| Literature DB >> 23166847 |
Bin Xu1, Catherine A Gordon, Wei Hu, Donald P McManus, Hong-Gen Chen, Darren J Gray, Chuan Ju, Xiao-Jun Zeng, Geoffrey N Gobert, Jun Ge, Wei-Ming Lan, Shu-Ying Xie, Wei-Sheng Jiang, Allen G Ross, Luz P Acosta, Remigio Olveda, Zheng Feng.
Abstract
Schistosomiasis japonica is a zoonosis with a number of mammalian species acting as reservoir hosts, including water buffaloes which can contribute up to 75% to human transmission in the People's Republic of China. Determining prevalence and intensity of Schistosoma japonicum in mammalian hosts is important for calculating transmission rates and determining environmental contamination. A new procedure, the formalin-ethyl acetate sedimentation-digestion (FEA-SD) technique, for increased visualization of S. japonicum eggs in bovine feces, is described that is an effective technique for identifying and quantifying S. japonicum eggs in fecal samples from naturally infected Chinese water buffaloes and from carabao (water buffalo) in the Philippines. The procedure involves filtration, sedimentation, potassium hydroxide digestion and centrifugation steps prior to microscopy. Bulk debris, including the dense cellulosic material present in bovine feces, often obscures schistosome eggs with the result that prevalence and infection intensity based on direct visualization cannot be made accurately. This technique removes nearly 70% of debris from the fecal samples and renders the remaining debris translucent. It allows improved microscopic visualization of S. japonicum eggs and provides an accurate quantitative method for the estimation of infection in bovines and other ruminant reservoir hosts. We show that the FEA-SD technique could be of considerable value if applied as a surveillance tool for animal reservoirs of S. japonicum, particularly in areas with low to high infection intensity, or where, following control efforts, there is suspected elimination of schistosomiasis japonica.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23166847 PMCID: PMC3499414 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001885
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis ISSN: 1935-2727
Figure 1Four layer separation of sieved fecal material using the FEA-SD technique.
The resulting four layer separation occurs after the addition of 100% ethyl acetate and centrifugation at 500 g. The top layer contains the ethyl acetate, the second layer the bulk debris to be discarded, the third layer comprises 10% (v/v) formalin and the final layer is the remaining sediment containing the eggs.
Reduction in bulk debris of water buffalo fecal samples from the People's Republic of China by the FEA-SD method.
| Volume of sediment (ml) | ||||
|
| Initial (I) | Post FEA-SD (P) | I-P (ml) | I - P/I % |
| 1A | 1.3 | 0.2 | 1.1 | 84.6 |
| 1B | 1.5 | 0.2 | 1.3 | 86.7 |
| 2A | 1.6 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 62.5 |
| 2B | 1.6 | 0.6 | 1.0 | 62.5 |
| 3A | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 60.0 |
| 3B | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 60.0 |
| 4A | 1.7 | 0.3 | 1.4 | 82.4 |
| 4B | 1.5 | 0.2 | 1.3 | 86.7 |
| 5A | 1.8 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 66.7 |
| 5B | 1.9 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 57.9 |
| 6A | 2.0 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 60.0 |
| 6B | 1.7 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 52.9 |
| 7A | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 69.2 |
| 7B | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 71.4 |
| 8A | 2.5 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 68.0 |
| 8B | 2.4 | 1.0 | 1.4 | 58.3 |
| 9A | 1.4 | 0.3 | 1.1 | 78.6 |
| 9B | 1.5 | 0.3 | 1.2 | 80.0 |
| 10A | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 70.0 |
| 10B | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 80.0 |
| 11A | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 80.0 |
| 11B | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 80.0 |
| 12A | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 70.0 |
| 12B | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 80.0 |
| 13A | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 |
| 13B | 1.0 | 0.6 | 0.4 | 40.0 |
| Mean | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 69.2 |
| SD | 12.3 | |||
Equivalent to 5 g feces/sample; n = 26.
Reduction in bulk debris of carabao fecal samples from the Philippines by the FEA-SD method.
| Sample | Initial (I) | Post FEA-SD (P) | I-P (ml) | I - P/I % |
| 1A | 1.0 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 80.0 |
| 1B | 1.2 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 75.0 |
| 2A | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 |
| 2B | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 54.5 |
| 3A | 1.3 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 61.5 |
| 3B | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 64.3 |
| 4A | 1.3 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 76.9 |
| 4B | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 71.4 |
| 5A | 1.4 | 0.4 | 1.0 | 71.4 |
| 5B | 1.5 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 73.3 |
| 6A | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 69.2 |
| 6B | 1.3 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 76.9 |
| 7A | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 50.0 |
| 7B | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 50.0 |
| 8A | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 69.2 |
| 8B | 1.3 | 0.3 | 1.0 | 76.9 |
| 9A | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 54.5 |
| 9B | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 70.0 |
| 10A | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 70.0 |
| 10B | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 54.5 |
| 11A | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 55.6 |
| 11B | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 |
| 12A | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 |
| 12B | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 66.7 |
| 13A | 1.5 | 0.6 | 0.9 | 60.0 |
| 13B | 1.6 | 0.5 | 1.1 | 68.8 |
| 14A | 1.6 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 43.8 |
| 14B | 1.6 | 0.9 | 0.7 | 43.8 |
| 15A | 1.2 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 58.3 |
| 15B | 1.2 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 50.0 |
| 16A | 0.8 | 0.3 | 0.5 | 62.5 |
| 16B | 0.7 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 57.1 |
| 17A | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 |
| 17B | 1.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 50.0 |
| 18A | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 60.0 |
| 18B | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 63.6 |
| 19A | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 44.4 |
| 19B | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 44.4 |
| 20A | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 60.0 |
| 20B | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 60.0 |
| 22A | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 72.7 |
| 22B | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 70.0 |
| 23A | 1.0 | 0.3 | 0.7 | 70.0 |
| 23B | 1.2 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 66.7 |
| 24A | 1.3 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 69.2 |
| 24B | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 64.3 |
| 25A | 1.0 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 60.0 |
| 25B | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 72.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reproducibility in recovery of S. japonicum eggs in buffalo fecal samples from the People's Republic of China using the FEA-SD technique.
| Number of eggs | ||||||
| Sample/Tube | Water supernatant (W) | Bulk debris (BD) | W+BD | Bottom sediment | Total | Egg recovery rate (%) |
|
| ||||||
|
| 0 | 1 | 1 | 50 | 51 | 98.0 |
| Tube B1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 66 | 69 | 95.7 |
| Sample 2 | ||||||
| Tube A2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 46 | 48 | 95.8 |
| Tube B2 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 66 | 71 | 93.0 |
| Sample 3 | ||||||
| Tube A3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 45 | 47 | 95.7 |
| Tube B3 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 64 | 69 | 92.8 |
| Mean | 95.2 | |||||
| SD | 2.0 | |||||
Equivalent to 10 g feces.
Equivalent to 5 g feces.
BD: Sediment in the bulk debris layer (Figure 1) removed during the FEA-SD procedure.
Egg recovery rate (%) = number of eggs in the bottom sediment/total number of eggs in the sample ×100.
Recovery of S. japonicum eggs in carabao fecal samples from the Philippines using the FEA-SD technique.
| Sample/Tube | Eggs recovered* | Total | Sample/Tube | Eggs recovered* | Total |
| Sample 1 | Sample 14 | ||||
| Tube A1 | 3 | Tube A14 | 1 | ||
| Tube B1 | 6 | 9 | Tube B14 | 2 | 3 |
| Sample 2 | Sample 15 | ||||
| Tube A2 | 2 | Tube A15 | 0 | ||
| Tube B2 | 1 | 3 | Tube B15 | 0 | 0 |
| Sample 3 | Sample 16 | ||||
| Tube A3 | 0 | Tube A16 | 0 | ||
| Tube B3 | 1 | 1 | Tube B16 | 2 | 2 |
| Sample 4 | Sample 17 | ||||
| Tube A4 | 0 | Tube A17 | 5 | ||
| Tube B4 | 8 | 8 | Tube B17 | 0 | 5 |
| Sample 5 | Sample 18 | ||||
| Tube A5 | 9 | Tube A18 | 5 | ||
| Tube B5 | 11 | 20 | Tube B18 | 7 | 12 |
| Sample 6 | Sample 19 | ||||
| Tube A6 | 1 | Tube A19 | 2 | ||
| Tube B6 | 1 | 2 | Tube B19 | 2 | 4 |
| Sample 7 | Sample 20 | ||||
| Tube A7 | 2 | Tube A20 | 0 | ||
| Tube B7 | 1 | 3 | Tube B20 | 1 | 1 |
| Sample 8 | Sample 21 | ||||
| Tube A8 | 0 | Tube A21 | 5 | ||
| Tube B8 | 2 | 2 | Tube B21 | 6 | 11 |
| Sample 9 | Sample 22 | ||||
| Tube A9 | 0 | Tube A22 | 1 | ||
| Tube B9 | 0 | 0 | Tube B22 | 3 | 4 |
| Sample 10 | Sample 23 | ||||
| Tube A10 | 2 | Tube A23 | 3 | ||
| Tube B10 | 7 | 9 | Tube B23 | 7 | 10 |
| Sample 11 | Sample 24 | ||||
| Tube A11 | 0 | Tube A24 | 2 | ||
| Tube B11 | 4 | 4 | Tube B24 | 6 | 8 |
| Sample 12 | Sample 25 | ||||
| Tube A12 | 2 | Tube A25 | 0 | ||
| Tube B12 | 0 | 2 | Tube B25 | 3 | 3 |
| Sample 13 | |||||
| Tube A13 | 0 | ||||
| Tube B13 | 4 | 4 |
Figure 2Visualization of S. japonicum eggs (circled) in water buffalo feces.
Top panel; egg visualization after sieving of feces only. Lower panel; egg visualization after feces are subjected to the FEA-SD technique.
Figure 3The FEA-SD method compared with other diagnostic techniques (Modified from Gordon et al. [22]).
FEA-SD, formalin–ethyl acetate sedimentation-digestion technique; qPCR, quantitative PCR; PCR, conventional PCR; KK, Kato Katz method; MHT, miracidial hatching test. 95% confidence intervals are shown.
Published studies of diagnostic procedures for identification of S. japonicum eggs in bovine feces.
| Location of study [Reference] | Year | Diagnostic | Bovine | Prevalence (%) | Intensity (EPG) |
| Poyang Lake, P. R. China | 2002 | MHT+filtration | Cattle & water buffalo | 14 | 42 |
| Hubei, P. R. China | 1994 | MHT+filtration | Water buffalo | 35.7 | 0.4 |
| Anhui, P. R. China | 2010 | MHT+filtration | Water buffalo | 10.5 | 3.4 |
| Cattle | 46.5 | 2.3 | |||
| Sichuan, P. R. China | 2006 | MHT+filtration | Cattle | 22.3 | - |
| Hunan and Jiangxi, P. R. China | 2007 | MHT+filtration | Cattle | 21.7 | 0.5–7.2 |
| Water buffalo | 14.9 | 0.5–7.2 | |||
| Dongting Lake, P. R. China | 2007 | MHT | Cattle | 6.1 | - |
| Water buffalo | 9.5 | - | |||
| Leyte, the Philippines | 2010 | MHT | Water buffalo | 0 | - |
| KK | 3.7 | - | |||
| DBL Technique | 3.7 | - | |||
| qPCR | 51.5 | 2.1 | |||
| Samar, the Philippines | 2012 | MHT | Water buffalo | 19.1 | - |
| KK | 25 | 4.7 | |||
| FEA-SD | 93.2 | 1.2 | |||
| qPCR | 90.9 | 6.1 | |||
| PCR | 31.3 | - | |||
| Samar and Sorsogon, the Philippines | 2005 | DBL technique | Water buffalo | 6.3 | - |
| Samar, the Philippines | 2007 | DBL technique | Water buffalo | 2.1 | - |
| Mindoro, the Philippines | 1999 | Formalin detergent technique | Water buffalo | 0 | - |
| Leyte, the Philippines | 1981 | Merthiolate iodine-formaldehyde concentration (MIFC) technique | Cattle | 0 | - |
| Water buffalo | 0.38 | - | |||
| Leyte, the Philippines | 1958 | Glycerol sedimentation with egg hatching and sedimentation counting of eggs remaining | Water buffalo | 1.5 | - |
| Cattle | 3.82 | - | |||
| Leyte, the Philippines | 1982 | MIFC and Circumoval Precipitin Test (COPT) | Cattle | 1 (MIFC) | - |
| Cattle | 0 (COPT) | - | |||
| Water buffalo | 9 (MIFC) | - | |||
| Water buffalo | 1 (COPT) | - | |||
| Cagayan, The Philippines | 2012 | COPT ELISA | Water buffalo | 34 (COPT) | - |
| 36 (ELISA) | - |
Geometric mean eggs per gram (EPG). All other values are arithmetic mean EPG.
MHT, miracidial hatching test; DBL, Danish Bilharziasis Laboratory method; KK, Kato-Katz technique; qPCR, quantitative real time PCR.