| Literature DB >> 30388188 |
Chandana H Mallawarachchi1, Nilmini T G A Chandrasena2, Susiji Wickramasinghe3, Ranjan Premaratna4, Nilmini Y I S Gunawardane5, Navoda S M S M Mallawarachchi1, Nilanthi R de Silva2.
Abstract
Human brugian filariasis has re-emerged in Sri Lanka after a quiescent period of four decades. This study investigated the prevalence of canine and feline filarial parasites in three localities with human sub-periodic brugian filariasis, in order to determine their potential reservoir status. All reachable dogs and cats, both stray and domestic, within a 350m radius of an index case of brugian filariasis in three locations (Madampe, Wattala and Weliweriya) were screened for microfilariae using Giemsa stained thick blood smears. A representative sample of canine and feline blood samples positive for Brugia spp. microfilariae by microscopy, from each of the three locations, were further analyzed by PCR with specific primers for internal transcribed spacer region 2 (ITS2) of the ribosomal DNA. A total of 250 dogs and 134 cats were screened. The overall microfilaraemia rates were high among both dogs (68.8%) and cats (47.8%). The prevalence of microfilaraemia was significantly higher among dogs than cats (p<0.05). Two filarial species were identified based on morphology of microfilariae: Dirofilaria (Nochtiella) repens (dogs, 54.4% and cats, 34.3%) and Brugia spp. (dogs, 51.6% and cats, 30.6%). PCR analysis of canine (n = 53) and feline (n = 24) samples elicited bands in the region of 615bp, which confirmed Brugia malayi infection. Co-infection with D.(N.) repens was detected by PCR with an additional band at 484bp, in 36 canine and 17 feline samples. Overall microfilaraemia rates of dogs (81.8%) and cats (75%) in Madampe (rural) were significantly higher than in urbanized Wattala (dogs, 62.4% and cats, 26.0%) (p<0.05). High rates of zoonotic filarial infections strongly implicate dogs and cats as potential reservoirs for human dirofilariasis and brugian filariasis in Sri Lanka.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30388188 PMCID: PMC6214534 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206633
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Measurements of B.malayi microfilaria from the current survey compared with B.malayi, B.pahangi and B.ceylonensis from scientific literature .
| MF measurements | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| dogs | cats | ||||
| Mean total body length (μm) | 225.82 | 226.31 | 220–221 | 245.8 | 220–275 |
| Mean length of Innenkorper (μm) | 38.04 | 38.46 | 31.1–32.29 | 49.5 | NA |
| Mean length of cephalic space (μm) | 5.65 | 5.47 | NA | NA | 6.3–6.7 |
| Mean width of cephalic space (μm) | 4.87 | 4.84 | NA | NA | NA |
| Cephalic space width: length ratio | 0.86 | 0.88 | 0.78 | NA | NA |
a Data obtained from [13, 18, 19, 20, 21].
NA- not available.
MF- microfilariae.
Fig 1Microfilaria of B. malayi.
CP- Cephalic space IN.K.- Innen-korper T.N.- Terminal nuclei.
Fig 2Microfilaria of D.(N.) repens.
AE—Anterior end with two distinct nuclei IN.K.—Innen- korper.
Fig 3Gel electrophoresis of PCR products following amplification with panfilarial primers.
A. Lanes 1 and 10–50 bp DNA marker, 2- Dog DNA, 3- Cat DNA, 4 –B. malayi positive control, 5 –D. repens positive control, 6—Co-infection B.malayi and D.repens 7- Mono-infection D.repens, 8 –Mono-infection B.malayi (6 to 8 Dog, Madampe), 9- Negative control, 11—Mono-infection D.repens and 12—Mono-infection B.malayi (11 and 12 Cat, Madampe). B. Lanes 1 and 10–50 bp DNA marker, 2 and 4—Mono-infection B.malayi, 3—Mono-infection D.repens (2 to 4 Dog, Wattala), 5 and 6 –Mono-infection B.malayi (Cat, Wattala), 7 and 8 –Co-infection B.malayi and D.repens dog and cat respectively (Weliweriya), 9- Negative control.
Prevalence of microfilaraemia among dogs and cats based on Giemsa stained thick blood smears.
| Sample size | Co-infections N (%) | Total infected N (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dogs | 250 | 36 (14.4) | 43 (17.2) | 93 (37.2) | 172 (68.8) |
| Cats | 134 | 18 (13.4) | 23 (17.2) | 23 (17.2) | 64 (47.8) |
Comparison of area-wise prevalence of microfilaraemia among cats and dogs.
| Animal participant | Area | Total screened | Total infected | Infected (%) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Madampe | 77 | 63 | 81.82% | ||
| Wattala | 109 | 68 | 62.39% | ||
| Weliweriya | 64 | 41 | 64.06% | ||
| Total | 250 | 172 | 68.80% | ||
| Madampe | 52 | 39 | 75% | ||
| Wattala | 50 | 13 | 26% | ||
| Weliweriya | 32 | 12 | 37.50% | ||
| Total | 134 | 64 | 47.76% |
a Comparison of infection rates between Madampe and Wattala.
b Comparison of infection rates between Madampe and Weliweriya.
c Comparison of infection rates between Wattala and Weliweriya.