3.9 Article

Gross and histologic features of gastritis due to Ophidascaris arndti in tropical rattlesnakes (Crotalus durissus)

Journal

Publisher

ARQUIVO BRASILEIRO MEDICINA VETERINARIA ZOOTECNIA
DOI: 10.1590/1678-4162-9010

Keywords

snake; parasitic granuloma; parasitic gastritis; Nematoda

Funding

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa de Minas Gerais (FAPEMIG)
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  3. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The tropical rattlesnake (Crotalus durissus) is a snake of great importance for biomedical industry since its poison is used for the production of antiophidic serum and researches. Several conditions related to animal health, such as diseases and parasites, which can promote the reduction of poison production by these snakes should be investigated. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to characterize the gross and microscopic lesions related to the presence of Ophidascaris arndti in stomachs of tropical rattlesnakes. The gastrointestinal tract of thirty-five South American rattlesnakes captured in Southeastern region of Brazil were analyzed and nineteen animals showed infestation by the parasites, found in the small intestine and, especially, in the stomach of the hosts. Grossly, lesions were characterized by mucosal ulcers occasionally associated with hemorrhage. Microscopic alterations included histiocytic granulomas, fibrosis, necrosis, and hemorrhage. Based on these findings, the diagnosis of a parasitic granulomatous disease was made. The lesions may be related to the cause of death in captivity snakes, since the lesions can promote secondary infections by opportunistic bacteria. Moreover, the intense inflammatory response accompanied by fibrosis may be related to poor functioning of the gastric snakes, which it may exhibit frequent regurgitation of the food.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available