Consequences of Concurrent Infections with <i> Ascaridia Galli</i> and<i> Eimeria </i>in Broiler Chickens
Ascaridia galli and Eimeria species constitute the aetiology of ascaridosis and coccidiosis respectively in chickens, and the two diseases are the most important internal parasitic infections that militate against the development of the poultry industry. Â Natural infections of both parasites are known to occur in chickens but it is not yet fully known how conjoint infections with both parasites can influence the pathology they inflict cause to the chickens. Â A. galli has been reported to enhance the pathogenicity/pathology of Pasteurella multocida and Escherichia coli when the organisms occurred concurrently with the nematode. Â This study was therefore conducted to investigate the influence of A. galli to the response of two-week old broiler chickens to single and concurrent infections with the parasites either given at the same time or at different times with the hope that the results would greatly inform decisions to be taken in mitigating the infections.
Forty two broiler chickens were used for the study. Â The birds were allocated into six groups of 7 birds each and placed in separate pens. Â Five of the groups were either infected with A. galli only, caecal Eimeria isolate only, Â A. galliÂ and caecal Eimeria isolate at the same time, A. galli and later caecal Eimeria isolate or caecal Eimeria isolate and later A. galli while the sixth group remained as uninfected controls. Â The dose levels used were 1000 embryonated A. galli eggs and 12,000 sporulated Eimeria oocysts per chicken by oral administration. Â Packed cell volume (PCV), body weight (BW), feed consumption (FC), faecal egg counts (EPG), faecal oocyst counts (OPG), caecal gross lesion score (GLS) for Eimeria infected birds, clinical signs and worm burdens (WB). Â The infections had a negative impact on the birds evident by low PCV, low BW gain, reduced feed consumption, listlessness, bloody diarrhoea and mortalities when compared with the uninfected controls that did not exhibit such effects.Â
A drop in the PCV from day 8 to day 12 of the birds infected with A. galli and later Eimeria group occurred following the administration of the protozoan infection. Â The A. galli and later Eimeria group also had the least weight gain from day 12 to day 42. Â Similarly their feed intake was also least from day 10 to day 26 in the A. galli and later Eimeria group in comparison with all the other infected and the uninfected control birds. Â The greatest mortalities (5 birds) also occurred in the A. galli and later Eimeria group.
It was concluded that the infections lead to poor performance of the chickens, however, the effect of the infection was severest in the chickens that were infected with A. galli and later with Eimeria. Â It was suggested that A. galli caused immunedownregulation of the chickens allowing the Eimeria to exert maximally its pathogenic effects on the birds. Â It was also suggested that the initial A. galli infection possibly attracted influx of large numbers of macrophages into the lamina propria where they in turn greatly enhanced the transportation of sporozoites from the lamina propria into the glands of Lieberkuhn.Â EPG, OPG and worm counts were not so high suggesting that both A. galli and Eimeria somewhat inhibit each other to an extent. Â It is therefore strongly recommended that the infections should be diagnosed regularly and controlled promptly when present particularly if they are concurrent as the effects can be disastrous in situations where A. galli infections precede Eimeria infections as in the semi intensive and free range systems of poultry production.
Eduvie, L.O (2002). Poultry production in Nigeria. A training Manual. Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Water Resources. Ahmadu Bello University, Zaira, Nigeria.
Nnadi, P.A and George, S.O. (2010). A cross sectional survey on parasites of chickens inselected villages in the Subhumid zone of South-Eastern Nigeria. Journal of Parasitology Research, Article ID 141824, 1-6.
Al-Jamaien, H.H., Ekeanyanwu, R.C., Aruwayo, A., Maigandi, S.A., Malami, B.S., Daneji, A.L. and Njoku, S. (2013). Helminth parasites in the intestinal tract of indigenous chickensin Jordanian villages. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 12: 209-212.
Opara, M.N., Osowa, D.K. and Maxwell, J.A. (2014). Blood and gastrointestinal parasites of chickens and turkeys reared in the Tropical Rainforest Zone of Southeastern Nigeria. Open Journal of Veterinary Medicine, 4: 308-313.
Letebrhan, G., Aberra, M., Sandip, B. and Gebremedhn, B. (2015). Product utilization, constraints and opportunities of village chicken under traditional management system in Gantaafeshum District of Eastern Tigray, Ethopia. Journal of National Sciences Research, 5: 33-38.
Akintunde, O.K. Adeoti, A.I., Okoruwa, V.O., Omonona B.T. and Abu, A.O. (2015). Effect of disease management on profitability of chicken egg production in southwest Nigeria. Asian Journal of Poultry Sciences, 9: 1-18.
Lasseinde, E.A.O. (2002). Poultry: Godâ€™s goldmine in the livestock industry. An inaugural lecture. Federal University of Technology, Akure. Classic Educational Publishers, Akure, Nigeria. PP. 48.
Etuk, E.B, Okoli, I.C and Ukonu (2004). Prevalence and management issues associated with poultry coccidiosis in Abak Agricultural zone of Akwa Ibom state, Nigeria. International Journal of poultry science, 3: 135-139.
] Akintunde, O.K and Adeoti, A.I. (2014). Assessment of factors affecting the level of poultry disease management in Southwest, Nigeria. Trends in Agricultural economics 7: 41-56.
Nematollahi, A., Moghaddam, G and Pourabad, R.F. (2009). Prevalence of Eimeria species among broiler chickens in Tabriz (Northwest of Iran). Munis Entomology and Zoology, 4: 53-58.
McDougald, L.R. (2008). Coccidiosis . In Saâ€™if et al (eds). Disease of poultry farms in
Argentina. Avian Dis., 41: 923-929.
Soulsby E.J.L. (1986). Helminths, Arthropods and Protozoa of domesticated animals. 7th edn.,Bailliere, Tindall, London, P807.
McDougald, I.R. and Reid, W.M. (1997). Coccidiosis. In Calnek B.W., Barnes H.J., Beard C.W.,Mcdoougald Band Saâ€™if, Y.M. (eds). Diseases of poultry. 10th edition. Iowa state University press, Ames United States of America. Pp. 865-883.
Makai, V.A., Makeri, H.K., Adeiza, A.A. and Makai, B.V.O. (2007). Preliminary studies of anticoccidial effect of Mahogany (Khaya senegalensis) and African Locust Bean Tree (Parkia biglobosa) aqueous bark extracts on chicken infected with coccidia. Savannah Journal of Agriculture, 2: 43-45.
Chookyinox, L.U., Stella, U and Sandy, O. (2009). Coccidiosis. Backyard poultry information centre. Php BB 2004-2009/ backyard.
McDougald, L.R. (2003). Coccidiosis. Diseases of poultry (11th edn). Iowa state university press, Ames, IA, USA.
Obasi, O.L., Ifut, O.J., Effiong, E.A. (2006). An outbreak of caecal coccidiosis in a broiler flock post Newcastle disease vaccination. J. An. Veter. Adv. 5: 1239-1241.
Okoye, J.O.A. (1985). Prevalence of avian coccidiosis in chickens. Avian pathology, 34: 275-289.
Molta, N.B., Biu, A.A., and Mohammed, M.I. (1999). The prevalence of Eimeria species among local breed of chickens in Maiduguri, Northeastern Nigeria. Annals of Borno, 15/16:144-149.
Muazu, A.K., Masdooq, A.A., Ngbede, J., Salihu, A.E., Haruna, G., Habu, A.K., Sati, M.N., Samilu, H. (2008). Prevalence and identification of species of Eimeria causing coccidiosis in poultry within VOM, Plateau state, Nigeria. Int. J. Poult. Sci .7: 917-918.
Jatau, I.D., Sulaiman, N.H., Musa, I.W., Lawal, A.I., Okubanjo, O.O., Isah, I., Magaji, Y. (2012). Prevalence of coccidia infection and preponderance Eimeria species in free range indigenous and intensively managed exotic chickens during hot-wet season, in Zaira, Nigeria. Asian J. Poult. Sci. 6: 79-88.
Alawa, C.B., Mohammed, A.K., Oni, O.O., Adeyinka, I.A., Lamidi, O.S and Adam, A.M. (2010). Prevalence and seasonality of common health problems in Sokoto Gudali cattleat a beef research station in Sudan ecological zone of Nigeria. Nigeria Journal of Animal Production, 2: 224-228.
Yamaguti, S. (1961). SystemaHelminthum.3. The nematodes of vertebrates. Interscience publishers, Newyork and London, Pp. 1261.
Jacobs, R.D., Hogsette, J.A., Butcher, J.D. (2003). Nematode parasites of poultry (and where to find them). The Institute of food and Agricultural sciences (IFAS) series PS 18, University of Florida, USA, PP. 1-3.
Dahl, C., A. Permin (2002). â€œThe effect of concurrent infections with Pasteurella multocida and Ascaridia galli on free range chickens. â€œVeterinary Microbiologyâ€ 86: 313-324.
Permin, A and Christensen, J.P. (2006). â€œConsequences of concurrent Ascaridia galli and Escherichia coli infections in chickensâ€. Acta Veterinarian Scandinavica 47: 43-54.
Norton, R.A. Yazwinski, T.A., Skeeles, J.K. (1992). (Studies on the effect of concurrent infections of Ascaridia dissimilis and Eimeria meleagritis in turkeys. Avian Dis. 36: 1056-9.
Pullan R., Brooker S. The health impact of polyparasitism in humans: are we under-estimating the burden of parasitic diseases? Parasitology. 2008; 135: 783â€“794.
Nacher M. Interactions between worms and malaria: good worms or bad worms? Malar. J. 2011;10:259. OIE . OIE; 2009. OIE Terrestrial Manual.
Jolles A.E., Ezenwa V.O., Etienne R.S., Turner W.C., Olff H. Interactions between macroparasites and microparasites drive infection patterns in free-ranging African buffalo. Ecology. 2008; 89: 2239â€“2250.
Telfer S., Birtles R., Bennett M., Lambin X., Paterson S., Begon M. Parasite interactions in natural populations: insights from longitudinal data. Parasitology. 2008; 135:767â€“781.
Thumbi S.M., Bronsvoort B.M.D.C., Poole E.J., Kiara H., Toye P.G., Mbole-Kariuki M.N., Conradie I., Jennings A., Handel I.G., Coetzer J.A.W., Steyl J.C.A., Hanotte O., Woolhouse M.E.J. Parasite co-infections and their impact on survival of indigenous cattle. PLoS One. 2014;9:e76324.
Ngongeh, L.A., Onyeabor, A., Nzenwata, E., Gurama, S.K. (2017). Comparative Response of the Nigerian Indigenous and Broiler Chickens to a Field Caecal Isolate of Eimeria Oocysts. Journal of Pathogens. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2674078.
Ward, J.W., J.R. Elsea, Animal case and use in drug fate and metabolism. In: Edward,R.J., Jean L.H. Editors. Methods and techniques. 1st Edn. New York. Publisher, Markel,
MAFF, Manual of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnostic Techniques, Bulletin Number 18, Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food (MAFF), HMSO, London, UK, 1977.
Hansen, J.W., Perry, B.D. (1994). The epidemiology, diagnosis and control of helminth parasites of ruminants. 2nd edn., International Laboratory for Research on Animal Diseases, Nairobi.
Conway, D. P., M. E. McKenzie (1991): Examination of lesions and lesion scoring. In: Poultry Coccidiosis - Diagnostic and Testing Procedures, 2nd ed Pfizer Inc., New York. pp.17-36.
Ngongeh, L.A., Chiejina, S.N., Lawal, A.I. (2014). Prevalence of gastrointestinal helminth infections in slaughtered chickens reared in the Nsukka area of Enugu State, Nigeria. IORS Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science. 7 (1): 51-54.
Merck Veterinary Manual 2011 (online). A subsidiary station NJUSA. Retrieved from:http://www.merckmanual.com/mvm/htm/present/mvm.mercklink/htm.
Permin, A., Hansen, J.W. (1998). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The epidemiology , diagnosis and controlof poultry parasites. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Dalloul, R.A. and Lillehoj, H.S. (2006). Poultry coccidiosis: Recent advancements in controlmeasures and vaccine development. Expert Review of vaccines. 5: 143-163.
Roespstorff, A. Morgaard-Nielsen, G., Permin, A., Simonsen, H.B. (1999). Male behavior and male hormones in Ascaridia galli hens. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of World Association for the Advancement of Veterinary Parasitology, Copenhagan, Denmark, p5.02.
John, R., Challey, W.M., C. Burns (1959). The invasion of the cecal mucosa by Eimeria tenella sporozoites and their transport by macrophages. The Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology. <https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1550-7408.1959.tb04364.x>
How to Cite
- Papers must be submitted on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, or thesis) and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by any other publisher.
- It is also the authors responsibility to ensure that the articles emanating from a particular source are submitted with the necessary approval.
- The authors warrant that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required.
- The authors ensure that all the references carefully and they are accurate in the text as well as in the list of references (and vice versa).
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.