Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-wq484 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:14:53.862Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

A comparative study of the vitelline cell in Schistosoma mansoni, S. haematobium, S. japonicum and S. mattheei

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

D. A. Erasmus
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University College, Cardiff, Wales
I. Popiel
Affiliation:
South African Institute of Medical Research, Hospital Street, Johannesburg, South Africa
J. R. Shaw
Affiliation:
Pfizer Research, Sandwich, Kent

Summary

A comparison is given of the ultrastructure of the vitelline cell in Schistosoma mansoni, S. haematobium, S. japonicum and S. mattheei. Four stages in development of the vitelline cell have been categorized as follows: Stage 1, the undifferentiated cell; Stage 2, the developing cell showing the beginning of synthetic activity; Stage 3, the developing cell showing active protein synthesis; Stage 4, the fully mature vitelline cell. These stages in development have been defined morphologically and Stages 1, 2 and 3 are very similar in all 4 species. Lipid is present in the Stage 4 cells of all species but appears earlier at Stage 3 in S. haematobium and S. mattheei. There are several differences as to the intercellular inclusions of the Stage 4 cells, the most marked of these being the absence of calcareous corpuscles from S. japonicum as compared with the other 3 species.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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.)

References

Brygoo, E. R. (1961). Substance alcoolo-acido-resistante de la coque de l'oeuf de quelques schistosomes. Archives de l'institut Pasteur de Madagascar 29, 81–2.Google Scholar
Byram, J. E. & Senft, A. W. (1979). Structure of the schistosome egg shell: amino acid analysis and incorporation of labelled amino acids. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 28, 539–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erasmus, D. A. (1969). Studies on the host parasite interface of strigeoid trematodes. IV. The ultrastructure of the lappets of Apatemon gracilis minor. Yamaguti, 1833. Parasitology 59, 193201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erasmus, D. A. (1975). Schistosoma mansoni: development of the vitelline cell, its role in drug sequestration, and changes induced by Astiban. Experimental Parasitology 38, 240–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erasmus, D. A. & Davies, T. W. (1979). Schistosoma mansoni and S. haematobium: Calcium metabolism of the vitelline cell. Experimental Parasitology 47, 91106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erasmus, D. A. & Popiel, I. (1980). Schistosoma mansoni: Drug induced changes in the cell population of the vitelline gland. Experimental Parasitology 50, 171–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ford, J. W. & Blankespoor, M. D. (1979). Scanning electron micrographs of the eggs of three human schistosomes. International Journal for Parasitology 9, 141–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia, E. G. (1976). The biology of Schistosoma japonicum, Philippine strain: a review. Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health 7, 190–6.Google ScholarPubMed
Moore, D. V. & Sandground, J. H. (1956). The relative egg producing capacity of Schistosoma mansoni and Schistosoma japonicum. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 5, 831–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muller, R. L. & Taylor, M. G. (1972). The specific differentiation of schistosome eggs by the Ziehl–Neelsen technique. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 66, 1819.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Popiel, I. & Erasmus, D. A. (1979). Schistosoma mansoni: differential inhibition of vitelline gland morphogenesis induced by selected chemotherapeutic agents. Parasitology 79, xxiii.Google Scholar
Popiel, I. & Erasmus, D. A. (1981). Schistosoma mansoni: Niridazole-induced damage to the vitelline gland. Experimental Parasitology 52, 3548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar