Hostname: page-component-76c49bb84f-kjkt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-12T17:40:08.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of variations in host and parasite density on the level of parasitization of Lymnaea truncatula by Fasciola hepatica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

R. A. Wilson  and
Susan L. Taylor
R. A. Wilson
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of York, Heslington, York YO1 5DD
Susan L. Taylor
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of York, Heslington, York YO1 5DD
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Groups of the snail Lymnaea truncatula, maintained at a range of spatial densities, were exposed to different densities of miracidia of Fasciola hepatica. The resulting degree of parasitization was measured 3–4 weeks after infection. The relationship between parasite densities and parasitization appeared to be curvilinear. The lower than expected parasitization at high parasite densities could be explained by the multiple infection of some snails by two or more miracidia.

The level of parasitization was not related exponentially to the temperature at which infection was carried out. This was thought to be due to the inverse relationship between miracidial longevity and swimming speed, with respect to temperature. A depth of free water overlying a mud surface was an absolute requirement for miracidia to successfully infect snails.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 76 , Issue 1 , February 1978 , pp. 91 - 98
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, R. M. (1976). Dynamic aspects of parasite population ecology. In Ecological Aspects of Parasitology (ed. Kennedy, C. R.), pp. 431&62. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Gettinby, G. (1974). Assessment of the effectiveness of control techniques for liver fluke infection. In Ecological Stability (ed. Usher, M. B. and Williamson, M. H.). London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Hairston, N. G. (1965). On the mathematical analysis of schistosome populations. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 33, 45–62.Google ScholarPubMed
Hassell, & Varley, G. C. (1969). New inductive population model for insect parasites and its bearing on biological control. Nature, London 233, 1133–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, C. R. (1975). Ecological Animal Parasitology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kuris, A. M. (1973). Biological control: implications of the analogy between the trophic interactions of insect pest-parasitoid and snail-trematode systems. Experimental Parasitology 33, 365–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nice, N. G. & Wilson, R. A. (1974). A study of the effect of temperature on the growth of fasciola hepatica in Lymnaea truncatula. Parasitology 68, 47–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nicholson, A. J. (1933). The balance of animal populations. Journal of Animal Ecology 2, 132–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ollerenshaw, C. B. (1974). Forecasting liver-fluke disease. In The Effects of Meteorological Factors upon Parasites (ed. Taylor, A. E. R. and Muller, R.), pp. 32–52Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rowcliffe, S. A. & Ollerenshaw, C. B. (1960). Observations on the bionomics of the egg of Fasciola hepatica. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 54, 172–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt-Nielsen, K. (1975). Animal Physiology: Adaptation and Environment. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, R. A. (1968). The hatching mechanism of the egg of Fasciola hepatica L. Parasitology 58, 78–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, R. A. & Denison, J. (1970). Studies on the activity of the miracidium of the common liver fluke Fasciola hepatica. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 32, 301–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed