Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-gs9qr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T08:24:22.832Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Echinococcus granulosus: changes in the surface ultrastructure during protoscolex formation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

M. T. Rogan  and
K. Sylvia Richards
M. T. Rogan
Affiliation:
Parasitology Research Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Keele, Keele, Staffs. ST5 5BG
K. Sylvia Richards
Affiliation:
Parasitology Research Laboratory, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Keele, Keele, Staffs. ST5 5BG
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Changes in the tegumentary projections of protoscoleces of Echinococcus granulosus, developing within brood capsules, were examined at the ultrastructural level. The original scant covering of spineless, truncated microtriches was supplemented by a population of microvilli covering the entire surface of protoscoleces in the early stages of formation. As differentiation continued, rostellar hooks were formed by enlargement of single large (T 1) microtriches, and normal spined microtriches were produced on the sucker region. These were formed in two ways: by addition of spine material to the truncated microtriches, and de novo followed by up-lifting from the tegumentary surface. A second type of large microthrix (T2) was present in a band immediately below the developing hooks. These microtriches appeared to be formed from a fusion of existing microtriches, but were subsequently lost prior to scolex invagination. The microvilli were also shed from both the sucker and soma regions, to be replaced by microtriches and small blunt elevations respectively.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Parasitology , Volume 94 , Issue 2 , April 1987 , pp. 359 - 367
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

Bilqees, F. M. & Freeman, R. S. (1969). Histogenesis of the rostellum of Taenia crassiceps (Zeder, 1800) (Cestoda), with special reference to hook development. Canadian Journal of Zoology 47, 251–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bortoletti, G. & Ferretti, G. (1973). Investigation on larval forms of Echinococcus granulosus with electron microscope. Rivista di Parassitologia 34, 89–110.Google Scholar
Conder, G. A., Marchiondo, A. A., Williams, J. F. & Andersen, F. L. (1983). Freeze-etch characterization of the teguments of three metacestodes: Echinococcus granulosus, Taenia crassiceps, and Taenia taeniaeformis. Journal of Parasitology 69, 539–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dew, H. R. (1922). Observations on the mode of development of brood capsules and scolices in the encysted stage of Taenia echinococcus. Medical Journal of Australia 2, 381–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engelkirk, P. G. & Williams, J. F. (1983). Taenia taeniaeformis (Cestoda) in the rat: ultrastructure of the host–parasite interface on days 8 to 22 postinfection. Journal of Parasitology 69, 828–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hess, E. (1980). Ultrastructural study of the tetrathyridium of Mesocestoides corti Hoeppli, 1925; tegument and parenchyma. Zeitschrift für Parasitenkunde 61, 135–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hulínská, D. (1980). The morphogenesis of microtriches in the tegument of Taenia hydatigena throughout its larval development. Folia Parasitologica 27, 329–36.Google ScholarPubMed
Lopez-Campos, J. L., Linares, J., Alonso, J., Aneiros, J. & Diaz-Flores, L. (1978). Estudio de la capa laminada, membranas germinativas y tegumento del protoescolex del Echinococcus granulosus en su localizacion humana. Morfologia normal y patologia 2, 99–109.Google Scholar
Lumsden, R. D. (1975). Surface ultrastructure and cytochemistry of parasitic helminths. Experimental Parasitology 37, 267–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lumsden, R. D., Oaks, J. A. & Mueller, J. F. (1974). Brush border development in the tegument of the tapeworm Spirometra mansonoides. Journal of Parasitology 60, 209–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lumsden, R. D., Voge, M. & Sogandares-Bernal, F. (1982). The metacestode integument: fine structure, development, topochemistry, and interactions with the host. In Cysticercosis: Present State of Knowledge and Perspectives, (ed. Flisser, A., Willms, K., Laclette, J. P., Larralde, C., Ridaura, C. and Beltran, F.), pp. 307–61. New York and London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, B. M. & Burt, M. D. B. (1982). Polymorphism of microtriches in the cysticercoid of Ophryocotyle insignis Lonnberg, 1890 from the limpet Patella vulgata. Canadian Journal of Zoology 61, 1062–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKinnon, B. M. & Burt, M. D. B. (1984). The development of the tegument and cercomer of the polycephalic larvae (cercoscolices) of Paricterotaeniaparadoxa (Rudolphi, 1802) (Cestoda: Dilepidae) at the ultrastructural level. Parasitology 88, 117–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, D. D. & Barrett, N. J. (1985). Isolation, fractionation and partial characterization of the tegumental surface from protoscoleces of the hydatid orgnism, Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology 90, 111–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morseth, D. J. (1967). Fine structure of the hydatid cyst and protoscolex of Echinococcus granulosus. Journal of Parasitology 53, 312–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mount, P. M. (1970). Histogenesis of the rostellar hooks of Taenia crassiceps (Zeder, 1800) (Cestoda). Journal of Parasitology 56, 947–61.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pennoit-De Cooman, E. & De Rycke, P. H. (1972). Experimental secondary echinococcosis of Echinococcus granulosus. III. Observationson the morphogenesis of protoscolices. Biologishe Jaarboek Dodonaea 40, 276–87.Google Scholar
Richards, K. S. & Arme, C. (1984). Maturation of the scolex syncytium in the metacestode of Hymenolepis diminuta, with special reference to microthrix formation. Parasitology 88, 341–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogan, M. T. & Richards, K. S. (1986). In vitro development of hydatid cysts from posterior bladders and ruptured brood capsules of equine Echinococcus granulosus. Parasitology 92, 379–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sakamoto, T. & Sugimura, M. (1970). Electron microscopical observations on histogenesis of larval Echinococcus multilocularis. Japanese Journal of Veterinary Research 18, 131–44.Google ScholarPubMed
Šlais, J. (1973). Functional morphology of cestode larvae. Advances in Parasitology 11, 395–480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smyth, J. D. (1962). The biology of the hydatid organisms. Advances in Parasitology 2, 169–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. C. A. (1976a). The development of brood capsules and protoscolices in secondary hydatid cysts of Echinococcus granulosus. Zeitschrift für Parasitenkunde 51, 31–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thompson, R. C. A. (1976b). Developing protoscoleces of Echinococcus granulosus on the outer surface of the brood capsule, detected by scanning electron microscopy. Journal of Helminthology 50, 75–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Threadgold, L. T. (1984). Parasitic platyhelminths. In Biology of the Integument vol. 1 (ed. J., Bereiter-Hahn, Matoltsy, A. G. and Richards, K. S.), pp. 132–91. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer–Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timofeev, V. A. & Kuperman, B. I. (1972). Origin and formation of microtrichia in Cestoda exemplified on Triaenophorus nodulosus - an electron-optic study. Translated from Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 207, 757–9.Google Scholar
Ubelaker, J. E. (1983). Metacestodes: morphology and development. In Biology of the Eucestoda, vol. 1 (ed. Arme, C. and Pappas, P. W.), pp. 139–76. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar