Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T14:45:51.775Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eimeria tenella: immunogenicity of the first generation of schizogony

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

V. McDonald ,
M. Elaine Rose  and
T. K. Jeffers
V. McDonald
Affiliation:
Houghton Poultry Research Station, Houghton, Huntingdon, Cambs. PE17 2DA
M. Elaine Rose
Affiliation:
Houghton Poultry Research Station, Houghton, Huntingdon, Cambs. PE17 2DA
T. K. Jeffers
Affiliation:
Lilly Research Laboratories, Greenfield Laboratories, P.O. Box 708, Greenfield, Indiana 46140, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The life-cycle of a precocious and attenuated line (WisF96) of Eimeria tenella, derived from the Wisconsin (Wis) strain, contained only the first of the three generations of schizogony undergone by the parent strain. The reproductive capacity of WisF96 was less than that of the parent strain by a factor of about 2000, but inoculation of chickens on two occasions with a large number of its oocysts induced resistance against challenge with oocysts, or with second-generation merozoites of Wis. The immunizing abilities of the attenuated line and its parent were compared by priming groups of chickens with numbers of oocysts of WisF96 or Wis, designed to produce infections of equal magnitude in terms of oocyst production (standard inocula), and then challenging with oocysts of Wis. The results suggested that an equivalent parasite mass of WisF96 was more immunogenic than Wis. This was confirmed by the finding that, even when the priming dose of Wis was increased 10-fold, the standard inoculum of WisF96 still produced the greater protective effect. These results indicate that the first generation of schizogony of E. tenella is highly immunogenic.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 93 , Issue 1 , August 1986 , pp. 1 - 7
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Cooper, D. M. & Timms, J. R. (1972). The rearing and maintenance of breeding chickens in isolators. 1. Glassfibre isolators. Avian Pathology 1, 45–57.Google Scholar
Davis, P. J., Parry, S. H. & Porter, P. (1978). The role of secretory IgA in anticoccidial immunity in the chicken. Immunology 34, 879–88.Google ScholarPubMed
Fernando, M. A. & Pasternak, J. (1977). Isolation of chick intestinal cells infected with secondgeneration schizonts of Eimeria necatrix. Parasitology 74, 19–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horton-Smith, C., Long, P. L. & Pierce, A. E. (1963). Behavior of invasive stages of Eimeria tenella in the immune fowl (Gallus domesticus). Experimental Parasitology 14, 66–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horton-Smith, C., Long, P. L., Pierce, A. E. & Rose, M. E. (1963). Immunity to coccidia in domestic animals. In Immunity to Protozoa (ed. Garnham, P. C. C., Pierce, A. E. and Roitt, I.), pp. 273–95. London: Blackwell Scientific Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Jeffers, T. K. (1975). Attenuation of Eimeria tenella through selection for precociousness. Journal of Parasitology 61, 1083–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeffers, T. K. & Long, P. L. (1984). Immunogenicity of Eimeria tenella sporozoites. Journal of Protozoology 31, 10A.Google Scholar
Johnson, J., Reid, W. M. & Jeffers, T. K. (1979). Practical immunization of chickens against coccidiosis using an attenuated strain of Eimeria tenella. Poultry Science 58, 37–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kendall, S. B. & McCullough, F. S. (1952). Relationships between sulphamezathine therapy and the acquisition of immunity to Eimeria tenella. Journal of Comparative Pathology 62, 116–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L. & Millard, B. J. (1968). Eimeria: effect of metichlorpindol and methylbenzoquate on endogenous stages in the chicken. Experimental Parasitology 23, 331–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, P. L., Millard, B. J., Joyner, L. P. & Norton, C. C. (1976). A guide to laboratory techniques used in the study and diagnosis of avian coccidiosis. Folia Veterinaria Latina 6, 201–17.Google Scholar
McDonald, V., Ballingall, S. & Shirley, M. W. (1982). A preliminary study of the nature of infection and immunity in chickens given an attenuated line of Eimeria acervulina. Parasitology 84, 21–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDougald, L. R. & Jeffers, T. K. (1976). Eimeria tenella (Sporozoa: Coccidia): gametogony following a single asexual generation. Science 192, 258–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, M. E. (1985). The Eimeria. In Parasite Antigens in Protection, Diagnosis and Escape. Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology 120, (ed. Parkhouse, R. M. E.), pp. 7–17.Google Scholar
Rose, M. E. & Hesketh, P. (1984). Infection with Eimeria tenella: modulation of lymphocyte blastogenesis by specific antigen, and evidence for immunodepression. Journal of Protozoology 31, 549–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rose, M. E. & Long, P. L. (1962). Immunity to four species of Eimeria in fowls. Immunology 5, 79–92.Google ScholarPubMed
Tyzzer, E. E. (1929). Coccidiosis in gallinaceous birds. American Journal of Hygiene 10, 269–383.Google Scholar
Wiesner, J. (1979). Biliary IgA from infected chickens as agglutinating factor for Eimeria tenella sporozoites. Journal of Protozoology 26, 46–74.Google Scholar