Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T16:13:50.094Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental chronic dermatophilosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

D. Davis  and
M. Philpott
D. Davis
Affiliation:
Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh
M. Philpott
Affiliation:
Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh
Get access

Synopsis

The effect of artificially induced climatic changes or arthropod bites on the development of experimental dermatophilosis lesions was examined. The lesions were produced following application of Dermatophilus congolensis zoospores to the skin of goats.

When zoospores were applied to skin which had been treated with methanol, the resulting lesion healed rapidly. This observation contrasts with the disease under natural conditions, where lesions become chronic. There was no increase in the time for lesions to heal if the goats were sprayed with water to simulate rainfall. However, if a delayed hypersensitivity reaction to chlorodinitrobenzene was induced at the site of zoospore application (to simulate the host's response to an arthropod bite), the resulting lesion was morphologically similar to natural lesions and failed to heal so long as applications of the chemical were repeated.

It is suggested that arthropods play a primary role in producing chronic lesions by inducing an immune reaction at the site of infection with D. congolensis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 79 , Issue 1-3: Surface ecosystems and the interactions within them which overcome skin defence mechanisms , 1980 , pp. 47 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1980

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

Allen, J. R., Doube, B. H. and Kemp, D. H., 1977. Histology of bovine skin reactions to Ixodes holocyclus Neumann. Can. J. Comp. Med., 41, 26–35.Google Scholar
Askenase, P. W., 1977. Role of basophils, mast cells, and vasomines in hypersensitivity reactions with a delayed time course. Prog. Allergy, 23, 199–320.Google Scholar
Austwick, P. K. C., 1976. The probable relationship of rainfall to Dermatophilus congolensis infection in sheep. In Dermatophilus infection in animals and man. Eds Lloyd, D. H. and Sellars, K. C., pp. 87–96. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bida, S. A. and Dennis, S. M., 1976. Dermatophilosis in Northern Nigeria. Vet. Bull., 46, 471–478.Google Scholar
Feingold, B. F., Benjamini, E. and Michaeli, D., 1968. The allergic responses to insect bites. A. Rev. Entomol., 13, 137–158.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. A., 1964. The genus Dermatophilus. J. Bact., 88, 509–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, R. M. and Crewe, W., 1948. The mechanisms by which mosquitoes and tsetse flies obtain their blood meal, the histology of the lesions produced, and the subsequent reactions of the mammalian host; together with some observations on the feeding of Chrysops and Cimex. Ann. Trop. Med. Parasit., 42, 334–356.Google Scholar
Ha'alstra, R. T., 1965. Isolation of Dermatophilus congolensis from skin in the diagnosis of streptothricosis. Vet. Rec., 11, 824.Google Scholar
McEwan, Jenkinson D., 1980. The topography, climate and chemical nature of the mammalian skin surface. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 79B, 3–22.Google Scholar
Kartman, L., 1966. Insect allergy and arthropod-borne infection. A hypothesis. 1st Int. Cong. Parasit., 2, 1092–1093.Google Scholar
Lloyd, D. H., 1980. The inhabitants of the mammalian skin surface. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinb., 79B, 25–42.Google Scholar
Macadam, I., 1962. Bovine streptothricosis: Production of lesions by bites of the tick Amblyomma variegatum. Vet. Rec., 74, 643–646.Google Scholar
Macadam, I., 1970. Some observations on bovine cutaneous streptothricosis in Northern Nigeria. Trop. Anim. Hlth Prod., 2, 131–138.Google Scholar
Miles, A. A. and Misra, S. S., 1938. The estimation of the bactericidal power of the blood. J. Hyg. Camb., 38, 732–748.Google ScholarPubMed
Oduye, O. O., 1975a. Bovine cutaneous streptothricosis in Nigeria. Wld Anim. Rev., 16, 13–17.Google Scholar
Oduye, O. O., 1975b. Effects of various induced local environmental conditions and histopathological studies in experimental Dermatophilus congolensis infection in the bovine skin. Res. Vet. Sci., 19, 245–252.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Philpott, M. and Ezeh, A. O., 1978. The experimental transmission by Musca and Stomoxys species of D. congolensis infection between cattle. Br. Vet. J., 134, 515–520.Google Scholar
Plowright, W., 1956. Cutaneous streptothricosis of cattle. I. Introduction and epizootiological features in Nigeria. Vet. Rec., 68, 350–355.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. S., 1963. Barriers to Dermatophilus dermatonomus infection on the skin of sheep. Aust. J. Agric. Res., 14, 492–508.Google Scholar
Roberts, D. S., 1967. Dermatophilus infection. Vet. Bull. 37, 515–521.Google Scholar
Stewart, G. H., 1972. Dermatophilosis: A skin disease of animals and man. Vet. Rec., 91, 537–544, 555–561.Google Scholar