African Trypanosomiasis
![]() |
![]() |
|
| Trypanosoma brucei rhodesiense in the blood of a patient, EATRO, Torro, Uganda (1970) | Haematocrit Centrifuge Technique, human trypanosomiasis survey, SRI, Tanzania (Woo, 1971) | Human trypanosomiasis (gambian sleeping sickness), EATRO, Torro, Uganda (Woo, 1970b) |
(2) Woo, P.T.K. 1970b. The haematocrit centrifuge
technique for the diagnosis of African trypanosomiasis. Acta Tropica
27: 384-386.
Since it is a rapid and sensitive technique
(Woo & Rogers, 1974)
it is also " . . . widely used for the diagnosis of animal trypanosomiasis" in livestocks
(Schlater & Van Den Bossche, 2004), and for detecting trypanosome infections in other animals including fish (
e.g. Bower & Woo, 1979), frogs
(e.g. Woo, 1983)
and birds (e.g. Wiehhn et al., 1999). The HCT is also a useful tool to determine the effectiveness of chemotherapy against mammalian
trypanosomiasis (e.g. Sekoni & Rekwot 2003),
and it has been modified to detect pathogenic haemoflagellates (Cryptobia, Spironucleus etc.) in economically important fish
(e.g. Woo, 2003 ; Guo & Woo, 2004). The HCT is sometimes also called the "Woo test" (Chappuis et al., 2005), or "Woo technique" (Quispe et al., 2003)
, or "Woo method" (Uilenberg, 1998; Schlater & Van Den Bossche, 2004).
One of his early contributions on human trypanosomiasis
in Africa was to use the Haematocrit Centrifuge Technique
(HCT; Woo, 1969)
in hospitals to detect trypanosomes in the blood and cerebral spinal fluid of patients with trypanosomiasis
(Woo, 1970b).
He adapted the HCT for use under field conditions
(Woo, 1971) and used it in a survey on human trypanosomiasis
(Onyango & Woo, 1971).
"The . . . technique of Woo is the most suitable for rural hospitals" (Foulkes, 1981), and
it " . . . is still in use in many HAT [Human African Trypanosomiasis] control programs" in Africa
(Chappuis et al., 2005). It is also used to diagnose the disease in patients outside of Africa
(Lejon et al., 2003),
for the detection of congenital Chagas' disease caused by Trypanosoma cruzi in South America ( Moretti et al. 2005), and is
". . . recommended for the parasitological diagnosis of acute Chagas' disease and malaria" in rural areas (Fuente et al., 1985).
Chappuis F et al. (2005)
Options for field diagnosis of human African trypanosomiasis. Clinical Microbiol. Reviews 18: 133-146.
Quispe AP et al. (2003)
Prevalencia de Trypanosoma vivax en bovinos de cuatro
distritos de la provincia de Coronel Portillo, Ucayali. Rev investig. vet. Peru 14: 161-165.
Uilenberg G (1998)
Diagnosis - Chapter 3. In:
A field guide for the
diagnosis, treatment and prevention of African animal trypanosomosis,
Food and Agriculture Organization, UN, 158 pages.
Schlater J & Van Den Bossche P (2004)
Trypanosomosis - Chapter 2.3.15.
In: Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines
for Terrestrial Animals, 5th edition (eds. Cullen CA & Pearson JE),
World Organization for Animal Health, OIE, 1178 pages.
Salmonid Cryptobiosis
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
| Cryptobia (T.) salmositica with a red blood cell from an anaemic fish | Bilateral exophthalmia in acute salmonid cryptobiosis (Woo, 2003) | General edema and abdominal distension with ascites (Woo, 1979) |
(4) Woo, P.T.K. & Li, S. 1990. In vitro
attenuation of Cryptobia salmositica and its use as a live
vaccine against cryptobiosis in Oncorhynchus mykiss. Journal of
Parasitology 76: 752-755.
This is the first vaccine against a fish
parasite - the live vaccine injected intraperitoneally into fish circulates in the blood of rainbow trout for at least 6 months, does not cause disease
but protects fish from cryptobiosis
(Woo & Li, 1990).
A single dose of the vaccine protects rainbow trout (adaptive
immunity) for at least 2 years, and protection is through the production of complement fixing
antibodies, enhanced phagocytic activities by marcophages, and cell-mediated cytotoxicity (both antibody-independent and antibody-dependent)
(Li & Woo, 1995).
Since this vaccine has no detectable bioenergetic costs to juvenile fish and does not affect growth (Beamish et al., 1996)
it is
used routinely to study the acquisition and mechanism of protective immunity in
salmonids (Woo, 2001). The vaccine has remained attenuated (does not
secrete metalloprotease, the main virulent factor in cryptobiosis) and it protects both juvenile and adult salmonids from cryptobiosis (Woo, 2003).
The two strains (vaccine and pathogen) have been used to detect Atlantic salmon that have a more responsive
immune system (Chin et al., 2004) - aims of the study
are to identify genes in salmon related to a rapid response to pathogens, and to emphasize this trait in breeding
programs. This is a proactive strategy against pathogenic organisms.
(5) Forward, G.M., Ferguson, M.M. & Woo, P.T.K. 1995. Susceptibility of brook charr, Salvelinus fontinalis to the pathogenic haemoflagellate,
Cryptobia salmositica, and the inheritance of innate resistance by progenies of resistant fish. Parasitology 111:337-345.
Using a very host specific hemoflagellate (Cryptobia catostomi) from white suckers,
Bower & Woo
(1977) showed the Alternative Pathway of Complement Activation (APCA) operates
in the blood of fish. They described an in vitro technique to determine in vivo susceptibility
of fish to parasites. APCA is innate or natural immunity and it also operates in other teleosts; for example, against Cryptobia salmositica
(
Wehnert & Woo, 1980), a pathogenic hemoflagellate in salmonids. In salmonid cryptobiosis (Woo 1979) some brook charrs are innately resistant to
C. salmositica, and this resistance to infection is inherited and
controlled by a dominant Mendelian locus. Cryptobia-susceptible charrs are homozygous recessive while Cryptoba-resistant fish are
either homozygous dominant or heterzygous; hence it is now possible to breed C. salmositica-resistant charrs
(Forward et al., 1995)
where the parasite is ruptured via APCA (Forward & Woo, 1996).
The adaptive or acquired immune (both humoral and cell-mediated) responses to various
antigenic stimulations (including to a commercial Aeromonas vaccine) are very similar in both
Cryptobia-resistant and Cryptobia-susceptible charrs (Ardelli & Woo 1995).
APCA is an important protective mechanism in fish against pathogenic protozoa (Woo 2007)
and attempts are being made to exploit this form of innate immunity.
(6) Tan, C.W., Jesudhasan, P. & Woo, P.T.K. 2008. Towards a metalloprotease-DNA vaccine against piscine cryptobiosis
caused by Cryptobia salmositica. Parasitology Research 102: 265-275.
The pathogenic strain of Cryptobia salmositica has a cysteine protease and a metalloprotease
(Zuo & Woo, 1997a).
The cysteine protease (49, 60, 66 and 97 kDa) is a metabolic enzyme while the metalloprotease (200 kDa) is the disease-causing
factor in cryptobiosis (Zuo & Woo, 1997a).
The purified metalloprotease digests red call membrane, collagens and laminin (Zuo & Woo, 1997b;
Zuo & Woo, 2000).
A murine monoclonal antibody (mAb 001; Feng & Woo, 1996) against a 200 kDa glycoprotein epitope
(Feng & Woo, 1998a;
1998b) is protective (both prophylactic and therapeutic)
when injected into fish (Feng and Woo, 1997).
MAb001 does not fix complement to lyse the pathogen but agglutinates it (Feng & Woo, 1996),
inhibits both parasite multiplication and respiration (Hontzeas et al., 2001),
and neutralizes the activities of the metalloprotease (Zuo et al. 1997).
The cysteine (Jesudhasan et al., 2007a)
and metalloprotease (Jesudhasan et al., 2007b)
genes have been sequenced and DNA vaccines produced by inserting the
protease genes into plasmids (Tan et al., 2008).
The metalloprotease-DNA (MP-DNA) vaccine (secretes metalloprotease) after inoculation into fish (Oncorhynchus mykiss and Salmo
salar) caused an anemia but the PCVs of fish started to recover as antibodies were produced to neutralize the secreted metalloprotease. The antibodies also
agglutinated live Cryptobia; however, fish inoculated with cysteine-DNA plasmids (or control fish with plasmids alone) were not anemic and
they did not have agglutinating antibodies against Cryptobia. As expected MP-DNA-vaccinated fish were not protected from infection after parasite challenge,
but they had lower parasitemias, delayed peak parasitemias, and faster recovery compared to control fish. However, fish vaccinated with attenuated strain
(Woo & Li, 1990)
were protected and
this confirmed the two vaccines (attenuated and the metalloprotease DNA) operated through different mechanisms. In a review on the use of DNA vaccines in aquatic organisms
Kurath
(2008) confirms this is the ". . . first published
demonstration of protective effects of a fish parasite DNA vaccine in fish".