Sensitivity of life-long diagnostic methods for geese nematodes
The basis of successful struggle and specific prevention of poultry worms is timely diagnosis, the final stage of which is the detection of the worms themselves, their eggs or larvae at various stages of development. Priority is given to the methods of lifelong laboratory diagnosis of helminthiasis, which are preferably recommended for use in all animal species, including poultry. The aim of this work was to determine the sensitivity of flotation methods of coprovoscopy for geese nematodes. Experimental determination of the efficiency of the well-known methods of flotation and their comparative evaluation of coproovoscopic diagnosis of heterocosis, capillary disease and trichostrongilosis of geese. The main indicator of the diagnostic effectiveness of the methods was the intensity of the invasion and the time spent on the flotation of the samples. The most effective methods for diagnosing geese geoccosis are Kotelnikov-Hrenov (with ammonium nitrate) – at exposures of 20 min and Mallory (with saturated sugar solution) – at exposures of 10–15 min. The rates of invasion intensity were respectively 62.0 ± 4.39 and 59.0 ± 3.47 eggs/g. In the laboratory diagnosis of goose capillary disease, the most sensitive methods were Kotelnikov-Hrenov and Mallory at exposures of 15–20 min, where infestation rates reached 34.0 ± 2.22 and 33.5 ± 2.64 eggs/g, respectively. For trichostrongilosis, the Kotelnikov-Hrenov method showed the highest sensitivity at the exposure of 20 min, the intensity of the invasion was 32.5 ± 3.23 eggs/g. The Mallory method proved to be less effective – at an exposure of 15 min poultry invasiveness was 23.5 ± 1.81 eggs/g. The least sensitive of this invasion was the Fulleborn method (with NaCl), where the intensity of the invasion gradually increased with prolonged exposure and ranged from 10.5 ± 0.5 to 19.5 ± 2.45 eggs/g. Based on the data obtained, it is recommended to use the most sensitive methods and to take into account the exposure, which ensures the concentration of the largest number of nematode eggs on the surface of the flotant when conducting life-long coproovoscopic diagnostics of heterosis, capillary disease and trichostrongilosis of geese.
Ashenafi, H., & Eshetu, Y. (2004). Study on gastrointestinal hel-minths of local chickens in central Ethiopia. Revue de Medecine Veterinaire, 155(10), 504–507. doi: 10.1016/j.vprsr.2019.100265.
Dakhno, I. S., & Dakhno, Yu. I. (2010). Ekolohichna helmintolo-hiia. Sumy (in Ukrainian).
Denizhan, V., & Karakuş, A. (2019). The Prevalence of Gastrointes-tinal Helminths in Domestically Farmed Chicken in Van, Tur-key. Kocatepe Veterinary Journal, 12(4), 443–447. doi: 10.30607/kvj.631622.
Hasan, T., Mazumder, S., Hossan, M. M., Hossain, M. S., Begum, N., & Paul, P. (2018). Prevalence of Gastrointestinal Helminth Infections in Indigenous Chickens of Selected Areas of Barisal District, Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Veterinary Medi-cine, 16(1), 1–6. doi: 10.3329/bjvm.v16i1.37366.
Jacobs, D., Fox, M., Gibbons, L., & Hermosilla, C. (2016). Princi-ples of Veterinary Parasitology. Chichester, West Sussex, UK ; John Wiley & Sons.
Kotelnikov, G. A. (1974). Diagnostics of animal helminthiasis. Koloss, Мoscow (in Russian).
Levecke, B., Behnke, J. M., Ajjampur, S. S. R., Albonico, M., Ame, S. M., Charlier, J., Geiger, S. M., Hoa, N. T., Kamwa Ngassam, R. I., Kotze, A. C., McCarthy, J. S., Montresor, A., Periago, M. V., Roy, S., Tchuem Tchuenté, L. A., Thach, D. T., & Ver-cruysse, J. (2011) A Comparison of the Sensitivity and Fecal Egg Counts of the McMaster Egg Counting and Kato-Katz Thick Smear Methods for Soil-Transmitted Helminths. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 5(6), e1201. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0001201.
Meana, A., Luzon, M., Corchero, J., & Gómez-Bautista, M. (1998). Reliability of coprological diagnosis of Anoplocephala perfoliata infection. Veterinary Parasitology, 74(1), 79–83. doi: 10.1016/S0304-4017(97)00145-3.
Mendes, C. R., Teixeira, A. T. L. S., Pereira, R. A. T., & Dias, L. C. S. (2005). Estudo comparativo entre os métodos de Kato-Kazt e coprotest. Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropi-cal, 38(2), 178–180. doi: 10.1590/S0037-86822005000200010.
Nonaka, N., Donoghue, A. R., Manzoni, A. M., & Schillhorn van Veen, T. W. (1991). A survey of helminth parasites in backyard flocks in Michigan by litter examination. Avian Diseases, 35(3), 554–558. doi: 10.2307/1591219.
Pankov, N. V. (1975). Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness of helminthological methods of examinations by Fulleborn and Kato. Medical Parasitology, 44(2), 225–226 (in Russian).
Pereckienè, A., Kaziūnaitè, V., Vyšniauskas, A., Petkevičius, S., Malakauskas, A., Sarkūnas, M., & Taylor, M. A. (2007). A comparison of modifications of the McMaster method for the enumeration of Ascaris suum eggs in pig faecal samples. Veteri-nary Parasitology, 149(1-2), 111–116. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2007.04.014.
Poulsen, J., Permin, A., Hindsbo, O., Yelifari, L., Nansen, P., & Bloch, P. (2000). Prevalence and distribution of gastro-intestinal helminths and haemoparasites in young scavenging chickens in upper eastern region of Ghana West Africa. Preventive Veteri-nary Medicine, 45(3–4), 237–245. doi: 10.1016/s0167-5877(00)00125-2.
Rehbein, S., Lindner, T., Visser, M., & Winter, R. (2011). Evalua-tion of a double centrifugation technique for the detection of Anoplocephala eggs in horse faeces. Journal of Helminthology, 85(4), 409–414. doi: 10.1017/S0022149X10000751.
Trach, V. N. (1992). Rekomendacii po primeneniju novogo metoda ucheta jaic gel'mintov i cist prostejshih v fekalijah zhivotnyh. Gosagroprom USSR (in Russian).
Yevstafieva, V. O. (2007). Porivnialna efektyvnist koproskopich-nykh metodiv diahnostyky parazytoziv tvaryn. Visnyk Poltavskoi derzhavnoi ahrarnoi akademii, 1, 110–111 (in Ukrainian).