Advertisement

Parasitology Research

, Volume 95, Issue 1, pp 30–39 | Cite as

Behavioural strategies used by the hookworms Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale to find, recognize and invade the human host

  • Wilfried Haas
  • Bernhard Haberl
  • Syafruddin
  • Irfan Idris
  • Dennis Kallert
  • Stephanie Kersten
  • Petra Stiegeler
Original Paper

Abstract

The infective third-stage larvae of the hookworms Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale infect their human hosts by active skin invasion, but A. duodenale is in addition capable of oral infection. The behaviour of the larvae when crawling on surfaces has already been described. Here we analyse in various in vitro systems the other behavioural invasion phases: activation, penetration, and orientation within the host. The larvae normally remained in a motionless, energy-saving, resting posture. An activation to sinusoidal locomotion was stimulated in both species by similar cues such as touch, vibration, water currents, heat, light, and chemicals. Human breath in addition stimulated searching and waving (“nictating”) behaviour, which facilitates a change-over to the host. Activating cues in air streams were warmth and moisture; CO2 activated only in combination with warmth and/or moisture. Penetration behaviour in both species was stimulated by warmth and skin extracts. The stimulating components of skin extracts were fatty acids, but their stimulating characteristics differed from those inducing schistosome cercarial skin penetration. After penetration into agar substrates, both species showed thermo-orientation, but only A. duodenale followed gradients of serum. The directing serum cues were not amino acids and glucose (the supposed cues for schistosome blood vessel localization), but Ringer’s solution attracted the larvae. The host-finding and host-invasion behaviour of both hookworm species is well adapted to the invasion of the human skin, and there seems to be no particular adaptation of A. duodenale behaviour to the oral infection mode. Hookworm host-finding behaviour is not as complex as that of schistosome cercariae but seems well adapted to the ecological conditions in the transmission sites.

Keywords

Haas Water Film Infective Larva Skin Extract Sinusoidal Movement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was carried out at the Research Center of the Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia and at the Institute for Zoology, Erlangen, Germany. We thank our Indonesian counterparts Drs. A. Mangali, I. Patellongi, A.M. Afdal, E.Y. Singka and the members of their teams for their valuable help with the field surveys and the sample collections, and Christina Loy and Bety Sapada for their expert technical work. We also wish to thank Professor Gerhard Schad for his encouragement and advice during this research project. This research was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung, and DAAD. The experiments performed in this work comply with the current laws of Germany and Indonesia.

