Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:30:08.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rate and course of sporulation of oocysts of Eimeria acervulina under different environmental conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

E. A. M. Graat ,
A. M. Henken ,
H. W. Ploeger ,
J. P. T. M. Noordhuizen  and
M. H. Vertommen
E. A. M. Graat
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, Agricultural University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
A. M. Henken
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, Agricultural University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
H. W. Ploeger
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, Agricultural University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
J. P. T. M. Noordhuizen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, Agricultural University, P.O. Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
M. H. Vertommen
Affiliation:
Poultry Health Centre, P.O. Box 43, 3941 BP Doom, The Netherlands
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

An experiment was conducted to determine the rate and maximum percentage of sporulation of Eimeria acervulina oocysts at various environmental conditions relating to temperature (21 versus 33 °C) and relative humidity (RH) (40 versus 80%). Measurements were made during 44 h after excretion of oocysts in 3 substrates: dry litter, clammy litter and pure faeces respectively. Maximum sporulation percentage in both dry (22·6%) and clammy litter (19·5%) was higher (P < 0·005) than in pure faeces (11·6%). Neither temperature nor RH had a significant influence on percentage of oocysts that sporulated. Under these simulated practical conditions approximately 25% of all oocysts sporulated, whereas sporulation under optimal conditions (29 °C, aeration, 2% K2Cr2O7) showed a higher (68%) sporulation ability of oocysts. At 33 °C sporulation proceeded at a faster pace than at 21 °C (P < 0·005). With respect to RH and substrate, once sporulation started, the rate of increase to maximum percentage was not different. Time of onset of sporulation was influenced by temperature (P < 0·0001) and RH (P < 0·001). Time of onset occurred 15 h later at 21 °C compared with 33 °C and 5 h later at 40% RH compared with 80%. Also, an interaction effect (P < 0·01) was found with effect of RH being stronger at 21 °C compared with 33 °C. It was concluded that the most important aspect in the epidemiology of E. acervulina during a flock cycle is the time of onset of sporulation with temperature being the most important factor.

Keywords

Eimeria acervulinacoccidiosissporulationenvironmental conditions
Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 108 , Issue 5 , June 1994 , pp. 497 - 502
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

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

Bafundo, K. (1989). Protective responses produced by immunization of day-old chicks with either Eimeria maxima, E. acervulina or E. tenella live oocyst vaccines. In Coccidia and Intestinal Coccidiomorphs, Proceedings of the Vth International Coccidiosis Conference (ed. Yvore, P.), pp. 395–400. Tours, France: INRA.Google Scholar
Braunius, W. W. (1980). Clinical aspects, detection methods and the damage caused by coccidiosis in broilers. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 44, 99–104.Google Scholar
Chakravarty, M. & Kar, A. B. (1946). Effect of temperature on the sporulation and mortality of coccidian oocysts. Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences of India 12, 1–6.Google Scholar
Edgar, S. A. (1954). Effect of temperature on the sporulation of oocysts of the protozoan, Eimeria tenella. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 73, 237–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edgar, S. A. (1955). Sporulation of oocysts at specific temperatures and notes on the prepatent period of several species of avian coccidia. Journal of Parasitology 41, 214–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hein, H. (1968). The pathogenic effects of Eimeria acervulina in young chicks. Experimental Parasitology 22, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Henken, A. M., Goelema, J. O., Neijenhuis, F., Vertommen, M. H., Van Den Bos, J. & Fris, C. (1992). Multivariate epidemiological approach to coccidiosis in broilers. Poultry Science 71, 1849–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horton-Smith, C. & Long, P. L. (1954). Preliminary observations on the physical conditions of built-up litter and their possible effects on the parasitic populations. In Proceedings of the 10th World's Poultry Congress, pp. 266–72. Edinburgh, Scotland.Google Scholar
Joyner, L. P. & Norton, C. C. (1977). The anticoccidial effects of amprolium, dinitolmide and monensin against Eimeria maxima, E. brunetti and E. acervulina with particular reference to oocyst sporulation. Parasitology 75, 155–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, M. & Shih, J. C. H. (1988). Effect of anaerobic digestion on oocysts of the protozoan Eimeria tenella. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 54, 2335–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L. & Rowell, J. G. (1975). Sampling broiler house litter for coccidial oocysts. British Poultry Science 16, 583–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, S. W., Meek, A. H. & Willeberg, P. (1987). Veterinary Epidemiology. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Parry, S., Barratt, M. E. J., Jones, S., McKee, S. & Murray, J. D. (1992). Modelling coccidial infection in chickens: emphasis on vaccination by in-feed delivery of oocysts. Journal of Theoretical Biology 157, 407–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reid, M. W. (1973). A diagnostic chart for nine species of fowl coccidia. Research report 163, University of Georgia, College of Agriculture Experiment Stations, 17 pp.Google Scholar
Ruff, M. D., Anderson, W. I. & Reid, W. M. (1978). Effect of the anticoccidial arprinocid on production, sporulation, and infectivity of Eimeria oocysts. Journal of Parasitology 64, 306–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryley, J. F., Meade, R., Hazelhurst, J. & Robinson, T. E. (1976). Methods in coccidiosis research: separation of oocysts from faeces. Parasitology 73, 311–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sas Institute (1990). SAS/STAT® User's Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
Snedecor, G. W. & Cochran, W. G. (1980). Statistical Methods, 7th Edn.Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
Verstegen, M. W. A., Hel, W., Van, Der, Brandsma, H. A., Henken, A. M. & Bransen, A. M. (1987). The Wageningen respiration unit for animal production research: a description of the equipment and its possibilities. In Energy Metabolism of Farm Animals with Special Reference to Effects of Housing, Stress and Disease (ed. Verstegen, M. W. A. & Henken, A. M.), pp. 21–48. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
von Löwenstein, M. & Kutzer, E. (1989). Zum Einfluβ der Antikokzidia Diclazuril und Maduramicin auf die Sporulationsfähigkeit von Hühnerkokzidien. Wiener Tierärztliche Monatsschrift 76, 368–70.Google Scholar
Weaver, W. D. & Meijerhof, R. (1991). The effect of different levels of relative humidity and air movement on litter conditions, ammonia levels, growth, and carcass quality for broiler chickens. Poultry Science 70, 746–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed