84

Exploratory Animal and Medical Research, Vol.3, Issue -1, June, 2013

Short Communication

CONCOMITANT HELMINTHIC AND ENTERO-PROTOZOALINFESTATION IN INDIAN PEAFOWL

B. Dutta*, Shivaji Bhattacharya1, J. Mukherjee, B.B. Roy and Malay Mitra

Institute of Animal Health & Veterinary Biologicals(R&T), Kolkata, West Bengal, India.1Assistant Director, ARD, Directorate of AR & AH, Govt. of West Bengal, N. S. Buildings, Kolkata – 700001.* Corresponding author.

The peafowl (Pavo cristatus) is a large,terrestrial and brightly colored bird of thephasianidae family native to India, Ceylon andSouth-east Asia, but introduced and semi-feralin many other parts of the world (Delacour1971, Pavloviae 2012). They feed and nest onthe ground but most roost in the trees at night.In India, peafowl is recognized as the nationalbird and protected as Schedule I animal underthe Wilf Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Inspite ofproviding all possible care and facilities, thebirds kept in the zoo are under constant stressdue to captivity and are prone to infections.Parasite control in zoo birds is important andextremely difficult with the number of speciesinvolved and distribution of birds in cage, largeenclosures and ponds. Losses due to parasiticproblems can be heavy and may even lead tooutbreaks. Parasitic infections have causedconsiderable losses to wild life in this country.

A number of parasites are responsible for illnessand death of captive birds and exercise greatinfluence on the success of bird’s managementin the zoo (Parsani et al. 2003). Althoughparasitic infections are among the most commonsanitary problems affecting wild birds and canbecome either a subclinical condition or even acause of death (Freitas et al. 2002), they havereceived attention only when they havethreatened agriculture or human health (Daszaket al. 2000). Early workers have been reportedparasitic infections in varying degree in Indianpeafowl and other gallinaceous birds i,eAscaridia spp. (Rao et al. 1981, Soulsby 1982,Rao and Hafeez 2006), Raillietina spp. (Levine1983, Saif et al. 2008). Eimeria spp. (Bhatiaand Pande 1966 & 1968). But report ofconcomitant infestation of Ascaridia spp. andRaillietina spp. along with Eimeria spp. inIndian Peafowl is scanty.

Explor. Anim. Med. Res.,Vol.3, Issue - 1, 2013, p. 84-87

ISSN 2277- 470X (Print), ISSN 2319-247X (Online)Website: www.animalmedicalresearch.org

ABSTRACT : Concomitant infestation of Ascaridia spp. along with Raillietina spp. and Emeria spp.has been identified in Indian Peafowl (Pavo cristatus) of Ramnabagan Mini Zoo, Burdwan, WestBengal, India.

Key words : Ascaridia spp., Raillietina spp., Eimeria spp., Indian Peafowl.

85

Carcass of an adult male Indian peafowl(Pavo cristatus), aged about 11 years ofRamanabagan Mini Zoo, Burdwan, WestBengal was sent to the Disease InvestigationLaboratory, Institute of Animal Health &Veterinary Biologicals, Kolkata, West Bengal,India during winter for laboratory investigation.Necropsy revealed the carcass was emaciated,dehydrated with ruffled feathers. Small intestine

was packed with semisolid faecal materialsmixed with blood. A huge number of roundworms and tapeworms also found in smallintestine along with partly hemorrhagic andinflammatory changes in mucosal layer.Mucous exudates mixed with blood werepresent in the lumen of duodenum. Liver,spleen, thymus, kidney were found pale andatrophied. Lungs, trachea, brain were mostly

Fig.1: Necropsy of an adult Indian peafowl. Fig.2: Worms found in small intestine of theIndian peafowl.

Fig. 3: Ascaridia spp. and Raillietina spp.isolated from the Indian peafowl.

Fig.4 : Oocysts of Eimeria sp. were detectedfrom faecal sample of the Indian peafowlunder microscope.

Concomitant helminthic and protozoal infestation in Indian peafowl

86

Exploratory Animal and Medical Research, Vol.3, Issue -1, June, 2013

pale in colour. Heart was slightly enlarged andengorged with blood. No specific changes werefound in other organs.

Microscopical examination of faecal sampleand intestinal scrapping revealed coccidianoocyst, eggs of Ascaridia spp. and Raillietinaspp .respectively.

Histopathological examination of the tissuematerials revealed chronic proliferative enteritischaracterized by hyperplasia of goblet cells,enlargement and ballooning of liningepithelium. Intracellular spaces of epitheliumshowed accumulation of oedematous fluid withpericellular infiltration of lymphocytes,mononuclear cells and fibroblasticproliferation. Intercellular spaces in betweensubmucosa and mascularis layer infiltrated byfew eosinophils, RBC and macrophages. Themascularis and serosal layer showeddegeneration, accumulation of oedematus fluidand fibrocystic proliferation. Vascularisation ofdifferent layers showed proliferation,thickening and hyalinasation of arterial walls.Liver showed few necrotic foci along withdegeneration and mononuclear cells. The portaltriad showed proliferation of biliary epitheliumand hepatic arterial endothelial hyperplasia.Spleen showed depletion of lyphodial folliclesin germinal centre.

Finally Eimeria spp. along with Ascaridiaspp. and Raillietina spp. were identified bymicroscopical and morphological study.

