Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:24:28.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Adaptation of a Filarial Worm, Brugia patei, to a New Mosquito Host, Aedes togoi

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

B. R. Laurence  and
F. R. N. Pester
B. R. Laurence
Affiliation:
Departments of Entomology and Parasitology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
F. R. N. Pester
Affiliation:
Departments of Entomology and Parasitology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The filarial worm Brugia patei was brought to London from East Africa in the larval stage developing in Mansonia mosquitoes. Subsequent transmission to domestic cats was possible in London through a laboratory colony of Mansonia uniformis and the worm was very infective to this species of mosquito. The worm was much less infective to Aedes togoi and Anopheles gambiae.

2. Subsequent passage of the worm through Aedes togoi has increased its infectivity to this species of mosquito. The infection rate has risen from 43·6% in females of A. togoi fed on the cat original- ly infected by larvae from Mansonia mosquitoes, to 59·2% in females fed on a cat containing the first generation of worms to pass through A. togoi, to 79·1% in females fed on cats containing the second generation of worms to pass through A. togoi, to 86·7% in females fed on cats containing the third generation of worms to pass through A. togoi, to 89·8% in females fed on cats containing the fourth generation of worms to pass through A. togoi.

3. The distributions of infective stage larvae in female mosquitoes were negative binomial distributions. These were related to the distributions of microfilarial intake immediately after infection which were also negative binomial. From one generation of worms passed through the new mosquito host to the next the mean and the k value of the negative binomial of the infective stage larvae approached the same parameters for the distribution of microfilarial intake. By the fourth generation of worms passed through A. togoi the distributions of microfilarial intake and infective stage larvae developing in A. togoi were similar, suggesting close adaptation to the new mosquito host. A similar relation between these distributions was found originally in Mansonia. There were however considerable differences in these distributions between the two species of mosquito.

4. The experiment extended over a period of 6 years. The change in infectivity did not appear to be related to the microfilarial density, age of infection, or sex, in the mammalian host. Neither could it be related to the genetics of susceptibility in the mosquito, nor to mosquito culture techniques, nor to mosquito mortality.

5. It is concluded that the observed change in infectivity is best explained by a change in adaptation of the worm to the new intermediate host by selection within the mosquito of those microfilariae adapted to it. No major change in infectivity to the original intermediate host, Mansonia, was found during the experiment.

6. These findings are examined with reference to changes in adaptation to mosquito hosts in the history of Bancroftian filariasis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 41 , Issue 4 , December 1967 , pp. 365 - 392
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1967

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

Akov, S., 1962.—“A qualitative and quantitative study of the nutritional requirements of Aedes aegypii L. larvae.” J. Ins. Physiol., 8, 319–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J., 1924.—“Filariasis in British Guiana.” Lond. Sch trop. Med, Res. Mem., 7.Google Scholar
Annett, H. E., Dutton, J. E. and Elliott, J. H., 1901.—“Report of the malaria expedition to Nigeria. Part II. Filariasis.” Liv. Sch. trop. Med. Mem., 4.Google Scholar
Anon., 1769.—An essay on the natural history of Guiana in South America. London.Google Scholar
Anscombe, F. J., 1950.—“Sampling theory of the negative binomial and logarithmic series distributions.” Biometrika, 37, 358–382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Backhouse, T. C. and Woodhill, A. R., 1954.—“Wuchereria bancrofti from New Caledonia in relation to certain scutellaris group of mosquitoes.” Tech. Inf. Circ. S. Pacific Comm., 11, 1–9.Google Scholar
Backhouse, T. C., 1960.—“Further studies on the hospitality of some scutellaris group and other mosquitoes towards Wuchereria bancrofti in New Caledonia. Tech. Inf. Circ. S. Pacific Comm., 17, 1–4.Google Scholar
Bertram, D. S., 1950.—”Studies on the transmission of cotton rat filariasis. II.-Factors influencing the efficiency of the vector, Liponyssus bacoti.“ Ann. trop. Med. Parasit., 44, 55—83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhishagratna, K. K. L., 1911.—Sushruta Samhita. English Translation. Vol. II, Calcutta.Google Scholar
Bliss, C. I. and Fisher, R. A., 1953.—”Fitting the negative binomial distribution to biological data.“ Biometrics, 9, 176–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breinl, A., 1915.—”On the occurrence and prevalence of disease in British New Guinea.“ Ann. trop. Med. Parasit., 9, 285–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brug, S. L., 1939.—”Efficiency of filaria vectors.“ Proc. 3rd Congr. Trop. Med. Amsterdam, 1, 230–238.Google Scholar
Burnett, G. F., 1960.—“The arrival of Aedes (Ochlerotatus) vigilax (Skuse) in Fiji.” Pacif. Sci., 14, 389–394.Google Scholar
Buxton, P. A., 1928.—“Researches in Polynesia and Melanesia. Parts V-VII.” Lond. Sch. Hyg. trop. Med. Res. Mem., 2, 1–139.Google Scholar
Buxton, P. A. and Hopkins, G. H. E., 1927.—“Researches in Polynesia and Melanesia. Parts I-IV.” Lond. Sch. Hyg. trop. Med. Res. Mem., 1, 1–200.Google Scholar
De Rook, H., 1957.—“Filariasis on the Island of Pam (South Waigeo District, West New-Guinea).” Documenta Med. geogr. trop., 9, 197–212.Google ScholarPubMed
De Rook, H., 1959.—“Filariasis in the village of Inanwatan (South Coast of the Vogelkop, Netherlands New Guinea).” Trop. geogr. Med., 11, 313–331.Google ScholarPubMed
De Rook, H., AND Van Dijk, W. J. O. M., 1959.—“Changing concept of Wuchereria bancrofti transmission in Netherlands New Guinea.” Trop. geogr. Med., 11, 57–60.Google ScholarPubMed
De Zulueta, J. 1957.—“Observations on filariasis in Sarawak and Brunei.” Bull. Wld Hlth Org., 16, 699–705.Google Scholar
Estrada, J. P. and Basio, D. G., 1965.—“Filariasis in the Philippines.” J. Philipp. med. Ass., 41, 100–153.Google ScholarPubMed
Feng, L. C., 1939.—“The distribution and transmission of filariasis in China.” Proc. 3rd Congr. trop. Med. Amsterdam, 1, 239–248.Google Scholar
Gelfand, H. M., 1955.—“Studies on the vectors of Wuchereria bancrofti in Liberia.” Am. J. trop. Med. Hyg., 4, 52–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hicks, E. P., 1932.—“The transmission of Wuchereria bancrofti in Sierra Leone.” Ann. trop. Med. Parasit., 26, 407–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, M. O. T., 1965.—“Epidemiology of filariasis in the South Pacific.” S. Pacific Comm. Tech. Paper, 148, 1–183.Google Scholar
Kartman, L., 1953.—”Factors influencing infection of the mosquito with Dirofilaria immitis (Leidy. 1856).“ Expl Parasit., 2, 27–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kashikar, C. G., 1951.—Indian Medicine. By Jolly, J., English Translation. Poona.Google Scholar
Laurence, B. R., 1964.—”Autogeny in Aedes (Finlaya) togoi Theobald (Diptcra, Culicidae).“ J. Ins. Physiol., 10, 319–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurence, B. R., AND Pester, F. R. N., 1961a.—”The behaviour and development of Brugia patei (Buckley, Nelson and Heisch, 1958) in a mosquito host, Mansonia uniformis (Theobald).“ J. Helminth., 35, 285–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurence, B. R. 1961b.—”The ability of Anopheles gambiae Giles to transmit Brugia patei (Buckley, Nelson & Heisch).“ J. trop. Med. Hyg., 64, 169–171.Google Scholar
Li, Huei-Han, 1959.—”Studies on filariasis in New China.“ Chin. med. J., 78, 148–160.Google ScholarPubMed
Lien, J. C., 1960.—“Laboratory culture of Aedes (Finlaya) togoi (Theobald), 1907 and measurements of its susceptibility to insecticides.” Ent. exp. & appl., 3, 267–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ligon, R., 1657.—A true and exact History of the Island of Barbados 1647-1650. Reprinted by the Extra-Mural Dept. of University College of W. Indies. Caribbean Affairs, 1950, No. 6.Google Scholar
Low, G. C., 1901.—“Malarial and filarial diseases in Barbados.” Br. med. J., 1901(2), 687–689.Google Scholar
Macdonald, W. W., 1962a.—“The selection of a strain of Aedes aegypti susceptible to infection with semiperiodic Brugia malayi.” Ann. trop. Med. Parasit., 56, 368–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macdonald, W. W. 1902b.—”The genetic basis of susceptibility to infection with semiperiodic Brugia malayi in Aedes aegypti.” Ann. trop. Med. Parasit., 56, 373–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parry, J. H. and Sherlock, P. M., 1963.—A short history of the West Indies. London.Google Scholar
Phalen, J. M. and Nichols, H. J., 1908.—“Filariasis and elephantiasis in Southera Luzon.” Philipp. J. Sci., (B) 3, 293–304.Google Scholar
Pielou, D. P., 1960.—“Contagious distribution in the European red mite, Panonychus ulmi (Koch), and a method of grading population densities from a count of mite-free leaves.” Can. J. Zool., 38, 645–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozeboom, L. E. and Cabrera, B. D., 1964.—“Filariasis in Mountain Province, Luzon, Republic of the Philippines.” J. vied. Ent., 1, 18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozeboom, L. E., 1965.—“Filariasis caused by Wuchereria bancrofti in Palawan, Republic of the Philippines.” Am. J. Epidemiol., 81, 216–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Service, M. W., 1966.—“The replacement of Culex nebulosus Theo. by Culex pipiens fatigans Wied. (Diptera, Culicidae) in towns in Nigeria.” Bull, ent. Res., 56, 407–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, H. L. and Suggs, R. C., 1959.—“New dates for Polynesian Prehistory.” Man, 59, 12–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Towne, R., 1726.—A treatise of the diseases most frequent in the West-Indies, and herein more particularly of those which occur in Barbadoes. London.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, W. J. O. M., 1958.—“Transmission of Wuchereria bancrofti in Netherlands New-Guinea.” Trap, geogr. Med., 10, 21–33.Google ScholarPubMed
Wharton, R. H., 1957.—“Studies on Filariasis in Malaya: The efficiency of Mansonia longipaipis as an experimental vector of Wuchereria malayi.” Ann. trop. Med. Parasit, 51, 422–439.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wharton, R. H., 1960.—“Studies on Filariasis in Malaya: Field and laboratory investigations of the vectors of a rural strain of Wuchereria bancrofti.” Ann. trop. Med. Parasit, 54, 78–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wharton, R. H. 1963.—“Adaptation of Wuchereria and Brugia to mosquitoes and vertebrate hosts in relation to the distribution of filarial parasites.” Zoonoses Res., 2, 1–12.Google Scholar
Williams, C. B., 1964.—Patterns in the balance of nature and related problems in quantitative ecology. London.Google Scholar