References

  1. Crompton DWT (2000) The public health importance of hookworm disease. Parasitology 121:S39–S50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. De Silva NR, Brooker S, Hotez PJ, Montresor A, Engels D, Savioli L (2003) Soil-transmitted helminth infections: updating the global picture. Trends Parasitol 19:547–551CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Grabe K, Haas W (2004) Navigation within host tissues: Schistosoma mansoni and Trichobilharzia ocellata schistosomula respond to chemical gradients. Int J Parasitol 34:927–934CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Granzer M, Haas W (1991) Host finding and host recognition of infective Ancylostoma caninum larvae. Int J Parasitol 21:429–440CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Haas W (1992) Physiological analysis of cercarial behavior. J Parasitol 78:243–255PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Haas W (1994) Physiological analyses of host-finding behaviour in trematode cercariae: adaptations for transmission success. Parasitology 109:S15-S29PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Haas W (2003) Parasitic worms: strategies of host finding, recognition and invasion. Zoology 106:349–364Google Scholar
  8. Haas W, Haberl B (1997) Host recognition by trematode miracidia and cercariae. In: Fried B, Graczyk TK (eds) Advances in trematode biology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 197–227Google Scholar
  9. Haas W, Schmitt R (1982a) Characterization of chemical stimuli for the penetration of Schistosoma mansoni cercariae. I. Effective substances, host specificity. Z Parasitenkd 66:293–307PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Haas W, Schmitt R (1982b). Characterization of chemical stimuli for the penetration of Schistosoma mansoni cercariae. II. Conditions and mode of action. Z Parasitenkd 66:309–319PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Haas W, Van de Roemer A (1998) Invasion of the vertebrate skin by cercariae of Trichobilharzia ocellata: penetration processes and stimulating cues. Parasitol Res 84:787–795CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Haas W, Granzer M, Garcia EG (1987) Host identification by Schistosoma japonicum cercariae. J Parasitol 73:568–577PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Haas W, Granzer M, Brockelman C (1990) Finding and recognition of the bovine host by the cercariae of Schistosoma spindale. Parasitol Res 76:343–350PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Haas W, Haberl B, Schmalfuss G, Khayyal MT (1994) Schistosoma haematobium cercarial host-finding and host-recognition differs from that of S. mansoni. J Parasitol 80:345–353PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Haas W, Körner M, Hutterer E, Wegner M, Haberl B (1995) Finding and recognition of the snail intermediate hosts by 3 species of echinostome cercariae. Parasitology 110:133–142PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Haas W, Diekhoff D, Koch K, Schmalfuss G, Loy C (1997) Schistosoma mansoni cercariae: stimulation of acetabular gland secretion is adapted to the chemical composition of mammalian skin. J Parasitol 83:1079–1085PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Haas W, Grabe K, Geis C, Päch T, Stoll K, Fuchs M, Haberl B, Loy C (2002) Recognition and invasion of human skin by Schistosoma mansoni cercariae: the key-role of L-arginine. Parasitology 124:153–167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Haas W, Haberl B, Syafruddin, Idris I, Kersten S (2004) Infective larvae of the human hookworms Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale differ in their orientation behaviour when crawling on surfaces. Parasitol Res (in press)Google Scholar
  19. Hoagland KE, Schad GA (1978) Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale: life history parameters and epidemiological implications of two sympatric hookworms of humans. Exp Parasitol 44:36–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Komiya Y, Yasuraoka K (1966) The biology of hookworms. In: Morishita K, Komiya Y, Matsubayashi H (eds) Progress of medical parasitology in Japan, vol 3. Meguro Parasitological Museum, Tokyo, pp 1–114Google Scholar
  21. Matthews BE (1982) Skin penetration by Necator americanus larvae. Z Parasitenkd 68:81–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Nawalinski T, Schad G, Chowdhuri AB (1978) Population biology of hookworms in children in rural West Bengal. II. Acquisition and loss of hookworms. Am J Trop Med Hyg 27:1162–1173PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Salafsky B, Fusco A (1987) Eicosanoids as immunomodulators of penetration by schistosome cercariae. Parasitol Today 3:279–281CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Salafsky B, Fusco A, Siddiqui A (1990) Necator americanus: factors influencing skin penetration by larvae. In: Schad GA, Warren KS (eds) Hookworm disease: current status and new directions. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 329–339Google Scholar
  25. Sasa M, Shirasaka R, Tanaka H, Miura A, Yamamoto H, Katahira K (1960) Observation on the behavior of infective larvae of hookworms and related nematode parasites, with notes on the effect of carbon dioxide in the breath as the stimulant. Jpn J Exp Med 30:433–477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Schad GA (1991) The parasite. In: Gilles HM, Ball PAJ (eds) Hookworm infections. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 15–49Google Scholar
  27. Sciacca J, Forbes WM, Ashton FT, Lombardini E, Gamble HR, Schad GA (2002) Response to carbon dioxide by the infective larvae of three species of parasitic nematodes. Parasitol Int 51:53–62CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Sukhdeo MVK, Sukhdeo SC (1994) Optimal habitat selection by helminths within the host environment. Parasitology 109:S41-S55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Sukhdeo MVK, Sukhdeo SC (2002) Fixed behaviours and migration in parasitic flatworms. Int J Parasitol 32:329–342CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Sukhdeo MVK, Sukhdeo SC, Bansemir AD (2002) Interactions between intestinal nematodes and vertebrate hosts. In: Lewis EE, Campbell JF, Sukhdeo MVK (eds) The behavioural ecology of parasites. CAB International, New York, pp 223–242Google Scholar
  31. Vetter JCM, Vingerhoed J, Schoeman E, Wauters HW (1985) Chemotactic attraction of infective hookworm larvae of Ancylostoma caninum by a dog serum factor. Z Parasitenkd 71:539–543PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Wauters HW, Klaver-Wesseling JCM, Vetter JCM (1982) The effect of ultrafiltrated and dialysed dog serum on the chemotaxis of infective hookworm larvae of Ancylostoma caninum. Z Parasitenkd 68:305–311PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wilfried Haas
    • 1
  • Bernhard Haberl
    • 1
  • Syafruddin
    • 2
  • Irfan Idris
    • 2
  • Dennis Kallert
    • 1
  • Stephanie Kersten
    • 1
  • Petra Stiegeler
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Zoology IUniversity Erlangen-NuernbergErlangenGermany
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineHassanuddin UniversityMakassarIndonesia

Personalised recommendations