The oocysts of coccidia resemble to Eimeriaspp. (Bhatia and Pande 1966) were ellipsoidal,smooth 18-27 µm by 13-20 µm having nomicropyle. Bhatia and Pande (1968) describethe development in the peachick. This occursbeneath the host cell nucleus of the epithelialcell of the villi and crypts of Lieberkuhn of theanterior small intestine.

Morphological study revealed round worms,having large lips and oesophagus had noposterior bulb. Males were 50-75 mm andfemales were 72-110 mm long. Tail of the malehad small alae bearing 8 pairs of short and thickpapillae. There was circular precloacal suckerwith thick cuticular rim. Spicules were sub-equal and 1- 2.2 mm long. Eggs were oval withsmooth shells measuring 74-90 by 46-52 µmand indistinguishable from Ascaridia spp. asdescribed by Soulsby (1982).

Tapeworms were resemblance withRaillietina spp., measuring up to 20 cm inlength and 1-1.4 cm in breadth. It was whitishin colour, highly elongated, dorso-ventrally flattened and entirely covered witha tegument. The strobila was composed of aseries of ribbon-like body segments i.eproglottids which gradually enlarging from theanterior end towards the posterior (Mu et al.2009). The scolex was smaller, bears apicalrounded rostellum, armed with several minutehooks, surrounded by suckers and lined withspines (Kaufmann 1996). Each matureproglottid had a set of male and femalereproductive organ and genital pores on oneside. Testes are located on both sides ofthe ovary and behind vitellarium. Each eggcapsule contained 4-10 eggs and manycalcareous corpuscles, each of which issurrounded by a membrane. As the tworeproductive systems matured, the proglottidsbecame gravid after fertilization (Mu et al.2009). The eggs are 28-40 µm in diameter.Raillietina spp. occurs in the posterior smallintestine of the chicken and other gallinaceousbirds throughout the world (Levine 1983). Saifet al. (2008) reported that ants also are theintermediate hosts of the related Raillietina spp.a parasite of chickens, turkeys, guineafowl and

87

peafowl. The intermediate hosts includegrasshoppers, beetles, ants, house-flies, earth-worms, slugs, snails and cray-fish (Wallach andBoever 1983). Peacock may get concomitanthelminthic and entero-protozoal infestationthrough intermediate host or contaminationinside the enclosure.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTAuthors are thankful to the Director of

Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services, WestBengal to provide facilities and DeputyDirector, ARD (Microbiology), RegionalLaboratory, Burdwan for sending sample.

REFERENCES

Bhatia BB and Pande BP.(1966). A newcoccidium, Eimeria mayurai (Sporozoa: Eimeriidae)from the common peafowl Pavo cristatus L. Proc.Nat. Acad. Sci. India. Section B. 36: 39-42.

Bhatia BB and Pande BP.(1968). On theendogenous development of Eimeria mayuri Bhatiaand Pande 1966 in a baby peafowl ( Pavo cristatusL.). Indian J. Anim. Hlth. 7: 105 – 107.

Daszak P, Cunningham AA and HyattAD.(2000). Emerging infectious diseases of wildlife-threats to biodiversity and human health. Science.287: 443-449.

Delacour J.(1971). The Pheasants of the World.1st edn. Country Life Ltd. New York.

Freitas MFL, Oliveira JB, Cavalcanti MDB,Leite AS, Magalhaes VS, Oliveira RA andEvencio-Sobrino A. (2002). Gastrointestinalparasites of captive wild birds in Pernambuco state,Brazil. Parasitol Latinoam. 57: 50-54.

Kaufmann H.(1996). Parasitic Infections ofDomestic Animals: A Diagnostic Manual.Birkhäuser Verlag. Basel. p. 354.

Levine ND.(1983). Text Book of VeterinaryParasitology. 1st edn. CBS Publishers &Distributors. Delhi. p. 72.

Mu L, Li HY and Yan BZ.(2009). Comparativestudy on morphology and development of twospecies of Raillietina from chicken. Zhongguo JiSheng Chong Xue Yu Ji Sheng Chong Bing Za Zhi. 27 (3): 232–236.

Parsani HR, Monim RR, Sahu RK and PatelBG.(2003). Prevalence of gastro-intestinal parasitesin captive birds at Kamla Nehru Zoological Garden,Kankaria Zoo, Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Zoos’ Print J.18(1) : 987 – 992.

Pavloviae, I. (2012). Coccidiosis of peacock.•ivinarstvo. 47(3/4): 8-9.

Rao AT, Acharjyo LN and PatnaikMM.(1981). Pathology of ascariasis in a peafowl(Pavocristatus) and caused by Ascaridiaperspicillum Rudolf 1803. Indian Vet. J. 58: 585.

Rao TB and Hafeez M.(2006). Ascariasis inindian peafowl Pavo cristatus chicks. Zoos Print//.J. 21: 2377.

Saif YM, Fadly AM, Glisson JR, McDougaldLR, Nolan LK and Swayne DE. (2008). Diseasesof Poultry. 12th edn. p.1057.

Soulsby EJL.(1982). Helminths, Arthropods andProtozoa of Domesticated Animals. 7th edn. BailliereTindall. London. p.163 – 164, 657.

Wallach JD and Boever WJ.(1983). Diseasesof Exotic Animals. W.B. Saunders Company.Philadolphia. p.861-864.

Concomitant helminthic and protozoal infestation in Indian peafowl