill University, Macdonald Campus, 21 111 Lakeshore Road, Ste-Anne de Bellevue, Québec H9X 1CO, Canada

Extract

BALB/c mice were characterized as more resistant to infection with Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematoda) than C57BL/6 mice based on lower establishment and survival during a primary infection and stronger protection induced by an immunizing regime. It was hypothesized, therefore, that C57BL/6 mice would be more heavily infected than BALB/c mice when they lived together as a single population in a large indoor arena where transmission occurred through contact between the mice and damp peat trays where parasite eggs developed into larvae. Fifty female mice (including 5 infected mice) of each strain were placed in a 3.2 x 0.8 m arena. Net egg production and numbers of larvae acquired by sentinel mice of each strain were monitored every two weeks. The experiment was replicated twice. The results did not support the hypothesis. No difference was detected between strains of mice in the number of larvae acquired by sentinel mice during 24 h exposure periods, or in the numbers of worms present after 12 or 23 weeks. Net egg production was also comparable between strains. A hypothesis that the unexpected similarity of infection in the two strains was related to differences in rates of contact with the peat trays was not supported by preliminary data on mouse behaviour that revealed equal frequency of contact with peat trays between strains. A second hypothesis that continuous exposure to larvae led to similar infection levels in the two strains (in contrast to the controlled characterization experiments) was also unsupported. Mice were infected weekly with 10, 50 or 100 larvae for 5 or 10 weeks. Net egg production and numbers of worms were consistently higher in C57BL/6 than BALB/c mice. At this time it is not clear why infection in the two strains was virtually identical in the large arenas but clearly distinct in all controlled infection experiments.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

Anderson, R. M. (1986). The population dynamics and epidemiology of intestinal nematode infections. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 80, 686–96.Google Scholar
Behnke, J. M. (1987). Evasion of immunity by nematode parasites causing chronic infections. Advances in Parasitology 26, 171.Google Scholar
Behnke, J. M. & Robinson, M. (1985). Genetic control of immunity to Nematospiroides dubius: a 9-day anthelmintic abbreviated immunizing regime which separates weak and strong responder strains of mice. Parasite Immunology 7, 235–53.Google Scholar
Chang, J. & Wescott, R. B. (1972). Infectivity, fecundity, and survival of Nematospiroides dubius in gnotobiotic mice. Experimental Parasitology 32, 327–34.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cypess, R. H. & Zidian, J. L. (1975). Heligmosomoides polygyrus (= Nematospiroides dubius): the development of self-cure and/or protection in several strains of mice. Journal of Parasitology 61, 819–24.Google Scholar
Enriquez, F. J., Zidian, J. L. & Cypess, R. H. (1988). Nematospiroides dubius: genetic control of immunity to infections of mice. Experimental Parasitology 67, 1219.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kerboeuf, D. (1985). The effect of host density on the establishment and fecundity of Heligmosomoides polygyrus. Parasitology 91, 177–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keymer, A. E., Tarlton, A. B., Hiorns, R. W, Lawrence, C. E. & Pritchard, D. I. (1990). Immunogenetic correlates of susceptibility to infection with Heligmosomoides polygyrus in outbred mice. Parasitology 101, 6973.Google Scholar
Mitchell, G. F. & Cruise, K. M. (1984). Immunization with Nematospiroides dubius adult worms plus pertussigen has different consequences in mice of various genotypes. The Australian Journal of Experimental Biology and Medical Science 62, 523–30.Google Scholar
Prowse, S. J., Mitchell, G. F., Ey, P. L. & Jenkin, C. R. (1979). The development of resistance in different inbred strains of mice to infection with Nematospiroides dubius. Parasite Immunology 1, 277–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, M., Wahid, F., Behnke, J. M. & Gilbert, F. S. (1989). Immunological relationships during primary infection with Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematospiroides dubius): dose-dependent expulsion of adult worms. Parasitology 98, 115–24.Google Scholar
Scott, M. E. (1988 a). Predisposition of mice to Heligmosomoides polygyrus and Aspiculuris tetraptera (Nematoda). Parasitology 97, 101–14.Google Scholar
Scott, M. E. (1988 b). Effect of repeated anthelmintic treatment on ability to detect predisposition of mice to Heligmosomoides polygyrus and Aspiculuris tetraptera (Nematoda) infections. Parasitology 97, 453–8.Google Scholar
Wahid, F. N., Robinson, M. & Behnke, J. M. (1989). Immunological relationships during primary infection with Heligmosomoides polygyrus (Nematospiroides dubius): expulsion of adult worms from fast responder syngeneic and hybrid strains of mice. Parasitology 98, 459–69.Google Scholar
Wakelin, D. (1986). Genetic and other constraints on resistance to infection with gastrointestinal nematodes. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 80, 742–7.Google Scholar
Wakelin, D. (1988). Genetic control of susceptibility and resistance to parasite infection. Advances in Parasitology 16, 219308.Google Scholar
Wakelin, D. M. & Blackwell, J. M. (1988). Genetics of Resistance to Bacterial and Parasitic Infection. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar