Journal of Parasitic Diseases

, Volume 37, Issue 2, pp 260–263 | Cite as

Comparative evaluation of flotation techniques for the detection of soil borne parasites

  • V. Gnani Charitha
  • V. C. Rayulu
  • P. M. Kondaiah
  • Ch. Srilatha
Original Article


Efficacy of the three conventional flotation techniques in recovering the parasitic forms from soil samples was compared after screening both naturally contaminated and experimentally seeded soil samples. Out of 200 soil samples screened from different locations of Rayalaseema region of Andhra Pradesh, parasitic stages were isolated in 62 (31.0 %), 32 (16.0 %) and 16 (8.0 %) samples by O’Lorcain (J Helminthol, 68:237–241,1994), Kazakos (Am J Vet Res 44:896–900, 1983) and Santarém et al. (Rev Inst Med trop Sao Paulo 51(3):163–167, 2009) methods, respectively. One hundred and forty-four soil samples were seeded with two different concentrations (100/200) of the eggs of Toxocara spp., Ascaris spp. and Ancylostoma spp. and oocysts of Eimeria spp. and were processed by these techniques. Irrespective of parasitic species or concentration, the mean recovery rate of parasitic stages obtained was above 50 ± 4.32, above 33.67 ± 5.084 and below 22.33 ± 2.37 percent by O’Lorcain (1994), Kazakos (1983) and Santarém et al. (2009) methods, respectively. O’Lorcain (1994) method was found better than the other methods for the isolation of soil borne parasitic stages but none of these methods were found to be cent per cent sensitive.


Efficacy Flotation techniques Recovery Eggs–oocysts Soil 


  1. Anand SL, Das SC, Baruah I (2004) Observations on the soil contamination with the zoonotic canine gastrointestinal parasites in selected rural areas of Tezpur, Assam, India. J Parasit Dis 8(2):121–123Google Scholar
  2. Azian N, Sakhone L, Hakim SL, Yusri MY, Nurulsyamzawaty Y, Zuhaizami AH, Rodi IM, Maslawaty MN (2008) Detection of helminth infections in dogs and soil contamination in rural and urban areas. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health 39(2):205–212PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bowman DD (1999) Georgis’ Parasitology for veterinarians. W.B.Saunders company, Philadelphia, p 430Google Scholar
  4. Brooker S, Clements ACA, Bundy DAP (2006) Global epidemiology, ecology and control of soil transmitted infections. Adv Parasitol 62:221–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. D’Souza PE, Dhanalakshmi H, Jaganath MS (2002) Soil contamination with canine hookworm and roundworm ova in Bangalore. J Parasit Dis 26(2):107–108Google Scholar
  6. Dada BJO (1979) A new technique for the recovery of Toxocara eggs from soil. J Helminthol 53:141–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Das SS, Kumar D, Sreekrishnan R, Ganesan R (2009) Soil contamination of public places, play grounds and residential areas with ova of Toxocara in Puducherry city. J Vet Res 17:13–16Google Scholar
  8. Dunsmore JD, Thompson RCA, Bates IA (1984) Prevalence and survival of Toxocara canis eggs in the urban environment of Perth, Australia. Vet Parasitol 16:303–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Garcia LS (1993) In diagnosis medical parasitology, 2nd edn. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, pp 512–542Google Scholar
  10. Grover R, Bhatti G, Aggarwal A, Malla N (2000) Isolation of Toxocara eggs in and around Chandigarh, India. J Parasit Dis 24:57–59Google Scholar
  11. Hawksworth D, Archer C, Rodda N, Smith M, Appleton C and Buckely C (2007) An improved method for the recovery of Ascaris ova from solid waste from urine diversion toilets. Accessed Sept 2012
  12. Kazakos KR (1983) Improved method for recovering ascarid and other helminth eggs from soil associated with epizootics and during survey studies. Am J Vet Res 44:896–900Google Scholar
  13. Loh AG, Israf DA (1998) Tests on the centrifugal flotation technique and its use in estimating the prevalence of Toxocara in soil samples from urban and suburban areas of Malaysia. J Helminthol 72:39–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. O’Lorcain P (1994) Prevalence of Toxocara canis ova in public playgrounds in the Dublin area of Ireland. J Helminthol 68:237–241PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Oge H, Oge S (2000) Quantitative comparison of various methods for detecting eggs of Toxocara canis in samples of sand. Vet Parasitol 92:75–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Quinn R, Smith HV, Bruce RG, Girdwood RWA (1980) Studies on the incidence of Toxocara and Toxascaris spp. ova in the environment. 1. A comparison of flotation procedures for recovery of Toxocara spp. ova from soil. J Hyg 84:83–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Santarém VA, Franco EC, Kozuki FT, Fini D, Prestes-carneiro LE (2008) Environmental contamination by Toxocara spp. eggs in a rural settlement in Brazil. Rev Inst Med trop Sao Paulo 50:279–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Santarém VA, Magoti LP, Sichieri TD (2009) Influence of variables on centrifuge-flotation technique for recovery of Toxocara canis eggs from soil. Rev Inst Med trop Sao Paulo 51(3):163–167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Smith M T (2005) Pollution Research Group, School of Biological and Conservation Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban. Accessed Jan 2006

Copyright information

© Indian Society for Parasitology 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. Gnani Charitha
    • 1
  • V. C. Rayulu
    • 1
  • P. M. Kondaiah
    • 1
  • Ch. Srilatha
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Veterinary Parasitology, College of Veterinary ScienceSri Venkateswara Veterinary UniversityTirupatiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Veterinary Pathology, College of Veterinary ScienceSri Venkateswara Veterinary UniversityTirupatiIndia

Personalised recommendations