Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T10:02:34.553Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Permeability changes in the egg-shell of hookworms during development and eclosion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

B. E. Matthews
B. E. Matthews
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JT
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The development and hatching of Ancylostoma ceylanicum and Ancylostoma tubaeforme eggs in a range of potentially inimical solutions has been examined using time-lapse video micro-recording techniques. In all compounds tested the larvae developed to the active pretzel stage. The inception of activity resulted in an increase in shell permeability to water and small molecules. In anthelmintics of molecular weight (Mr) 400 development continued normally until about the time that control eggs hatched, when there was a marked decrease in larval activity and eclosion did not occur. The addition of a low Mr surface-active agent potentiated the effect of the anthelmintic and caused larval activity to be lost earlier. The calcium inhibitor lanthanum chloride affected larval development rather than eclosion. Large Mr compounds did not affect either development or hatching and the results suggest that the egg-shell may act as a form of sieve, allowing the essential oxygen to reach the developing larva while excluding large potentially dangerous molecules. No appreciable differences were found between the two species of hookworm examined.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 93 , Issue 3 , December 1986 , pp. 547 - 557
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Arthur, E. J. & Sanborn, R. C. (1969). Osmotic and ionic regulation in nematodes. In Chemical Zoology, vol. 3, (ed. M., Florkin and Scheer, B. T.). New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ash, C. & Atkinson, H. J. (1984). Nematodirus battus: Permeability changes, calcium binding, and phosphorylation of the eggshell during hatching. Experimental Parasitology 58, 27–40.Google Scholar
Atkinson, H. J. & Ballantyne, A. (1979). Evidence for the involvement of calcium in the hatching of Globodera rostochiensis. Annals of Applied Biology 93, 191–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, H. J. & Taylor, J. D. (1980). Evidence for a calcium-binding site on the eggshell of Globodera rostochiensis with a role in hatching. Annals of Applied Biology 93, 307–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrett, J. (1976). Studies on the induction of permeability in Ascaris lumbricoides eggs. Parasitology 73, 109–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bird, A. F. (1971). The Structure of Nematodes. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bridge, J. (1974). Hatching of Tylenchorhynchus maximus and Merlinius icarus. Journal of Nematology 6, 101–2.Google ScholarPubMed
Clarke, A. J. & Hennessey, J. (1981). Calcium inhibitors and the hatching of Globodera rostochiensis. Nematologica 27, 190–8.Google Scholar
Clarke, A. J. & Perry, R. N. (1980). Egg-shell permeability and hatching of Ascaris suum. Parasitology 80, 447–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke, A. J., Perry, R. N. & Hennessey, J. (1978). Osmotic stress and the hatching of Globodera rostochiensis. Nematologica 24, 384–92.Google Scholar
Crofton, H. D. & Whitlock, J. H. (1965). Ecology and biological plasticity of sheep nematodes. V. The relationship between egg volume and hatching time. Cornell Veterinarian 55, 274–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Croll, N. A. (1974). Necator americanus: Activity in the egg and the mechanism of hatching. Experimental Parasitology 35, 80–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Croll, N. A. (1975). Components and patterns in the behaviour of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Journal of Zoology 176, 159–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drury, R. A. B. & Wallington, E. R. (1980). Carletons Histological Technique. 5th Edn. Oxford, New York and Toronto: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ehrenstein, G. von & Schierenberg, E. (1980). Cell lineages and development of Caenorhabditis elegans and other nematodes. In Nematodes as Biological Models, vol. 1. Behavioural and Developmental Models, (ed. Zuckerman, B. M.). New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ellenby, C. (1968). Desiccation survival in the plant parasitic nematodes Heterodera rostochiensis Wallenweber and Ditylenchus dipsaci (Kuhn) Filipjev. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B 169, 203–13.Google Scholar
Flegg, J. J. M. (1968). Embryonic studies of some Xiphinema and Longidorus species. Nematologica 14, 137–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaulenas, M. & Fairbairn, D. (1966). Induction of permeability in infective and uninfective eggs of Ascaris lumbricoides. Journal of Parasitology 53, 303–6.Google Scholar
Lane, C. (1923). The mass diagnosis of ankylostome infection, Part 1. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 16, 274–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Jambre, L. F., Crofton, H. D. & Whitlock, J. H. (1970). An assay technique for nematode egg hatchability. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 89, 397–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Jambre, L. F., Ratcliffe, L. H., Whitlock, J. H. & Crofton, H. (1970). Polymorphism and egg-size in the sheep nematode Haemonchus contortus. Evolution 24, 625–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthews, B. E. (1985). The influence of temperature and osmotic stress on the development and eclosion of hookworm eggs. Journal of Helminthology 59, 217–24.Google Scholar
Perry, R. N. & Clarke, A. J. (1981). Hatching mechanisms of nematodes. Parasitology 83, 435–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reed, K. C. & Bygrave, F. L. (1974). The inhibition of mitochondrial calcium transport by lanthanides and ruthenium red. The Biochemical Journal 140, 143–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, W. P. (1958). Physiology of the hatching of eggs of Ascaris lumbricoides. Nature, London 181, 1410–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, W. P. & Brookes, F. (1977). The mechanism of hatching of eggs of Haemonchus contortus. International Journal for Parasitology 7, 61–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tefft, P. M. & Bone, L. W. (1985). Leucine aminopeptidase in eggs of the soybean cyst nematode Heterodera glycines. Journal of Nematology 17, 270–4.Google Scholar
Thistlethwayte, B. (1969). Hatch of eggs and reproduction of Pratylenchus penetrans (Nematoda: Tylenchida). Ph.D. thesis, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Vinayak, V.K., Dhir, S., Chitkara, N. L. & Nail, S. R. (1978). Mechanism of hatching of larvae of Ancylostoma duodenale. Indian Journal of Parasitology 2, 7–9.Google Scholar
Wallace, H. R. (1968). Undulatory locomotion of the plant parasitic nematode Meloidogyne javanica. Parasitology 58, 377–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, D. A. (1979). Ascaris sp. Water loss during desiccation of embryonating eggs. Experimental Parasitology 48, 398–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wharton, D. A. (1980). Nematode egg-shells. Parasitology 81, 447–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, P. A. G. (1958). The effect of weak electrolyte solutions on the hatching of eggs of Trichostrongylus retortaeformis (Zeder) and its interpretation in terms of a proposed hatching mechanism of strongyloid eggs. Journal of Experimental Biology 35, 584–601.Google Scholar