Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T03:47:44.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The presence of predators modifies the larval development of Fasciola hepatica in surviving Lymnaea truncatula

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2024

D. Rondelaud*
Affiliation:
UPRES EA no. 3174, Facultés de Pharmacie et de Médecine, 2 rue du Docteur Raymond Marcland, 87025 Limoges Cedex, France
P. Vignoles
Affiliation:
UPRES EA no. 3174, Facultés de Pharmacie et de Médecine, 2 rue du Docteur Raymond Marcland, 87025 Limoges Cedex, France
G. Dreyfuss
Affiliation:
UPRES EA no. 3174, Facultés de Pharmacie et de Médecine, 2 rue du Docteur Raymond Marcland, 87025 Limoges Cedex, France
*
*Fax: 33 5 55 43 58 93 Email: rondelaud@pharma.unilim.fr

Abstract

Experimental infections of Lymnaea truncatula with Fasciola hepatica were performed to study the consequences of the presence of predators (sciomyzid larvae or zonitid snails) on the characteristics of larval F. hepatica development in surviving snails. Controls consisted of infected snails that were not subjected to predators. Compared to controls, the survival rate at day 30 post-exposure, the duration of cercarial shedding, and the number of cercariae shed by surviving snails were significantly lower when predators were present in snail breeding boxes, whatever the type of predator used. In contrast, the prevalences of Fasciola infections in snails, and the length of time between exposure and the onset of cercarial shedding showed no significant variation. The progressive development of a stress reaction in surviving snails against predators during the first 30 days of experimental exposure to F. hepatica would influence snail survival during the cercarial shedding period and, consequently, the number of cercariae shed by the snails.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

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

Abrous, M., Rondelaud, D. & Dreyfuss, G. (2001) The stress of Lymnaea truncatula just before miracidial exposure with Fasciola hepatica increased the prevalence of infection. Experimental Parasitology (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Augot, D., Abrous, M., Rondelaud, D. & Dreyfuss, G. (1996) Paramphistomum daubneyi and Fasciola hepatica: the redial burden and cercarial shedding in Lymnaea truncatula submitted to successive unimiracidial cross-exposures. Parasitology Research 82, 623627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berg, C.O. (1964) Snail control in trematode diseases: the possible value of sciomyzid larvae, snail-killing Diptera. Advances in Parasitology 2, 259309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Didier, B. & Rondelaud, D. (1989) Les caractéristiques des proies consommées par le mollusque Zonitoides nitidus Müller et leur dynamique en juin, juillet et août. Bulletin de la Société d'Histoire Naturelle de Toulouse 125, 111117.Google Scholar
Knutson, L. (1976) Sciomyzid flies. Another approach to biological control of snail-borne diseases. Insect World Digest 3, 1218.Google Scholar
Rondelaud, D. (1975) La prédation de Lymnaea (Galba) truncatula Müller par Zonitoides nitidus Müller, moyen de lutte biologique. Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 50, 5561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rondelaud, D. (1978) Le comportement des Limnées tronquées (Lymnaea (Galba) truncatula Müller) saines ou infestées par Fasciola hepatica L. en présence de leurs prédateurs. Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 53, 6374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stat-Itcf (1988) Manuel d'utilisation. Institut Technique des Céréales et des Fourrages, Service des Études Statistiques, Boigneville, France, 210 pp.Google Scholar
Taylor, E.L. (1965) Fascioliasis and the liver-fluke. FAO Agricultural Studies, Roma, no 64, 235.Google Scholar
Vala, J.C. (1989) Diptères Sciomyzidae euroméditerranéens. Faune de France, no. 72. Fédération Française des Sociétés de Sciences Naturelles, Paris, 300 pp.Google Scholar