Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T04:20:28.316Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seasonal and spatial trends in the detectability of leprosy in wild armadillos

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

R. W. Truman ,
J. A. Kumaresan ,
C. M. McDonough ,
C. K. Job  and
R. C. Hastings
R. W. Truman
Affiliation:
Laboratory Research Branch, G.W.L. Hansen's Disease Center, Carville, Louisiana 70721, USA
J. A. Kumaresan
Affiliation:
Laboratory Research Branch, G.W.L. Hansen's Disease Center, Carville, Louisiana 70721, USA Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana
C. M. McDonough
Affiliation:
3Division of Environmental Studies, University of California, Davis, California
C. K. Job
Affiliation:
Laboratory Research Branch, G.W.L. Hansen's Disease Center, Carville, Louisiana 70721, USA
R. C. Hastings
Affiliation:
Laboratory Research Branch, G.W.L. Hansen's Disease Center, Carville, Louisiana 70721, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A survey for leprosy among 565 armadillos from Louisiana and Texas found IgM antibodies to the phenolic glycolipid-l antigen of Mycobacterium leprae in 16% of the animals. There were no geographic trends in the distribution of prevalence rates between the sites and the disease probably has a much greater range. Repeat observations in one location showed significant seasonal variations in the observable antibody prevalence rate, but the yearly average remained similar. Infected armadillos tended to be heavier, and the females usually had plasma progesterone concentrations indicative of sexual maturity. Using these characteristics to stratify the populations into adult and sub-adult cohorts, variations in the observable leprosy prevalence rate were seen to be proportional to changes in the age structure of the populations. Leprosy appears to be maintained in steady state within some regions, and nearly a third of the adult armadillos in Louisiana and Texas harbour M. leprae.

Type
Research Article
Information
Epidemiology & Infection , Volume 106 , Issue 3 , June 1991 , pp. 549 - 560
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

References

REFERENCES

1.Smith, JH, Folse, DS, Long, EG et al. Leprosy in wild armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus) of the Texas gulf coast: epidemiology and Mycobacteriology. J Reticuloendothel Soc 1983; 34: 75–88.Google ScholarPubMed
2.Walsh, GP, Storres, EE, Burchfield, HP,Vidrine, MF, Binford, CH.. Leprosy-like disease occurring naturally in armadillos. J Reticuloendothel Soc 1975; 18: 347–51.Google ScholarPubMed
3.Truman, RW,Shannon, EJ,Hugh-Jones, ME,Hagstad, HV,Wolf, A,Hastings, RC.Evaluation of the origin of M. leprae-infections in wild armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus). Am J Trop Med Hyg 1986; 35: 588–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Thomas, DA,Mines, JS,Mack, TM,Thomas, DC,Rea, TH.Armadillo exposure among Mexican-born patients with lepromatous leprosy. J Infect Dis 1987; 156: 990–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Walsh, GP,Meyers, WM,Binford, CH. Naturally acquired leprosy in the nine-banded armadillo: a decade of experience 1975–1985. J Leucocyte Biol 1986; 40: 645–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Lumpkin III, LR,Cox, GF,Wolf, JE.Leprosy in five armadillo handlers. J Am Acad Dermatol 1983; 9: 899–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.West, BC, Todd, JR, Lary, CH et al. Leprosy in six isolated residents of northern Louisiana. Arch Internal Med 1988; 148: 1987–92.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Meyers, WM,Walsh, GP,Binford, CH,Storrs, EE,Brown, HL. Indigenous leprosy in ninebanded armadillos. In: Anonymous ed.; Proceedings of the armadillo as an experimental model in biomedical research, a workshop held at the Pan American Center for Research and Training in leprosy and tropical diseases at Caracus, Venezuela. Pan American Health Organization Scientific Publication No. 366, 1978; 67–76.Google Scholar
9.Hall, ER.The mammals of North America, vol. 1. 2nd ed.New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1981: 690.Google Scholar
10.Walsh, GP,Storrs, EE,Meyers, WM,Binford, CH.Naturally acquired leprosy-like disease in nine-banded armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus): recent epizootiologic findings. J Reticuloendothel Soc 1977; 22: 363–8.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Kirchheimer, WD. Examination of north american armadillos for mycobacteriosis: a further report. Lepr India 1979; 51: 60–4.Google ScholarPubMed
12.Amezcua, ME,Escobar-Guitierrez, A, Storrs, EE,Dhople, AM,Burchfield, HP.Wild Mexican armadillo with leprosy-like infection. Int J Lepr 1984; 52: 254.Google ScholarPubMed
13.Acha, PN, Szyfres, B, eds. Leprosy. In: Zoonoses and communicable diseases common to man and animals. Pan American Health Organization Scientific publication No. 503, 1988; 89–95.Google Scholar
14.Martinez, AR, Resoagli, EH, De Millan, SG et al. , Lepra Salvje En Dasypus novemcinctus (Linneo 1758). Arch Argent Dermatol 1984; 34: 21–30.Google Scholar
15.Job, CK,Sanches, RM,Hastings, RC.Manifestations of experimental leprosy in the armadillo. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1985; 34: 151–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Truman, RW,Morales, MJ,Shannon, EJ,Hastings, RC.. Evaluation of monitoring antibodies to PGL-1 in armadillos experimentally infected with M. leprae. Int J Lepr 1986; 54: 556–59.Google Scholar
17.Hunter, SW,Fujiwara, T,Brennan, PJ.Structure and antigenicity of the major specific glycolipid antigen of Mycobacterium leprae. J Biol Chem 1982; 257: 15072–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Truman, RW,Job, CK,Hastings, RC. Antibodies to the phenolic glycolipid-1 antigen of Mycobacterhim leprae for epidemiologic investigations of leprosy in armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus). Lep Rev 1990; 61: 19–24.Google Scholar
19.Stalknecht, DE,Truman, RW,Hugh-Jones, ME,Job, CK.Surveillance for naturally acquired leprosy in a nine-banded armadillo population. J Wildlife Dis 1987; 23: 308–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Schumaker, FX,Eshmeyer, RW.The estimation of fish populations in lakes or ponds. J Tenn Acad Sci 1943; 18: 228–9.Google Scholar
21.Lloyd, M.Mean crowing. J Anim Ecol 1967; 36: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Job, CK,Sanchez, RM,Hastings, RC.. Effect of repeated lepromin testing on experimental nine-banded armadillo leprosy. Indian J Lepr 1985; 57: 716–26.Google ScholarPubMed
23.Green, B., Leake, RE, eds. Steroid hormones: a practical approach. Washington DC: ITLL Press 1989, 261.Google Scholar
24.Enders, AC.The reproductive cycle of the nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcindus). Symp Zool Soc Lond 1960; 15: 295–310.Google Scholar
25.Peppier, RD,Hossler, FE,Stone, SC.Determination of reproductive maturity in the female nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcindus). J Reprod Fert 1986; 76: 141–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Peppier, RD,Stone, SC.Plasma progesterone level during delayed implantation, gestation and post-partum period in the armadillo. Lab Animal Sci 1980; 30: 188–91.Google Scholar
27.Storrs, EE. The life and habitat of the Dasypus novemcindus. In: Anonymous ed.; Proceedings of the armadillo as an experimental model in biomedical research, a workshop held at the Pan American Center for Research and Training in leprosy and tropical diseases at Caracus, Venezuela. Washington DC: Pan American Health Organization Scientific Publication No. 366, 1978; 3–11.Google Scholar
28.Job, CK,Harris, EB,Allen, JL,Hastings, RC.. A random survey of leprosy in wild armadillos in Louisiana. Int J Lepr 1986; 54: 453–7.Google ScholarPubMed
29.Job, CK,Drain, VD,Truman, RW,Sanchez, RM,Hastings, RC.Early infection with M. leprae and antibodies to the phenolic glycolipid-1 in the nine-banded armadillo. Ind J Lepr 1990; 62: 193–201.Google Scholar
30.Newman, HH.The development of the nine-banded armadillo from primitive streak to birth, with special reference to the questions of polyembryony. J Morph 1910; 21: 359–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Sheppard, CC,Saitz, EW. Lepromin and tuberculin reactivity in adults not exposed to leprosy. J Immunol 1967; 99: 638–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar