Endoparasites in six anuran species from a changing rainforest biotope in Edo State, Southern Nigeria

Abstract

The endoparasitic infections of anurans from Evbuabogun, a peri-urban community in Ikpoba-Okha Local Government Area of Edo State, southern Nigeria was investigated. The six anuran species encountered and the parasite prevalence recorded in them were Hoplobatrachus occipitalis (56.5%), Leptopelis spiritusnoctis (50%), Ptychadena oxyrhynchus (76.7%), P. pumilio (100%), Sclerophrys maculata (90.9%) and S. regularis (100%). Overall parasite prevalence and mean intensity were 75.6% and 52.4, respectively. The endoparasites recovered included pentastomids (Raillietiella sp.), acanthocephalan cystacanth, cestodes (Cylindrotaenia jaegerskioeldi and Nematotaenoides sp.), digeneans (Metahaematoloechus micrurus and Mesocoelium monodi) and nematodes (Camallanus dimitrovi, Chabaudus leberrei, Cosmocerca commutata, C. ornata, Oswaldocruzia hoepplii, Rhabdias africanus, Amplicaecum sp., Aplectana sp., Physaloptera sp., Ophidascaris sp. larva and an unidentified oxyurid nematode). The few anuran species recorded attests to the degraded nature of the study area. We presume that the high parasite prevalence in the anurans examined was due to intense exposure to parasite larvae in the few and crowded aggregation/breeding sites in the locality. Furthermore, exposure to herbicides used to suppress weeds in nearby farms, (which contaminate breeding ponds through run-offs), may have suppressed the immunity of the frogs, thus rendering them more susceptible to parasitic infections. Infections of P. pumilio with Raillietiella sp. and Nematotaenoides sp. are new

Ecological Scenarios and Parasite Diversity in Anurans of West Africa: A Review

“…Studies conducted in a changing rainforest biotope due to increasing urbanization and other anthropogenic activities [64] not only showed a drastic reduction in amphibian diversity (only six species) in the study area, but also recorded a high overall prevalence (75%) and diversity (17) of parasites. Of particular interest among the helminth parasites recorded was an Ophidascaris sp.…”

“…The highest prevalence and infection intensity recorded was 20% and 10.3 parasites/infected host, respectively, in Ptychadena bibroni. Prevalence (P) and mean intensity (MI) values recorded in four anurans at Evbuabogun community [64] are as follows: S. maculata (P: 31.8%, MI: 67.9); S. regularis (P: 50%, MI: 1.0); P. oxyrhynchus (P: 50%, MI: 13.1); P. pumilio (P: 33.3%, MI: 1.0). Adults of this nematode have been recorded in snakes (Causus maculatus, Python regius and Loprophis fuliginosus) by Awharitoma et al [65], some of which were caught at Evbuabogun.…”

“…The amphibian hosts parasitized were diverse; they included terrestrial species (Sclerophrys regularis, S. maculata, Ptychadena spp., Phrynobatrachus liberiensis and P. plicatus, see [59]), tree frogs (Hyperolius fusciventris, H. fusciventris burtoni, H. picturatus, H. sylvaticus, Afrixalus dorsalis, A. nigeriensis, Chiromantis rufescens, Amnirana albolabris, Leptopelis spiritusnoctis) and the clawed toad, Silurana tropicalis (see [63,81]). The cysts occurred either singly or in pairs [58,63,64], but in recent studies, cysts containing numerous cystacanths (60-70 larvae) in a cyst pack have been reported [62,83]. Aisien et al [62] remarked that multiple cystacanth recorded in the urbanized tropical rainforest at Diobu-Port Harcourt represented a parasitic adaptation to ensure effective delivery of infective stages in an unstable environment.…”

“…(Figure 3C) with a wide host range, including several tree frog spp., Ptychadena spp., Phrynobatrachus spp. and Silurana tropicalis (see [49,59,62,64,71,93]), a Proteocephalus sp. (Figure 3D) from Amnirana galamensis [50] and a Proteocephalus sp.…”

Development and application of a mini-QuEChERS method for the determination of pesticide residues in anuran adipose tissues

“…The sample preparation includes (i) the isolation of analytes from the sample matrix; (ii) the removal of interferences from the extract; and (iii) the concentration of the analytes to detectable instrumental levels. [24][25][26][27][28] Ideally, a sample preparation method should be able to carry out these three steps simultaneously simply and reliably, and as quickly as possible. 26,28 The sample preparation methods used for extracting pesticide residues in anuran samples use high volumes of solvents and several steps and do not demonstrate their efficiency, repeatability, and robustness (Table S1, ESI †).…”