Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T22:41:58.745Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies with Eimeria acervulina and E. mivati: pathogenicity and cross-immunity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

C. C. Norton and
L. P. Joyner
C. C. Norton
Affiliation:
Central Veterinary Laboratory, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, New Haw, Weybridge, Surrey
L. P. Joyner
Affiliation:
Central Veterinary Laboratory, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, New Haw, Weybridge, Surrey
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Pathogenic effects caused by graded doses of recent isolates of Eimeria acervulina, E. mivati and a new isolate, thought at first to be E. mitis, were compared. Cross-immunity studies were conducted with 3 strains of E. acervulina and 2 strains of E. mivati, together with the new isolate. The results showed marked similarities between E. mivati and the new isolate and clear distinctions between these and E. acervulina. E. mivati produced scattered petechiae but did not form discrete lesions in the intestine comparable to those seen with E. acervulina. Endogenous stages of E. mivati were most numerous in the lower small intestine and proximal caeca. The ratio of villus height to total mucosal thickness in the lower intestine was reduced. Similar changes caused by E. acervulina were seen in the anterior intestine only.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 81 , Issue 2 , October 1980, pp. 315 - 323
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

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

Edgar, S. A. & Seibold, C. T. (1964). A new coccidium of chickens, Eimeria mivati sp. n. (Protozoa Eimeriidae) with details of its life history. Journal of Parasitology 50, 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hein, H. E. (1968). The pathogenic effects of Eimeria acervulina in young chicks. Experimental Parasitology 22, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, J. & Reid, W. M. (1970). Anticoccidial drugs: lesion scoring techniques in battery and floor pen experiments with chickens. Experimental Parasitology 28, 30–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joyner, L. P. (1958). Experimental Eimeria mitis infections in chickens. Parasitology 48, 101–12.Google ScholarPubMed
Joyner, L. P. (1969). Immunological variation between two strains of Eimeria acervulina. Parasitology 59, 725–32.Google ScholarPubMed
Joyner, L. P. & Long, P. L. (1974). The specific characters of the Eimeria, with special reference to the coccidia of the domestic fowl. Avian Pathology 3, 145–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joyner, L. P. & Norton, C. C. (1980). The Eimeria acervulina complex: problems of differentiation of Eimeria acervulina, E. mitis and E. mivati. Protozoological Abstracts 4, 45–52.Google Scholar
Long, P. L. (1972). Eimeria mivati: reproduction, pathogenicity and immunogenicity of a strain maintained in chick embryos by serial passage. Journal of Comparative Pathology and Therapeutics 82, 439–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L. (1973). Studies on the relationship between Eimeria acervulina and Eimeria mivati. Parasitology 67, 143–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L. (1974). Experimental infection of chickens with two species of Eimeria isolated from the Malaysian jungle fowl. Parasitology 69, 337–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Long, P. L., Joyner, L. P., Millard, B. J. & Norton, C. C. (1976). A guide to laboratory techniques used in the study and diagnosis of avian coccidiosis. Folia Veterinaria Latina 6, 201–17.Google Scholar
Marquardt, W. C. (1973). Host and site specificity in the coccidia. In The Coccidia, (ed. Hammond, D. M. and Long, P. L.), pp. 23–43. Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Pout, D. D., Hebert, C. N. & Payne, R. (1971). The possible use of simple biometrics of fowl intestine. Research in Veterinary Science 12, 101–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ryley, J. F. & Betts, M. J. (1973). Chemotherapy of chicken coccidiosis. Advances in Pharmacology and Chemotherapy 11, 221–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shirley, M. W. (1979 a). A reappraisal of the taxonomic status of Eimeria mivati Edgar and Seibold 1964, by enzyme electrophoresis and cross-immunity tests. Parasitology 78, 221–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shirley, M. W. (1979 b). Studies on the pathogenicity of chicken-maintained (virulent) and embryo-adapted (attenuated) strains of Eimeria mivati. Avian Pathology 8, 469–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shirley, M. W. & Rollinson, D. (1979). Coccidia: the recognition and characterization of populations of Eimeria. Symposia of the British Society for Parasitology 17, 7–30.Google Scholar
Tyzzer, E. E. (1929). Coccidiosis in gallinaceous birds. American Journal of Hygiene 10, 269–383.Google Scholar