Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T10:18:37.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Histochemistry of Hymenolepis microstoma (Cestoda: Hymenolepididae)

II. Regional distribution of succinic dehydrogenase*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Burton J. Bogitsh  and
David A. Nunnally
Burton J. Bogitsh
Affiliation:
Department of General Biology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
David A. Nunnally
Affiliation:
Department of General Biology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Reduction of neotetrazolium in the presence of succinate is used as a quantitative assay for succinic dehydrogenase activity in homogenates of Hymenolepis microstoma, and nitro blue tetrazolium and thiazolyl blue tetrazolium-cobalt are employed with cryostat sections for its histochemical localization in adults and cysticercoids. The highest concentrations of the enzyme occur in the anterior region of the worm (scolex, neck, and immature proglottids), lesser amounts in the region of mature and early gravid segments, and least amounts in the gravid region of the strobila. Primary sites of succinic dehydrogenase activity are the mitochondrial layer of the cuticle and the cells of the subcuticle. In the anterior region the entire parenchyma shows uniformly high concentrations of enzyme activity. This reaction decreases posteriorly until, in the gravid region, only the subcuticle and the mitochondrial layer of the cuticle display activity. Intense activity was also noted in the layer just under the shells of the eggs. The ovary and immature testes show high enzyme concentrations; however, in the testes, the concentration diminishes as the organs mature. In the scolex, the rostellum and the muscles of the suckers show higher enzyme activity than the surrounding tissues. The scolex, inner membrane, and tail of the cysticercoid show uniformly high concentrations of formazan.

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 56 , Issue 1 , February 1966 , pp. 55 - 61
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

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

Bogitsh, B. J. (1963). Histochemical studies on Hymenolepis microstoma (Cestoda: Hymenolepididae). J. Parasit. 49, 989–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daugherty, J. W. & Taylor, D. (1956). Regional distribution of glycogen in the rat cestode, Hymenolepis diminuta. Expl Parasit. 5, 376–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, E. & Nolf, L. O. (1954). Succinic dehydrogenase activity in the cestode Hymenolepis nana. Expl Parasit. 3, 275–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hedrick, R. M. (1956). The distribution of succinic dehydrogenase activity in Hymenolepis diminuta and Raillietina cesticillus. J. Parasit. 43 (Sect. 2, Suppl.), 34.Google Scholar
Heyneman, D. & Voge, M. (1960). Succinic dehydrogenase activity in cysticercoids of Hymenolepis (Cestoda: Hymenolepididae) measured by the tetrazolium technique. Expl Parasit. 9, 14–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowry, O. H., Rosebrough, N. J., Farr, A. L. & Randall, R. J. (1951). Protein measurement with the phenol reagent. J. biol. Chem. 193, 265–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lumsden, R. D. (1965). Autoradiographic and electron microscope studies on the synthesis and intracellular transport of macro-molecules in the cestode integument. J. Parasit. 51 (Sect. 2, Suppl.), 41.Google Scholar
Nachlas, M. M., Tsou, K. C., Souza, E., Cheng, C. S. & Seligman, A. M. (1957). Cytochemical demonstration of succinic dehydrogenase by the use of a new p–nitro-phenyl substituted ditetrazole. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 5, 420–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunnally, D. A. (1962). The functional differentiation of the small intestine X. Duodenal succinic dehydrogenase in chick embryos and hatched chicks. J. exp. Zool. 149, 103–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oyama, V. I. & Eagle, H. (1956). Measurement of cell growth in tissue culture with a phenol reagent (Folin-Ciocalteu). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 91, 305–7.Google Scholar
Pearse, A. G. E. (1960). Histochemistry: Theoretical and Applied, 2nd ed.Boston: Little Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Read, C. P. (1952). Contributions to cestode enzymology. I. The cytochrome system and succinic dehydrogenase in Hymenolepis diminuta. Expl Parasit. 1, 353–62.Google Scholar
Read, C. P. (1956). Carbohydrate metabolism of Hymenolepis diminuta. Expl Parasit. 5, 325–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Read, C. P. & Simmons, J. E. Jr (1963). Biochemistry and physiology of tapeworms. Physiol. Rev. 43, 263–305.Google Scholar
Rothman, A. H. & Lee, D. L. (1963). Histochemical demonstration of dehydrogenase activity in the cuticle of cestodes. Expl Parasit. 14, 333–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Threadgold, L. T. (1962). An electron microscope study of the tegument and associated structures of Dipylidium canium. Q. Jl microsc. Sci. 103, 135–40.Google Scholar
Waitz, J. A. & Schardein, J. L. (1963). Histochemical studies of four cylophyllidean cestodes. J. Parasit. 50, 271–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar