Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:35:02.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Eimeria duodenalis sp.nov. from English covert pheasants (Phasianus sp.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

C. C. Norton
Affiliation:
Central Veterinary Laboratory, Weybridge, Surrey

Extract

A new species of coccidium E. duodenalis sp.nov., has been described, from the pheasant. It is characterized by the subspherical shape of the oocyst, the lack of polar granules and the presence of large sporocystic residual bodies. Endogenous stages are found in the epithelial cells lining the villi, and occur chiefly in the duodenum and upper intestine. Second-generation merozoites form gametocytes and/or third-generation schizonts. The prepatent period is 5 days.

E. duodenalis is moderately pathogenic, doses of 50 000 oocysts causing a 30% mortality and a significant weight loss in the survivors. Treatment with a range of sulphonamides in the drinking water was successful as was preventive treatment with Sulphaquinoxaline mixed with the food.

Acknowledgements are due to Mr S. F. M. Davies for initiating this programme and carrying out a number of the animal inoculations, to Dr Helen Hein for help and advice in the design of the experiments and to Dr L. P. Joyner for advice in the preparation of the manuscript. The author also wishes to thank Miss C. N. Hebert for the statistical analysis of weight gains and Mr M. A. Peirce, Mr G. L. Choon, Miss J. Saddington and Miss M. Blore for technical assistance.

Type
Research Article
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

REFERENCES

Coles, C. (1958). Planning for pheasants. Agriculture, Lond. 65, 57.Google Scholar
Davies, S. F. M. & Joyner, L. P. (1963). Design of therapy for the control of species of Eimeria in the domestic fowl. J. Comp. Path. Ther. 73, 379–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davies, S. F. M., Joyner, L. P. & Kendall, S. B. (1963). Coccidiosis, 264 pp. Edinburgh, London: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Doran, D. J. & Farr, M. M. (1962). Excystation of the poultry coccidium, Eimeria acervulina. J. Protozool. 9, 154–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hawkins, P. A. (1952). Coccidiosis in turkeys. Mich. St. Coll. Tech. Bull. no. 226.Google Scholar
Himes, M. & Moriber, L. (1956). A triple-stain for deoxyribonucleic acid, polysaccharides and proteins. Stain. Tech. 31, 6770.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, M. B. (1965 a). Survey of game bird diseases. A. Rep., Game Res. Ass. no. 4, 45–8.Google Scholar
Jones, M. B. (1965 b). Coccidiosis and coccidiostats. A. Rep., Game Res. Ass. no. 4. 75–6.Google Scholar
Long, P. L. (1963). The effect of a combination of Sulphaquinoxaline and Amprolium against different species of Eimeria in chickens. Vet. Rec. 75, 645–50.Google Scholar
Long, P. L. & Rowell, J. G. (1958). Counting oocysts of chicken coccidia. Lab. Pract. 7, 515–18.Google Scholar
Moore, E. N. & Brown, J. A. (1952). A new coccidium of turkeys, Eimeria innocua n.sp. (Protozoa: Eimeriidae). Cornell Vet. 42, 395402.Google ScholarPubMed
Ormsbee, R. A. (1939). Field studies on coccidiosis in the ring-neck pheasants of Eastern Washington. Parasitology 31, 389–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pellérdy, L. P. (1965). Coccidia and coccidiosis, 657 pp. Budapest: Akadémiai kiadó.Google Scholar
Trigg, P. I. (1965). The life cycle and pathogenicity of Eimeria phasiani from the pheasant. Progress in Protozoology. Abstracts from 2nd Int. Conf. Protozool. London. Excerpta med.Google Scholar
Tyzzer, E. E. (1929). Coccidiosis in gallinaceous birds. Am. J. Hyg. 10, 269383.Google Scholar
Yakimoff, W. L. & Matschoulsky, S. N. (1937). Nouvelle coccidie du faisan. Annls Parasit. hum. comp. 15, 162–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar