Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T18:57:15.481Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Helminth communities of Leptodactylus latrans (Anura: Leptodactylidae) from the Atlantic rainforest, south-eastern Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2013

G.M. Toledo ,
D.H. Morais ,
R.J. Silva  and
L.A. Anjos
G.M. Toledo*
Affiliation:
Departamento de Parasitologia, Instituto de Biociências, UNESP – Universidade Estadual Paulista, Campus de Botucatu, Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil
D.H. Morais
Affiliation:
Departamento de Parasitologia, Instituto de Biociências, UNESP – Universidade Estadual Paulista, Campus de Botucatu, Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil
R.J. Silva
Affiliation:
Departamento de Parasitologia, Instituto de Biociências, UNESP – Universidade Estadual Paulista, Campus de Botucatu, Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil
L.A. Anjos
Affiliation:
Departamento de Biologia e Zootecnia, Faculdade de Engenharia de Ilha Solteira, UNESP – Universidade Estadual Paulista, São Paulo, Brazil
*
*E-mail: gisatoledo@hotmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The helminth fauna associated with Leptodactylus latrans, a large frog living in a disturbed environment of Atlantic rainforest in south-eastern Brazil, was evaluated. We found eight helminth taxa, including five nematode species, Falcaustra mascula, Oswaldocruzia subauricularis, Physaloptera sp., Rhabdias sp. and an unidentified cosmocercid, two trematodes, Gorgoderina parvicava and Haematoloechus fuelleborni, and one larval cestode. The overall prevalence of infection was 63.2% with a mean intensity of 11.3 ± 3.8. The cosmocercid nematode and O. subauricularis showed the highest prevalences, although the trematode G. parvicava was the most abundant and dominant parasite species. Host size positively influenced both the intensity of infection and parasite species richness. Our data suggest that the juvenile individuals of L. latrans are more susceptible to parasitic infection than the adults. The comparison of the similarity of this community component with that found in other studies in South America shows that, as well as the characteristics of the host, the sampling area also influences the parasitic fauna. Therefore, the results of this study agree that the helminth communities of frogs have relatively low species richness and dominance of generalist species.

Type
Short Communication
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 89 , Issue 2 , March 2015 , pp. 250 - 254
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

Achaval, F. & Olmos, A. (2007) Anfíbios y Reptiles Del Uruguay. Serie Fauna n.1. 3rd edn.160 pp. Montivideo, Uruguay, Zonalibro Industria Gráfica.Google Scholar
Aho, J.M. (1990) Helminth communities of amphibians and reptiles: comparative approaches to understanding patterns and process. pp. 157–190in Esch, G.W., Bush, A.O. & Aho, J.M. (Eds) Parasite communities patterns and process. London, Chapman and Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, R.C. (2000) Nematode parasites of vertebrates: their development and transmission. 2nd edn.New York, CABI Publishing.Google Scholar
Anderson, R.C., Chabaud, A.G. & Willmott, S. (2009) Keys to the nematode parasites of vertebrates. Archival volume. 463 pp. Wallingford, CABI International.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, M., Ayres, M. Jr, Ayres, D.L. & Santos, A.A. (2007) BIOESTAT – aplicações estatísticas nas áreas das ciências bio-médicas. Belém, Paraíba, Brazil, Ong Mamiraua.Google Scholar
Bolek, M.G. & Coggins, J.R. (2003) Helminth community structure of sympatric eastern American toad, Bufo americanus americanus, northern leopard frog, Rana pipiens, and blue-spotted salamander, Amphystoma laterale, from southeastern Wisconsin. Journal of Parasitology 89, 673–680.Google Scholar
Boquimpani-Freitas, L., Vrcibradic, D., Vicente, J.J., Bursey, C.R., Rocha, C.F.D.V. & Sluys, M. (2001) Helminths of the horned leaf frog, Proceratophrys appendiculata, from southeastern Brazil. Journal of Helminthology 75, 233–236.Google ScholarPubMed
Brusquetti, F. & Lavilla, E.O. (2006) Lista comentada de los anfíbios de Paraguay. Cuadernos de Herpetología 20, 3–79.Google Scholar
Bursey, C.R., Goldberg, S.R. & Parmelee, J.R. (2001) Gastrointestinal helminths of 51 species of anurans from Reserva Cuzco Amazónico, Peru. Comparative Parasitology 68, 21–35.Google Scholar
Bush, A.O., Lafferty, K.D., Lotz, J.M. & Shostak, A.W. (1997) Parasitology meets ecology on its terms: Margolis et al. revisited. Journal of Parasitology 83, 575–583.Google Scholar
Campião, K.M., Silva, R.J. & Ferreira, V.L. (2009) Helminth parasites of Leptodactylus podicipinus (Anura: Leptodatylidae) from south-eastern Pantanal, State of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. Journal of Helminthology 83, 345–349.Google Scholar
Duellman, W.E. & Trueb, L. (1994) Biology of amphibians. 670 pp. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Duré, M.I. (1999) Leptodactylus chaquensis (NCN). Diet. Herpetological Review 30, 92.Google Scholar
Frost, D.R. (1985) Amphibian species of the world, a taxonomic and geographical reference. Lawrence, Allen Press.Google Scholar
Gibbons, L. (2010) Keys to the nematode parasites of vertebrates. Supplementary volume. 416 pp. Wallingford, CABI International.Google Scholar
Goldberg, S.R., Bursey, C.R., Caldwell, J.P., Vitt, L.J. & Costa, G.C. (2007) Gastrointestinal helminths from six species of frogs and three species of lizards, sympatric in Pará State, Brazil. Comparative Parasitology 74, 327–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, S.R., Bursey, C.R., Caldwell, J.P. & Shepard, D.B. (2009) Gastrointestinal helminths of six sympatric species of Leptodactylus from Tocantins State, Brazil. Comparative Parasitology 76, 258–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamann, M.I. & Kehr, A.I. (1998) Variación espacio temporal en infrapoblaciones de helmintos y su relación con las fluctuaciones poblacionales de Hyla nana (Anura, Hylidae). Cuadernos de Herpetología 12, 23–33.Google Scholar
Hamann, M.I., González, C.E. & Kehr, A.I. (2006a) Helminth community structure of the oven frog Leptodactylus latinasus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) from Corrientes, Argentina. Acta Parasitologica 51, 294–299.Google Scholar
Hamann, M.I., Kehr, A.I. & González, C.E. (2006b) Species affinity and infracommunity ordination of helminths of Leptodactylus chaquensis (Anura: Leptodactylidae) in two contrasting environments from northeastern Argentina. Journal of Parasitology 92, 1171–1179.Google Scholar
Heyer, W.R., Rand, A.S., Cruz, C.A.G., Peixoto, O. & Nelson, C.E. (1990) Frogs of Boracéia. Arquivos de Zoologia (São Paulo) 31, 231–410.Google Scholar
Holmes, R.M., Bocchiglieri, A., Caldeira de Araújo, F.R.R. & Silva, R.J. (2008) New records of endoparasites infecting Hypsiboas albopunctatus (Anura: Hylidae) in a savanna area in Brasília, Brazil. Parasitology Research 102, 621–623.Google Scholar
Janovy, J., Clopton, R.E. & Percival, T.J. (1992) The roles of ecological and evolutionary influence in providing structure to parasite species assemblages. Journal of Parasitology 78, 630–640.Google Scholar
Klain, T., Gomes, M.A., Tavares, L.E.R., Rocha, C.F.D. & Van Sluys, M. (2011) Diet and nematode infection in Proceratoprhys boiei (Anura: Cycloramphidae) from two Atlantic rainforest remnants in Southeastern Brazil. Anais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências 83, 1303–1312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovach, W.L. (1999) MVSP: A multivariate statistical package for Windows. v. 3.11. 133 pp. Pentraeth, Wales, UK, Kovach Computing Services.Google Scholar
Kwet, A. & Di-Bernardo, M. (1999) Pró-Mata – Anfíbios. Amphibien. Amphibians. 107 pp. Porto Alegre, EDIPUCRS.Google Scholar
Lavilla, E.O., Langone, J.A., Caramaschi, U., Heyer, W.R. & De Sá, R.O. (2010) The identification of Rana ocellata Linnaeus, 1758. Nomenclatural impact on the species currently known as Leptodactylus ocellatus (Leptodactylidae) and Osteopilus brunneus (Gosse, 1851) (Hylidae). Zootaxa 2346, 1–16.Google Scholar
Luque, J.L., Martins, A.N. & Tavares, L.E.R. (2005) Community structure of metazoan parasites of the yellow Cururu toad, Bufo ictericus (Anura, Bufonidae) from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Acta Parasitologica 50, 215–220.Google Scholar
Magurran, A.E. (1988) Ecological diversity and its measurement. 179 pp. Princeton, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Magurran, A.E. (2004) Measuring biological diversity. 260 pp. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Maneyro, R., Naya, D.E., Rosa, I., Canavero, A. & Camargo, A. (2004) Diet of the South American frog Leptodactylus ocellatus (Anura, Leptodactylidae) in Uruguay. Iheringia, Série Zoologia 94, 57–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinhão, R., Wunderlich, A.C., Anjos, L.A. & Silva, R.J. (2009) Helminths of toad Rhinella icterica (Bufonidae), from the municipality of Botucatu, São Paulo State, Brazil. Neotropical Helminthology 3, 35–40.Google Scholar
Poulin, R. (1993) The disparity between observed and uniform distributions: a new look at parasite aggregation. International Journal for Parasitology 23, 937–944.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, H.O., Rodrigues, S.S. & Cristofaro, R. (1982) Contribuição ao conhecimento da fauna helmintológica de Barra do Piraí, estado do Rio de Janeiro. Atas da Sociedade de Biologia do Rio de Janeiro 23, 5–8.Google Scholar
Rodrigues, H.O., Rodrigues, S.S. & Faria, Z. (1990) Contribution to the knowledge of the helminthological fauna of vertebrates of Maricá, Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil. Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz 85, 115–116.Google Scholar
Rózsa, L., Reiczigel, J. & Majoros, G. (2000) Quantifying parasites in samples of hosts. Journal of Parasitology 86, 228–232.Google Scholar
Santos, V.G.T. & Amato, S.B. (2010) Helminth fauna of Rhinella fernandezae (Anura: Bufonidae) from the Rio Grande do Sul Coastland, Brazil: analysis of the parasite community. Journal of Parasitology 96, 823–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaefer, E.F., Hamann, M.I., Kehr, A.I., González, C.E. & Duré, M.I. (2006) Trophic, reproductive and parasitological aspects of the ecology of Leptodactylus chaquensis (Anura: Leptodactylidae) in Argentina. Herpetological Journal 16, 387–394.Google Scholar
Schmidt, G.D. (1986) CRC handbook of tapeworm identification. 675 pp. Florida, CRC Press.Google Scholar
Stumpf, I.V.K. (1982) Helmintos em Leptodactylus ocellatus (L. 1758) em Curitiba, Brasil. Acta Biologica Paranaense 10/11, 215–218.Google Scholar
Vicente, J.J. & Santos, E. (1976) Fauna helmintológica de Leptodactylus ocellatus (L.) de Volta Redonda, Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Atas Sociedade de Biologia do Rio de Janeiro 18, 27–42.Google Scholar
Vicente, J.J., Rodrigues, H.O., Gomes, D.C. & Pinto, R.M. (1991) Nematóides do Brasil. Parte II: Nematóides de anfíbios. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 7, 549–626.Google Scholar
Yamaguti, S. (1959) Systema Helminthum – cestodes. Vol. II. London, Interscience Publishers.Google Scholar
Yamaguti, S. (1961) Systema Helminthum – nematodes. Vol. III, Parts I and II. London, Interscience Publishers.Google Scholar