Experimental Fascioliasis in Australia

Radix natalensis(Gastropoda: Lymnaeidae), a potential intermediate host ofFasciola hepaticain Egypt

“…The presence of infected snails without shedding or containing only free rediae of F. hepatica is more interesting to comment. Even if this fact was already noted in several snail species infected with F. hepatica (Vignoles et al, 2002) or with F. gigantica (Shalaby et al, 2004), the most plausible interpretation was to consider it to be an incomplete adaptation between the snail and its parasite (Boray, 1969). This first assumption is reinforced by the report by Lofty et al (2002) according to which the introduction of F. hepatica in Egypt from imported cattle would be more recent than that of F. gigantica.…”

“…However, the prevalence of infection was low in this case (12.0 %, see Table I) so that the snails from the other five groups were each submitted to two successive bimiracidial exposures (with a 4-hour interval between them). This method was chosen according to the report by Boray (1969). Indeed, this author noted an increase in the prevalence of infection when snails (Lymnaea peregra in this case) were subjected to successive exposures with F. hepatica.…”

“…Negative infections of R. natalensis with F. hepatica were reported by several authors (Kendall, 1965;Boray, 1966;Mohamed et al, 1998;Hussein & Khalifa, 2008). In contrast, in another experiment, Boray (1969) obtained successful infections of young snails and the production of viable cercariae when he used a Kenyan population of R. natalensis and European isolates of F. hepatica. In the same way, a 4.2 % infection rate and the shedding of cercariae were reported by Dreyfuss (1994) and two successive exposures (a total of 4 miracidia/ snail) were performed using lymnaeids measuring 1 to 6 mm in height.…”

Changes in energy metabolism of the juvenile Fasciola hepatica during its development in the liver parenchyma

“…In the development of newly excysted F. hepatica to parenchymal liver fluke the situation is probably different. Burrowing through the gut wall is not an essential step in this development: the implantation of in vitro excysted juveniles or of untreated metacercariae in the abdominal cavity results in normal development of the flukes [5,6]. Penetration of the host liver is also not necessary for normal development, as F. hepatica can also end up as an egglaying adult in the lung [6].…”

Inventory of wild rodents and lagomorphs as natural hosts ofFasciola hepaticaon a farm located in a humid area in Loire Atlantique (France)

“…Other small mammals species are only able to harbour fluke livers in particular environmental conditions (Rattus spp., micromammals) and serve, as the black rat Rattus rattus in Corsica, as a reservoir of fasciolosis in these specific biotopes (Valero et al, 1998) [Mas- Table I), fluke eggs eclosability and developmental success are poor (Boray, 1969;Rondelaud & Dreyfuss, 1995 (Jouventin et al, 1996), suggest that M. coypus probably plays a major epidemiological role in fasciolosis. …”