The open-field behaviour of mice infected with Trichinella spiralis | Parasitology | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Summary

The behaviour of mice exposed to graded doses of Trichinella spiralis larvae was monitored in an open-field situation. Ambulatory and exploratory activity declined significantly as the infections progressed, whereas the time spent inactive increased concomitantly. The advent of these behavioural changes coincided with the expected release of larvae by the adult worms and showed no clear signs of abating as late as 90 days post-inoculation. The levels of activity were negatively correlated with the inoculating dose. Such behavioural changes may render the host more vulnerable to predation and thus enhance parasite transmission.

References

Barnett, S. A. (1981). Modern Ethology. The Science of Animal Behaviour. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Belding, D. L. (1942). Textbook of Clinical Parasitology. New York and London: Appleton-Century Company Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Belosevic, M. & Dick, T. A. (1979) Trichinella spiralis: Comparison of stages in host intestine with those of an arctic Trichinella sp. Experimental Parasitology 48, 432–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bernard, G. R. (1954). The effects of trichinosis upon certain excretory products, the adrenals, blood, activity and fur of Mesocricetus auratus. Ph.D. thesis, Boston University.Google Scholar

Bernard, G. B. (1959) Experimental trichinosis in the golden hamster. I. Spontaneous muscular activity patterns. American Midland Naturalist 62, 369–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Blodgett, H. C. (1929) The effect of reward upon maze performance. University of California, Berkeley, Publications in Psychology 4, 113–34.Google Scholar

Brand, T. Von, Weinstein, P. P. & Wright, W. H. (1954) The working ability of rats infected with Trichinella spiralis. American Journal of Hygiene 59, 26–31.Google Scholar

Brassard, P., Rau, M. E. & Curtis, M. A. (1982). Parasite-induced susceptibility to predation in diplostomiasis. Parasitology (in the Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Dolinsky, Z. S., Burright, R. G. & Donovick, P. J. (1981) Behavioural effects of lead and Toxocara canis in mice. Science 213, 1142–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goodchild, C. G. & Frankenberg, D. (1962) Voluntary running in the golden hamster, Mesocricetus auratus (Waterhouse, 1839), infected with Trichinella spiralis (Owen, 1835). Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 81, 292–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gould, S. E. (1945). Trichinosis. Springfield, Illinois: C. C. Thomas.Google Scholar

Holmes, J. C. & Bethel, W. M. (1972) Modifications of intermediate host behaviour by parasites. In Behavioural Aspects of Parasite Transmission. Zoological Journal of the Linnaean Society 51, 123–49.Google Scholar

Hutchison, W. M., Aitken, P. P. & Wells, B. W. P (1980) Chronic Toxoplasma infections and familiarity-novelty discrimination in the mouse. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 74, 145–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hutchison, W. M., Bradley, M., Cheyne, W. M., Wells, B. W. P & Hay, J. (1980) Behavioural abnormalities in Toxoplasma infected mice. Annals of Tropical Medicine and Parasitology 75, 337–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kagan, I. G. (1960) Trichinosis: a review of biological, serologic and immunologic aspects. Journal of Infectious Diseases 107, 65–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Metzgar, L. H. (1967) An experimental comparison of screech owl predation on resident and transient white-footed mice (Peromyscus leucopus). Journal of Mammalogy 48, 387–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Steel, R. G. D & Torrie, J. H. (1960). Principles and Procedures of Statistics. New York, Toronto and London: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc.Google Scholar

Tanner, C. E. (1968) Relationship between infecting dose, muscle parasitism and antibody response in experimental trichinosis in rabbits. Journal of Parasitology 54, 98–107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed