Humoral immune responses during experimental infection with Fascioloides magna and Fasciola hepatica in goats and comparison of their excretory/secretory products
Language English Country Germany Media print-electronic
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Electrophoresis, Gel, Two-Dimensional MeSH
- Biomarkers MeSH
- Diagnosis, Differential MeSH
- Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay MeSH
- Fasciola hepatica immunology MeSH
- Fasciolidae immunology MeSH
- Fascioliasis immunology MeSH
- Immunoblotting MeSH
- Trematode Infections immunology MeSH
- Goats MeSH
- Goat Diseases immunology MeSH
- Antibodies, Helminth blood MeSH
- Cross Reactions MeSH
- Animals MeSH
- Check Tag
- Animals MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Biomarkers MeSH
- Antibodies, Helminth MeSH
This study investigated the humoral immune responses of goats experimentally infected with Fascioloides magna and Fasciola hepatica to F. magna excretory/secretory products (FmESP) or F. hepatica excretory/secretory products (FhESP), respectively. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to determine serum antibody responses and for possible discrimination of F. magna and F. hepatica infections in goats. Comparison of ESPs of both flukes and evaluation of ESP antigenicity was also studied applying immunoblotting techniques. In all infected goats, antibody level was significantly increased (against negative control) since 2 weeks post infection (WPI). However, the dynamics of antibodies varied between F. magna and F. hepatica groups during the course of the infection. The cross-reaction of antibodies developed against F. magna and F. hepatica with ESP proteins was recorded by ELISA. The species-specific proteins 40, 120 kDa from FmESP and 80, 160 kDa from FhESP (with no antibody cross-reaction) were detected by two dimensional electrophoresis and immunoblot as the potential immunodiagnostic markers. Our results suggest that F. magna and F. hepatica infection could be distinguished by common immunological techniques based on species-specific antigen-antibodies interaction.
See more in PubMed
Vet Res. 2003 Jul-Aug;34(4):435-43 PubMed
J Parasitol. 1985 Apr;71(2):263-4 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1988 Mar;27(3-4):283-90 PubMed
Am J Vet Res. 1998 May;59(5):533-7 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 2006 Nov;99(6):643-7 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1996 Apr;62(3-4):247-52 PubMed
J Parasitol. 1976 Feb;62(1):26-32 PubMed
Am J Vet Res. 1980 Jun;41(6):883-4 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1991 Nov;40(3-4):241-55 PubMed
Am J Vet Res. 1980 Sep;41(9):1531-2 PubMed
Parasitol Res. 1997;83(7):680-6 PubMed
J Clin Microbiol. 1988 Oct;26(10):2048-53 PubMed
J Wildl Dis. 1979 Jan;15(1):83-9 PubMed
J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1962 Feb 15;140:342-7 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1986 Jan;19(1-2):145-50 PubMed
J Parasitol. 1990 Oct;76(5):736-9 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1992 Dec;45(1-2):59-71 PubMed
J Parasitol. 1988 Oct;74(5):810-8 PubMed
Am J Vet Res. 1992 Feb;53(2):246-50 PubMed
J Comp Pathol. 1999 Feb;120(2):199-210 PubMed
Am J Vet Res. 1985 Aug;46(8):1637-41 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1991 Nov;40(3-4):227-39 PubMed
Vet Parasitol. 1995 Jul;58(4):357-63 PubMed
Korean J Parasitol. 2003 Jun;41(2):121-3 PubMed
