Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Histopathology of experimental infection of sheep sheep Ovis aries by Neospora caninum

Histopatologia de la infección experimental de ovejas sin lana Ovis aries por Neospora caninum



Open | Download

How to Cite
Oviedo, T., Goretti, R., Vargas, M., & Patarroyo, J. (2003). Histopathology of experimental infection of sheep sheep Ovis aries by Neospora caninum. Journal MVZ Cordoba, 8(1), 261-264. https://doi.org/10.21897/rmvz.1050

Dimensions
PlumX
Teresa Oviedo
Rafael Goretti
Marlene Vargas
Joaquin Patarroyo

Sheep out of fleece, in different reproductive stages, were inoculated with N. caninum tachizoites strain «NCbeef » with the purpose of study the pathophysiology of the disease and the possibility of using them as an experimental model of bovine neosporosis. Inoculation by intravenous route was used. Five pregnant sheep (one with 15 days, two with 30 days, two with 90 days), three not pregnant and two with 10 days post partum were inoculated. By serology, the animals were negative for N.caninum and T. gondii. Two pregnant sheep, not inoculated, were used as negative controls. All lambs born from sheep inoculated before or during the gestation showed hystopathologic alterations in different tissues. The most severe were observed in the central nervous system. Inflammatory nonsuppurative processes with or without dystrophic mineralization were the most common lesions. Presence of tissue cysts was also observed. Clinical signs of the disease or antibodies against the parasite in the lambs born from sheep inoculated 10 days post partum weren’t observed. In the necropsy of one lamb belonging to this group no pathologic sign was observed. None of the animals of the control group showed hystopathologic alterations.


Article visits 707 | PDF visits


Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
  1. Anderson ML, Andrianarivo, AG, Conrad P.A. Animal Reproduction Science, 2000; 60: 417-431. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4320(00)00117-2
  2. Buxton D, Maley SW, Thomson KM, Trees AJ, Innes E.A. Journal of Comparative Pathology, 1997; 117: 1 - 16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9975(97)80062-X
  3. Buxton D, Maley SW, Wright S, Thomson KM, Rae AG, Innes E.A. Journal of Comparative Pathology, 1998; 118: 267 - 279. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9975(07)80003-X
  4. Buxton D, Wright S, Maley SW, Rae AG, Lundén A, Innes E.A. Parasite Immunology, 2001; 23: 85 - 91. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3024.2001.00362.x
  5. Dubey J.P. And Lindsay D.S. Veterinary Parasitology, 1996; 67: 1 - 59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4017(96)01035-7
  6. Dubey J.P. Veterinary Parasitology, 1999;84, p.349 - 367. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4017(99)00044-8
  7. Dubey JP, Hartley WJ, Lindsay D.S. And Topper M.J. Journal of Parasitology, 1990;76, 127 - 130. https://doi.org/10.2307/3282640
  8. Jolley WR, Mcallister MM, Mcguire AM, Wills R.A. Veterinary Parasitology,1999; 82, 251 - 257. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4017(99)00017-5
  9. Luna L.G. Manual of Histologic Staining Methods of the Armed Forces Intitute of Pathology. 3a ed. Washington D.C. McGraw - Hill. 1968, 1 - 37.
  10. Mcallister MM, Mcguire AM, Jolley WR, Lindsay DS, Trees AJ, Stobart R.H. Veterinary Pathology, 1996; 33, 647 - 655. https://doi.org/10.1177/030098589603300603
  11. Prophet EB, Mills B, Arrington JB, E Sobin L.H. Laboratory Methods in Histotechnology Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. Washington. 1992, 274.

Sistema OJS 3.4.0.3 - Metabiblioteca |