Activity of the following glycosidases was detected in the plasma of the freshwater snail Biomphalaria glabrata: β-D- fucosidase, β-D-glucosidase, β-D-galactosidase, β-D-mannosidase, β-D-glucuronidase, N-acetyl-β-D-galactosaminidase, N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase, and lysozyme. At the physiological pH (7·2–7·4) of snail haemolymph, enzymatic activity was about 10–50% of the maximum activity at each enzyme's respective acid pH-optimum. Schistosome-susceptible B. glabrata showed lower plasma protein concentration and significantly lower enzymatic activities (U/mg protein) than schistosome-resistant snails. Changes in glycosidase activity levels correlate with the progress of infection. After successful schistosome invasion, activities of plasma glycosidases but not the concentration of total plasma proteins increased significantly during the first 2 days in both snail strains. Thus, most tegumental glycoproteins of schistosome larvae can be altered by humoral host glycosidases. The detection of only very low activities of hexosaminidases leads to the hypothesis that GalNAc/GlcNAc may be involved in the process of non-self recognition. At 4 days post-infection, glycosidase activities were identical or slightly below the levels found in naive snails. At this time of infection the parasite is encapsulated and destroyed by haemocytes of resistant snails. In susceptible snails, however, the schistosomes have transformed into sporocysts and will complete their life-cycle without eliciting effective defence reactions. After >30 days post-infection, when cercariae are fully developed in susceptible snails, plasma protein concentration decreased significantly, whereas glycosidase activities were elevated.

Although the mosquito vectors of malaria have an effective immune system capable of encapsulating many foreign particles, they rarely encapsulate malaria parasites in natural populations. A possible reason for this apparent paradox is that infection by malaria reduces the capability of the mosquito to mount an effective immune response. To investigate this possibility, we blood-fed Aedes aegypti mosquitoes on an uninfected chicken or on one infected with Plasmodium gallinaceum, and compared the proportions of the infected and uninfected mosquitoes that melanized a negatively charged Sephadex bead injected into the thorax 1, 2 and 4 days after blood-feeding. About 40% of the uninfected mosquitoes, but less than 25% of the infected ones, melanized the bead. The difference between infected and uninfected mosquitoes was most obvious 1 day after infection (at the parasite's ookinete stage), while the difference diminished during the early oocyst stage (2 days after infection) and disappeared at the later oocyst stage (4 days after infection). These results suggest that the parasite can either actively suppress its vector's immune response or that it modifies the blood of its chicken host in a way that reduces the efficacy of the mosquito's immune system. In either case, the reduction of immunocompetence can have important consequences for malaria control, in particular for the current effort being invested into the genetic manipulation of mosquitoes.